Kids in the Hall Mafia - Game Over, Daves are Supreme

[vollkan]

/confirm

[vollkan]

Don't everyone get too excited around here

I haven't actually even heard of KITH before signing up. The above (and the gazebo video) are just hilarious though.

[vollkan]

QUESTIONNAIRE

Are you a strapping male?
Are you tanned?
Do you have a hard six-pack?
Do you work out?
Are you strikingly handsome?

Kindly answer these questions.

1) Male, yes. Strapping, no.
2) My teeth probably are
3) No
4) Heck no
5) See above re strapping-ness

[vollkan]

Vote: Lain

for having the same picture as GreyICE

[vollkan]

Vote: Lain

for having the same picture as GreyICE

[vollkan]

Buy a manzier from Mr. Costanza

Liar. The manzier was invented by Mr Kramer. Mr Costanza just renamed it.

Unvote, Vote: Lurconis

[vollkan]

I give up.

Was the meta read a joke or not?

[vollkan]

People. I was high and drunk when I voted for Farside. My initial post was my first post. At this point I'm asking about theory. I don't see why early meta reads should be any less legitimate than other early reads. Isn't meta most useful when you have the least information from other sources?

I don't think early meta is non-legit as a matter of principle. However, I can't think of a single early meta argument that I don't think is so weak as to be counterproductive.

So I took a couple of seconds to say that I've seen farside start off a thread with a girl's club as town, so it's probably not a valid tell one way or the other. I don't have a metascumread or metatownread on farside, I just have evidence that the tell Amrun was trying to use is more a product of her social nature rather than her alignment.

Any reason you said "farside runs the estrogen club as town" rather than "I have seen farside run...etc"

My theory is that at least one scum is going to take the "serious approach" and try to look active in the breaking point, following also the criteria that scum don't put all eggs on one basket. Also, the "serious approach" basket had least people on it.

There's a fairly basic problem with this, and with most arguments that try to divide the players based on activity and then say "there are X scum in this or that group". Namely, whilst it is true that scum do not want to put all their eggs in one basket - not everything in this game is important enough to count as an "egg" (ie. something scum should actually be worried about).

For instance, nobody says "Well, half the players in this game are using good grammar. Scum don't want to put all their eggs in one basket...etc"

The key point is that the "all eggs in one basket" logic only works if scum actually think that there is any realistic risk in them all acting the same way - or even considering it to be risk-relevant to begin with

(especially in RVS when, I would argue, people are far less likely than normal to be strategically thinking from the perspective of their alignment)

Unvote, Vote: Scooby

Not a fan of Lord G's jumping on the scooby "wagon" either, seems to me like an attempt to get attention on someone other than himself.

1) Do you disagree with anything LG has said about scooby? If not, why shouldn't LG vote him?
2) Assume you are LG. Assume you are scum. How worried are you about the amount of attention people are giving you?

[vollkan]

I agree with Scooby's logic. Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.

Well, duh.

In any game of Mafia, roughly 25% of players, at least, will be scum. So, if you keep tabs on whether or not any of the first 3 or 4 "serious" posters in a game are scum, it will almost certainly turn out that, on average, at least one of them is scum.

That's a completely boring statistic and is absolutely useless as far as scumhunting goes.

No one on Scooby's list looks like they have any real tells yet, other than pops... that's another reason my vote is on pops.

1) Define "real tells" in the context of RVS. As in, RVS is mostly about finding material to question on, etc. I haven't given Scooby any of my scumpoints yet (see first two lines of this for an explanation of what I mean), but the line of inquiry is valid.
2) What "real tells" are there on pops?

Now let's assume Scooby is scum. Then this post would be motivated to get a lynch moved on with as fast as possible, AKA, he is joining the very B group that he made. ...Yeah I could see it being plausible, but unless told other wise by someone who knows scooby, I'm inclined to believe he was throwing logic into the puzzle.

Wait...so because, on your reading, scooby's argument would be contradictory, that makes it

less

likely he is scum?

(FWIW: I don't think his argument is contradictory. At some point, a player has to be able to say "I think these people became serious too early on" - though, whether or that sort of argument is BS or not is an

entirely

different matter )

I don't know about six pack, but feel free to rate my arms:

<snip to avoid cringing>

You may allow the flattery to bias your opinion.

Policy lynch anyone????

[vollkan]

Most games I have seen thus far, there is scum within the first few serious posters.

There is scum in the players whose first posts have an even number of words.
There is scum in the players that post pictures.
There is scum in the players that scratch their scalps while posting.
There is scum in the players that lurk.
There is scum in the players that wall-post.
There is scum in the players that are quick to get serious in the RVS.
There is scum in the players that are lactose-intolerant.
There is scum in the players that don't have a /confirm post.

I think I cracked the game.

Why are you ignoring the scum in the players who have even numbers on the playerlist? Is it because you are one of them?

[vollkan]

Unvote

since L-1 and no scumpoints.

vollkan 177: "I don't think early meta is non-legit as a matter of principle. However, I can't think of a single early meta argument that I don't think is so weak as to be counterproductive." Even very weak reads early game aren't counterproductive - if nothing else, they start discussion and move things out of RVS.

Granted, but since basically any argument has the advantage of promoting discussion, that's not something I really consider to be relevant.

-Vollkan went professor mafia on Scooby telling him why his theory is crap, even though I think several people already did this. This wasn't horrible, but it made me tingle, and not the way that Kison makes me tingle. Reason is 1)Didn't add anything to convo; 2)If you're going to explain everything like the professor then tell me why you think his particular bad theory is more likely from scum than town.

1) I didn't think anybody had addressed the same issues as me, let alone in the same way. Umbrage had addressed the general Group A/Group B thing briefly, and gave his personal opinion that scum tend not divide up. I gave a more complete explanation of why I think the "all eggs in one basket" thinking is wrong. There's a difference between giving a separate, albeit largely concurring, opinion and simply repeating the arguments of others.

