Mini 692: Boost Mafia (Game Over!)

[Incognito]

It makes sense to me, so I don't see why I shouldn't use it. On the flipside, are you saying that if you make a good point, you're automatically town?

Nope, not saying that at all. Town and scum can both make good points like you said. My point is that if you were genuinely suspicious of me like you say you are, you'd take things that I say

especially

player read-related more with a grain of salt or you would scrutinize them a bit closer to make sure they hold some weight. You seemed to just accept my point about him fairly easily to base your town-read of him on, which really strikes me as counter-intuitive.

[Crazy]

I usually don't do analysis like this (I'm a short, frequent poster, usually)... and I've only read up through page 5 now. Still got page 6. I just needed to catch up in some way.

1) Electra

Scum are not likely to gambit like she did on Page 1. Doesn't confirm her 100%, but it makes it hard to think of her as scum.

@ iLord – I don’t know what kind of information I get, but I do hope it’s something cop-ish, and it certainly would be nice if I got scum out of it. :p And no, I don’t think I get some sort of benefit by being boosted earlier (unless I get the info as soon as I’m boosted? I assumed it would just be at night, but it would certainly be nice… I will ask the mod.)

Okay, there's the answer of someone's question that I encountered earlier. Maybe people will call this more WIFOM, but I don't believe scum will fake an indefinite ability. Just seems weird.

@ Incognito – Yup. I don’t think I know anything about anyone else. I just finished a game with sthar and skillet, like I said. I think the only other person here I’ve ever been in a game with is Crazy, but I forgot which one.

Windkirby's Mini 675.

2) Skillit

people with, people without, and mafia.

Electra if the mafia aren't people, what are they?

There are likely either only 2 categories, or 4. it seems presumptuous to assume that all mafia members would be in one category when everyone else falls into one of 2. I agree that people either have or do not have roles, but to assume that either all or no mafia have roles seems like it would require some extra information to assert. you don't...have extra information about the specifics of the mafia members powers...do you?

If im being confusing on this just tell me, i get a lot of sass for that.

Weak attack, I've said it before, still saying it. It's really just going on an irrelevant point.

Skillit does defend his point well in #34, but to be honest, the point to begin with was arbitrary.

Jahudo - i had an answer all typed up but i got some kind of popup and lost everything and now in too angry to retype. >_<

the gist of it was that i was not trying to imply any kind of slant either way about E and that i was just trying to make sure that, if we were going to use her theory to frame the discussion about boosting, that it should be as accurate as possible.

Uhh, what? It was an attack; you

did

provide slant.

Also

Boost: Incognito

for allowing me to indulge in more heroes chat. (really for making the effort to understand my point)

What the heck is the reason for a semi-random boostvote? Are you buddying up or what?

3) Raging Rabbit

I think we should definitely discuss boosting as well vote, no reason whatsoever to both make the days a whole lot longer and make the discussions unconnected. I think people's opinion on who to boost can help a lot with scumhunting, especially after we'll have a confirmed scum.
Vote iLord for trying to prevent this.

Also, boost Electra. Could be a scumgambit, but I think this is testable enough to make it worth our while. We're basically as unsure about her as we are about anyone at this point, and considering her claim boosting her will gain as more info.

First paragraph I can agree, though I don't think it makes much difference any way we do it.

The problem is... the information Electra gives us is

not

testable. What if she claims an innocent on Player X? How would you test that?

What's more testable than information? It'll be very easy to find out if what she supplies us with is true or false as the game progresses. Definitely easier to test than the unknown effects of boosting anyone else,

Scum don't always provide false information, but yeah, I think I see your point now. I didn't before.

I don't really buy you weren't noticing the stuff you wrote, this sorta panicky response looks like scum kicking himself for being suspected.

Unvote, vote sthar.

Umm, what? I'll go back to the Open 94 scenario and ask what would you expect a townie to do in that situation? (And as far as I can see, Sthar's #62 is a good defense of this)

4) iLord

I'm wary of Electra - what she's doing is way too easy of a scum gambit for me to trust.

Additionally, didn't Patrick give us the vanilla town PM? It said nothing about powers after boosted. It'd be kind of odd for vanillas to be different from the mod example.

Since when are scum gambits ever easy? And vanilla in some terms can mean just "no active powers."

"Scum can't gambit on the first page" is exactly what makes such gambits effective.

And the fact that people say that makes them ineffective! Wooh, WIFOM!

