Mini 1516: Mafia in Space (Game Over)

[fferyllt]

Your first couple of posts did look scummy as hell to me, MME. It was the way you went about addressing that, along with your stances that changed my mind about you, because that looked very town-minded.

fitz had so many scum-posts. Aside from day 1, the posts got kind of buried in all the town vs town noise, day 3 and 4 in particular. That's one town failing we all shared. He should never have made it to lylo.

[Infinity 324]

You're wrong there. And your definition of scummy is off.

A scummy post is a post that

looks

like it could have been made by a scum-aligned player, it doesn't need to be made by a scum. It's all in the interpretation of the observer, it's all speculation on the side of the observer. You can't define scummy or scumminess based on the alignment of the player, because you don't know the alignment, all you have is a few posts and your observations.

I disagree. By that definition, what do you call a post that looks towny on the outside but is in reality scummy on the inside? Given that, and my theory that an alignment influences every single post, you may be able to at least understand where I'm coming from.

In this case I did know my own alignment, however, the others didn't and I realized that that one post looked horribly scummy from their perspective. What good would it have done to have ignored that fact and just continue marching to a lynch on me? I had made scummy posts. This does not have anything to do with my alignment.

You thought I was scum because of that post. There's nothing that shouts towny about that post. You didn't find any (subtle) town hints in that post back then. You might find something townie

now

that you know I was a townie, but not knowing that you couldn't find anything townie about it, so you were sure I was scum.

Pretty much the definition of scummy right there^

"Scummy" is a relative word by your definition. It depends on what perspective you're coming from, how you look at it, and the circumstances it's in. Therefore, you can't say for sure that a post was towny or scummy unless you define those words based on the alignment that posted it. (It was actually not that post, but the fact that you called it scummy and other things that led me to believe you were scum. I didn't see that post as particularly scummy) If you can see the town hints after the game is over, then they were still there in the first placwe and one

could

have found them.

I therefore disagree that it was scummy of fitz, even though he was scum, to call your post towny. You should really only call someone scummy in that circumstance unless you can't see how someone could genuinely think it's town (which is possible, but unlikely). The scummy thing that fitz did was calling it a good post, because there are more clearly defined rules for good posting.

I don't really recall the exact context of this, but I believe it was this:
- I was at L-2 with everyone looking my way.
- I believed I was going to be lynched at that time.
- I knew I made a few scummy posts.
- A few days before deadline.

And then this one guy comes along and calls your post or your behavior townie or good or whatever? Suuurrrree... I now realize how stupid I was to not realize that at that time.[/quote]

As I said before, people can have different opinions on whether a post is scummy. Just because someone reads your post differently doesn't mean they're scum. This may be nitpicky, but if fitz had just said he thought your post was towny, that would not mean he is scum. But there are more clearly defined rules for whether a post is "good." (You articulated well, you put in effort, etc) Therefore, fitz can be scummy for saying your post was good when it wasn't.

[Wake1]

Work just got heavier; it's going to take some time breaking down and digesting all of the advice/thoughts given (thanks).

I would like to follow-up on all of this here or elsewhere in the future.

[T S O]

You are a fuckiing piece of shit.

An absolute fiucking piece of shit.

YOUR read is flawed. I'm town. You're going to die.

And this town's LOSS will be your fault.

YOURS.

Wake, you are a fiucking, fuckiing monster.

[Wake1]

You are a fuckiing piece of shit.

An absolute fiucking piece of shit.

YOUR read is flawed. I'm town. You're going to die.

And this town's LOSS will be your fault.

YOURS.

Wake, you are a fiucking, fuckiing monster.

Yeah. I also eat babies.

[Infinity 324]

That's what I get for not previewing. edited below

You're wrong there. And your definition of scummy is off.

A scummy post is a post that

looks

like it could have been made by a scum-aligned player, it doesn't need to be made by a scum. It's all in the interpretation of the observer, it's all speculation on the side of the observer. You can't define scummy or scumminess based on the alignment of the player, because you don't know the alignment, all you have is a few posts and your observations.

I disagree. By that definition, what do you call a post that looks towny on the outside but is scummy on the inside? Given that, and my theory that an alignment influences every single post a player makes, you may be able to at least understand where I'm coming from.

In this case I did know my own alignment, however, the others didn't and I realized that that one post looked horribly scummy from their perspective. What good would it have done to have ignored that fact and just continue marching to a lynch on me? I had made scummy posts. This does not have anything to do with my alignment.

You thought I was scum because of that post. There's nothing that shouts towny about that post. You didn't find any (subtle) town hints in that post back then. You might find something townie

now

that you know I was a townie, but not knowing that you couldn't find anything townie about it, so you were sure I was scum.

Pretty much the definition of scummy right there^

"Scummy" is a relative word by your definition. It depends on what perspective you're coming from, how you look at it, and the circumstances it's in. Therefore, you can't say objectively that a post was towny or scummy unless you define those words based on the alignment that posted it. If you can see the town hints in a post after the game is over, then they were still there in the first place and one

could

have found them.