2) I actually pointed out in my previous post that I haven't assigned scooby scumpoints for this; maybe if it was later game, but I have a pretty wide RVS latitude

unvote

I don't watch L- counts very closely. Sorry.

Now DGB forced a claim even though no one declared intent to hammer <_< yell at her, not me.

lynch this scumbag now. gets a vanilla claim and suddenly the lynch is no good anymore? YOU MAY AS WELL CLAIM SCUM NOW.

Scumpoints time.

VPB+5

Vote: VPB

Your argument here entirely ignores what pops said entirely and strawmans him to be saying "because scooby claimed vanilla, we shouldn't lynch him". That's very different from what it appears pops was doing, namely backing away from a rushed claim.

[vollkan]

Your argument here entirely ignores what pops said entirely and strawmans him to be saying "because scooby claimed vanilla, we shouldn't lynch him". That's very different from what it appears pops was doing, namely backing away from a rushed claim.

He's backing away because he got what he wanted out of that wagon. As a scumbag, it's much more useful to leave vanillas alive and try to out a PR day 1. Scooby did nothing to change pops' opinion of him. So why should he unvote? vollkan buddy, methinks.

1. His post implies that he didn't expect the wagon to reach L-1 + claim
2. That being the case, it doesn't matter whether or not scooby changed "his opinion"; surely you can recognise that being willing to push a wagon early D1 is very different from being willing to see that wagon reach claiming stage (normally, you can just count on other people to have the good sense not to push it that far0
3. It's trite that scum want to hunt PRs. That doesn't mean that every instance of abandoning a wagon post-vanilla claim is scummy.

But since it was not a rushed claim, and since pops is scum, your VPB vote puts you in the pops-buddy category.

Whether or not

you

think it was rushed is beside the point. The issue is that pops' posts show pretty clearly that his behaviour was motivated by missing how far the VC had gone.

[vollkan]

Your argument here entirely ignores what pops said entirely and strawmans him to be saying "because scooby claimed vanilla, we shouldn't lynch him". That's very different from what it appears pops was doing, namely backing away from a rushed claim.

He's backing away because he got what he wanted out of that wagon. As a scumbag, it's much more useful to leave vanillas alive and try to out a PR day 1. Scooby did nothing to change pops' opinion of him. So why should he unvote? vollkan buddy, methinks.

Whether or not

you

think it was rushed is beside the point. The issue is that pops' posts show pretty clearly that his behaviour was motivated by missing how far the VC had gone.

Nope. Not buying it.

Then what's your reading of 227, 228?

[vollkan]

Pops is using miscount as an excuse for his VOTE. His vote comes right below a VOTECOUNT.

Right. Below.

And what's more likely:
a) that scum plans to cast an under-explained L-1 vote, then hope that an unsolicited claim occurs, and then backtrack if vanilla; or
b) null-pops didn't see the VC, voted in ignorance, then later realised his mistake.

As in all things, "cock-up before conspiracy"

[vollkan]

1. His post implies that he didn't expect the wagon to reach L-1 claim
2. That being the case, it doesn't matter whether or not scooby changed "his opinion"; surely you can recognise that being willing to push a wagon early D1 is very different from being willing to see that wagon reach claiming stage (normally, you can just count on other people to have the good sense not to push it that far
03. It's trite that scum want to hunt PRs. That doesn't mean that every instance of abandoning a wagon post-vanilla claim is scummy.

1 - lol, so? What's your point? So when someone does something scummy, as long as they go 'hardy har, my B!' you're ok with it? Since when are you so gullible?
2 -surely you can see that on page 10 or whatever you should be pushing for a lynch of someone scummy and not random wagoning? or is such laziness good town play in your book?
3 - It is fucking scummy. Hugely scummy. I expect serious votes only at this point in the game. RVS is done. If you're voting someone, it should be because you want them dead. Backing off for no reason shows me that you don't believe in your vote. That's what scum do.

Please continue with this garbage defense. You outting yourself as scum makes my life easier, since you're the lawyer type that can escape lynches.

1. I'm not suggesting at all that "my bad, dude" is a universal get-out-of-jail-free card. As I explained in my answer to DGB, it's easy to say "Hah! No way was that a mistake" - but the same point cuts both ways, in that the scum-strategy theory is even more implausible (you basically have to assume that pops-scum was psychic). Whereas, I don't think it's at all unreasonable that he, in posting, would have missed a VC (when you are reading over posts, you focus on the important issues and may well skim past things that don't strike you as significant. If you aren't expecting a L-1 wagon, you don't look for it.)
2. and 3. By p.10 of a large game, people should be moving the game into proper territory. That doesn't mean pushing a serious (ie. lynch-worthy) wagon, but of course it does mean no longer playing randomly. The game doesn't simply reach a "breaking point" between RVS and non-RVS. It's more a gradual thing from pure silliness -> amorphous seriousness -> lynch-oriented scumhunting

[vollkan]

volkan: I totally agree this, except with your thinking that the breaking point doesn't force players to make stances. The breaking point, that is the point where rvs starts to disappear and serious game starts, it's actually a critical point on the game where scum are forced to make early stances (For example, "should I keep joking in a game of 5 pages of jokey rvs or should I start making a serious vote like scumpartner A did?). You can understand the difference with "using good grammar" (the example you used) which, I agree, is a situation that isn't a valid differentiation.

But there is no "point" at which people are forced to make stances. What I'm saying is that RVS just gradually becomes "serious" when all the random jokiness and hyperbole is eliminated. That happens over time, for the simple reason that gathering enough material to begin scumhunting proper is something that that takes time.

If you didn't assign scooby scumpoints for this, why did you vote him?? I didn't see other discussion directed at scooby from you.

I haven't given Scooby any of my scumpoints yet (see first two lines of this for an explanation of what I mean), but the line of inquiry is valid.