What I'm saying is that sure, we can start discussing boost targets, but not to boost anyone until we decided who to lynch. There, we can choose the best targets.

I do like this idea. Seems the best way to keep our options open.

I'm not sure the info is as accurate as an investigation result, but if she does claim to have caught scum with this, lynching him is clearly the right move. If he turns town we'll just lynch her the next day.

And if she claims to get an innocent?

I don't believe RR ever answered this question... too bad, 'cuz that was the pivotal point of the argument.

5) TDC

3) Mafia - if we boost them, they probably get things like investigation immunity or an extra night kill, or a NK that overrides doc/boosted NK immunity

So obviously, boosting Mafia is very bad and we should avoid doing it.

So to try to aid this, I'm going to put myself up for being boosted, and also claim-ish.
[..]
So that's my case, do what you want with it.

And how would we know whether or not you fall in category 3?

This sounds overanxious, really. Especially since he [..]ed through the part where Electra claimed, you know, the important part that gave evidence that she

wasn't

mafia.

And, as Electra said, for a scum to make that leap of faith about the existence or otherwise of boostable vanilla townies, or whatever, is pause for thought.

That's a fair point.

Boost: Electra

.

I'm not sure why ILord and RR are talking about guilties and innocents, when Electra's claim clearly said she'll get "information about the town", which I'd guess would be things like "There's X scum in the town" or "there are Y vanillas". Nothing she said suggested it's a cop investigation.

Skillit's last post reads like back-pedaling from a fairly contrived attack on Electra.

unvote, vote: Skillit

And while I'm at it

Boost: eldarad

, I liked what he's said so far.

I really admire posts like this. Good perception and straight to the point. The second paragraph is a good thought, and I'd like to see Electra's clarification on that (if I come to that continuing my readthrough.)

Also, Electra is on "B-1". I think there's no harm in waiting a bit with the "hammer" until we have a better idea of who's going to be the lynch and who might be the second boost.

Yeah... I'm starting to think it doesn't really matter at this point. I can't really see anything changing that would make Electra

not

a good boost choice.

7) Incognito

(Before I read, I'd like to ask how Incognito does those quotes with links to the Post #? Is there a shortcut for that?)

Yes, I read the link that you linked to and was able to determine who the character was and what the specifics were with respect to the character. But that's precisely my point: if you're saying that you think Electra just wants to be special [by being altered in some way, (in this case through boosting)], then doesn't that imply that you believe her vanilla claim? If it was a joke like you say it was, then fine but if it wasn't, I'd like to know why you seemed to readily accept her claim.

This seems like a town-oriented line of questioning. Not sure why.

I really like Incog's #56, except for the vote on Sthar. Answering for other people is what a lot of people have a habit of doing. I'm sure I do it quite often myself (though I try to avoid it.)

8) eldarad

I'm fairly sure Patrick will have considered the impact of a massclaim when creating the setup, so I am sceptical of the claim that there is a game-breaking strategy.

True.

QFT to eldarad's #32.

9) sthar8

Sthar is soft-claiming in #12 and #17... which means he is very likely town. Scum don't want to ruin their fake-claim so early in case they change their mind.

Sthar's #35 is nice.

"Tempted" does not equal "considering." I was teasing electra based on her most recent post, and announcing that I see some value in the Skillit wagon. For the record, I consider my vote to still be random, but I also like the results of it sitting where it is. I don't see anything that merits a true nonrandom vote yet, although there are a couple promising leads.

I'd find this very scummy if I didn't already think he was town... crap.

I'll try and take it as a slight pro-town sign that you've called me of all people out on certain things when I've pretty much had absolutely nothing directed at me and have been finding myself trying to create my own content to get involved in.

This is manipulative and scummy.

In case anyone doesn't see what's going on here, in this quote Incog responds to lullaby's attack with "You're wrong to suspect me, but it's pro-town of you to pressure someone taking as little heat as I am." This isolates lullaby's view as minority and dismisses his attack by reminding everybody that no one is particularly suspicious of Incog otherwise. It also does some very subtle buddying, portraying Incog as a nonthreat or ally to lullaby, making him less likely to pursue Incog in the future, if it works. I've used this tactic to great effect as scum.

If this were representative of your total response to lullaby, I'd be voting for you.

Excellent point, though I believe the rest of Incog's defense more than makes up for it.

10) springlullaby

Boost electra

I think her post comes from a townie.

