Mini 1073: Autumn Mafia - Game Over!

[ICEninja]

It's suspicous because he joined a forming wagon too quickly, and yet not a big case because since zinive's started he has played 8-9 mafia games i don't believe he would make such a newbish move like joining a wagon on page 2 expecting 4 more votes. clear?

You think he made that vote with the intent of lynching?

Your posting is getting better. I'll

unvote

for the time being.
I liked M=W's post.
Equinox and Per seriously need to get in here and start posting.

[Me=Weird]

"@Me=weird: I chose fernando to put more pressure on him since he already has a vote."
So you find it better to put more pressure on one person instead of trying to evenly distribute the pressure?

"Also, you're voting cruelty for calling much of the early game discussion useless - does that mean that you disagree with him? What's your opinion on the early game discussion?"
Yes, I do disagree that early game is pointless. RVS can be over in just a few posts, but after that it's still early game, despite being serious. Thus, early game ≠ random and pointless.

Taken from post 23, ICEninja "Quiet, reasonless unvoting and revoting" this is wrong, IMO, because if it's reasonless, people tend to get called out on it.
I don't like how netlava didn't get why Oso ranked him and llama. Should we only do things when forced? As I said earlier, information is pro-town.
Taken from post 41, Llama "I do want to hear more opinions of Zinive." I find it strange that he would single out zinive, and not mention me, or perardua. If llama dies and flips scum, zinive may be a buddy.
I agree with Oso about ICE, for lack of a better word, obsessing about the deadlines. Yes, because they're short it may be harder to lynch your top suspect, but we shouldn't have to change the way we play because of the short deadlines.
Taken from SV's post 60, "Xine is obvTown; I know of her meta through the site and she certainly doesn't strike me as a liar. Since she claims she has "not yet" played as scum, I believe her." So you find her town through meta, when she's only ever been town so far, and because she doesn't seem like a liar? :thumbs down: Need I point out the stupidity of this?

That's pretty much my thoughts on various points of the game up until I posted. Not too much "early game irrelevant banter", I don't think.

[Xine]

PerArdua:
Are you lurking because you are scum?
Who is the scum?
Do you think that hypocrisy is a scum tell?


Oso: given the assumption that a lurker will just be mod killed why does that mean that we don’t have to worry about it? What if we lose town to a mod kill, and lynch a fairly active town player too. Mathematically speaking wouldn’t it be nice to lose only one town player

[Oso]

..
Oso: given the assumption that a lurker will just be mod killed why does that mean that we don’t have to worry about it? What if we lose town to a mod kill, and lynch a fairly active town player too. Mathematically speaking wouldn’t it be nice to lose only one town player

Information basically.

Short Answer: Killing an inactive player that is going to be killed anyway and that we have no hope of getting a replacement for (under BaM) is counter-productive. Even with the possibility of getting two townies killed (one lynched/one Mod-Killed) town is still better off making a lynch of an active player after reasoned and considered discussion in most situations, at least in my opinion.


Longer answer:
Optimally, no-one would be mod-killed because of inactivity. Town would lynch people based on (hopefully) good reasoning and scum would NK based on some sort plan and we wouldn't have to worry about it.

I'll admit that letting the mod kill off players according to the BaM Rule #12 isn't optimal but if we are going to spend time and skull sweat trying to figure out who we think is scum and town, every flip we get through a lynch (whether they flip scum or town) needs to have some sort of game discussion behind it other than "Well, he's going to be mod-killed anyway." No way in hell we are ever going to be able to separate the town and scum players if we do that too often.

And I may not have made myself clear earlier, the case I put forward only applies to Day 1. After Day 1, if someone still posts just enough to avoid the mod-kill then we have to deal with it, we won't have any other choice. No one (including Fernando, the vote ICE made) is in danger of being mod-killed I don't think. Everyone has posted at least once this game day so it's the timing of ICE's targeting low activity players that has alarmed me. Past today (game day), his reasoning will be much more valid as there will be at least an emerging pattern to point to.

