Mini 539: Game over

[Xtoxm]

Ythill chides him less mildly. Did you really not see that? IMO, Incog’s interjection was less excusable than Xtoxm’s but me pointing it out aggressively would have seemed OMGUS, reducing the validity of the accusation. I figured I’d leave it for someone who wasn’t on the wagon to bring up, but I guess it’s too late for that now.

This sound like an excuse for purposely trying to avoid something being brought up, soemthing mafia would do so as to stop the town clocking something

[Xtoxm]

Good points ChronX. I may revote Mafia later, but I think we have plenty to talk about for now and I’d like to reserve my vote for pressuring others.

Why do you want to reserve your vote for pressuring? are you trying to force out power claims or something? I just decide who i'm gonna vote for and stick with it, not throw it around on people i'm not conviced are mafia for the sake of it. Why are you willing to revote mafia later over the same information we got on page one?

[Xtoxm]

My Current Reads
Ask if you want me to elaborate on anything. Obviously I do not have any reads on DS or Natude.

Definitive Town: Ho1den, charter.
Probably Town: ChronX.
Middle of the Road: Mafia (slightly town), Incog, Xtoxm, Justin (slightly scum).
IGMEOY: Apyadg
FoS: North

I'd be interested to hear why you have me at the middle of the road?

And what has Apyadg done? I swear he never posts and might need replacing

[Nanosauromo]

Vote count!

Apyadg 2 (charter, Incognito)
Ythill 2 (Justin Playfair, Shteven)
MafiaSSK 1 (Xtoxm)
Shteven 1 (Disciple Slayer)
Incognito 1 (Ythill)

[Ythill]

@Kuribo: Welcome and thanks for replacing. Sorry I've been such a blabbermouth, I'm sure it makes your reread harder. I look forward to reading your views. As I've said before, I believe a fresh perspective is refreshing and good for the game.

[mrow]Responses to Shteven

Accusing Ythill of tunnel vision seems odd.

I've come to realize that it's not quite tunnel vision. It's a different kind of play style. What he'll do is he'll pick someone and focus on them for a day or two (or three or four). He'll carry out an argument with them fully, and not argue with other players. But after the argument concludes, he'll latch on to another person.

Good read. This is exactly what I’m doing. Not sure it’s a good playstyle, as it seems to have drawn quite a bit of suspicion down on me, but whatever. I would like to note that the arguments last until I get a good read (not a random amount of time as your post could suggest). The exception here is my argument with North/you, which I tried (and failed) to slip away from after I got a read.

Ythill seems to avoid game theory pretty strongly. For the record, I don't think -minor- game theory is a scumtell if it's balanced with game content…

I wouldn’t say I’ve avoided game theory altogether, though I have made a point of identifying it as such and only discussing it when it is directly related to alignment. I don’t think it’s always (or even usually) a scumtell but, unless the theory talk is very relevant, I do think that it is bad for town. I really don’t understand how me acting on this belief is scummy by itself, but I do see how it could add to your next point.

In a related, yet separate tell, Ythill also posts various I'm-a-saint phrases… I don't like him being so grandiose; it feels like a gambit. Trying to build up the you-can-trust-me vibe.

Grandiose is an excellent word to describe my writing in mafia and elsewhere. I certainly can’t argue with your opinion that it “feels like a gambit.” And I don’t think it’s out of line for any player to want the others to trust him. After all, this is a team game. For the purposes of discussion, I think we should separate the two types of “suspicious” statements you’ve attributed to me. Those in which I invite suspicion are discussed below (in my response to Xtoxm). The others are a different animal. When read in context, they make a lot more sense. If you want to pick apart a specific example or two, I’m game.

The switch to Incognito is very interesting in particular, because of the previous avoidance… Ythill realized there was something wrong there, and as a bit of a perfectionist, he's zealously correcting the error.

You seem to be getting a very accurate read on my personality, which is good. It will help you to understand my motives. However, I stand by the fact that I never avoided Incog, selectively or otherwise. Incontrovertible evidence of this was posted here. Also, if you look at my posts in isolation, starting with my second post from December 15, you can see this switch to Incog forming long before your false allegation that I was avoiding him. [mrow]Responses to Xtxom

@ Xtoxm: If you are town, watch your back on this. Your intentions may be entirely innocent but I do not believe Shteven’s are. Either way, you could tarnish your reputation here if you’re not careful.

(1)

Why did you say that?

(2)

what does it mean?

(3)

That sounds just very manipulative to me...doesn't show good for you I don't think?

(4)

And what's my reputation anyway? I haven't even completed a game on this site yet

I added the numbers to reference my answers. (1) If you are town, I thought it fair to warn you of this subtle pitfall because you might have missed the ramifications. There are other reasons for my post, but I’m not making them public. (2) It means that you should be careful to avoid tying yourself accidentally to Shteven. Let’s say I’m lynched and I come up town, D2 would include a thorough read of my interactions and, if you’re not careful here would tie you to Shteven at a point when his behavior is being seriously questioned by me. If your attacks are weak here, they could be identified as very scummy. (3) I don’t know if this is actually a question. Could you rephrase? (4) I mean your reputation in this game.

Anyone else want to take a stab at me before we move on to other matters?

This. And I also remember you saying somehting about having your go in the hotseat, but I couln't find the post.

Obviously you also couldn’t find ChronX accusing me of this or my defense either. I’ve quoted both for you and would appreciate you continuing the line of debate rather than starting it over from scratch.

And, some reverse psychology is attempted when he volunteers to be on the hot seat.