What skillet said seems superficial but on second thought I think it makes a good point, it's good to keep in mind that mafia may have abilities that are independent from boost to avoid reasonings based on wrong basis - ie: "X can't be responsible of action XXXX because X hasn't been boosted".

I don't like TDC's vote on him.VOTE:TDC

Well, it's clear that there are some town roles in this game that aren't the vanilla role in the first post. So that alone would compensate for the reasonings in your post here.

And... your attack on Incognito ventures way too far into "Too Townie" territory. Overall, the attack was fairly weak and Incog defended herself well.

11) Jahudo

I am against claiming and Electra basically stated the reasons against it. Scum will know what the boosted people can do and how best to approach them at night. I think we should go about things normally.

If someone thinks they should or should not be boosted they can say that before the lynch, but no specifics. It should be a combination of the candidate thinking they have a useful power and the group thinking they're pro-town.

I didn't see Electra's claim as out of place, and I don't think you can make a general rationalization of how much information to claim. Different cases call for different measures.

12) fuzzylightning

I like most of FL's first post (#69), though the immense speculation in this paragraph makes me somewhat wary, though I can't really say that it's scummy.

Now as to my theory on the effects of boosting, I think it will work where any one-time roles will get a free use on that night, and any other roles will get an extra use. As far as vanilla's, I think information would make sense, or maybe NK immunity for the one night, which could be good for an almost lylo situation. As far as speculation on what would happen for the mafia, it depends on when the boost goes into effect, because if it is immediate i could see an extra NK or the ability to RB.

Crazy: You say that you are getting scum vibes from TDC and RR, where do you think they are coming from, because you really haven't shown anything against them.

Yeah... I didn't want to make anything at that point... they were just some minor points. I've probably mentioned some of them in this post.

[Incognito]

@Crazy:

It's really quite labor-intensive sometimes, but I like the result, and I promised to get myself in the habit of doing it from this game on, heh. You do the following in the code:

Code: Select all

[quote="Insert-name-here, [url=that paper icon thing on the top left corner of the post you want to quote]in post #[/url],"]The content that it's in the quote.[/quote]

I need to read the rest of that post later.

[iLord]

Nope, not saying that at all. Town and scum can both make good points like you said. My point is that if you were genuinely suspicious of me like you say you are, you'd take things that I say especially player read-related more with a grain of salt or you would scrutinize them a bit closer to make sure they hold some weight. You seemed to just accept my point about him fairly easily to base your town-read of him on, which really strikes me as counter-intuitive.

I consider any points carefully, it makes little difference whether they were made by suspicious players or confirmed players. And I do believe that what you are saying makes sense.

It's not a "read" tell that you made - it's a good point that weighs on some WIFOM, which I believe is unlikely for scum to pull.

Excellent point, though I believe the rest of Incog's defense more than makes up for it.

Cases don't work like that - any points that Incognito defends well against count as null, not as benefits. They can't outweigh the good points in the case against him.

For example, if I said that Incognito was scummy because he formats his post and he didn't comment on Electra. Then if he completely blows the formatting argument out of the water, does that lower the value of the Electra point at all?

Crazy, what do you think about RR's attack on sthar8?

[Crazy]

Crazy, what do you think about RR's attack on sthar8?

It's crap and it's scummy. I guess I didn't make that clear enough.

[Crazy]

Cases don't work like that - any points that Incognito defends well against count as null, not as benefits. They can't outweigh the good points in the case against him.

For example, if I said that Incognito was scummy because he formats his post and he didn't comment on Electra. Then if he completely blows the formatting argument out of the water, does that lower the value of the Electra point at all?

Well, there is a difference here. That point was from sthar, not from SL, who was the one attacking Incog. So I don't think it's quite the same thing.

And besides, voting someone based on that one point about whatever sthar said (I forgot, something about buddying up to SL or similar) isn't warranted.

[iLord]

Well, there is a difference here. That point was from sthar, not from SL, who was the one attacking Incog. So I don't think it's quite the same thing.

And besides, voting someone based on that one point about whatever sthar said (I forgot, something about buddying up to SL or similar) isn't warranted.

Ah, I thought it was from SL.

It's crap and it's scummy. I guess I didn't make that clear enough.

I see.

What do you think about Incognito's alignment?

[Crazy]

I see.

What do you think about Incognito's alignment?

I'm thinking town. I disagree with SL's case.

[iLord]

I'm thinking town. I disagree with SL's case.