In short, it wouldn't meet my threshold for scumpoints, but it did meet the threshold for something to use to springboard discussion.

1. He stated he ignored a vote count before voting. Why would a player do that?

Carelessness?

2. Yet it happened and there was a vote count before he voted

Person joins wagon for unserious reasons. Person misses VC. Wagon gets serious. Person bails.

It isn't that complicated.

3. I didn't see Pops unvote as hey I'm looking for a PR. I saw it as oops I screwed up and got caught at putting someone at L-1 early, back track, back track, back track.

Well, to begin with, saying you think he "screwed up", does that mean you do think he accidentally missed the VC? You seem to be having it both ways here by denying the reasonableness of his mistake whilst also relying on a narrative in which he made said mistake.

In short, you seem to only be accepting the legitimacy of the mistake in a framework in which he is scum. If the mistake is legit, the mistake is legit no matter what the alignment.

farside is an emotional player. thats what makes her so fun.

Does anybody have meta on pops? Specifically, is he always this brief and irrelevant?

The only people who have even posted since your ridiculous vote are myself and Porochaz. Neither of us has ever stated anything close to certainty that popsofctown is scum.

He looks just as bad as he did before. However, you now look like a slimy, vile scumbag for that vote.

The Umbragevote was a pretty obvious joke. Why is it scummy?

[vollkan]

VP, how did you feel about vollkan's scooby vote?

I agree with you that it's scummy, but that's true of anyone that voted scooby over his poo poo theory. That entire scooby wagon was crap to me because it's just as possible for a townie to propose a dumb theory as it is a scum. Therefore, the people voting him over that theory are voting because he had a logical error rather than he actually did something scummy.

tl;dr - vollkan certainly is scummy to me along with several other people, it's just not as slam bang as I had perceived it yesterday.

Except, as I have raised twice now, I never said that I thought scooby's behaviour was a proper scumtell as opposed to something that was a legitimate object of early game pressure. In an early game where not much was (or is...really) leaping out as blatantly scummy, scooby's bad argument was a good place to apply pressure (even though I didn't think it was points-worthy)

and umbrage for his inexplicable whiteknighting...same as vollkan.

What does this even mean, beyond being a neat label?

My defence of pops was hardly "inexplicable". I just (as is my tendency) took a more sceptical/mistake-tolerant view than most other people. If I had agreed with you that his VC ignorance was unlikely as a mistake, I would have reached the same conclusion as you. But, instead, I stuck to Hanlon's Razor (never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity).

I absolutely disagree with LG - that wasn't a bad wagon. Pops went crazyface and I'll bet when it parses out that was more town than not on that choo choo train.

Despite my stance on pops himself, I largely agree with you in relation to the wagon. The reasons for suspecting pops were understandable, even though I personally didn't agree (ie. my criticism of the wagon is effectively one of theory, rather than seeing it as inherently opportunistic).

My reasoning on Lord G is for some of the reasons stated yesterday. His high vote and meta claim on farside then saying it was a joke. He then goes on to ask why early meta reads are bad and not legitimate. This to me suggest his meta read wasn't a joke but a fake claim. This behavior is contradictory which to me is scummy.

Lurconis+5

The "contradiction" (always a word that implies relatively serious scumminess) you are alleging is pretty much artificial. There's no difficulty in seeing him having a joke read, but then also, especially given the early game context, questioning people who attack him. Spinning this into any sort of inconsistency is simply disingenuous.

[vollkan]

Except, as I have raised twice now, I never said that I thought scooby's behaviour was a proper scumtell as opposed to something that was a legitimate object of early game pressure. In an early game where not much was (or is...really) leaping out as blatantly scummy, scooby's bad argument was a good place to apply pressure (even though I didn't think it was points-worthy)

So, for the record then, you don't find scooby scummy, you were just pressuring him at that time, correct?

Yup.

The reasons for suspecting pops were understandable, even though I personally didn't agree (ie. my criticism of the wagon is effectively one of theory, rather than seeing it as inherently opportunistic).

This is pretty hard fence sitting if you ask me. Frankly, pops looked mega-scummy yesterday. I agree with Spyrex that there were probably lots of town on that wagon because pretty much everything he did was another bad move that would be opportunistic for a scum player. You were staunchly against that wagon yesterday, and now today you're saying 'well, gee, I was only talkin' bout some theory there' Seems like a soft back pedal from your stance yesterday.

Do you accept that being staunchly against a wagon on the basis that you don't think its subject is scummy is different from thinking that a wagon is scum-driven?

[vollkan]

Yup.

Seems like a bit of a waste if it was only pressure considering how much time you spent arguing for that yesterday. What did you learn out of your "pressure" there?

I only had one post (177) in which I actually attacked/pressured/etc. scooby. The issue of the scooby wagon certainly came up in a number of posts, but it's simply not true that I devoted a great deal of time yesterday to pushing him.

Do you accept that being staunchly against a wagon on the basis that you don't think its subject is scummy is different from thinking that a wagon is scum-driven?

This is news to me. You seemed to think I was super scummy yesterday for pushing the pops wagon. Considering I was one of the few people actually making substantial cases and such for it, I don't see how you're getting to the point now that it was town driven because that's what SpyreX said.

Go back and look at where I assigned scumpoints to you.

lynch this scumbag now. gets a vanilla claim and suddenly the lynch is no good anymore? YOU MAY AS WELL CLAIM SCUM NOW.

Scumpoints time. VPB+5 Vote: VPB

Your argument here entirely ignores what pops said entirely and strawmans him to be saying "because scooby claimed vanilla, we shouldn't lynch him". That's very different from what it appears pops was doing, namely backing away from a rushed claim.

My problem with this wasn't that you were simply pushing the pops wagon. it was that you were attacking him simply on the basis of an assumption that pulling off a rushed lynch was scummy - purely on the basis that a vanilla claim had occurred.