WIFOM already? You’re a better player than that, ChronX. You’ll find that I’m always willing to face accusations because I think that giving honest townies the chance to scrutinize me will be conducive to forming good relationships for the purpose of scumhunting. I think it’s important for us to look at

everyone

, including me, before we do anything rash. Plus, at this stage of the game, it helps town to be attacking players capable of defending themselves: less likely to lead to a mislynch and more likely to reveal useful information.

I’ve answered your #200 in my response to Shteven, above.

Good points ChronX. I may revote Mafia later, but I think we have plenty to talk about for now and I’d like to reserve my vote for pressuring others.

(1)

Why do you want to reserve your vote for pressuring?

(2)

are you trying to force out power claims or something? …

(3)

Why are you willing to revote mafia later over the same information we got on page one?

(1) Pressure often assists in gaining information, which allow us to get reads. It is a common town strategy in this game. I’m chalking your lack of understanding here up to you being new. (2) I have done absolutely no claim-fishing. My unvote of SSK was explicitly posted to avoid claim-fishing. I’ve consistently warned wagons away from my pressure targets because I want to (among other things) avoid claim-fishing. (3) I said I “may revote Mafia later,” without giving

any

reasons. Were I to revote mafia, it would be for the information from page 1

and

any other scummy information we got anywhere else. However, since making that post I have come to trust my read that SSK is the VI, meaning I will probably not vote him for his behavior at all. Ideally, we have a cop and the cop will investigate him, or SSK will become inactive enough to be replaced by a player with a different approach. Barring these, we will have to determine his alignment from the actions of other scum (which is only slightly more reliable) before we get into a LYLO situation. Since you’re new, I’ll suggest that you read [url=http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6946]this thread[/quote] as it will help you understand why some of us are pussyfooting around SSK.

(1)

I'd be interested to hear why you have me at the middle of the road?

(2)

And what has Apyadg done?

(1) I have you at MotR simply because I have few tells on you either way. This fact will most likely change as time goes on. (2) What Apyadg had done to gain my suspicions at that point was clearly presented in the post you quoted. Since then, he’s addressed my statements and, IMO, the accusations of others. My read on him has changed significantly since then. I wouldn’t list him as “definitive town” but I’m not really all that suspicious of him at this point.

[Xtoxm]

So i'm an incompetant noob? Gee, thanks.

The one you asked me to rephrase you're right isn't a question, ? is a typo. Don't know why I put it there lol.

(2) It means that you should be careful to avoid tying yourself accidentally to Shteven. Let’s say I’m lynched and I come up town, D2 would include a thorough read of my interactions and, if you’re not careful here would tie you to Shteven at a point when his behavior is being seriously questioned by me. If your attacks are weak here, they could be identified as very scummy.

But if you're lynched and come up mafia...?

You say you are questioning Shteven's behaviour. Why is this? whta has he does that is suspicious? And how does this in turn make me scummy?

WIFOM already? You’re a better player than that, ChronX.

Don't know what WIFOM means.

But the way you tell ChronX he's a better player than that sounds like a way of trying to get rid of him off your trail, trying to put down his argument against you as nothing. I think that's another reason which could make you look "scummy" (finally given in to this phrase lol).

However, I am pretty satisfied with everything else you said...

[Ythill]

So i'm an incompetant noob? Gee, thanks.

Lol. Not at all. First, I think that VI play (which the thread refers to) only gives the appearance of incompetance. Second, I was talking about SSK's play, not yours. Apply that article to SSK's play and you'll see what I mean.

You say you are questioning Shteven's behaviour. Why is this? whta has he does that is suspicious? And how does this in turn make me scummy?

Not going to repeat accusations against North/Shteven here. They are all clearly posted in the thread. But making weak attacks against me right around the time I am attacking Shteven, he is cheerleading you, and both you and he are suspecting SSK could make the two of you

seem

like scumbuddies. It's the sort of thing players look back for later in the game.

Don't know what WIFOM means.

Wine In Front Of Me: in brief, a statement or argument which could be read several ways depending on the intentions or motives of the target. For example, ChronX said that I invited suspicion as "reverse psychology" to seem more town, when it is just as likely that I said that to actually invite suspicion. Neither can be proved or disproved and the argument is really just baseless speculation. There's a lot of discussion about WIFOM in the Mafia Discussion section, as well as an article on the wiki. You'll probably find better definitions than mine there.

[Xtoxm]

Not going to repeat accusations against North/Shteven here. They are all clearly posted in the thread. But making weak attacks against me right around the time I am attacking Shteven, he is cheerleading you, and both you and he are suspecting SSK could make the two of you seem like scumbuddies. It's the sort of thing players look back for later in the game.

No, I strongly disagree. That's rubbish. Apart from the fact that I voted for mafia long before Shteven replaced northjay, and our suspicions were made independantly, agreement is required for a lynch to take place, so I don't see how you can use that as an argument against me.

[Claus]

Hey There!

I'm replacing CronX in this fine game. Now, I'm sort of busy for a re-read until new year's eve, but I'll be following the thread, so if someone wants to write me a small sum-up of the goings, It would be appreciated.

Oh, and Hello Incognito! I think that is the only face I recognize here.

unvote

- in case my predecessor voted anyone.

[Ythill]

@ Xtoxm: I have no clue what you're talking about. I've not made an argument against you. Why are you defensive?

[Xtoxm]

Hey Claus.

@ Xtoxm: I have no clue what you're talking about. I've not made an argument against you. Why are you defensive?

Well it sounded very much like an argument against me. You're accusations of me and Shteven.

[kuribo]

First off, you guys should know that I tend to be very aggressive.

Okay, here's a blow by blow analysis. (Anal Leases)

First off, the fact that a number of you are fairly new makes things a little more difficult.