If later in the game, we are faced with a choice of not being able to come to a lynch consensus, only then would I consider lynching someone who was about to be mod-killed. But if you do that (even in that situation) it would be almost equivalent to voting a no-lynch and no information would be had as you would just be hanging out to see who else gets killed that night, narrowing down the list of suspects. The idea of cutting your losses to one townie is one worth considering though, I'll give you that.

If it comes to the situation I described above, then I think town is pretty much screwed anyway. I have no data to back this up, just my own opinion, but unless it's for an unavoidable real life crisis that causes the player to flake, I suspect that anyone who does get ganked because of that rule is someone disinterested in the game or their role, both of which in my view, point to non-scum, non-PR roles. In short, VTs. Better to just go ahead and bite the bullet and lynch who you think is scum. Go down swinging if we find ourselves in that situation.

[Llamarble]

I asked to hear more about Zinive because I had pointed out a post of his I found scummy and wanted to know what others thought of it.

My take on Oso's case vs Ice:
Supposing Ice is scum, even if the plan Oso described hasn't managed to lynch a lurker,
he has at least found a pretty low-risk vector for contributing and looking pro-town.
On the other hand, it's not false that town should be concerned with lurkers given short days.
Thus the issue from my perspective is more the degree to which Ice relied on the short deadline to produce posts.
While he mentions the short deadlines a lot, he doesn't spend much time actually pressuring lurkers until he votes Fernando.
He also discusses enough other topics that mentioning the deadline doesn't feel like a crutch.

I do still think his interaction with Shattered was strange on both ends.
I'm surprised Ice didn't come down harder against Shattered for some of the more ridiculous things he said.
Ice said the funny sounding "You'd better impress me extremely quick with some very insightful analysis."
But followed up by defending himself against an accusation of "trying to hard to go into analysis" and then leaving Shattered alone afterward.

[Oso]

Xine's question got me thinking and I have the time so I'll give two examples where you'd want to do things oppositely(these are hypothetical by the way):

Case #1: Game tomorrow is Mis-Lynch and Lose (or suspected to be as much). If there was a player about to be Mod-Killed because of BaM and it is believed he is flaked town, then by all means. No-Lynch or Lynch him (doesn't matter which) as a bad lynch there loses the game because a bad lynch will cause the game to blow right through MyLo into game over. Say 6 town : 3 scum suspected. Bad lynch=5:3. Mod-Kill=4:3. Night Kill=3:3.

Case #2: MyLo, you believe that you are in it. You have to lynch as unless the flaked player is scum, his mod-kill is going to be the same as a mis-lynch. 5:3 (or 4:2) Bad-lynch makes LyLo but Mod-Kill makes it Scum Win. Have to lynch there, no choice.

Disclaimer to all: This isn't meant to be a game post for discussion really but Xine got me to thinking. Until she asked her question, I personally hadn't considered all the ramifications of a compulsory Mod-Kill mixed in with a Lynch/Nk combo. Just thought I'd go ahead and point it out in case some of the quirks of this mechanic may have passed by others as well. (I haven't actually played a game under the BaM Rules either, just read them passing some time ago).

[Oso]

..
Case #2: MyLo, you believe that you are in it. You have to lynch as unless the flaked player is scum, his mod-kill is going to be the same as a mis-lynch. 5:3 (or 4:2)

Bad-lynch makes LyLo

but Mod-Kill makes it Scum Win. Have to lynch there, no choice.
..

Edit correction. Bold part should read No-Lynch not Bad-Lynch. Sorry.

[ICEninja]

I'm surprised Ice didn't come down harder against Shattered for some of the more ridiculous things he said.

You're right, I actually made the active decision to not pursue Shattered for a short while. I did this because the fact that he voted me for bad reasons combined with how much of an elitist player he is making himself, I would have a very difficult time attacking him without getting overly flustered, which would distract the town at this point. I am, however, definitely watching him carefully and as soon as I feel like I have a solid case on him, believe me you'll hear it.