(It was actually not that post, but the fact that you called it scummy and other things that led me to believe you were scum. I didn't see that post as particularly scummy).

I don't really recall the exact context of this, but I believe it was this:
- I was at L-2 with everyone looking my way.
- I believed I was going to be lynched at that time.
- I knew I made a few scummy posts.
- A few days before deadline.

And then this one guy comes along and calls your post or your behavior townie or good or whatever? Suuurrrree... I now realize how stupid I was to not realize that at that time.

As I said before, people can have different opinions on whether a post is scummy. Just because someone reads your post differently doesn't mean they're scum. This may be nitpicky, but if fitz had just said he thought your post was towny, that would not mean he is scum. But there are more clearly defined rules for whether a post is "good." (You articulated well, you put in effort, etc) Therefore, fitz can be scummy for saying your post was good when it wasn't.

[Wake1]

Just reread this game over again, and am very grateful for all of the helpful advice and suggestions. In general I'm trying to use the advice you've imparted as best I can. Another thing that rings truer every day is that no matter how right you are, it's gonna be really tough persuading people if you're mean/nasty. I figure in general it'd be wise to polite, nice, and respectful... this holds true for so many things.

If... Ifyou guys are in the mood, I'd like to talk about this game some more. This one particularly struck me. What do you think any of us could have changed? Let's say the gambit never happened, but I suspected Regfan. ...what do you think are some things I could have tried to pin him down as Scum?

[Garmr]

I don't know but i probably would of supported you on that one wake.

[Desperado]

The only thing that changes the outcome of this game is lynching Fitz D1.

[My Milked Eek]

Pretty much this^

[Infinity 324]

If... Ifyou guys are in the mood, I'd like to talk about this game some more. This one particularly struck me. What do you think any of us could have changed? Let's say the gambit never happened, but I suspected Regfan. ...what do you think are some things I could have tried to pin him down as Scum?

Make a case. It was definitely possible. ISO him and you can find stuff. I think ice and regfan were ultimately too good but work with town and you may have been able to pull it off.

[My Milked Eek]

ICE might have been found. I was getting some doubts on him based on his early play, but Regfan would have never been lynched.

[Infinity 324]

If wake was super persuader extraordinaire then it would've been possible

[Wake1]

Yeah, I need to awaken the Piers Brosnan in me. SECRET AGENT MAN.

My ability to make cases needs improvement. There's always some sort of tell. A little something extra, a little something missing. Or stuff out of place at certain times.

And then after everything's gathered to make the case, I need to be able to persuade people. I'm not sure how to do that without being perceived as buddying or being too nice...

There is always some little thread sticking out, just waiting to be unraveled.

[Infinity 324]

And then after everything's gathered to make the case, I need to be able to persuade people. I'm not sure how to do that without being perceived as buddying or being too nice...

The thing is, people have to have a reason if they disagree with you. If they don't, you can ask them why not.

Then, you can give your reason back (but remember to consider the possibility that they're right), etc. until one of you is convinced. So really all you have to do is explain why

you

think they are scum.

[Infinity 324]

Important to note is that you could just agree to disagree, which is too bad, but you don't

need

to convince everyone. Just enough people.

[Wake1]

And then after everything's gathered to make the case, I need to be able to persuade people. I'm not sure how to do that without being perceived as buddying or being too nice...

The thing is, people have to have a reason if they disagree with you. If they don't, you can ask them why not.

Then, you can give your reason back (but remember to consider the possibility that they're right), etc. until one of you is convinced. So really all you have to do is explain why

you

think they are scum.

Important to note is that you could just agree to disagree, which is too bad, but you don't

need

to convince everyone. Just enough people.

I need to practice this more. It's really easy for me to keep up an illusion as Scum, but I have trouble as Town trying to push forward cases and get other players to listen to me and follow along.

It'd be wise to always check people's reasonings, and question those that don't sound right. If I were Town I could adhere to nothing but logic... but it's so easy to do this as Scum, too. I should try to dig my heels in more and take on and grapple with these players with logic and reason, in order to subdue and redirect them as Town.

[Claus]

I'm not sure how to do that without being perceived as buddying

I usually don't like the accusation of Buddying. Making town-blocks (blocks of players that think they are each other town) is one of the most powerful weapons for town. Two town players SHOULD buddy up, and if they do, it is terrible for scum. If a scum buddy's up to a town player, they are trying not to get lynched by emotional means, but that also means that they will have to give up some of their decision power to the town player (or worse, town bloc) being buddied up to.

In short, Town players should be buddying up to each other.

[Infinity 324]

Strong townreads are not considered buddying. I get suspicious of buddying (ex. regfan -> ffery this game) when someone is being overly and unusually nice or cooperative.

[Tierce]