(contrast that with the "refusal to accept mistake" line of reasoning adopted by the likes of Farside)

[vollkan]

so you talked about how bad he was repeatedly yesterday and argued with several people about his posts, but you weren't pushing the wagon. gtfo with your semantics and at least own up to your play.

So because I make

one

post in which I apply early-game pressure to scooby (and don't give points), and then I make several other posts where I either make it clear that I don't suspect scooby and/or respond to questions asking me to clarify my position, I am "pushing his wagon"?

This isn't a semantic argument (though, kudos for employing a stereotype). You are, in fact not semantics, accusing me of doing something that I simply never did.

re: your reason for voting me - that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying:

1) VP Baltar was one of the main contributors to that wagon
2) You thought VP Baltar was scummy
3) Today you say it wasn't a scum driven wagon
4) Number 3 does not compute with your own stated stances

Your reason for voting me is entirely irrelevant to that line of logic.

You're alleging an inconsistency that simply isn't there. I've already explained why I don't think the reason for most people suspecting pops was scummy. The fact that there was a particular element of your attack on pops that I objected to doesn't make the entire wagon guilty by association.

[vollkan]

Whos putting down who here, Elvis? You and the DBGScum are the ones ignoring my case. You and DBGScum are off on some random tangent and ignoring my points on DBGScum simply because you dont want to face them. Im playing mafia and making solid mafia points, youre going the ad hominem route and advocating some Femme Club scene.

So whos fooling who here?

@IS: In a list of numbered points, what are your amazing argument/s against DGB? Or is this just your bog-standard rhetoric outstripping reality?

[vollkan]

Sorry, had law exam yesterday and then had dinner out that evening, so didn't get round to posting. Reading up now.

[vollkan]

Whos putting down who here, Elvis? You and the DBGScum are the ones ignoring my case. You and DBGScum are off on some random tangent and ignoring my points on DBGScum simply because you dont want to face them. Im playing mafia and making solid mafia points, youre going the ad hominem route and advocating some Femme Club scene.

So whos fooling who here?

Meta issue here:

Whenever I have played with IS, he has been scum AND he has also done this sort of rhetorical "I am a genius and you are being slippery" type of post. Is this just null-IS, or is this a scumtell? (for those who have seen more ofhis meta than me)

lol @ IS... could you have made a bigger wall?

And to show you that I dont duck questions and hide behind others like DBGScum over there, what did you expect me to do while reading day 1? Read ahead? Read the ending of the book first? What would the be point then if my initial reads werent genuine? You seriously think im going to show up here and play armchair mafia and tell you what a bunch of idiots you were on Day 1 and just act like im starting fresh on Day 2? Thats bullshit projecting on me. How am I supposed to catch scum that way?

You seriously didn't read the flips before reading the thread? How can you possibly do that? I know I can't.

To answer your question, what I expected you to do in your reread is help us find scum. Reading through D1 and spending time calling dead townies scum is not helping us find scum. Besides just curiosity, this is why I would expect you to read the flips and act accordingly. Otherwise, your reread is full of unhelpful garbage.

On the subject of DGB, please throw more of a fit and fish for my information a little harder.

I am perfectly serious about DGB, and I will tell everyone why right now but it does involve night actions and some role information, more hers than mine. I kind of like the idea of fucking with scum and making them wonder how important it is to try to kill one or both of us. However, I am not totally against telling it either. I resent that IS is throwing a tantrum though and demanding it instead of talking to me reasonably, so I'm sticking out my tongue.

Sorry princess, you cant expect me to "go fish" and play your little games just because its amusing to your cutesy friends in fairyland. You want me to lay off DBGScum, you want me to change what I believe, then YOU need to lay out the god damn evidence. YOU need to lay out some rock solid points instead of expecting me to get all googly eyed at you everytime you post.

I made a case of why DBG is scum, now you make yours why shes not.

And this does get

IS+7

. EK had already stated explicitly that her reasons were role-related. Not then giving DGB the benefit of the doubt is bad enough, but continually pressing is inexcusable.

Vote: IS

since he now has the high score.

The fact that Vollkan is trying to act all inquisitive while at the same time accusatory while at the same time not hopping on the wagon reeks of scum not wanting to jump on my blatantly townie wagon in order to look good.

You're alleging an inconsistency here when there isn't one. Being "inquisitive" and "accusatory" are preparatory steps to actually finding somebody scummy (ie. joining your "blatantly town wagon").

1) Went after Scooby with really crappy reasoning
2) Remained "skeptical" on the pops wagon and started hovering
2a) Is doing the same on my wagon. Vollkan is still hovering.

1) Already addressed multiple times by pointing out that I explicitly said I didn't think scooby was scummy; it was just a good early wagon.
2) YES. I WAS "HOVERING" AROUND A WAGON THAT I WAS EXPLICITLY AGAINST.
2a) No; I've been trying to understand it better.

Vollkan is clearly trying to look committed by being non-committal. Meaning he deliberates on wagons and throws all the points out there but never votes for them. Notice how he pegged a vote on Scooby, gave a realy craptastic reason for it but yet remained active all day and threaded water with the pops wagon.

This looks like scum thats trying to avoid getting sucked up into vote counts.

Vollkan is a perfect middle of the ground scum.

Not having strong reads =/= Non-committal.

You again repeat the hackneyed scooby argument, this time going so far that you imply that, not only did I suspect scooby contrary to my express assertions otherwise, but that I was avoiding said suspicion by commenting on pops.

==
The whole Umbrage-rage argument is too Fate + GreyICE like for me to even stomach reading. Suffice to say, this sort of thing is anti-town and null.
===

I could really go for a vollkan or UT lynch at this point. I mean, if this really is a clusterfuck of town-town fighting, scum are sitting there laughing, so we should wagon somebody who is quietly fueling the fire (vollkan, LG) or somebody who has done noooooooooothing (UT).

