NY 174: Oldy Mafia 2 (Game Over)

[Yosarian2]

Weird double post; MS might still be being strange.

Anyway:

Rationale:
[*]UT has been on 3 of the major bandwagons, the most out of any player (tied with StD)
[*]UT was also on the Nat wagon which looked incredibly opportunistic at the time.

@Yos: did you just skim or completely miss this post and the subsequent discussion?

Eh. Like I said, your claim that Nat was an "opportunistic wagon" doesn't make much sense to me; there was never much chance of Nat being lynched. And your other argument looks pretty weak; UT just comes off as the "aggressive" playstyle, aggressively pushing wagons to get reactions and to speed up the game.

He voted Tigras for, as he called it, "shameless bandwagoning" (he even said "choo choo" as he did it) but dropped the vote a few posts later because he thought Tigras was looking town. Then he voted you, at a point when you were, in fact, starting to look pretty scummy. Then he joined my Nat lurker pressure wagon, in what I think is a pro-town move.

None of that looks scummy to me.

[Yosarian2]

Oh, for the record, STD is town. So far, he's picked a fight with Seol, LML, me, and PJ, who are 4 people that are all absurdly good at getting people lynched, all in the first 13 pages of day 1, without any obvious benefit to him from picking all those fights. So either he's righteous town cloaked in the paladin-like armor of righteousness, or he's gone completely suicidal. No way a scum pretending to scumhunt would stick their neck out that far.

He even attacked me for attacking Undo for the same thing he attacked Undo for earlier this game, which is so completely inconsistent it must be a town tell.

Oh! That's cool, Yos! Find an inconsistency and call it protown? That's the weirdest thing you may have ever said.

Consistency is a scum tell.

[LoudmouthLee]

It's much more often the vote that is scummy rather than the rationale. You don't lynch people with rationale. You lynch people with votes. By neglecting to look at voting patterns, you miss out on significant scum tells.

I still feel strongly that one or both of UT and STD is scum. Look at the patterns.

Edit while posting: consistency is a scum tell? I've never been scum ever, then.

[VitaminR]

Consistency is totally a scum tell. Yos comes off as quite town in his last few posts, with his discussion of DGB and LML. I'm not convinced that LML's scumhunting is actually scummy, but I agree that it's a bit superficial.

I also feel a lot better about DGB with that post. She was starting to make me nervous. I don't get the Porochaz read, though. Why is he scum?

[Patrick]

Kublai Khan replaces Tigris.

[VitaminR]

His notes are also explicitly independent of alignment.

I read over this somehow, never mind then.

[VitaminR]

What did you think of his comment about me?

I remember I never replied to this. What were you referring to?

[Patrick]

Votecount

LoudmouthLee (3) -- VitaminR, Green Crayons, Yosarian2
Kublai Khan (2) -- MrBuddyLee, Zorblag
MafiaSSK (5) -- petroleumjelly, Seol, Porochaz, CrashTextDummie, undo
Seol (5) -- Sotty7, Shanba, Cogito Ergo Sum, chamber, Glork
Untrod Tripod (1) -- LoudmouthLee
Cogito Ergo Sum (1) -- MafiaSSK
petroleumjelly (2) -- Albert B. Rampage, Save the Dragons
Zorblag (1) -- Untrod Tripod
Porochaz (1) -- DrippingGoofball

Not voting: Kublai Khan
22 alive, 12 to lynch.

[Kublai Khan]

Kublai Khan replaces Tigris.

*nods*

Will try to have a full read and analysis by later tonight.

[chamber]

his mirrored my thinking exactly. I'm currently a fan of chamber's play, and have him pro-town.

[chamber]

Consistency is totally a scum tell.

I think saying this, unqualified, when someone is disagreeing isn't likely to help alleviate the confusion. I agree with the meaning of the statement, but its specific types of consistency that are scummy, and those types of consistency are, in ways, a lack of other types of consistency.

Everyone's actions should be reasonably consistent from their POV. So when you say consistency is a scum tell I think you mean one of the following two things:

They generate reads early, and stick with them for too long/ the whole game. Reads should naturally be changing with new info, and humans are biased towards putting more weight on recent events, so reads not changing is weird.