In reading over Net's ISO, I notice a few things.

Firstly, I really didn't like his random vote. Sure it is one thing to vote someone based on their name or avatar or previous game, but he chose to vote Oso for being "antsy", and hasn't given any explanation as to what made him feel Oso was antsy, despite multiple questions related to his random vote. It seemed like he really noticed something antsy about Oso's posts, or else he would have made a random vote about something silly.

Then there was this, which I've already explained why is blatantly wrong:

Ice, shorter days do not necessarily mean less content. Your excuse is pointless, not to mention invalid.

He later concedes the point, which is interesting considering how harsh of wording he used. "Pointless" and "invalid" are fairly absolute.

After, he puts a vote on Fernando. While I feel like it was a good move, I didn't like his reasoning for it. He said he simply placed the vote on Fernando because he had votes on him already. That should suggest that this lurker is already under some pressure to vote, so why not pick a lurker who isn't being discussed?

The fact that Net's vote is still on Fernando for lurking, despite the fact that Fernando is posting now, also gives me pause. All in all, I don't really like what I see.

Vote Netlava

.

[Netlava]

Does it really matter how I came to the conclusion that Oso was antsy? I read his post, thought to myself, "Oso seems antsy" and voted Oso. His quick response on some side topic seemed, well, antsy.

Also, I said that I could see your point. I didn't say you were right. I figured you could be scum making up excuses to explain your drop in activity. When I saw that your activity was fine, it became a nonissue, and I stopped caring. Your excuse is still pointless and invalid, either way.

As for my vote on Fernando, it's really not that critical when I decide to move it. I'll move it if the time comes.

[Llamarble]

You're right, I actually made the active decision to not pursue Shattered for a short while. I did this because the fact that he voted me for bad reasons combined with how much of an elitist player he is making himself, I would have a very difficult time attacking him without getting overly flustered, which would distract the town at this point. I am, however, definitely watching him carefully and as soon as I feel like I have a solid case on him, believe me you'll hear it.

Yikes, this bothers me a lot.
If Ice thought Shattered was scummy he should have accused him and pointed out his reasons.
Prioritizing not getting flustered over scumhunting shows a scummy focus on appearance.
The "it would distract the town" excuse is dubious, it's not like we're in a room together where only one person can talk at a time
and we were low on content anyway, so a couple of players going at it and the reactions of others to the situation would have been helpful.
Ice's sentence about watching and intending to deliver a case later sounds like he already has an opinion on Shattered's alignment.
It doesn't say he wants to read Shattered, but rather that he wants evidence.
Scum care about evidence / opportunities to lynch rather than reading, for obvious reasons.
Ice's post explaining how there will be less content looks like an overreaction to Netlava's "your excuse is invalid" post.
That post could have gone
"There's a lot less time, so assuming vaguely comparable post rates, we'll have less information. Everyone please make an effort to post a lot."
Instead it's several paragraphs long.
Another consideration is that Ice has been spending a lot of time mentioning how soon the deadline is;
if there was a case to be made against Shattered it should have been made immediately so that we could discuss it fully
Rather than delayed until the town would have to analyze and vote on it hastily.

Ice/Shattered scumteam is looking more plausible now...
This most recent Ice post sounded like preparation to bus a scumbuddy if he gets into trouble,
but leaving him alone for now in case a town player gets fired upon first.
Shattered refused to participate in RVS and then made a basically unfounded angry vote against Ice.
The tone/wording of that exchange smelled strongly like distancing or something similarly fishy to me.
Making an unfounded angry vote also seems to contradict the spirit of avoiding RVS in favor of well thought out accusations.
The rest of his posts have basically been to act obnoxious toward other players.
Of course, there's his absurd "Xine isn't scum from meta even though she has never played as scum" claim.
Though I suppose it's possible he really does know that Ice is scum because they're scumbuddies and that Xine is innocent because she isn't with them.