Most of it or all of it?

[Crazy]

I'm thinking town. I disagree with SL's case.

Most of it or all of it?

I haven't even read all of it. After the first post by SL and the first post by Incog, I just skimmed it.

1. Incognito has yet to take a position on Electra, indeed despite multiple posts since the beginning of the game, he has not once addressed the Electra issue directly, preferring to ask peripheral questions instead.

I think this is scummy because assuming Electra is town, scum wouldn't know how to react to her post, and would want to gauge town's sentiment first.

Even scum could have just agreed with an option by then. The fact that she's hesitant shows nothing.

2. All of Incognito's posts has 'look I'm such a good little townie' written all over them, but has yet to produce anything meaningful.

a. Ask 'soft' questions of doubtful relevance in about every post he makes, but doesn't seem to garner any insights from the answers he got.

Questions can't hurt the town. And I do think that most of her questions had some feasible point to them.

2. A weak vote on sthar, it doesn't convey a sense of suspicions, but rather annoyance at sthar answering in other's stead. When sthar answers, Incognito seems to be satisfied with sthar's response as indicated by post addressing Raggin Rabit, yet vote still on sthar.

It seemed like a real vote to me. I don't have a problem with the second part.

3. A prod within the first 3 pages, wtf.

Incognito, I think you very much resemble scum trying to look busy, what do you think?

And this is nothing.

There.

[iLord]

I haven't even read all of it. After the first post by SL and the first post by Incog, I just skimmed it.

Ah okay. Keep us informed on your opinion after you have finished the case.

Even scum could have just agreed with an option by then. The fact that she's hesitant shows nothing.

Scum could also be afraid of agreeing with the wrong or scummy opinion.

But this does weaken the point some what.

[Raging Rabbit]

This game is getting really really wordy, which I generally love but considering how busy I am atm is making following getting a grip on it extremely hard. I need to start reading people in isolation, since I don't have a good read on most of the people playing. Apologies, will try to post something more extensive in the next few days.

Crazy - already answered your question in previous posts to the best of my ability. I'm aware of the similarity to my play in 94, while my case was contrived there I do read overeager apologies as scummy. My main sin that was intentional there and isn't here is getting tunnelvisioned on it, which I'm forced to do because sthar's the only person I have a somewhat substantial scumread on. Hopefully that'll change when I'll get to catch up more.

[iLord]

@RR: Explain why answering for other people is indictive of scum alignment.

[fuzzylightning]

In terms of responses to it, I find fuzzylightning’s response kind of weird. He did a long analysis of it, and then ended with a FoS on springlullaby as a conclusion. How did you get to that point from the confusion you had a few posts ago? What was different about your read the first time and then the second?

To answer your question, the first time I read through it, I was just trying to see how the game was going and to get something written in the form of a post. The fact that I was confused by what was going on made me take a second, much closer look at everything that was said. When I read it a second time, I analyzed each post, point by point, and thats how I came up with my analysis of it. I still have the analysis saved on the computer, if you really want to see my thought process, but IMO it would take up way too much space in an already wordy game.

Thats all I have for now, look for more soon

[springlullaby]

I'm gonna try to be brief here. This is getting ridiculous.

Man, I hate the implied dismissal in this.

Re: my posts sucked. I really don't see what's been so sucky about my posts. I'll note here that you're not even using rational analysis here to explain why it is they've been sucky. You've now pretty much resorted to personal insults which still say absolutely nothing and are actually quite scummy. Thanks for making me feel great about my vote on you.

And thank you for attacking me on words blatantly isolated from its context, it does make me even more convinced you are scum. Tell me, what have I been doing in my last couple of posts if not explaining why I think your posts sucked?
---------------------------------------------

Re: "appealing" to someone else's opinion about Electra. How many times do I need to rehash this point?

I didn't have to decide immediately about my opinion on her.

I fail to see how this is scummy. And when I did eventually voice my opinion about her, I stated in as much detail as I could as to why I felt that way. I thought eldarad pointed something out about Electra's role claim that made sense, and I simply agreed with it. I read through Electra's posts on my own following her claim and began to like her contribution to the game. I was not going to check her off as town like everyone else did just because of a ridiculous assumption of "scum are unlikely to make a gambit like that on page 1". I've already explained why I was unwilling to accept that as a valid enough reason to feel like she's town because of it.

This is plausible rationalization, you may just be a wussy player who think that to never be caught changing your mind is more important than expressing your stances on issues, only I don't believe you.