There is always a trail of bread crumbs explaining all of their changes of thought. This trail of thought breadcrumbs should exist for townies, but townies don't always state everyone of their thoughts, it wont be explicit. This is what I think you and yos meant.

[Sotty7]

For full disclosure, I was voting him as a joke to jump onto yet another bandwagon. I think Zor's post is not very telling of his alignment and I am concerned about people who saw the wall of text and read it as town. For fuller disclosurer, CES's post helped me come to that conclusion (but since CES's post is public record I fail to see why others wouldn't).

My vote is on PJ.

I missed you sliding that vote back on PJ.

Sotty7 (looking for reasons to findi players scummy)

Yup, that's pretty much how I find scum.

Oh! That's cool, Yos! Find an inconsistency and call it protown? That's the weirdest thing you may have ever said.

This triggered a reaction for me as well, more because he was debating with STD who found him a little scummy but then Yos went out of his way to proclaim STD town while debating him. It's just feels like he was trying to defuse the situation a little trying to show that he isn't the threat STD might think he is. Green Crayons did this with me earlier on if I remember the exchange right. Felt out of place.

It's much more often the vote that is scummy rather than the rationale. You don't lynch people with rationale. You lynch people with votes. By neglecting to look at voting patterns, you miss out on significant scum tells.

And by neglecting to look at the reasoning you miss out too but this is a pretty circular argument. What's your opinion on CTD/CES/Green Caryons?

[Sotty7]

Quite a few things. I did just mention, though, that I'm less suspicious of VitR then I was several pages ago, and yeah, I suppose it's for a similar reason, although to a lesser extent.

You did? I missed it, can you point me back to the post or elaborate on why he's no longer as scummy to you.

[Yosarian2]

Quite a few things. I did just mention, though, that I'm less suspicious of VitR then I was several pages ago, and yeah, I suppose it's for a similar reason, although to a lesser extent.

You did? I missed it, can you point me back to the post or elaborate on why he's no longer as scummy to you.

I mentioned it in this post here:

[*]One of my favorite things to do is to find the village idiot and hunt scum off of the wagon. That used to be a really easy way to find scum. Also, when you have an outspoken "foot in mouth player" (such as myself and DGB), we become mafia fodder as well.

Ugh. This one makes me cringe, especially since I remember LML as being especally hard to lynch most of the time. Is he really using the "I'm a village idiot so scum like to target me" defense here? His posts have felt off to me for much of the game, and this just feels like a scummy defense.

The biggest problem I have with his play so far, though, is that there's very little real scumhunting. Most of his posts seem to be him making excuses for not doing much proper scumhunting yet, which really bothers me, and feels both out of character and scummy. His attempts to have it both ways with Tigras still bothers me, but it wouldn't bother me so much if he was also scumhunting. The only other real scumhunting he did was his STD vote, but that also feels pretty weak to me; he doesn't really explain it, and he doesn't press it, or try to put pressure on STD, or try to get STD to answer any questions or anything.

VitimanR feels less suspicious to me now. Still wouldn't mind an Undo wagon.

For now,

vote:loudmouthlee

VitimanR has been falling in my suspicion for a while. I originally voted him because I didn't like his attack on LML (the reasoning didn't make much sense to me at the time), but as the game has been going on, VitiminR has been looking steadily better, while LML has been looking worse and worse. Now, I'm just thinking that LML's scumhunting has just been off all game, and perhaps VitiminR just spotted that before I did (and perhaps didn't articulate it very well).

[Yosarian2]

There is always a trail of bread crumbs explaining all of their changes of thought. This trail of thought breadcrumbs should exist for townies, but townies don't always state everyone of their thoughts, it wont be explicit. This is what I think you and yos meant.

That's part of it. Also, townies who are going back and re-reading the game multiple times, trying to look for scum in different ways, will usually end up contradicting themselves one way or the other, because they're trying different theories on for size and are looking at the game in different mindsets using different (and sometimes contradictory) types of scum-hunting theories. Scum, on the other hand, tend to be much more aware of all the positions they've taken all game, and tend to work to avoid any internal contradictions they might be called out on.