Ythill in Post #5 seemed a little off to me. The random voting state is generally how things get started, and leads to discussion. Also, the worry about forestalling a mislynch seems a bit iffy to me. Scummier is the flat out point that he even SAYS he's playing the "n00b" card. That sort of thing always comes across to me like scum trying to cover up future scummy behavior. I'm willing to chalk these up to inexperience, though. And with so many of you abstaining from the random vote, that's not really a tell either.

Post 12- Xtoxm sets up the n00b play for himself, as well.

Post 13- Ythill seems to be a big fan of the meta. Just so you know, it's hard to learn anything from meta. Especially from inexperienced players, whose playstyle will adapt over time.

Post 17- MafiaSSK tosses a third vote onto Xtoxm, calling him "suspicious," and leaving it at that. WTH?

Post 22- MafiaSSK complains about the tie (Which, btw, Xtoxm was 3 votes to Mafia's 2)

Post 24- ChronX places a third vote on MafiaSSK, and says it's for pressure. I hate when people TELL you a vote is just for pressure, because when you tell them that, it doesn't pressure them at all.

Post 25- Ho1den removes his random vote and places it on Xtoxm, simply stating he didn't like xtoxm "defending" MafiaSSK. This post is suspicious to me--- it didn't seem like a "defense" at all, (just a statement on the wording). And if you think xtoxm was defending MafiaSSK, why vote him? Why not MafiaSSK? What's wrong with xtoxm defending him if you think Mafia's town?

Post 26- Good post by Justin Playfair.

Post 28- And good contribution by Incognito.

Post 30- Ythill makes some astute observations regarding MafiaSSK and sticks him at L-3. The dreaded "pressure" is back. How I loathe that.

Post 34- Xtoxm actually DOES seem to defend MafiaSSK a bit regarding the gender thing, making assumptions.

Post 36- THANK YOU INCOGNITO. That's one of my pet peeves.

Post 40- MafiaSSK becomes more suspicious, saying he just wanted to be on a bandwagon. PROTIP- Page 1 bandwagons aren't as good as they sound for the town.

Post 42- MafiaSSK admits to lying. You do know that alot of people like to "LYNCH ALL LIARS" on this site, right?

And in Post 43- Xtoxm jumps on with the L-2 vote.

Post 44- Incognito voices one of my own thoughts--- WAY too early (page 2? Seriously? for anyone to be at L-2. However, he poo-poo's the fact that MafiaSSK didn't claim a random reasoning for his vote--- he actually (vaguely) said Xtoxm was suspicious.

Post 50- MafiaSSK votehops again, bouncing onto Justin Playfair, which leads to...

Post 51- Ho1den gives the argument (in effect) that MSSK is too scummy to be scum. Then he uses MafiaSSK's lie to.... put suspicion on Incognito? What? MAJOR scumdar going off here.

Post 52- Ythill raises the possibility of a jester. Just FYI, I read somewhere on this site that 4 out of 5 times that a jester is mentioned, the mafia are the ones mentioning it.

Post 60- The bandwagon has officially stalled.

Post 63- Pointless meta from Ythill. Any player in this game could be doing anything.

Post 67- After two really protown posts from Justin (65, 66), Mafia says he needed a reasoning for the vote against Xotxm. Here's a hint--- no one ever needs a reason for the random vote stage, and to lie just to get one is majorly scummy.

Post 68- Charter makes his token "i'm not lurking" appearance to toss some nonsensical suspicion onto Apyadg. Calling someone out for not scumhunting when you've been actively lurking isn't very productive.

Post 76- Ythill goes on the offensive (or acting defensive if you will) against Justin Playfair. This post seemed very defensive to me.

Post 83- Ythill accepts a completely non-explanation from SSK and then asks his opinion of the other players. What? In post 84, Ythill claims Ho1den and Chater are definite town. But Ho1den has been scummy to me, and Chater has been lurking. So they're not definite town to ME. And he's leaning toward SSK being town. Huh? Attacks North for not posting much, but his "Definate" town guy Charter hasn't contributed much either at this point. In fact, toss out his page 1 posts (Random vote, pointless meta, "Please contribute") and he has exactly the same number of posts as North. Two. And yet, he's town but North is scum? Hmmmm...

Post 96- Charter gets the Brown Sherlock award for openly questioning someone's opinion of his alignment- No, charter, you haven't done any scumhunting. If Ythill is scum, this is a piss-poor distancing attempt.

Post 98- Ythill's post is pointless. He throws away his suspicion while saying that "Definate" means "maybe" and "maybe" means "I got my eye on you..." but he included someone in the category of "I got my eye on you." Ends with a defensive North vote while not calling charter out on the same thing. Don't like this post at all.

Post 104- Ho1den asks SSK's opinion of the other players.

Post 116- DS is lurking in plain sight. I had forgotten this guy was playing.

Post 120- Jayhawk seems very pro-town to me in this post, and smells BS with Ythill. In post 122, Ythill makes some semantic assumptions about Jayhawk being a newbie mafia.

Post 161- SSK suspects Natudo for lurking... but not charter or even worse, DS?

Post 164- Shteven bounces in and seems to wonder the same thing I am. How is SSK any LESS scummy than he was before?

Post 170- Another protown post from Playfair.

Post 186- Ythill accuses Shteven of trying to control the thread. Jealous, Mr. TLDR?

Post 208- Ah, Claus, we meet again.


Anyway, This is the part where I mention who I think is scummy. Most of you have been scummy at one time or another, and since this is Mafia, that's to be expected. However, there are those that I see as more scummy, and I feel I've posted the reasons in my lengthy analysis.

Ythill, charter, and DS are my Top Three at the moment, with Ho1den clawing his way towards them. Now, I realize that all 4 of you aren't scum, but I'd be willing to bet my right eye that two of you are.

