Dr Who - Game over

[Hoppster]

So shouldn't you be voting Zang?

Your reason for voting MoI is, quite literally, "lol this is suspicious if Zang is scum".

You have it backwards

No, I don't.

"That is interesting that Magna writes of the possibility of scum being on the Zang wagon if Zang flips scum.

Covering tracks

if

Zang actually flips scum here

?"

By your own words, he is only doing something suspicious "if Zang actually flips scum".

You have not provided any reason for suspicion should Zang not flip scum.

[jasonT1981]

The Rufflig replaces GMan, thanks you

[bv310]

So your reason for voting MoI is that he's acting like a 5-man wagon may contain scum on it (not a big stretch imo)? And if it does, you think he's the most likely out of the five?


Also, sidebar, mid-season finales are annoying. My River theory was half-right though.

[Tarhalindur]

CES's lack of reasoning makes Tarhalindur a sad panda.

I'm reasoning plenty, just fyi.

Reasoning is like Schroedinger's Cat; you can't be sure it's there until you've seen it posted in the thread. Do get on that.

Hmm didn't see this one till Tar actually quoted it. That is interesting that Magna writes of the possibility of scum being on the Zang wagon if Zang flips scum. Covering tracks if Zang actually flips scum here?

VOTE: MagnaofIllusion

...

So shouldn't you be voting Zang?

UNVOTE: SnakePlissken
VOTE: Ant

Your reason for voting MoI is, quite literally, "lol this is suspicious if Zang is scum".

Nice catch.

CES's lack of reasoning makes Tarhalindur a sad panda.

A sad and suspicious panda?

Vaguely, but there are bigger fish to fry. Sadly, I don't think I can afford to use my preferred solution to players like him on him. I need that shot elsewhere.

-----

Okay, screw this. This game is going nowhere.

Two things of importance:

1) When I was last actively playing (I'm just back from about a year's break), I noticed that my scumhunting was exceptionally bad in situations where I couldn't rely on setup analysis. In an effort to overcome this, I am experimenting with a new scumhunting technique this game (in conjunction with some of my more conventional methods). You've seen some signs of it already, since a couple of my actions have been affected by it (including the Zang RVS wagon). I don't particularly feel like revealing exactly what that method is at this time (let's not let scum know what not to do, eh?), but I will do so later.

2) This should be self-explanatory.

Kill: Zang

Vote: Ant_to_the_Max

FoS: Surye, bv310, pappums_rat

That should work despite lack of unvote, since kill should reset the vote count.

As tempted as I was to get rid of one of the players FoS'ed/voted for above - or CES, whose lack of reasoning in thread is going to be a pain endgame and is thus an ideal vig candidate - I don't think I can afford not to nuke Zang. It'll help us figure out several other alignments, and I don't particularly want Zang (who is either scum or VI) alive at endgame anyways.

Note to self: If CES is scum he's likely Godfather given the way he's playing.

[The Rufflig]

Howdy.

I've made a quick read through of the game and the two things that stuck out at me the most are completely useless.

1) iamausername's favorite monster was the candyman??? Seriously? UGH!!!

2) I've played with Zang twice before (he was town both times). I don't recognize the Zang I see playing here; he isn't lurking and he is producing some content. Which doesn't help at all since someone just sent in a daykill on him.

Oh well, time to do a second read through.

[pappums rat]

Hey guys I'm sorry about my lack of contribution but I have had a really shitty week. I promise I'll have something up tomorrow.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I so hope that kill is real.

[jasonT1981]

Day 1 Vote Count 1

Ant 3: Username,Hoppster,Tarh
Zang 2: MOI, Snake
CES 2: Surye, Zang
Surye 2: Nexus, BV3
Snake 1: Corgito,
Hoppster 1: Rat
MOI 1: Ant

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

*hops*

Unvote, vote: Ant

[SnakePlissken]

Hello, Im back. Wow 5 pages, im going to have to take some serious time to read through all of this.

My first thoughts back are this. Ive played with Nexus a fair few times offsite and whenever he gets really aggressive & into arguments fairly easily he's more often than not scum

Unvote

VOTE: Nexus

[Nexus]

If you actually read the posts you'll see I'm not being aggressive at all.

Read the thread before you comment, Snake.

And then vote Surye.

[bv310]

If you actually read the posts you'll see I'm not being aggressive at all.

Read the thread before you comment, Snake.

And then vote Surye.

This.

Anyway, Tar, what's up with the fake DK?

[Tarhalindur]

If you actually read the posts you'll see I'm not being aggressive at all.

Read the thread before you comment, Snake.

And then vote Surye.

This.

Anyway, Tar, what's up with the fake DK?

Why assume a fake daykill instead of a daykill that was stopped by something (bulletproof shield or the like)?

[bv310]

Because, in my experience, a fake-DK gambit is much more common than an actual daykill and a Bulletproof.