I haven't picked up any substantial further nastiness from Zinive's recent posts (though I still haven't heard nearly enough from him), so I'll go ahead and

Unvote; Vote IceNinja

I think but am not certain that this is the third vote on Ice.

[Zinive]

I believe we should not focus on the lurkers to much care of the lurkers as we can't do anything about it and the ruleset is pretty strict in this regard. Of course it would be favorable if everyone keeps talking as much as possible but at this point its only wishful thinking.

Do I think ICEninja is suspicious because of him pressing this matter?

No, not really. I believe his motivation was not to make us lynch the lurkers but simply make everyone aware of the special deadline limit. I also didn't feel that it was pressuring me into somekind of OMG I have to vote fast mode.

Do I believe Oso is suspicious because of him making this case?

No, I think the point is valid and him bringing up what could be a scum plot seems like honest scum hunting.

M=W post towards Cruelty

Cruelty made statements I can not follow. Calling the scum lists anti-town for example. It was just a listing of players without going into detail about why who was on the place. I can see the possibility to abuse a detailed list for scum but I personally think the benefit for the town having more easily readable player outweighs the abuse possibility by far.
For this I can follow M=W argument and Cruelty has become a possible target for my vote at this point.

Another think I could not understand was Cruelty saying it is a mistake that Llama placed himself on the list, is this somewhere on the line with congratulating a doc?

To FeRnAnDo
His rhetorical question seems odd to me as I thought at that point the RVS had ended already since a discussion had started which is for me the aim of RVS or RQS. His vote on shattered is interesting. People that play like willing and knowingly like assholes are often abused by scum if they are not scum. However as I have stated I am willing to vote on shattered since I consider this kind of play as distracting for the town and thus its a playstyle (shattereds) I consider scummy. If I had to decide now I still would think FeRnAnDo is a townie given the timing of his push against shattered seems unfavorable.

Llamas point about ICE is interesting I will think about it a bit longer before I make a statement to it.

[AGar]

Noon was approaching, as the town still was fairly split. One man slowly began to draw the stares of his fellow townsmen quite frequently, however.

Votecount 1.3

cruelty (1)

- Me=Weird

FeRnAnDo (0)

-

ICEninja (4)

- Equinox, Shattered Viewpoint, Oso, Llamarble

Llamarble (1)

- cruelty

Me=Weird (0)

-

Netlava (1)

- ICEninja

Oso (0)

-

PerArdua (0)

-

Shattered Viewpoint (1)

- FeRnAnDo

Equinox (0)

-

Xine (0)

-

Zinive (1)

- Llamarble

Not Voting (12)

- netlava, PerArdua, Xine, Zinive

With

12

alive, it takes

7

to lynch.

ICEninja

is the current wagon leader(s), at

L-3

Deadline is October 29th, 2010 @ 11:59 PM EDT

@All

Apologies, I missed the VC yesterday. To make up for it, you'll get two today!

[Xine]

VOTE: cruelty

I really like to have my vote in play at all times, so it is obv where my suspisions are.
There is something that bugs me about Iceninja's wagon. I need to do more meta reasearch on him this evening. I will comment on other stuff later too.

Equinox: you are back from V/La yesterday? I have confidance you can read this and get some good input to us in the next few hours.

[ICEninja]

If Ice thought Shattered was scummy he should have accused him and pointed out his reasons.

You're right. Once I find Shattered scummy, I will accuse him and point out my reasons. I did say I would do this.

Prioritizing not getting flustered over scumhunting shows a scummy focus on appearance.

This would be valid if I were not scum hunting. Yet if you look at the rest of the post you're attacking, you'll find that I am.

Ice's sentence about watching and intending to deliver a case later sounds like he already has an opinion on Shattered's alignment.