[kuribo]

EBWOP- Actually, replace Ho1den with SSK in that top four. SSK is way scummier than Ho1den.

[Xtoxm]

Interesting analysis, Kuribo.

You don't mention me much at all but there's this:

Post 12- Xtoxm sets up the n00b play for himself, as well.

I was not "setting up the noob play", I was responding to Ythill, and excusing myself for the inevitable meta on my newbie game.

And in Post 43- Xtoxm jumps on with the L-2 vote.

I was not "jumping on the bandwagon", I think my suspicions for mafia were made clear by that point, and I had seperate reasoning for voting him. My vote still stands and I am happy with it.

[kuribo]

I was not "setting up the noob play", I was responding to Ythill, and excusing myself for the inevitable meta on my newbie game.

Newbie games should be exempt from meta, since it's assumed your playstyle will change as you gain experience.

[Incognito]

Well, Ythill, that was opportunistic of you and that certainly came out of nowhere. Anyway, I'll respond to your post.

Incognito has the fourth highest post count in the game, yet the second worst sig:noise after ChronX. He’s lead the most digressions. So he is active, yet posts less content than some players who are less active than he. Meanwhile, he directly references others’ inactivity nine times, including sending a prod to the mod. This game is slow and many of us have referenced inactivity a bit, but Incognito, who posts a lot of fluff, is establishing himself as the “lurker police.” Why? To establish that post count equals content? To draw suspicion away from his disinterested scumhunting?

It's cute how you attack me here on something that you yourself told all of us we may want to watch, out of respect for the replacements in your Post 143. Did you not notice when I began asking for prods to the mod and referencing others' inactivity? Somewhere around Page 5 where Natude still hadn't said a word, Disciple Slayer still hadn't posted any content even though he promised to upon returning on the 9th, and ChronX just finished mentioning that he would not be available until the end of that week. And guess what - on page 6 things worsened: Northjayhawk left, Ho1den said he would be inactive for a time, and ChronX asked for a replacement. To me it doesn't make sense to continue adding more and more content to a thread when it seems like at least half of the players aren't even participating. Did you not notice how active I

was

when it seemed like a fair majority of the players were also active? Since when is asking for more activity from all of the players a scumtell?

PBPA

• In #28 Incog defends Xtoxm under the guise of attacking Ho1den. This is his first serious post and we see his first incidence of fence sitting. This post can be played later as an attack or a defense (he ends up calling it an attack in #88, after Justin challenges him on it being a defense).

You make it seem like the game-related posts in the game of Mafia have to always be one of two extremes: either attacks or defenses. Where in Post 88 did I mention that I was attacking Ho1den? I distinctly remember mentioning that I was asking for

clarification

from Ho1den. After he provided clarification, I never went further to place a vote on him or an FoS or ask further questions - I felt his explanation was sufficient and didn't warrant an attack. Also, please if you're going to begin referencing post numbers, could you link the post it is you're referring to so people could get a clear understanding of what you're citing? Otherwise it looks like you're hiding something in an attempt to distort the facts to hopefully gain some support from the other players.

Incog also makes his first “voice of authority” post here, which I saw as not scummy in itself, as he simply answers Apyadg’s question. But the post thereby establishes Incog realizing that Apyadg is a true n00b (and therefore a good target?) because he doesn’t know about the closed setup.

Did it not occur to you that maybe I was just trying to help someone who asked a game set-up question in the thread? Your statement "and therefore a good target?" is a reach and it urks me that you would accuse me of having an ulterior motive for helping someone with a question.

In #36 Incog poses as the IC again, this time bringing a digression to the thread, possibly attempting to distract from the attention on Xtoxm or SSK. If so, it doesn’t work. There is something else very scummy about this post but I want to let it play out before drawing attention to it. If allowed to progress naturally, it will either confirm or disprove itself.

This is hilarious. I share with you some advice on how I think you might be able to draw out better information from future targets and you consider this an attempt to "distract attention from him"? You're better off making that accusation towards my subsequent post in Post 44 where people actually began unvoting from SSK and directing attention elsewhere. Oh but that would probably be a much more difficult accusation for you to make considering the fact that you agreed with me and subsequently unvoted. Ah, the irony.

In #44 Incog clearly defends SSK. It would have been entirely possible for him to question the wagon without that defense but he posts it anyway. In fact, the defense takes up the majority of the post and the attack seems like more of a deflection of suspicion. It is very vague.

Actually it wouldn't have been possible for me to question the wagon without mentioning my portion about his vote being a random one and my thoughts about random voting in general. Undoubtedly if I just mentioned that "a bit too much is being placed on the random voting phase", people would have followed up with the question: "Do you really think that MafiaSSK's vote and reason for voting was random?". My intent was to include my own feelings about SSK's first vote while questioning the wagon. Also, didn't you agree with me wholeheartedly in your subsequent post? Why have your feelings suddenly changed about that post?

[*]

Chron, this is a strange statement especially since I wouldn't even consider myself to be an "experienced player". I've only been on the site for a month and have only completed one Newbie game while this current game is my first mini-game ever.

This is Incog’s defense to the “voice of authority” accusation (which came in #49). I thought the accusation was well thought out even if it was a bit of a stretch. The defense, however, makes me wonder about Incog. It amounts to

I am not a duck, therefore I could not have been pretending to be a duck

and is left to stand unsupported.