[jasonT1981]

Surye (1) has been prodded

[Surye]

Surye (1) has been prodded

Will be reviewing and posting at lunch, got two new kittens this weekend and they kept me more busy than expected.

[Zang]

Nope, that's not why.

Then what is? I don't see any reasons with your vote.

*shrug* It's a meaningful distinction, whether you like it or not.

There may be a distinction for you but there is no distinction at all for me. How do I know if you even have reasoning or if you're scum voting randomly?

Kill: Zang

Vote: Ant_to_the_Max

FoS: Surye, bv310, pappums_rat

Really? This has been so overused that it becomes almost obvious that it's a fake day kill gambit when you post it. What did you hope to gain from this?

2) I've played with Zang twice before (he was town both times). I don't recognize the Zang I see  playing here; he isn't lurking and he is producing some content. Which doesn't help at all since someone just sent in a daykill on him.

You can't really judge me on that. The first game was only my third game and the second I only made two posts in. Although I did recently take a break from mafia and I'm only in two games right now that help prevent me from lurking.

*hops*

Unvote, vote: Ant

What? Why?

Why assume a fake daykill instead of a daykill that was stopped by something (bulletproof shield or the like)?

I know if I'm bulletproof or not. Now are you going to answer why you used a fake daykill gambit?

[Tarhalindur]

Because, in my experience, a fake-DK gambit is much more common than an actual daykill and a Bulletproof.

Hmm, fake-daykill must have become more common recently. Darn.

Nope, that's not why.

Then what is? I don't see any reasons with your vote.

*shrug* It's a meaningful distinction, whether you like it or not.

There may be a distinction for you but there is no distinction at all for me. How do I know if you even have reasoning or if you're scum voting randomly?

Kill: Zang

Vote: Ant_to_the_Max

FoS: Surye, bv310, pappums_rat

Really?

This has been so overused that it becomes almost obvious that it's a fake day kill gambit when you post it

. What did you hope to gain from this?

0) To get people to actually, you know, POST.
1) An off chance that, if you were VI (or enterprising scum), you might respond with a "bah, go team" post.
2) A set of reactions pursuant to the scumhunting method mentioned in the fake daykill post, most importantly one that I was ALSO looking for when I made the third-vote RVS wagon. That tell is tied to something involving how I played the daykill gambit; I will not elaborate further at this time. Nobody has clearly dropped it yet.

Now, about that underlined section: Please identify all games you know of where a fake daykill gambit was tried. NOW.

[quote="Zang"}

Why assume a fake daykill instead of a daykill that was stopped by something (bulletproof shield or the like)?

I know if I'm bulletproof or not. Now are you going to answer why you used a fake daykill gambit?[/quote]

Do you think I am scum? Why?

[bv310]

Because, in my experience, a fake-DK gambit is much more common than an actual daykill and a Bulletproof.

Hmm, fake-daykill must have become more common recently. Darn.

It may not be more common, I just play with Fate a lot.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I've encountered more fake daykills than actual daykills and zero failed daykills. Heck, I've done a fake dayprotect gambit (twice) because fake daykill seemed too obvious. That's actually why I believed it was real.

The really interesting question here is why people are pretending it's interesting.

[The Rufflig]

@zang: You made four posts in that second game. The last post of which had you asking how you were lurking more than three other players. Yeah, instead of providing content you were asking how you were worse than others. In this particular game there are actually people providing less content than yourself which comes as a great shock to me. I'm not sure if you changed your play style, are actually interested in this theme, or scum trying to make it past day 2. What I can say is that I don't have a good read on you.
------

Anyway, I completed another read through and I'd like to share a few actual thoughts this time around. In alphabetical:

ant: ant's vote on MoI appears dependent on Zang flipping scum in spite of ant's protest to the contrary. If ant is telling the truth then he must be keeping back some other reasons for his vote on MoI. I noted his use of 'yet', but I can't make more than a molehill of it personally. leaning a bit negative

bv310: Not enough content - no real opinion.

ces: Well, his fos and votes help, but I would really like to see some reasoning. I'm not so good at connecting the dots. Neutralish

hop: I wasn't sure what to make of hoppster at first. True he was firing off a lot of questions, but he wasn't taking any stances initially -- that bothered me a lot. At the moment, I'm willing to chalk it up to his play style. leaning positive

iam: iam is brief and to the point - I try to be but I frequently end up quite wordy. I might call nexus probably townie - but I don't understand super obvious. Neutral

MoI: I disagree with the 'If Zang is town' line of argument. My best reason why I feel it is false lies in my other ongoing game. Bussing partners seems to becoming much more common. Still, I can't see this faulty argument as scummy seeing as I recently fell into that trap as well.

nexus: No real problems with Nexus. leaning positive

pap: Not enough content - leaning a bit negative.

snake: Another content challenged individual - a bit negative because of the nexus vote.

surye: Do you have an opinion on anyone yet? leaning negative

Tar: no real problems with Tar - leaning positive

VOTE: Surye

By the way, no one has to tell me that they hate my reads. Everyone always hates my reads. If you hate my reads, tell me why you hate them or which reads you hate.