EK+5

Aside from the "Let's move over here" element, the bigger problem here is that it's basically a more subtle form of dividing the players into camps and then lynching based on those camps. There probably is, just on statistics, some town-town fighting. That doesn't mean that everybody fighting is therefore town. Equally, whilst there may well be scum sitting in the shadows, that doesn't mean that everybody who is in the thick of it is necessarily scum

I'm assuming here that DGB's role is some sort of friendly neighbour role. Even if that's not the case, it's what EK claims to believe.

EK's actions don't add up. If, upon receiving the omelette, she thought it meant DGB was confirmed town, the first logical thing she would do is tell us about it.

But that's not what she did. She kept insisting DGB was town, but she never proved it when she could've all along. She let IS an myself rant for a while before she revealed the omelette. Why?

Similarly, DGB's first thought today should be about EK. She gave EK the omelette for a reason. Why?

EK had the knowledge that DGB was town the whole day. I'm not convinced that DGB being the Chicken Lady means she's town, but EK said she did. As far as she knew, she could confirm DGB, and yet she didn't.

Look. Either the omelette is harmless or it isn't. If it is, it's definitely some sort of friendly neighbour role, or whatever it's called. If so, DGB would use it to become confirmed town. That's it's only possible use.

So why, when targeted with a role she believed was used so that DGB can be confirmed town, did EK not immediately confirm DGB?

Furthermore, why didn't DGB try and confirm herself? At any time, she could've asked EK to say what happened.

The only explanation is that the omelette is NOT used in this way.

The omelette CAN'T be something good, or DGB would've said what it was. There's no point in giving a fellow townie a gift if they have no idea what to do with it.

So either the omelette's something bad, and it didn't work on EK, or there is no omelette.

If the former, DGB is either scum or a vig/vig-like role. If the latter, EK and DGB are scum together.

Let's assume the omelette is something bad. The fact that it apparently didn't work on EK means something. If an ability has different effects on different people, it's pretty much guaranteed to be based on alignment, like a CPR Doc.

So if DGB is town, she got an alignment result on EK. Which begs the question: WHY DIDN'T SHE SAY ANYTHING?

DGB: explain what the omelettes do now.

I'm not rolefishing. I'm just trying to see if there's any possible way EK and DGB can be town. Forget everything else. Think about it: THEIR ACTIONS MAKE NO SENSE. No matter what the omelette is or does, it has to do SOMETHING, and either EK or DGB had to have gotten a result from it. WHY DIDN'T THEY SAY ANYTHING?

If you were given power-related information that a player was confirmed town, you would instantly confirm them, even though you wouldn't know the nature of their power? (aside from the fact that nothing here actually does make DGB confirmed-town)

Also, the net conclusion you draw is basically that DGB's role is uncertain - so you then demand that she reveal everything about it?

Umbrage+5

[vollkan]

man, I bet the mod is going to miss that IS vote if someone doesn't say that you did it

VOTE: IS

[vollkan]

Vote: IS

And to address MBL's post from the end of yesterday:

@vollkan, is IS really your #1 suspect? If so, please make a more explicit, thorough case. If not, who's your top suspect and why?

Yes. Reason was the continued pushing of DGB for "hard evidence" after she'd already claimed role-related reasons. It's effectivley just role-fishing in scum-IS's standard Conspiratorial Cassandra rhetoric.

[vollkan]

That's it Vollkan? I'm the eternal scum, the scum of all scum, the most vile man in all of the universe because you think I was role-fishing?!?

Quote for me please where I indicated anything of the sort.

[vollkan]

I've never seen vollkan make so little sense...

That's it Vollkan? I'm the eternal scum, the scum of all scum, the most vile man in all of the universe because you think I was role-fishing?!?

Quote for me please where I indicated anything of the sort.

How about two posts above where you said:

Vote: IS

And to address MBL's post from the end of yesterday:

@vollkan, is IS really your #1 suspect? If so, please make a more explicit, thorough case. If not, who's your top suspect and why?

Yes. Reason was the continued pushing of DGB for "hard evidence" after she'd already claimed role-related reasons.

It's effectivley just role-fishing

in scum-IS's standard Conspiratorial Cassandra rhetoric.

I think you miss my point...

As I've pointed out already, every time I have played with IS-scum (including one time when I was his scumpartner and we bussed on this basis) he has engaged in the sort of grand "There's a conspiracy against me" post you see in the first quote. The post he got 7 points for was scummy because it was role-fishing well beyond the point when questioning DGB had become reasonable. Coupled of course with the language issue (and, to a lesser extent, his arguments against me which I also find ridiculous), and I think he is scummy.

However, he instead presents it as if I am treating him as confirmed/obvscum for a petty reason. I'm sure you can see that there is a huge difference between finding somebody scummy and thinking that they are the Mafia equivalent of Hitler.

(and, honestly, I'm the

last

player for whom this should even be an issue - because I assign quantitative points to my suspicions. A score of 57 is the highest relatively-speaking, but, in an average game (ie. one without the playerbase here), that would probably be an average or below-average score)

I voted for Umbrage, I explicitly expressed my distrust on him, but thats STILL not good enough for you ladies, is it? It doesnt matter, this pure confirmation bias. You want me out of here so BAD, so desperate to get rid of me that you know the only way to do it is by making up bullshit appeals to emotion and sprinkle a bunch of lies and innuendo on top.

It aint going to work, ladies!

Good point. Scum never vote their scumpartners, let alone express distrust of them!

@vollkan, why did IS get 7 points and Umbrage only 5 for rolefishing? Do you often give people 7 points instead of a nice round 5? Giving IS 7 instead of five appears to have given you a convenient reason to vote IS instead of Umbrage.

I can get you meta references saying the same thing, but basically I try to only give values of 5 (minor), 7 (moderate), and 10 (major).