Way to cut off the rest of my post. Actually my post read more like this:

Chron, this is a strange statement especially since I wouldn't even consider myself to be an "experienced player". I've only been on the site for a month and have only completed one Newbie game while this current game is my first mini-game ever. And since you've made the statement "this will come back to bite him when the inevitable rash of replacements occur" while you've also implied that my supposed "voice of authority" is a scum tactic, I'm guessing you've already come to the solid conclusion that I'm scum.

in response to a comment made by ChronX which looked like this:

Incognito seems to be setting himself up as the town's voice of authority, by answering game setup questions and making lengthy statements about game theory and such. This is often a scum tactic adopted by experienced players in a game with apparent newbs; you establish yourself as the wise man and can direct votes and thought processes later. Fortunately, this will come back to bite him when the inevitable rash of replacements occur and more vets filter into the blend.

First he misrepresented me by labeling me as an "experienced player" and next he makes a statement that seems like a solid conclusion about my alignment. I wasn't trying to state "I am not a duck, therefore I could not have been pretending to be a duck"; instead I was pointing out the flaws in his argument that he was using to classify me as "scum". Don't you think that an argument with flaws probably shouldn't be strong enough to come to a negative conclusion about someone's alignment? I'm really surprised that you believe my response to ChronX was more scummy than his statement "Fortunately, this will come back to bite him when the inevitable rash of replacements occur and more vets filter in the blend".

What gets me here is, why not post those players’ names the first time he suspected the wagon? Why deepen it once he comes under attack? Neither player had done anything else “scummy” in the interim. And why lump the two players together? This is another fence-sitting post, looks like he’s accusing both to see which attack gets support. The accusation regarding Apyadg was clearly not valid, a fact that Apyadg points out two posts later (in #60).

Reread Ho1den's Post 51. In that post he has more of an issue with me accepting SSK's transition from thinking someone's suspicious to jumping on a bandwagon and lying about it. He then proceeded to place a vote on me. My response post mentions ChronX and Apyadg because they both had chosen to place serious votes on MafiaSSK

before

SSK even made the transition that Ho1den had mentioned in his post. Later on in your very next post you yourself even admitted that you too had "jumped on the wagon even before MafiaSSK admitted to lying". If my post was truly a fence-sitting post, don't you think I should have, as you call it, "lumped you" in there as well right along with Apyadg and ChronX? Guess what: I didn't because you had classified your vote as a pressure vote as opposed to a serious one and I certainly didn't want to misrepresent you. But right now it seems like you have no issue misrepresenting me.

[*]But ChronX has posted a weaker defense in #59 and Incognito comes back in #62 to argue with him; ChronX’s #64 and Incog’s #68 continue this spat. Neither player makes very good points. My gut says that this exchange feels contrived, but I can’t back that up with facts. Suffice to say, Incog never challenges the stronger of the two defenses. This choice of arguments infers that he has identified ChronX as the scummier of the twins from #58.

If I truly found ChronX scummier, I would have voted for him. My posts following Apyadg's reply and ChronX's reply were made for me to both clarify what I stated in Post 58 and to determine if ChronX truly didn't understand what I was getting at or if he was deliberately trying to misrepresent me. Eventually he fell silent and mentioned that he would be away for about a week, so unfortunately I wasn't able to get a good determination of what he was attempting to do and now he's been replaced. I'll wait for Claus's interpretation of the thread to come to this kind of conclusion.

[*]Except charter takes Incog’s bait in #69, attacking Apyadg. Two posts later, in #71, Incog follows and cheerleads charter, voting Apyadg. So we have the

reality

in which Incog quietly initiates suspicion on Apyadg (the n00b) but the

illusion

that charter lead the attack, both factors set up by Incog’s posts. Also with his vote, Incog suggests that it is Apyadg (not ChronX) whom he finds the scummiest of those original twins. He never returns to the ChronX argument, or to suspecting him at all.

OMG another hilarious statement! Now you mention that charter has "taken my bait". Hmmm... Wasn't charter's vote on Apyadg the reason you labeled him as definitive town in your Post 98? It's really funny how you're becoming tangled in your own lies.

[*]In #88, Incog is on defense. He deflects suspicion back on Apyadg, reiterating his use of the word “bad” to vaguely say “scummy.” My main problem with this is that, in context, Apyadg’s meaning was clear. Incog has heavily decried me questioning SSK’s grammar, yet does the same thing here without the depth of my “failed premise”. Also Incog chronically commits the same sin he accuses Apyadg of, using phrases like “a little odd” and “a bit odd.” Even in context, these statements of his are less clear than Apyadg’s and could actually be construed as intentionally placing suspicion without coming out and saying it.

In order to say that I was on the defense at that point, I guess you'd have to assume that Justin Playfair's questions were attacks. But if I remember correctly, Justin Playfair himself mentioned that he wasn't attacking me, and I personally never felt that Justin Playfair was attacking me either. Where did I use the phrase "a little odd" or "a bit odd" in that post? I just used Ctrl + F to find the word "odd" on Page 4, and I only found two instances of the word. One in your Post 84 in which you're quoting Northjayhawk and one in your Post 86 where you're quoting Justin Playfair. Seriously, why the hell are you trying to misrepresent me?

[*]By the time Incog posts #109, DS has come out of lurking to quick-vote Apyadg, making the wagon seem scummier. Incog doesn’t address Apyadg’s defenses or his own vote, just questions DS and promises to post content “later today” (Tuesday, December 11).

And so you find me scummier than Disciple Slayer for making Post 109 than his Post 89 in which he pops up out of nowhere to place a vote on Apyadg? I think you've been awfully accommodating towards Disciple Slayer this whole game. Apyadg was already being questioned by Ho1den, and I became suspicious of Disciple Slayer for placing a vote on Apyadg the way he did. Considering Disciple Slayer's action, I was actually beginning to form a different opinion about Apyadg but I was still waiting for the scum-hunting that he promised before removing my vote. He has yet to provide us with that scum-hunting.