[pappums rat]

Alright, I have read through the game again and I still found the Zang wagon and the Surye counter-wagon to be counter-productive. When people are run up like that, how exactly are they supposed to respond? People are going to read whatever they are looking for into the player's response to this and as such I think it is a poor scumhunting technique.

At this point I am going to

Unvote
Vote: Snake

His second RQS question, as has been pointed out, can potentially help scum, so I see no town motivation behind it. His third post has a couple of points of concern for me. First, he says he is going to have to spend some "serious time to read all of this" despite the fact that there is only 5 pages. It sounds to me like he is trying to buy for time and active lurk here. Also, in my opinion his reason for voting Nexus is bad.

[Zang]

0) To get people to actually, you know, POST.
1) An off chance that, if you were VI (or enterprising scum), you might respond with a "bah, go team" post.
2) A set of reactions pursuant to the scumhunting method mentioned in the fake daykill post, most importantly one that I was ALSO looking for when I made the third-vote RVS wagon. That tell is tied to something involving how I played the daykill gambit; I will not elaborate further at this time. Nobody has clearly dropped it yet.

Now, about that underlined section: Please identify all games you know of where a fake daykill gambit was tried. NOW.

0. Ok, I'm fine with getting people to post but there are other ways.
1. Did you think I was a VI?
2. I'm not sure what tell your looking for so I'll hold off on questioning you further until you reveal what it is.

The first time I saw the gambit was here- 
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13811
Coincidentally, Magna was also in that game.
A very similar variant of the gambit was used here-
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13693
It was also used here-
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 91&start=0
I think theres another game that I saw it in but I don't remember the name. 

How many times have I been in with a real day kill? 0

Do you think I am scum? Why?

I am suspicious of you but I don't see what that has to do with what you quoted.

@zang: You made four posts in that second game. The last post of which had you asking how you were lurking more than three other players. Yeah, instead of providing content you were asking how you were worse than others. In this particular game there are actually people providing less content than yourself which comes as a great shock to me. I'm not sure if you changed your play style, are actually interested in this theme, or scum trying to make it past day 2. What I can say is that I don't have a good read on you.

Ok, I got the amount of posts wrong but still that isn't really a good game to judge my play off of. 

[The Rufflig]

My apologies.

V/LA June 7-9

[Hoppster]

Kill: Zang

Vote: Ant_to_the_Max

FoS: Surye, bv310, pappums_rat

Really? This has been so overused that it becomes almost obvious that it's a fake day kill gambit when you post it. What did you hope to gain from this?

Uhh, not liking this reaction at all.

Can't quite put my finger on it but my gut is

POSITIVELY SCREAMING

to me that this is a scum reaction to an apparent DK-gambit on himself.

Feels a bit like scum gleefully mocking somebody who fake DK'd him.

By the way, no one has to tell me that they hate my reads. Everyone always hates my reads. If you hate my reads, tell me why you hate them or which reads you hate.

I HATE YOUR READS.

bv310: Not enough content - no real opinion.

[...]

pap: Not enough content - leaning a bit negative.

???

Alright, I have read through the game again and I still found the Zang wagon and the Surye counter-wagon to be counter-productive. When people are run up like that, how exactly are they supposed to respond? People are going to read whatever they are looking for into the player's response to this and as such I think it is a poor scumhunting technique.

At this point I am going to

Unvote
Vote: Snake

His second RQS question, as has been pointed out, can potentially help scum, so I see no town motivation behind it. His third post has a couple of points of concern for me. First, he says he is going to have to spend some "serious time to read all of this" despite the fact that there is only 5 pages. It sounds to me like he is trying to buy for time and active lurk here. Also, in my opinion his reason for voting Nexus is bad.

OH HEY

I REMEMBER YOU

pappums ISO #0:

RVS

pappums ISO #1:

Doesn't really say much here, but says "dialogue between Surye and Hoppster is just a bunch of meaningless noise"

pappums ISO #2:

Oops, contradicting himself from before. He suggests the dialogue between Surye and I made him suspicious of me although it was "meaningless noise" before. Then he doesn't vote me?

pappums ISO #3:

UH NOT VOTING HOPPSTER 'COS I'M STILL IN RVS

pappums ISO #4:

Okay, I have decided for some arbitrary reason that I AM READY TO LEAVE RVS!

pappums ISO #5:

/prod-dodge

pappums ISO #6:

Hmm, let me

conviniently forget all my previous suspicions of Hoppster and not mention him at all

, and then make an easy cop-out vote on somebody who's said even less than me instead of doing any real scum-hunting!

UNVOTE:
VOTE: pappums