I have an opinion about his personality that will definitely cloud my judgment about him until I find more alignment indicative content. At the moment, the only thing at all that I can find in Shattered's ISO is where he's overstating how I am probably scum and how Xine is probably town based on purely town meta. No town is actually that confident this early in the game. However, I've played with other people that have similar personality types, and they generally do seem to think they're good enough to declare someone scum on page 2 and town on page 3 or 4. Therefore my opinion on Shattered really doesn't say much about his alignment at all.

Therefore anything I say being aggressive towards him would simply be me being frustrated about how irritating he is, which would distract town. If you think I'm scummy for not scum hunting the player you want me to scum hunt, then that isn't my problem. I'm looking at other players, too.

That post could have gone
"There's a lot less time, so assuming vaguely comparable post rates, we'll have less information. Everyone please make an effort to post a lot."
Instead it's several paragraphs long.

You'll find me doing this a lot, in every game I play. I like to be very thorough.

Another consideration is that Ice has been spending a lot of time mentioning how soon the deadline is;

I've felt that my play style is not suited to this rule set, so I have been spending a lot of effort trying to adapt to short days. I'm sorry if I'm saying it too much, but I feel like it is relevant when I bring it up.

if there was a case to be made against Shattered it should have been made immediately so that we could discuss it fully
Rather than delayed until the town would have to analyze and vote on it hastily.

Did I not clearly state that as soon as I have a case against him I'll bring it up?

This most recent Ice post sounded like preparation to bus a scumbuddy if he gets into trouble,
but leaving him alone for now in case a town player gets fired upon first.

Or maybe it is preparation to attack a player as soon as he says something scummy (and give me a great deal of satisfaction should we lynch him and he flips scum) or not get frustrated based on tells that are, for the most part, not alignment telling.

Zinive, you don't have your vote on anyone yet you've made a few statements suggesting you suspect people. Are you waiting for an opportunistic time to vote?

Xine, if you like I can direct you to a couple games where I have personality clashes with players like Shattered. I am trying to avoid frustrating situations that happened in said games.

[Shattered Viewpoint]

@Netlava: I rarely joke. Yes, I'm really this insufferable. Deal with it.

ICE is most likely town.

[Shattered Viewpoint]

@MOD: Please answer the question about PRODDING PLAYERS.

Love,
SV

[Llamarble]

Looks like I missed the equinox vote last night when I was counting.
@Ice:
Your attitude toward Shattered makes more sense to me after a night of sleep;
If you never found him scummy, but merely irritating, then it makes more sense to leave him alone.
My impression was that you thought his actions scummy but were avoiding a hunt anyway.
The tone of that paragraph still bothers me though.
Making a decision whether to pursue someone based on anything other than the evidence against them feels like a scum thought process.

@Shattered:
If you think he's town then why is your vote still on him when he's at L-3?
The timing of your flip-flop is odd too, right after I've attacked a statement of Ice's.
Yet you provide no justification for your opinion.
In fact, you haven't posted any actual content, just "Player X is scum/town" with no reason and "I'm obnoxious whee!"
Smells like active lurking to me.
And yet you deny lurking in one of your posts.
That makes four contradictions of yourself:
Refusing to participate in RVS but making an early unfounded vote anyway
Active lurking but saying you're not lurking
Saying you're sure Ice is scum and that he's town without taking your vote off.
Also the one Net mentioned about you being rude but saying you're just confident.
I don't see how you can think what you're doing is helping the town.

Both of Cruelty's posts have sounded bad to me.
I completely agree with the reasons several people have mentioned for voting him.
Perardua has failed to participate for a long enough time that I'm truly suspicious of him, too.
Hopefully Equinox will show up soon.

Fernando's push against Shattered (or anyone's) could easily be scum going after a weak town player,
but his irritation could also be honest.

Oso, Xine, M=W and to a lesser extent Zinive have all stayed fairly aloof and logically jumped on a few players.
It's hard to read that sort of playstyle, but so far the cases made have been worth making.

Netlava hasn't posted a lot of real value, but he has made a number of posts.
I don't have a confident read on him.