You see, you were

never

upfront with your doubts, and there is no reason for a townie to not come out and say 'hmm, dunno'.

And you see, you expressly asked me why I thought Electra was town while being still unpronounced yourself and I believe that what you were doing there was trying to gauge the situation and see if there was an obviously protown reason people were thinking Electra was town before pronouncing yourself.

Here I fully expect you to attack me on calling you a wuss while refusing to consider my point.

Re: your 8 out of 10 thing. If the point that you were trying to make was that the majority of people who choose to reserve judgment about someone are scum like you claim, then that's all you had to say. I can't see myself believing that though. There must have been a significance to you referencing those numbers, and I think you pulled those numbers out the way you did to try and strengthen your already flimsy case against me. Either way, I'd like you to show me specific examples from your supposedly vast experience where you've seen scum reserve judgment about people more often than town. Gogogo!

1. Your speculation is wrong.

2. There is only one game in which an early gambit was formed that I have played in, it has been very relevant in forming my opinion but it is still ongoing.

3. Where did I ever suggest that my experience was vast or otherwise? My views are based on my experience as it is and I provide it freely, and people are at liberty to agree or disagree with me. I do not like the fact that you make it appears as if I have claimed to be an authority on the subject. Are you purposefully skewing your representation of me?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to what I think? I obviously think you're incorrect. You might have a point here if I was just checking in every once in awhile with a one sentence or one word post here and there and not contributing anything at all and then out of nowhere, I jumped in and started attacking someone after I got a feel for how the game was going. But I haven't done that. I've been contributing where appropriate, and my suspicions have followed along with my thought process. For example, I questioned Skillit about a bunch of his early posts because I noticed a number of inconsistencies in what he was saying but never voted for him because I, for the most part, bought his explanation. Do I need to outright say this and make it completely public? No, I don't think I do. There are plenty of pro-town reasons to withhold information that, you guessed it, I won't go into.

1. The way I see your discussion with skillit is yet another instance of you being undetermined, you seem to be vaguely suspicious of him by asking him lot of questions, but yet you choose to vote sthar. This is a major strike against you.

2. I call bullshit on your last sentence, please do expose your 'pro-town reason to whithhold information' because I highly suspect you of being nothing but appearance and no substance.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In point number 4, deliberate or not, you're strawmanning me. I never said that I won't make cases against people because I'm afraid I'll be wrong and ring up a townie. In fact, I can cite numerous examples from my experience where I've made large cases against people, gotten them lynched, and ended up being quite wrong. I was saying that during early game, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a pro-town player reserving judgment about a player until said pro-town player receives enough information to feel comfortable with his or her suspicions. In fact, reserving judgment and not jumping to conclusions is more likely to leave a pro-town player with a more satisfying result. I can even make an argument that many scum players oftentimes

won't

reserve judgment about players because they don't want to give these players the benefit of the doubt and want to get those players lynched ASAP. Do you agree with this or not?

1. With your question here you are turning the point around. I 100% agree that keeping a clear view and giving the benefit of the doubt to a player you are suspicious of is necessary. But tell me, where did I say otherwise and how is it relevant to the discussion at hand?

2. Re 'want to get those players lynched ASAP': agreed. But tell me again, how it is relevant to the discussion at hand?

3. There is something problematic and a kind of shifting POV in what you have been saying so let me straighten the discussions and make my stance clear.

a)
You say: There is nothing wrong in my reserving judment on Electra.
My opinion: I disagree, I think it is scummy, see above.

b)
You say: "Have you considered that it's usually a good idea to reserve judgment on people because it's, oh, I don't know, a bad thing when you find yourself running up on someone who ends up being innocent? Is it abnormal for someone to not know who exactly is scum on page fucking 4 of the thread and who is instead choosing to use this early time to try and figure people out?" - actual quote.
My opinion: Fuck you, if you are town you are required to be pro-active.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: bullshit questions. I've already explained the significance of those questions. I still stand by them being game-related and not bullshit. Simple as that. And you still ask the question of "don't you expect scum to lie?" but still seem completely oblivious to your own contradiction.

Again I already explained the difference between your bullshit questions and mine. Yes I expect scum to lie, but my question aren't question that are verifiable and I have no other mean but to ask them so I can gauge your answers.

Your questions on the others hand were simple yes/no question you could have verified by yourself without asking them.