[*]On Decenmber 13, Incog finally posts content in #129, but only to address a direct question. His read on charter is on the fence, leaning town, which makes sense considering the public reads on charter and Incog’s recent teaming up with him. His one accusation is a sly defense of himself, as he is only referring to charter’s attack on him; he twists the words of that attack, making it seem as if charter posted a scummy read regarding SSK, when, in reality, charter never referenced SSK’s alignment; and he accuses charter of making an “inaccurate statement” that IMO (and others’) was accurate. Incog is setting up a way to distance himself from others who are voting Apyadg.

Uhm, seriously, wtf? Where did I mention that my read on charter is on the fence, leaning town? Please everyone have a look for yourself and tell me where I mentioned that I'm leaning town on charter: Post 129.

I don't even feel the need to continue this long post replying to your PBPA of me when you clearly haven't even analyzed my posts well enough to be considered an analysis. When I first read it, I remember thinking: Wow, I really said all that? After reading that shit where you've completely misconstrued everything I said and after I've finished reading all of your other posts in the thread, I think it's pretty easy for me to switch my vote from Apyadg to you. And no, this is not an OMGUS vote.

Unvote

Vote: Ythill

I still have an

FoS on Apyadg

because I'd like to see the scum-hunting he promised and now an

FoS on Disciple Slayer

for reasons that I've mentioned previously.

Oh and hey, Claus and kuribo! It's nice to know we now have the full complement of players. =)

[Ythill]

Well it sounded very much like an argument against me. You're accusations of me and Shteven.

Rereading, I can see how you thought this. My apologies for being unclear. Rest assured that I didn't mean to attack you. I've got enough on my hands right now, lol.

Looks like I've got a lot of work to do... Catching up my notes right now, and my response to kuribo is almost finished. Will be addressing Incog afterwards, but I may not get to it for a little while (maybe tonight?). Pretty please respect my backlog and try to wait with things I need to directly address until I get caught up.

[Ythill]

Thanks for the quick read, kurbio. It seems like you’ll be active here, which is a good thing. I’m also glad to have another aggressive player on board. It’s a bit of a pain that you are posting yet another Ythill inquisition, but I did invite suspicion…

Most of you have been scummy at one time or another, and since this is Mafia, that's to be expected.

If all players slip up with scumtells, then it must be somewhat true that players who post more make more of these all-players-do-it mistakes. They also have more chances to set off mistakes of perception. Not saying this is a town tell on me, but note that this is my 56th post, which is more than double the count from the next most frequent poster. Also, my word count is quite high. Just keep these things in mind when calculating who is scummiest.

Ythill in Post #5 seemed a little off to me… I'm willing to chalk these up to inexperience, though.

You seem to be withdrawing the accusations here. I will therefore refrain from defending, Let me know if you want me to address post #5.

Post 13- Ythill seems to be a big fan of the meta.

Just as others seem to “be a big fan” of random voting. I think it’s clear that discussing meta is at least as revealing and game relevant as discussing random votes, as others still are at that point in the game.

Post 52- Ythill raises the possibility of a jester. Just FYI, I read somewhere on this site that 4 out of 5 times that a jester is mentioned, the mafia are the ones mentioning it.

If this is given just FMI, why include it as one of the bulleted items in an aggressive analysis? This is mud-slinging, and uses false statistics. I read somewhere on this site that 999, 999, 999 out of 1,000,000,000 times someone raises false statistics, they are a penguin. If you want to claim sources, identify those sources… penguin.

Post 63- Pointless meta from Ythill. Any player in this game could be doing anything.

Not pointless at all. It was the answer to a direct question and was one of several pieces of evidence I’ve given that SSK is the VI.

Post 76- Ythill goes on the offensive (or acting defensive if you will) against Justin Playfair. This post seemed very defensive to me.

Justin’s first attack against me was rambling and full of crap-logic. It felt like he was trying to build a case against me rather than stating an honest case. So my defense is going to be a little barbed. Since you’re a fan of using out-of-game data in your accusations, here’s one for you. That said… yes, I did just call someone defensive myself.

Post 83- Ythill accepts a completely non-explanation from SSK and then asks his opinion of the other players. What?

In my notes, under

Player Overview

, SSK’s very first entry is: “Responds to honey, not vinegar 67.” Kissing up to someone a little bit is as valid a tactic as being aggressive or insulting if it seems to be the best way to get information.

In post 84, Ythill claims Ho1den and Chater are definite town. But Ho1den has been scummy to me, and Chater has been lurking. So they're not definite town to ME.

So we saw things differently, not a big deal, especially considering your other reads. Since then, charter has slipped from that definitive town category IMO. I’ve currently got him @ MotR because of some things I caught in a reread. I still have a pretty high opinion of Ho1den but haven’t really pressured or reread him so could be wrong.

And he's leaning toward SSK being town. Huh?

SSK is clearly a VI. I’ve already linked to this article but will point you to this specific post from it so as to avoid being a penguin. Other people have the same opinion as the post I’ve linked to: the VI is scum about 25% of the time. This is the main reason for my lean.

Attacks North for not posting much, but his "Definate" town guy Charter hasn't contributed much either at this point. In fact, toss out his page 1 posts (Random vote, pointless meta, "Please contribute") and he has exactly the same number of posts as North. Two. And yet, he's town but North is scum? Hmmmm...

Twisting statistics? Of those two posts you credit to North, one is a random vote (which you’ve subtracted from charter). Of the posts subtracted from charter, you’ve included “pointless meta,” which is

your

opinion: not very applicable since what you’re attacking is

my

opinion of charter at that point and in

my

opinion, the meta was not pointless. So, with correct math, the North:charter content post count was 1:3. Also, though lurking was certainly part of my accusation against North, you glaze over the fact that I was also attacking him for the content and timing of the post he came out of lurking to make.