[Netlava]

Unvote

I'm mostly just questioning players and observing right now. I don't want to reveal who I suspect until I'm ready. *suspense*

[Equinox]

Sorry about that V/LA, guys.

1) What is your timezone? This can be important if you live overseas and we're waiting for a post from you.
2) What is your mafia experience, here and elsewhere?
3) How frequently do you expect to be able to post? This is exceptionally important this game.

1. UTC-8 (UTC-7 until November 7)
2. 22 games here, extensive chat Mafia experience
3. At least once per day

Regarding activity: The week of October 25 is going to be a little difficult for me, but I'm going to do my best to keep up, especially given that our deadline is coming up pretty soon.

For my own reference (* = DST):

UTC-3: FeRnAnDo
UTC-6: Me=Weird*
UTC-7: Equinox*, ICEninja*, Llamarble*^?, Netlava*^?, Oso*, PerArdua*, Shattered Viewpoint*, Xine*
UTC+1: Zinive
UTC+12: cruelty

---

My catch-up post has gotten to the point where I need Ctrl+F to find stuff, so I'm splitting this portion out. I'm about 3/4 of the way now, so you'll see the wall shortly. Advance apologies for the length.

Equinox, thanks for disappearing for a few days. Were you aware of the BaM ruleset when you agreed to replace in? (Personally, I wasn't)

Not to seem like a jerk, but disappearing for a few days is a pretty big deal considering the deadline length. And thanks for changing your avatar after your first post.

Moment of stupidity: No, I wasn't. I just gunned for AGar's game as soon as it was in the Replacement Queue.

You're right, though, to point out that my disappearance was poor timing.

[Me=Weird]

"Oso, Xine, M=W and to a lesser extent Zinive have all stayed fairly aloof and logically jumped on a few players.
It's hard to read that sort of playstyle, but so far the cases made have been worth making."
Where has zinive "logically jumped on someone"? And how does that make it harder to read us?

Netlava, why do you ignore my post you asked for, especially since there's a question for you?
"Unvote

I'm mostly just questioning players and observing right now. I don't want to reveal who I suspect until I'm ready. *suspense*"
Withholding information is scummy. Especially since you seem to be doing it for theatrics. We need to know what you think.

Sorry for not having something more substantial up. Allergies are really bad today. Hopefully I'll have something better up tonight.

[Nobody Special]

@Shattered:
If you think he's town then why is your vote still on him when he's at L-3?

Oops.

unvote

"I'm obnoxious whee!"

Mind if I sig this? It made me laugh, literally, out loud. And that, my friend, is quite rare.

[Shattered Viewpoint]

Well, shit.

The above sig question stands.

unvote

[Equinox]

Frick. My catch-up post is huge... like Mastin-huge. And that's saying something.

I'm going to save this to Drafts and post a summary instead. Please stand by...

Me=Weird, I'm sorry for sounding like a jerk, but... quote tags. Please. Get well soon.

[ICEninja]

Shattered, is Nobody Special your account?

Llama, your list of contradictions is interesting. Individually, each of them is extremely weak and can be explained away, but suspicion of Shattered is definitely justified.

Net, I feel like you're brushing off my vote and saying that you'll do stuff later. I don't like that.

After Llama's statement about cruelty's 2 posts being bad, I went back and looked at them myself. Both of his posts contain a statement implying that things aren't worth commenting on, and has contributed virtually nothing. He votes because someone presented a town/scum list, which, yes, was odd to do so early in the game, but not exactly scummy.

If cruelty doesn't start contributing something of content soon, I'm going to be extremely suspicious.

I'm looking forward to reading everything Equinox has to say. If he has a significant wall to post on only 4 pages of info, there could be some really good analysis in there. I'd like to note how he random voted me on virtue of my tendency to post walls. This isn't scummy, but it is ironic.

[Equinox]

<Note to self: Post was made up to post 91, page 4.>

That Netlava provided a reason for his vote also influenced me, since votes + a reason = more pressure and is more likely to produce discussion.