I'm quoting them again because you have yet to provide me with an answer and this is a major strike against you:

@Electra: Are sthar8 and Skillit the only two people in this game who you have metas on?

Why didn't you directly verify Electra's meta? Don't you expect her to lie to you if she were scum? I see this as a complete bullshit question.

Then:

Have all of your previous games been modded by mods who send PM's out when the game begins?

Question which you explained with:

I have a slight meta on sthar8 as I just finished moderating a game in which he was scum in. I thought he played fairly well in that game, and I do have respect for his scum play, so I wanted to place a bit of pressure on him to try and get a better read of him. I thought he kinda skated by a bit in that game particularly on Day 1 as nobody seemed to really place much pressure on him until later on in the game during Day 2. Therefore, I figured that by placing a pressure vote on him early even for more minute reasons I would be able to draw more information out of him and not allow him to skate on by. Plus his answering of posts directed at other people has the potential to lessen the information we can draw from their responses since they could just copy or formulate their response around his own response thereby making any response they do put forward a null tell. I wanted to nip that type of "answering posts directed at other people" thing in the bud immediately.

I see zero relevance in your explanation.

Re: vote on sthar8. [url=http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 60#1322360]I didn't defend him.

Okay, I overstated it, you merely implied that you were not in accord with another's suspicion of him, right after you voted for him.

But that is miles away from my original point which is: you say you 'pressured' sthar aggressively. I say bullshit, there wasn't even an hint of teeth behind your vote.

-----------------------------------------------------

Reducing my case against you to OMGUS. I figured you'd end up doing that.
Still cool with my vote.

Saying that I'm reducing your case to OMGUS, I figured you'd end up doing that. 1)Where did I accuse you of OMGUS 2)Tell me, what point of your case have I not answered in my prior reply to you?

I've got a huge 'how dare you suspect me' vibe from you, and I'm not digging it. I'll tell you again that I'm 100% serious in all the accusation I made.

[iLord]

To answer your question, the first time I read through it, I was just trying to see how the game was going and to get something written in the form of a post. The fact that I was confused by what was going on made me take a second, much closer look at everything that was said. When I read it a second time, I analyzed each post, point by point, and thats how I came up with my analysis of it. I still have the analysis saved on the computer, if you really want to see my thought process, but IMO it would take up way too much space in an already wordy game.

Thats all I have for now, look for more soon

If it was already on your computer, I would actually like to see it. Can you post it sometime?

@FL: FL look closely at your points. Even if you don't believe they negilible, drop the weaker ones.

The point of case is to convince people. In order to do so, you must also take into consideration the perspective of everyone else. Apparently, we all think Incognito is defending well - if you don't want your efforts to be futile, you have to reshape your attack.

[eldarad]

Skillit

- I didn't like, and still don't like, Skillit's attack on Electra early, based on such a flimsy base. Jokey or not. However, I do agree that one of the people on his wagon is probably scum.
Meh.

unvote

TDC

- I'm actually going to retract my 'gut read' since it has been replaced with an actual read, for want of a better word, and he seems more townie than not.

Crazy

- as much as I like people agreeing with me, I am surprised that springlullaby pulled Incog up for referring to my opinion, but completely ignored Crazy doing the same in a much more blatant way.
I also don't like the continued assumption that Electra's "information" will be a cop investigation.

vote Crazy

Incognito

- as far as I can tell, Incog is playing how Incog always plays. I note springlullaby's comment that Incog used my opinion on Electra's claim as validation got his own opinion and whilst I doubt that is the case, I am alive to the possibility.

springlullaby

- there is a lot in her case against Incog that I don't like:
- The implication that passive-aggressiveness is somehow scummy and/or less townie than the outright aggression that colour her own posts.
- The idea that asking questions where the purpose is not immediately clear is scummy.

You are saying here that you prefer reserving judment before commiting to anything, well let me tell you that I think 8 out of 10 persons who prefer to reserve judment are scum because 1)it is hader for them to form an opinion in the first place2)they want to keep all options open the longer possible, especially if they do not indicate their initail read at all, which is your case.

- Ignoring the invented statistic, the idea that reaching a quick, gut read is better than keeping an open mind and not forming any judgement for a while.
- The whole issue of whether Incog's questioning style is intrinsically scummy, as opposed to it just being the way he scumhunts/plays mafia.
- Consistently accusing Incog of trying to 'turn the point around' or whatever (when I can't see that happening) and a substitute for
- The "why are you asking scum questions since they're going to lie" thing is stupid, and sl's refusal to accept that once it was pointed out to her.
- Using "proactive" as if it is the same thing as "aggressive"

There's not enough there to support a vote on sl, particuarly as I can't tell whether the artificial aggression is all a show to hide her alignment, or just someone who uses a different persona to play mafia from her regular personality.