[DrippingGoofball]

I don't get the Porochaz read, though. Why is he scum?

The combination of RL excuses and the posting style prior to said excuses smell of scum avoiding the game.

[Zorblag]

OK, since page 11 here are some new thoughts (focused on those that I had on my "would vote for" list first):

Cogito Ergo Sum: I'd really like to see more attention spread throughout the game, but I like the reaction to my entrance. I'm inching him towards town for now.

@Cogito Ergo Sum:

Have you played with DrippingGoofball or Albert B. Rampage much in the past (or had much exposure to their play in other ways?)

Green Crayons: At this point there's a fair amount of energy directed at digging at differences in post styles and what feel like minor language issues. I guess it's still somewhat early in the game and solid cases are still a bit on the elusive side, but the arguments almost across the board strike me as manufactured rather than with serious intent to find scum. It doesn't help that the timing of the LoudmouthLee case looks like a decision to pile on a popular wagon after setting up the option earlier, and he's generally finding people scummy who I don't. I'm still seeing scum here.

@Green Crayons:

Would you say that you're following the game on the whole fairly closely? Who is the scummiest of the players that you haven't particularly talked about so far?

MafiaSSK: Still nothing of use since the active pressure has come off. I'd really like to see more engagement in the game. I'll let him provide that without any questions from me to see where he goes.

MrBuddyLee: Hurrah! It's content! In 294 I can live with having those opinions on the main wagons and tend to agree with the others that he's leery of for similar reasons (with the primary exception of Shanba.) The question to petroleumjelly about Glork and MafiaSSK is very nice. If we get more play like that I'm happy to move him towards the town list.

Porochaz: Still doesn't inspire me. I like DrippingGoofball's latest reasoning; it's similar to what I've been feeling the entire game for him. I know that he's busy, but I don't feel like he's caring. Like with Green Crayons his play strikes me as manufacturing cases rather than trying to find scum.

Tigris: Didn't do anything to seem more town before replacing out, but I'll let Kublai Khan have a go at things.

undo: I suppose that being irritated at others (Albert B. Rampage and chamber) for failing to elaborate on what they find scummy is something to talk about, but there's just so much less productive scum hunting in these posts than I feel like there should be.

Untrod Tripod: Nothing much here either. Standing by a couple scum reads and responding to questions (or saying you will in the future) is fine, but there's so much more that could be done.

In other news, as I said towards the start of the post, Cogito Ergo Sum had a good, skeptical reaction to my initial posts. He, chamber and Save the Dragons all reacted in a way that made it clear they were paying attention to or interested in motives which is the key. DrippingGoofball had a reaction that I'd expect her to have, a bit less so with Sotty7, though she didn't have to say that she had it, so that's probably fine. VitaminR's was maybe an issue, but I don't know how much attention to detail to expect from him.

I disagree with a lot of the motivations for wagonning that LoudmouthLee is working from, but at least I think he's working.

UNVOTE: Kublai Khan
VOTE: Porochaz

Along with Green Crayon's he's my top scum read at the moment. I'd also be happy enough following an undo or Untrod Tripod movement if they came along.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[petroleumjelly]

1.)

@PJ, Poro, CTD and undo, you have somewhat similar reasons for voting SSK. I haven't read the guy in other games yet--have you? I want to know whether these odd behaviors you've noted are scumtells of his, or as Sotty has alluded to, are hallmarks of his overall loose/"lynchable" play. If you believe that one or more of these behaviors are genuine tells for him in particular, please elaborate.

@PJ, do you think Glorkscum would defend SSKscum as stridently as he has?

If cannot find a game where I played with MafiaSSK. My suspicions are based solely on his play in this game. He has played in two games I have modded, where he was lynched as a Townie on Day Two (a 2009 game) and as a Townie on Day Four (a 2010 game), but I do not remember his play in either game.

Yes, I can easily see Glorkscum defending MafiaSSKscum. I certainly have no reason to rule it out.

2.)

Do you think that a debate between MafiaSSK, on the one hand, and you and Seol (+/- LML), on the other, is going to end with the town going "by golly, that MafiaSSK guy is totally right"? If you think I'm using outdated meta, fine, just tell me I'm wrong. (No offence meant, MafiaSSK.)