Did you feel Netlava's reasoning was legitimate? Why or why not?

are we still on RVS? i think so. then i'll VOTE: Netlava, for making 4 posts in a row with that scary avatar.

(This was written a bit later.)

How closely had you read the thread at this point?

I think we still don't have a good reason to start moving a bandwagon to already make a lynch but assuming the short deadline and the low amount of content we have right now I don't think your vote on me is too suspicious Llamarble.

The wording in this post really, really bothers me. Why aren't you even trying to refute Llamarble's vote? You've just validated it instead, which... really irks me.

So far, Oso gets a quick little wagon, doesn’t seem to particularly notice, until other players bring it up. Llamarble gets one vote, and a few players mention amiability towards the reason, yet don't place vote, and Llamarble feels the need to self defend as if he were the subject of a wagon.

Also, Netlava places a random vote on Oso, for "being ansty" and "antsy could describe the tone of every one of his posts since then.

If you had enough time to type up a summary like that, you had time to pitch in your opinion. Where and what was it? (...and I'm ninja'd by ICEninja. How appropriate.)

I see this is followed by:

It let's you all know that I am still here and what I'm thinking about, and gives anyone the opportunity to correct me on false assumptions.

Then I will reiterate the problem I had with your post. You weren't thinking anything; you were simply rehashing. I can understand doing it as a note to yourself, but in that case, posting it wasn't necessary; if you were doing it as an "I'm here" kind of thing, you've wasted your time. Your post gives off the image of participating in the party when in fact you're standing at the wall, sipping punch.

ICEninja, if you don't like my playstyle, nightkill me. Don't badger me to death in-thread. You'll just end up pissing me off and that won't end well for anyone.

This post is ugly and not just in its tone. Instead of analyzing or doing something to advance the game, Shattered Viewpoint places down a vote

out of spite

. Why did you ignore the rest of the game in favor of displaying this kind of antagonism? (Oh, yeah, I'm not taking this for an answer.) Where has ICEninja been rude, and why do you feel it merited a vote?

I think it's always useful to explain yourself if somebody is suspicious of you as long as you're not just being repetitive; content is good.

Xine wasn't directing anything at anyone; why did you feel the need to say this?

Actually, let me expand that. Posts 41 and 43 are basically you in a soapbox. Why take this approach?

Regarding ICEninja-Shattered Viewpoint: How does their exchange read as distancing to you? I don't see it.

Llamarble I did not vote for you since

I thought it isn't justified just yet

and I simply sounded my opinion.

Geez, this sounds several levels of terrible. It's betraying an "I'm looking for lynches" mindset, rather than the town "I'm looking for scum" mindset.

A question it is, then. What's your stance toward Llamarble?

why are you posting scumlists on page three?

Do you have a problem with that? It's not like we've been devoid of content, even if you personally feel it's worthless.

Why are scumlists anti-town?
It seems to me like they just carry information about your opinions and thus help people read you.

That's a matter of opinion. Some say that such lists help scum narrow down their NK choices; others say it doesn't really matter because scum already have an idea of who to take out.

Why are you discounting your own list because of "very little information"? We know it's only page 3.

If you ISO him, you will see there is only one post he has made so far (it's ISO-#2/Game Post-#23) where he doesn't make mention to the short amount of time.

ICEninja

: Is this your first game under the BaM ruleset?

His vote on Fernando reeks for that reason. Granted, Fernando hasn't posted but once and that does merit suspicion but not one Day 1. Lurker hunting makes no sense in a normal game Day 1 and makes about as much in a game run under BaM. If he is a true lurker preparing to flake, he'll be mod-killed. If not, it will be obvious he is trying to fly under the radar especially since everyone is already hyped to see low participation as being automatically scummy, he(Fernando) won't be able to do it for long.

What about ICEninja's case beyond FeRnAnDo's inactivity was invalid? I don't see any opportunism there; looking back at FeRnAnDo's post, I see ICEninja has a valid reason.