[iLord]

Skillit - I didn't like, and still don't like, Skillit's attack on Electra early, based on such a flimsy base. Jokey or not. However, I do agree that one of the people on his wagon is probably scum.
Meh. unvote

Why are you unvoting?

Crazy - as much as I like people agreeing with me, I am surprised that springlullaby pulled Incog up for referring to my opinion, but completely ignored Crazy doing the same in a much more blatant way.
I also don't like the continued assumption that Electra's "information" will be a cop investigation.
vote Crazy

Could you explain how this is indictive of scum alignment?

springlullaby - there is a lot in her case against Incog that I don't like:
- The implication that passive-aggressiveness is somehow scummy and/or less townie than the outright aggression that colour her own posts.
- The idea that asking questions where the purpose is not immediately clear is scummy.
- Ignoring the invented statistic, the idea that reaching a quick, gut read is better than keeping an open mind and not forming any judgement for a while.
- The whole issue of whether Incog's questioning style is intrinsically scummy, as opposed to it just being the way he scumhunts/plays mafia.
- Consistently accusing Incog of trying to 'turn the point around' or whatever (when I can't see that happening) and a substitute for
- The "why are you asking scum questions since they're going to lie" thing is stupid, and sl's refusal to accept that once it was pointed out to her.
- Using "proactive" as if it is the same thing as "aggressive"

There's not enough there to support a vote on sl, particuarly as I can't tell whether the artificial aggression is all a show to hide her alignment, or just someone who uses a different persona to play mafia from her regular personality.

So I take it that you agree with the other points?

[eldarad]

Why are you unvoting?

So I can put my vote on Crazy.

Could you explain how this is indictive of scum alignment?

Maybe we should ask springlullaby how it is indicative of scum alignment in Incog, but not in Crazy?
Her repeated agreement with me without any additional input herself makes we wary. The overall lack of content (until her recent scumdar) also doesn't sit well with me.
I also think that, given springlullaby's avoidance of Crazy when she was scumhunting, it looks like there is some link between them - ie I think there is a possibility that they are scumbuddies.
Hence lynching Crazy will also give us a decent steer on sl's alignment.

So I take it that you agree with the other points?

Well I didn't say I agreed with the other points. So that would be a strong assumption to make.

[springlullaby]

The "why are you asking scum questions since they're going to lie" thing is stupid, and sl's refusal to accept that once it was pointed out to her.

I never said what your paraphrase makes me say, I said that two of his questions specifically were bullshit because he could have found out the answer by himself, and indeed it is what I would have expected from a protown player, instead he choose to ask them, leading me to ask him "Why didn't you verify these by yourself? Don't you expect scum to lie?".

You paraphrasing blatantlys take things out of context. READ AGAIN.

[springlullaby]

Could you explain how this is indictive of scum alignment?

Maybe we should ask springlullaby how it is indicative of scum alignment in Incog, but not in Crazy?
Her repeated agreement with me without any additional input herself makes we wary. The overall lack of content (until her recent scumdar) also doesn't sit well with me.
I also think that, given springlullaby's avoidance of Crazy when she was scumhunting, it looks like there is some link between them - ie I think there is a possibility that they are scumbuddies.
Hence lynching Crazy will also give us a decent steer on sl's alignment.[/quote]

I haven't been avoiding Crazy as much as I have been concentrating on Incognito. By your reasoning, half the people in this game could be linked to me.

As for your question (next time ask me directly, lest I miss it), there is a confluence of elements that make me think Incognito is scummy, more so than Crazy. I recall I didn't like something he did, but I forgot what. I'll do a general reading of the game once Incog has answered me, I'm pretty curious as what he is going to do next.

[springlullaby]

EBWOP messed up tag, quote from eldarad

[Incognito]

Oh.

So yeah.

In addition to the Crazy/Incog double standardization, I'd really like to know what springlullaby thinks of iLord's reads with special attention paid to his read of fuzzylightning. kthx.

[springlullaby]

You answer everyone of my points first. Kthx.

[Incognito]

You answer everyone of my points first. Kthx.

Um, no.