In a vacuum, no.

Your question in itself, though, practically concedes that if both Seol and I are debating MafiaSSK on the same issue, we probably have a

valid point

we are trying to get across. This is opposed to

purposefully ganging up on a "weak" player

. Certainly neither of us has a pressing need to go attacking "weak" players. I take it you would agree either of us can stand toe-to-toe on theory with practically anybody.

This has been the root of my issue with you. Rather than giving weight to the theory that Seol and I (plus or minus LoudmouthLee) are trying to uncover something in good faith, you instead jump -- or willingly invite others to take the leap -- to the conclusion that we are scum swooping in on an easy mislynch.

Even

if

MafiaSSK is "weak" Town, your attitude does not reflect well on you because I would fully expect scum to proactively attributing / sowing the seeds of blame, and of course scum would know MafiaSSK is Town to begin with. The

easiest

path is actually to let MafiaSSK draw out his own noose and weakly protest his lynch and malign his attackers.

~

Your defensiveness on my follow-up line of questioning has not impressed me, either. It was very clear players were interested in your answer to my original question ("who are the weak players"), but you instead sidestepped it twice and have now sidestepped my question on strong players.

3.)

In response to Post 377, as I have said,when I first read Albert B. Rampage's "trust me" post I immediately switched my vote. As I started to edit my post to be shorter (starting around midnight) I decided I would rather stick to my MafiaSSK vote, but I wanted to make it clear I could just as easily vote Albert B. Rampage on that one post alone.

"Give me X Days/Nights" is a highly reliable scumtell in my experience. But I was so confused by its positioning (Albert B. Rampage did not have a pressing urgency to

make

such a claim) that I felt more comfortable leaving my vote on MafiaSSK at the time.

4.)

Unvote: MafiaSSK

Vote: LoudmouthLee

FoS: MafiaSSK

FoS: VitaminR

I have been giving LoudmouthLee a large berth so far, because I have been trying to separate his tone (the words that come to mind are "weaselly" and "argumentative," though I feel bad using such obviously negatively connotative words) from his play. In general I tend to not like his tone (definitely reminiscent of stereotypical "New Yorker"), and so I have put a concerted effort in trying to read him based on his content instead of his wording. But at this point I can no longer believe he believes his own content, particularly his Vote Count Analysis.

LoudmouthLee indeed (as others have already pointed out) seems to be ignoring the context of votes completely to come to his conclusions.

->

a.)

He labels every first vote in the game as a "random" vote (even though not all first votes are random; indeed, mine was not random in the slightest).
->

b.)

He then focuses on those who have changed their votes several times. I tend to think Townspeople are actually more likely to change their votes and their minds as evidence presents itself, especially if they are largely voting for pressure and reactions.
->

c.)

His take on the Natirasha wagon is simply incorrect. The Natirasha push was a policy push for action; action which has now occurred.
->

d.)

He makes no mention of the players who have not moved their vote at all (Porochoz, MrBuddyLee, Shanba, and myself) even though that would be an

easier

route for scum to take.

The biggest kicker for me is that LoudmouthLee has been defensive of his own voting history by trying to explain the circumstances:

... I've already explained multiple times why I felt your move stood out in particular. You're just picking on my wording there.

So, to paraphrase you: You're voting me because I went along with two (wait, one and an FoS) weak wagons with less than 7 pages on D1, and when I find something that truly looks and smells scummy to me, I change my vote to that person?

When I voted StD, I had a grand total of 2 or 3 votes on me (You, DrippingGoofball- who will vote for me regardless of anything whatsoever due to history, and Albert- who also likes voting me as well) - Hardly a wagon. There was no real pressure (sorry!) for me to make a move. I did it because I'm actively scum hunting.

(And this is not the only example I could cite).

But then he turns around and ignores similar circumstances in his Vote Count Analysis (and in his earlier argument with Save the Dragons). He seems to give no consideration to what a player actively trying to scumhunt might be doing with her vote, and further insinuates that if a vote was on a bandwagon it must have been opportunistic to a degree. Putting in work is not the same as actually scumhunting, and right now, I think LoudmouthLee is trying substitute one for the other.