I recognised this apparent contradiction at the time, and considered only giving IS 5, but the difference between the two was that Umbrage's post expressed uncertainty/suspicion ABOUT the role and therefore wanted to know everything about it. Whereas, IS's attack was simply overlooking the claim entirely and pushing for DGB to spill everything. In short, Umbrage seemed to have genuine suspicion about DGB's role that made it slightly less unreasonable to question it. The fact that IS adhered to what I understand to be his scum meta (though, I note that this has not been confirmed or denied yet) also bolstered it.

[vollkan]

Yes or no, you think DGB and EK are scum? If you try to qualify this, I'm voting you. I want a yes or no answer.

No.

Whatever, im quantifying it anyways. Not at the moment. The ladies sound like they are misguided townies being led by emotions and a general disdain towards me. Maybe its because im not kissing their ass, who knows really how their mind works. If they are townies they are clearly playing against their wincon regardless. They are ignoring all points on Vollkan, no matter how hard I try to illustrate that point and yet they insist on coming after me instead. They are muddying the waters, they are causing the distraction, not me. I am quite certain Vollkan is scum. Even his latest response reeks of lazy scum that knows his lynch is inevitable. If it wasnt for the ladies tugging on my shit, he would be close to lynch by now.

That being said, no one is a 100% stone cold lock guaranteed townie until the mod flips them. I still dont trust the fucking egg and the staunch (there it is again, ladies) refusal to even say where the egg went today, especially if the egg doesnt do jack shit. I still dont trust how Elvis can blatantly be such a mindless minion. Hey, maybe thats what the egg does?

In the end, I care more about a Vollkan lynch today. Its a slam dunk and I fail to see how the BULLSHIT arguments against me (I am buddies with Umbrage?!? ME?!? seriously?!? Thats it?!?) are being held to any merit. If anyone is buddies with Umbrage, its Vollkan. But since the ladies want my blood instead, everyone wants to listen to them instead. Its sillyness at its finest. Swallow your pride, you know im right about this.

Vote for Vollkan.

IS, so far you haven't presented your points against me. I even asked for a case. Again, now, you've done the same thing which is just making broad "grand-narrative" attacks against me - "lazy scum that knows his lynch is inevitable". I'll ignore the obvious question of how you differentiate lazy scum from lazy/busy/in the middle of exams town, and just note the fairly obvious fact that, once my lynch has become achievable, DGB (formerly "DGBscum") has gone from the butt of your attacks to being a "misguided townie".

IS+5

[vollkan]

This is all I needed to hear. I now have no clue what the fuck the eggs do now. The only last conspiracy is that Elvis is in on it with DBG, but even I wont pursue that for now. Even with the blatant OMGUS strategy DBG likes to employ.

Im not looking to out power roles. Im SCUMHUNTING. DBG looked like scum to me, I went after her. She clucked clucked away her role already, so she WANTED to be outed anyways. And Elvis did all that revealing shit, dont let the fairy princess blame it on me. All I did was put pressure on who I thought was scum. You know, what we are all supposed to be doing.

So suddenly that makes me scum? That hilarious.

Imaginality is blatantly bandwagon jumping.

I dont want Gurgi's vote. Hell I dont even know how that can be allowed.

I do have a second suspect that I will throw out there now.

Unvote: DBG
Vote: Vollkan

The fact that Vollkan is trying to act all inquisitive while at the same time accusatory while at the same time not hopping on the wagon reeks of scum not wanting to jump on my blatantly townie wagon in order to look good.

I do have a bigger case on him, I just have to go put it together later.

ONE!
[/quote]

I've already addressed this and you ignored my response (For reference: accusations and inquiries come BEFORE you join a wagon; novel concept, I know)

As far as Vollkan:

1) Went after Scooby with really crappy reasoning
2) Remained "skeptical" on the pops wagon and started hovering
2a) Is doing the same on my wagon. Vollkan is still hovering.

Vollkan is clearly trying to look committed by being non-committal. Meaning he deliberates on wagons and throws all the points out there but never votes for them. Notice how he pegged a vote on Scooby, gave a realy craptastic reason for it but yet remained active all day and threaded water with the pops wagon.

This looks like scum thats trying to avoid getting sucked up into vote counts.

Vollkan is a perfect middle of the ground scum.

TWO!!

Addressed in the same post as ONE!. Namely, I was clear that scooby was an early-game point-of-inquiry rather than a suspicion.

A man after my own ego. I still mistrust the eggs, but I don't know what to do about them at this point. Umbrage does have a point, but I still need more evidence before the rest of you will hang DBGScum.

I still really like my Vollkan vote though. The dude is still coasting, skimming and cheerleading. When he is town, he goes all out with the white knight points bullshit. I think he has assigned points twice so far. Have you just finally dropped that sillyness Vollkan or are you just scum?

THREE!!!

My playstyle leads me to often be accused of "coasting". I'm not sure on what basis you say I am skimming. And, as for the white knight argument, I've already pointed out that my reasons for defending pops were clear.

I much prefer to lynch scum, like VollkaScum. The case is already laid out on him. He was bullshit arguing with Scooby, non-comital surfing with pops and now is taking a back seat to the happenings of this day, from the egg to the Umb-RAGE. Thats more than enough reason to see the VollkaScum hang.

Much a better lynch than getting rid of someone just because they are annoying. I play to win, not to make it comfortable.

FOUR!!!!

This is essentially just a rehash of everything else, not an independent point.

That's it Vollkan? I'm the eternal scum, the scum of all scum, the most vile man in all of the universe because you think I was role-fishing?!? Back to this weaksauce shit Vollkan? Really? No voting analysis to fuel an Umbrage conspiracy theory? No looking for blatant distancing? No breaking down of my reasons for going after DBG in the first place? No lucky slip ups in my arguments with Elvis.

Nope none, just role fishin.

You didn't even assign me enough bullshit Voolkan points. Time to hang, scum.

Vote: Vollkan

FIVE!!!!!