Post 98- Ythill's post is pointless. He throws away his suspicion while saying that "Definate" means "maybe" and "maybe" means "I got my eye on you..." but he included someone in the category of "I got my eye on you."

You like to bandy the term “pointless” for things you may not understand. Most of what you say here is untrue to the extent that you are severely twisting my words, and your use of quotes is misleading support for this dishonesty. What I actually wrote was, “It might help to know that I’m using definitive by it’s main definition (most reliable) and not the alternate definition (final answer). Definitive is the town equivalent of Fos/vote whereas probably town is the equivalent of IGMEOY.”

Ends with a defensive North vote while not calling charter out on the same thing

“Defensive” again? I pointed a FoS at North, saying that it was not a vote because he was apparently absent. He responded immediately and failed to clear himself. Me

not

placing that vote would have been suspect. As for the charter issue, I’ve addressed it above. And please forgive me for neglecting to take a game action based on the unstated opinions of a player who hadn’t joined the game yet. My actions followed my own stated opinions to the letter.

Post 120- Jayhawk seems very pro-town to me in this post, and smells BS with Ythill. In post 122, Ythill makes some semantic assumptions about Jayhawk being a newbie mafia.

A vague statement. I won’t question your read on North but “smells bullshit?” In that post North poorly argues game theory, and falsely accuses me of word-twisting, denying that he said something I never claimed he said. Can you substantiate his accusation? No. He may smell shit in #120, but it’s on his own shoes.

Post 186- Ythill accuses Shteven of trying to control the thread. Jealous, Mr. TLDR?

This accusation is so baseless and obviously false that I’m going to chalk it up to misunderstanding, probably because you were boggled from the read. I absolutely

did not

accuse Shteven of that. What I did was quote the previous post, where

he

accused

me

of it.

Finally... here’s some of my signature “reflective suspicion”:

I hate when people TELL you a vote is just for pressure… And good contribution by Incognito… The dreaded "pressure" is back. How I loathe that… THANK YOU INCOGNITO… Incognito voices one of my own thoughts...

The most cheerleading yet in one post. Considering the play that I’m about to make, I think you had better explain this. That said, I didn’t get much of a scummy vibe from your post. You made some questionable arguments but, in your defense, they were justifications of first impressions based on a very quick read.

[Ythill]

Actually, this post is going to be easier than I thought. Time to take this game to the next level.

Thanks for #215 Incog. It includes very suspicious semantics arguments, severe stretches, and what appears to be intentional “confusion” allowing you to argue minutiae while dodging the real points. You conveniently note that it isn’t worth bothering to address the rest of the post after only touching on a few of its points. Your #215 is the scummiest thing anyone has posted so far and confirms my read on you.

I’m going to do a 180 on my playstyle here and refrain from picking your post apart quote by quote. You have made a few good points, as was expected, but they are all the easy defenses and make little difference to my overall case. You have committed, in #215, a few of the scumtells already mentioned as such by people I am reading as town. You have also posted some obviously unreasonable defenses. Conveniently enough for me, some of these are defenses to things you were accused of by other players I am reading town. Point? The towniest among us should be able to see your #215 for what it is without any help from me.

Despite your preemptive

oh-no-it-isn’t

, your vote is very clearly OMGUS. Furthermore, it is a quiet leap off of the Apyadg mistake. Shouldn’t a townie accused of a scummy vote justify his vote instead of unvoting it? Further-furthermore, you have leapt onto the player who is unquestionably under the most pressure. With yours as the third vote and two other people actively accusing me, what better place is there for scum to land?

I do not, however, think that my bandwagon is bad for town. In fact, I am encouraging it. If you suspect me, by all means vote me. And, for the clincher, I am ready to claim:

V

ery

i

nteresting

g

ames.

I am a single-shot vigilante (one night kill). If not lynched today, I will confirm tonight by killing the person my vote is on (currently Incog). If that person is lynched, I will kill the person my FoS is on (currently Shteven). From now on I will be confirming my current vote and FoS at the bottom of each of my posts.

Some of you may think this was too quick a play. I disagree and I really hope I’m right about it. From the beginning, I’ve been playing with the assumption that I probably wouldn’t live past N2, which should shed some light on certain points of my behavior. There are a limited number of scenarios which could come of this claim. I am not going to bother addressing any that suppose I am not a vig, because the fact that I am will be proven without question soon.

(1) I am lynched. You will see my role and know that I was not lying. Town will lose a power role but it is a minor one. The confirmation of that role will shed new light onto my 27182637213891236 words and the responses to them. Not a bad exchange as I believe there is a great deal of useful information there. All I ask is that I am given the chance for a “final words” post sometime after L-2.

(2) I am not lynched #1. Scum has bad strategy and I am confirmed by my kill N1. We have a confirmed townie (basically a vanilla at that point, since I’ve used my night kill) and, maybe I’m being overly confidant here, but we have an extra scum killed by my hand.

(3) I am not lynched #2. Scum have middling strategy and I am killed by them N1. Same as combining the above two, except that my death also protects more important power roles. I have already confirmed with the mod that my kill will still happen if I am night-killed.

(4) I am not lynched #3. Scum have excellent strategy, they don’t NK at all. My claim seems false and I am pretty much guaranteed to be lynched D2. But, again, I don’t think my death is the worst thing that could happen to town. Whether D1 or D2, it will reveal my alignment and role which will uncork a mountain of data on other players. Not to mention that this option costs scum a NK.

This outcome could also happen if I am targeted by scum but doc protected. Because it could be the most favorable to scum of the four, I am going to ask that (if we have a doc) I not be protected from N1 NK whether you believe me or not; there are far better targets for protection anyway.