5.)

Yosarian2, why do you think LoudmouthLee and VitaminR are unlikely bedfellows?

[petroleumjelly]

6.)

And MrBuddyLee, when you have time please answer my earlier question:

3.) MrBuddyLee, thoughts on Sotty7?

[MrBuddyLee]

she's ait

[Porochaz]

I feel cruel but

VOTE: Porochaz

Sorry mate

The game is the game

I can't complain. I realise its more a content vote than anything else, which has obviously been affected by my personal problems. But even before than I have struggled to get a hook on the game.

Im hoping that I can come up with a fresh perspective tonight when I reread or on Sunday when I return.

[Porochaz]

I don't get the Porochaz read, though. Why is he scum?

The combination of RL excuses and the posting style prior to said excuses smell of scum avoiding the game.

I was okay with your vote until this post. Im not really sure what you are trying to achieve with your vote.

Im also going to believe that "RL excuses" was just a poor choice of words.

[Porochaz]

So I am properly reading now and writing proper notes, which is something I haven't done in ages. I am at work atm, so shouldn't even be on site, so I'll post these later (Ive only done 3 pages worth anyway). However the main thing I've been looking at is the way Tigris made her vote, whilst her defence of her vote is valid, the way she made it was purely manufactured and she said as much. Whilst, I disagreed and still do with what SSK said initially in post 45, he does have a point about it just being another completely random RVS vote. In regards to my other point again ssk's overanalysing, I'll relook at it when I get to it, however for now...

unvote

[LoudmouthLee]

-> a.) He labels every first vote in the game as a "random" vote (even though not all first votes are random; indeed, mine was not random in the slightest).
-> b.) He then focuses on those who have changed their votes several times. I tend to think Townspeople are actually more likely to change their votes and their minds as evidence presents itself, especially if they are largely voting for pressure and reactions.
-> c.) His take on the Natirasha wagon is simply incorrect. The Natirasha push was a policy push for action; action which has now occurred.
-> d.) He makes no mention of the players who have not moved their vote at all (Porochoz, MrBuddyLee, Shanba, and myself) even though that would be an easier route for scum to take.

Call me wonderfully old school, and an asshole. I'm fine with either.
a) If you want to argue semantics, that's ABSOLUTELY fine. It's my freaking excel. I could have easily called it "initial vote" and you'd have nothing to argue here. You're grasping at straws, PJ, and I generally expect better from you.
b) To an EXTENT, you're absolutely correct. The rest of the sheep will push for the non-posters to post. However, the people who change their votes as frequently as some of the players do are looking to CONFUSE the town by creating suspicious reads in EVERY person they can. This HELPS SCUM. -Even if the person they're wagoning is scum and does not get lynched right away, they can easily go back to D1 and say "Well, I was on that wagon." It creates plausible deniability...
c) Here's a really great question for you, PJ (and Yos, and EVERYONE ELSE ON THE POLICY KICK), why Nat, and not any of the other players that hadn't moved their votes? Because Nat was being adversarial. Was stirring the pot. Was angering people. You say policy. I say VI. I think, somewhere in the middle, we're both right.
d) Why not let everyone else do that? You guys can go after the lurker tells (I don't believe in them) and I look to actively scum hunt.

And by neglecting to look at the reasoning you miss out too but this is a pretty circular argument. What's your opinion on CTD/CES/Green Caryons?

CTD is a perfect example on why I'm questioning the Nat votes as a VI push. There has been absolutely no push on CTD at all, but he has been pretty much non-active. CES as well. I have no opinions on either of them, but the game of mafia is not won in a day. I'm sure more information will surface. GC has been attacking me for a little while, and we seem to be spinning wheels. When people tend to be steadfast and rehashing the same argument over and over again with me, I tend to get a town read rather than a scum read.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

@Cogito Ergo Sum: Have you played with DrippingGoofball or Albert B. Rampage much in the past (or had much exposure to their play in other ways?)

I mislynched DrippingGoofball as a mason in 2006, boyo.

Porochazvoters should be looking to switch to Seol, really.