I've already pointed out that it's misleading to suggest that I am somehow claiming that rolefishing is an insta-death offence. Otherwise, I'll happily admit that *shock horror* I think blatant role-fishing is a scumtell.

==
The whole Umbrage-rage argument is too Fate + GreyICE like for me to even stomach reading. Suffice to say, this sort of thing is anti-town and null.
===



If you were given power-related information that a player was confirmed town, you would instantly confirm them, even though you wouldn't know the nature of their power? (aside from the fact that nothing here actually does make DGB confirmed-town)

Also, the net conclusion you draw is basically that DGB's role is uncertain - so you then demand that she reveal everything about it?

Umbrage+5

Ok ladies. I did your homework for you. You see those TWO whole lines up there? Thats Vollkans ENTIRE connection to Umbrage. THATS it. Vollkan is CLEARLY Umbrage's partner.

1) He tries to pass of Umbrage as null-yeller, giving him an excuse to not be involved.
2) Doesnt VOTE for Umbrage, AT ALL.
3) Doesnt even mention him by name, except for ONE TIME when I call him out on it.
4) Vollkan is definitely an off-voter not interested in looking for Umbrage scum.
5) Blatant distancing.

And thats just from his NON-INTERACTIONS with Umbrage alone. There is also the rest of the case made against him.

But hey, DBG doesnt give a shit. She doesnt like me, so I must be lynched! She doesnt care if im scum or not. She got lucky with Umbrage, lets ride out the wave some more. Is this your way of establishing your dominance DBG? By making Elvis your puppy and glaming on to other people? "Dont worry Vollkan, I got your back"? REALLY?

Dont forget that I want to know where your egg went today too, DBG.

SIX!!!!!!

I found Umbrage slightly scummy, but that's the extent of it. I'd also note that I wasn't passing umbrage off as null; I was ignoring a particular type of debate which I find to be meaningless alignment-wise (ie. the Fate-GreyICE "You eat donkey balls!", "NO U", "OMG SCUM!", "STFU" circus)

[vollkan]

Based on the questionnaire answers I'd say imaginality is scum because he answered in the exact same format as Untrod. So did Umbrage and I thought he was scum for it before I read the list of dead. And it's likely that two scum would do the same thing here because it's unconscious.

What makes you think it is a subconscious scumtell rather than just a common format?

[vollkan]

The umbrage voting stuff: I came in when people were annoyed that I wasn't posting. I admitted my mistake in my previous post, but I felt that we were wasting our dayphase lynching a purposefully obnoxious poster. I made a mistake, but I posted my thoughts and was trying to be active and post constructively. Do you really think ANY scum members would posting like I did when Umbrage when he already had 10 votes and others were asking everyone to pile on more votes? If I were his partner, I would quietly voted and let everyone have fun with Umbrage. I hadn't seen a game with a role like this, and thought his initial survival was enough. But I changed my mind when vpb and others were set on umbrage, and was somewhat convinced to throw down the final vote. Scum probably bussed him quickly or tried to distract from the wagon early on.

Mist+7

Aside from over-explanation and WIFOM, the biggest issue here is simply that your explanation doesn't make sense. Specifically, you're relying on an internally inconsistent theory of how scum would have behaved in your situation: ie. that scum would either have bussed early on

or

tried to distract early on

but definitely not

avoid/vacillate. Your defence simply assumes that scum would have predicted the Umbrage lynch in advance and acted accordingly.

[vollkan]

In other news, the people who win the "FUCKING SHUT UP, I DON'T CARE" award is jointly DGB, IS and Elvis.

Erm, yeah, that's why I haven't engaged conversationally with IS, and why I'm keeping a low profile right now.

IS is still scum, though, and it's a total no-brainer.

Biased opinion!

I don't get why he's not lynched yet.

Appeal to expedience! (sales weasel type trick)

I read his posts, and from my perspective, it's absolutely impossible for him to be town.

Biased opinion

I think there is an unspoken collective will to shirt focus from us three attention whores, even if that means giving a scum a free pass.

IS's behavior yesterday was the most scummy with regards to Umbrage

Biased opinion!

, with MistBeauty a close second.

Biased opinion!

SpyreX is depriving us of moonbeams, so he's starting to worry me again.

Setting up the next lynch

And evilpacman/Mysterio haven't impressed me at all thus far, they are still in the scum list.

Wild speculation

Shall I repeat my case against IS?

Oh yes, I would love to see some actual FACTS in this "case" of yours.

Shall I analyze his behavior today? I've been avoiding doing it, because (1) I thought anyone would see for themselves that IS is scum so there was no need for me to push the issue

Appeal to superiority!

, and (2) I am trying to avoid conflict with IS in order to make the game more agreeable

Avoid IS because IS knows when youre full of crap and can point it out!

, but he's still scum and he needs rope bad. [Biased opinion[/b]

You notice that above DBG? THIS is why I have been on your case. There isnt a single FACT in your statement above. NONE. Yet, you attempt to sound all wise and knowing. As if you got this figured out. Youre nothing but hot air, lady.

My case on Vollkan is based on FACTS. You can read the third time I presented the case on Vollkan and see for yourself that I deal with FACTS and REASON. Not biased opinions and aggressive speculation.

1) Vollkan clearly avoids Umbrage in order to not be associated with him.
2) Vollkan doesnt vote for Umbrage despite it being a good recourse.
3) Vollkan mentions Umbrage ONCE, ans that was because he was prompted. Even then it was just a mini-blurb.
4) Vollkan decides to tunnel on IS instead, hoping someone else takes the bait and foolishly comes after me. (That would be you, ladies).

See those there? Those are FACTS. Combine that with the other evidence and Vollkan is clearly scum that needs to hang TODAY.

I didn't vote for Umbrage because he didn't have the highest score. Umbrage had 5 points, but that was the extent to which I considered him to be scummy.

And if you exclude posts in which I respond to your arguments against me, I don't think there is any basis for saying that I am tunnelling you.