ICEninja

: What were your reads on the active players when you voted for FeRnAnDo?

Okay, so there's 4 people who hadn't posted more than once yet. Why pick him? Looks like bandwagoning to me.

Do you feel Netlava's action is more likely to be done as scum or as town? Bandwagoning is done by both factions.

Also, ICEninja, you might have noticed that Shattered Viewpoint also claimed he would post at least once a day, and yet you only pointed at me for stating so. Don't worry, my posts are generally long.

You went on defensive mode pretty quickly here. Why did ICEninja's vote against you feel so threatening?

Taken from post 41, Llama "I do want to hear more opinions of Zinive." I find it strange that he would single out zinive, and not mention me, or perardua. If llama dies and flips scum, zinive may be a buddy.

(Link addition is mine.)

It wasn't that strange of Llamarble to single out Zinive at that point, given the situation. You, however, singling out yourself and PerArdua is odd. Why?

And dude, links are a godsend. Use them.

Does it really matter how I came to the conclusion that Oso was antsy? I read his post, thought to myself, "Oso seems antsy" and voted Oso. His quick response on some side topic seemed, well, antsy.

[...]

As for my vote on Fernando, it's really not that critical when I decide to move it. I'll move it if the time comes.

It does matter how you came to that conclusion. A number of people had asked you why you found Oso "antsy." (By the way, timing is a null tell. Why would Oso wait, anyway?)

It is critical. FeRnAnDo has posted; your vote appeared to be to get a lurker posting, which FeRnAnDo has done. You not unvoting means that you find him scummy. An explanation is in order, then.

I recall saying something about the ICEninja-Shattered Viewpoint connection that Llamarble is drawing, but I can't find it. -_-;

Prioritizing not getting flustered over scumhunting shows a scummy focus on appearance.
The "it would distract the town" excuse is dubious, it's not like we're in a room together where only one person can talk at a time
and we were low on content anyway, so a couple of players going at it and the reactions of others to the situation would have been helpful.
Ice's sentence about watching and intending to deliver a case later sounds like he already has an opinion on Shattered's alignment.

Defense of ICEninja is a GO! Llamarble's case is founded on a whole bunch of null tells.

• Focus on appearance is scummy. Agreed on this count.
• However, ICEninja doing this is not a scum tell. One being emotional (and seriously, it's hard not to when SV is being that antagonistic)
  does
  distract town, as it makes it more difficult for them to read one, and sometimes people who are emotional start tunneling, which is dangerous. ICEninja has a legitimate reason to wait here. Null tell.
• I can see how ICEninja's statement about "watching [Shattered Viewpoint] carefully" leads to "has an opinion on Shattered's alignment." What I don't see is how that's scummy. I do this, too, and fairly often. You'd have a case if ICEninja somehow slipped that he knew SV's alignment, but that's not the case here. Null tell.

I agree that SV's vote was obnoxious, but the rest of your post regarding ICEninja screams confirmation bias.

I believe we should not focus on the lurkers to much care of the lurkers as we can't do anything about it and the ruleset is pretty strict in this regard.

While I can see not wanting to push lynches on lurkers purely on policy, I disagree that we shouldn't focus on them. This ruleset deals out very harsh punishments, and Oso makes an excellent point: People with relatively uninteresting roles (e.g., Vanilla Townie) are more likely to lose interest, and if we don't push posts from these people, we're going to get very damaging modkills.

That said, if any of you folks suddenly fancy flaking out, do us all a favor and tell us, and I will personally hunt down a replacement for your slot. This has been done before in a BaM ruleset game.

Have scum been modkilled for playing the lurking card wrong? Of course. The success percentage, however, is not something I'd gamble on.

However as I have stated I am willing to vote on shattered since I consider this kind of play as distracting for the town and thus its a playstyle (shattereds) I consider scummy.

All right, answer me this question: Do you see pro-scum motivation behind SV being as antagonistic as he's being?