Ythill's current vig targets: Incognito (vote) and Shteven (FoS)

[Incognito]

Before I even reply to your claim, I'm going to suggest that if someone else has the role of Vigilante, now would be a good time to counterclaim Ythill since there's most likely only one Vig per mini-game. I'll just mention that I'm not completely buying your claim since I could think of a number of legitimate reasons for mafia to claim such a role at this stage of the game, especially since you're threatening to vig-kill me on Night 1. I really don't see how you've already come to this solid conclusion that I'm scum, and you place me into a weird position since I feel I too am forced to claim just so you won't vig-kill me tonight if either one of us doesn't end up getting lynched today.

[Xtoxm]

I'd be happy to go along with that...if you die and your mafia, then Ythill is twlling the truth, if your town, we can lynch Ythill.

[Justin Playfair]

Well. Things have picked up.

Okay, Ythill. First, the claim is too early. It almost looks like you were planning it all along and just couldn’t keep from pulling the trigger any longer. Three votes? I don’t consider it a certain scum tell, but it seems either the result of panic or pre-planning.

Just for consideration, here’s one possibility other than you being normal scum in a panic or a townie making a strangely unforced claim, though I think it’s far-fetched. Just not so far-fetched that I don’t want to comment on it.

You’re not a vig. You’re a serial killer. You make your declared kill (and this would play into the brand of scumhunting you’ve done, where you only seem interested in proving that you’re really suspicious of someone, not trying to prove their guilt to town), then simply refrain from killing again until endgame. You coast on your proven cred as a one-shot vig, able to mislead town as you will with little chance of serious suspicion coming your way. You could even try to reverse scumhunt, never closing hard on who you think is scum, to make yourself a less attractive target for a nightkill. You make sure you’re not the most attractive target for scum on the first night by pointing out that your action will happen anyway (so, since you’re a one-shot and since if you have targeted town they know that, and if you’ve targeted scum the scum would be dead anyway, what’s the point?) and afterwards you hope to keep them so hooked on your busy hunting of town that they’ll want you to live. I wouldn’t imagine it would keep you alive to endgame, but then you could always reverse yourself at some point after night one and ask for the doctor’s protection as a proven townie.

The only possible downside I could see is that if you happen to announce you’re going after a scum on night one the scum might kill you night one just based on your success as a scum hunter. Or you might get killed later by scum as a seemingly proven townie, but this claim followed by your kill would put you in a better position to eventually ask for protection, if protection was still available, so you might believe your risks of being nightkilled are less even with this claim than the random chance of being night killed combined with the very real chance that you were going to be lynched day one.

As far as your chance of being the day two lynch because scum would refrain from killing on night one just to make you look like scum, that seems like a real false possibility to me, this one raised not with you as a serial killer but with you as just plain old scum. Whatever you are, why would scum decide that making you the most likely (but not assured) day two lynch would be worth not taking their very certain night one kill? Would you mind explaining why you think that would be the best scum strategy, because it seems like the dumbest to me, unless you think that as a “confirmed townie” you would get protection on day two or thereafter. Otherwise they could kill you anytime they wanted.

For now I’m going to

Unvote: Ythill

But rest assured, if the scum “have an excellent strategy” and don’t kill night one, I will not be swayed an inch with any argument about how those brilliant scum put you in the hot seat. That last bit seems scummy in a way that is absolutely laying the carpet for your day two defense, and it would have been an absolute deal-breaker on this claim for me, if I didn’t also feel it was possible (and sorry for what I’m about to say) that you have such a high opinion of yourself that you think the most brilliant strategy would be the one that counters your brilliant strategy, as opposed to the one that would do the most certain good for the bad guys.

As for the other, we don’t know what the roles are, so it would be as likely, I guess, for you to be a serial killer as a one-shot vig. But would it be as likely for you to be the serial killer AND come up with this idea AND for me to think of it? I don’t have that high an opinion of myself. Probably close, though.

But on that score, even if two bodies hit the floor tonight, I’ll be keeping an eye on the cases you make. So far the only one that has even come close for me (sorry again), was the one on Shteven. I’ll get into what I think of your case on Incognito and do a run-down on my other suspects directly, though in this case directly will likely be close to 24 hours from now.

At the pace this game is suddenly moving we may have a couple more claims by then.


Hey, welcome Kuribo and Claus!

[Justin Playfair]

XtoXm,

Ythill could be wrong and still be the vig. Him killing town would not prove him scum. Just wrong. If two bodies hit the ground tonight, and one is the person Ythill said he was going to kill, whatever their alignment, Ythill is on more solid, if not absolutely solid, ground.

[Incognito]

I'd be happy to go along with that...if you die and your mafia, then Ythill is twlling the truth, if your town, we can lynch Ythill.

Xtoxm, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Are you suggesting that I should be the person lynched today to have my alignment revealed by the mod? And that if my alignment is revealed as town, that automatically proves that Ythill is lying about his role and that he should be lynched on Day 2? Have you considered that maybe Ythill isn't lying while at the same time I'm aligned on the side of the town?

[Xtoxm]

I'd be happy to go along with that...if you die and your mafia, then Ythill is twlling the truth, if your town, we can lynch Ythill.

Xtoxm, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Are you suggesting that I should be the person lynched today to have my alignment revealed by the mod? And that if my alignment is revealed as town, that automatically proves that Ythill is lying about his role and that he should be lynched on Day 2? Have you considered that maybe Ythill isn't lying while at the same time I'm aligned on the side of the town?

No, I want to lynch mafiaSSK today. This will have no effect on what Ythill said. Ok so he could be vig and be wrong. But if he kills you at night and you are mafia we know he is telling the truth