@volkaan, why didn't you place the 11th or 12th vote on scUmbrage yesterday? You posted three times when town was discussing the optimal "pile on votes" strategy and you totally ignored the debate.

Can you give me post #s around the discussion you refer to?

[vollkan]

I didn't vote for Umbrage because he didn't have the highest score. Umbrage had 5 points, but that was the extent to which I considered him to be scummy.

Whereabouts did Umbrage rank in relation to everyone else yesterday? I find it weird that you think that bit of rolefishing was the only scummy thing he did all game.

I really don't have time to do up the proper score table right now, but at the end of yesterday my scores were:

IS: 57
Umbrage: 55
EK: 55
Lurconis: 55
VPB: 55
Everyone else: 50

[vollkan]

Yes, the most points you manipulated yourself, giving me "bonuses" of +7 while Umbrage (confirmed scum) was getting +5's. You're always scum when you're so blatant with this manipulative point system bullshit. Even the ladies should have seen enough by now. You need to hang, scum.

I've already explained why yours merited more points than Umbrage's.

So Umbrage was the second highest person on your scumlist in a way (lolI'm as scummy as umbrage was), but you thought he wasn't vote worthy. I don't get that. You never compromise on your suspects?

Basically, no - unless there are extreme circumstances. To quote a disclaimer I often post: "Absent claims, need for deadline compromises, etc. I will always vote the person with the highest score."

The whole point of my points system is (for a range of reasons that I won't go into because it will only lead to a theory debate) to explicitly and inextricably link my voting behaviour to particular scumtells (as expressed through the points). Whilst some flexibility is needed for extreme cases, the system loses its necessary element of constituting a form of pre-commitment if its operation becomes subject to my own discretion.

[vollkan]

Just posting to confirm that (due to a huge assignment load over the next day and a bit), I won't be making a substantive post in that time.

[vollkan]

Ok, I finished reading last night...

unvote
VOTE: DGB

Why the vote? Because: Where's the egg?

I highly doubt the egg "does nothing" as elvis claims, so obviously there is a purpose. What is it's purpose? My best guess at the moment is that you eat it: you join the chicken lady's cult. You don't eat it: you piss off the cult and they kill you.

If the egg REALLY WAS NOT THREATENING TO THE TOWN... then why hasn't DGB told us who she gave it to last night? And/or why has no one claimed that they received it? Because it's anti-town.

So here's what we need to do. We need to kill DGB right now. If she is a cult recruiter, then we seriously fuck the cult's day up. Right now they have 3 members: DGB, elvis, and [to be determined]. If we kill DGB today, that's it... the cult doesn't grow, we know half of the remaining members (again: elvis), they are a non-threat to the town for the rest of the game.

If we DON'T kill DGB today, she recruits someone else at night. Instead of having 3/16 members like they do now, they'll have 4/14 or even 4/13 members (assuming we lynch someone + 1-2 nightkills). Then, not only do they have another unidentified person, they also have a larger percentage of the town. If we wait another day, they'll have 5 out of anywhere from 10-12 remaining players (again, pending nightkills). Oh, guess what, at 5/10 they fucking win AND WE LOSE. The longer we wait, the harder it gets to destroy the cult, and we could lose as early as NIGHT 4.

And, if a cult doesn't exist... if we kill her and there is no indication of the cult, then that's still good too. Because then at least we don't have someone sending mysteriously unexplained eggs to people every night.

I played on here a few years ago, stopped for a while, but got the mafia-itch so I came back recently and I re-read all my old games plus a handful of others just to "get back into it". One of the MAIN THINGS that I noticed while re-reading all those old games was that townies CONSTANTLY got fucked over by not taking action against claims they didn't understand. Constantly. There are so many games out there where someone claimed something that didn't make sense (like passing out eggs at night!!!), but they convinced everyone that it's NOT MAFIA (usually it's not) so the townies stupidly just ignored it until finally they lost at the end of the game because, oh, guess what, that weird role they didn't understand actually had a few extra caveats that wasn't claimed and then they were completely fucked because they didn't deal with it when it first came up.

Since I'm town in this game, I'm NOT going to let that happen here. That fucking egg does SOMETHING and most likely it's NOT GOOD for the TOWN.

Zeek+7

For starters, the cult speculation is just bad; DGB has claimed a role that targets people - there is nothing to suggest that she is a cult recruiter. More importantly, there are plenty of fairly obvious reasons why a town PR would not claim their role, even if it was useless (WIFOM, for example). I find it highly implausible that you could have the insight to go into such elaborate depth about the dangers of cult-DGB and yet also be so blind.

At that point, vollkan, you posted three times in a few hours and ignored the topic of the Umbrage pile entirely, even though seven(7) players brought it to light.

I do recall that debate, and I think the reason why I didn't comment on it was that I didn't see/understand what was scummy about it, so I deferred commenting until it made sense...except I never came back to it.

Also, as reflected by:

The whole Umbrage-rage argument is too Fate + GreyICE like for me to even stomach reading. Suffice to say, this sort of thing is anti-town and null.

There was an element of "Ugh, wtf is this Umbrage stuff about" as I was reading.

]
You heard that? VOLLKAN IS SCUM. I have made a solid gold case where in any sane game he would have been hanging and I would have been swimming in GLORRYYY. But im losing the popularity contest, so this game is now being poisoned due to pride and insanity. Some people cant admit that im RIGHT.

You made A case, which I rebutted point by point.

[vollkan]

Okay, just checked in, and I see I am at L-1, so:

I am

Kevin

from Citizen Kane. I have a protecting and killing power. Basically, the first time I target a person, I protect them. If I choose to target them again, it will be a kill attempt instead. Night 1 I targeted VPB. Reasoning was that VPB was one of my #2 suspects. My hope was to push IS on D2, and then, if VPB got scummier over D2, to kill him on N2. On N2, however, I instead protected DGB, given her claim. I win with town.