Mini 692: Boost Mafia (Game Over!)

[Elmo]

Day 1, Vote Count #10 - Lynching

Crazy (3) <- Mana_Ku, sthar8, Electra
iLord (2) <- Raging Rabbit, eldarad
Mana_Ku (2) <- TDC, Crazy
Raging Rabbit <- iLord
Incognito <- Guardian
Guardian <- Incognito

Not voting: fuzzylightning, Jahudo.

Boost Count

Electra (5) <- eldarad, Raging Rabbit, TDC, Jahudo, fuzzylightning
Guardian <- Jahudo, iLord
Incognito <- Mana_Ku
eldarad <- TDC
Jahudo <- eldarad
sthar8 <- Guardian, iLord
iLord <- Guardian
TDC <- Incognito

With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch/boost. Buy one, get one free!

[TDC]

I didn't bring up the Nice Shot! to draw a comparison between her play here and her play there because I agree with what you say about her play seeming different there from her play here. If I wasn't clear, I referenced Nice Shot! purely for Battle Mage's comment about her since he claimed to have meta-experience with her.

I see, I had taken it as "BM correctly pinned her as scum because she was player like in R-1000".

As for her posting rate, I think her posting rate here better matched her posting rate in her scum games. She was posting here at a rate of about 1 post every 3 days, which, if you look at her past scum games seems about right for her. In her town games, she seems to post at least once per day excluding weekends where her posting does seem to decline regardless of her alignment.

Really? I don't see it.
Look at these three games:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7452
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7687
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7729
She's been town in all three of them, and her posting pattern is pretty much 3 days of nothing, one day of multiple posts, etc.
Which is also the pattern in this game.
In fact, if you look at it a bit more closely, her scum games have a similar pattern, but sometimes the "gap" opens up to more than a week. (See the two scum games you linked for examples of this). So, if anything, her posting frequency would be a slight town tell.

I can't follow how you came to your conclusion. Which town game have you seen where she posted as regular as you claim?

[TDC]

EBWOP: player -> playing in the first sentence.

[Incognito]

@TDC:

I mainly looked at this one: Mini 682. I realize it's still ongoing, but she was already lynched there as a Vanilla Townie. I liked this one though because that game's start date began roughly at the same time as Boost, which means that her real life situation and her playing style would have been about the same when compared to here. Those town games you linked to all began in March which doesn't really accommodate for any possible real life issues she may have been having at the time and also doesn't accommodate for any changes that may have happened to her pro-town playstyle from then until now.

[TDC]

Oh, right, I didn't think of looking for her ongoings.
Her other game where she's already dead seems to support this, too: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9599

[eldarad]

eldarad and incognito are linked.

For what it's worth, I noticed this a while ago. I also realised when I read back that it isn't all one-way, in the sense that I have (inadvertently) created some linkage back to Incog. I'd rather you hadn't mentioned it, but meh.

I think maybe some of it is that we have a similar playstyle, and some is that we were both town in the most awesome endgame I've ever played in. I have not discarded the possibility that some of it is Incog buddying up to me.

[Jahudo]

unboost: Guardian

Which was from a random boost on SL. I don't think SL was being entirely realistic at the end there. Does this meta people are talking about show her liking those long posts and more sophisticated language?

A few of iLord's questions and comments on RR look to me like he is drawing conclusions without looking carefully enough at the information. For now, just a
FoS: iLord

Um, that's not a scumtell.

Um, I think scum and town could draw conclusions without looking into the info but scum know who's not scum and have to make them look scum somehow.

@The Rest of the Town: Do you think Guilt is indictive of scum?

If it's guilt of a mislynch or something and feels out of character, like acted or something, then I might think it's suspicious. What sthar did was a "oops my bad, moving on now" kind of thing and don't think it is indicative of alignment.

[Guardian]

I am putting my response to Incognito first since his post feels wrong to me. Then chronological order, pretty much.

Really?

I'll look at that link later, but if SL is known to fake anger, then that would drastically make me reevaluate my read of her.

I would boost Electra and sthar8, but since Electra's refraining at B-1, I'll boost my next choice.

Boost: sthar8

Boost: springlullaby

Damn, that must have been a quick read. What did you think of those links?

Someone remind me to comment on this after rr/iLord does.

Now, onto Guardian.

Incognito's whole attack on SL looks like a long drawn out OMGUS and much more like the latter (pretend scum hunting) rather than the former (real scum hunting).

This OMGUS argument isn't gonna cut it. I mentioned in my 117 that one of the main reasons I was voting for springlullaby was because something about her attack felt off. At the time, I couldn't quite articulate as well as I could have what it was that felt off about it but after looking through MD, I found the phrase that I was looking for. I really think springlullaby's attack against me was

preemptive OMGUS

, which I think is a very little known but highly potent scum tell. What do I mean by this? Let's look at how things happened in temporal order early in the game:

springlullaby began with this:

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

I didn't like this post because her reasoning for boosting Electra seemed very vague and just seemed to be following the popular opinion about her, and her reasoning for voting TDC seemed equally as vague as well. So I questioned her on what it was I didn't like about this post:

Can you elaborate on this a bit more? Why do you think Electra's post comes from a townie? Also, can you explain in a bit more detail why you don't like TDC's vote on Skillit?

...to which she responded with her 81 in which she both answered my questions and then chose to unleash her attack against me for the remainder of her time in the game. So you see, I don't think your argument that my vote on her was "a long drawn out OMGUS" holds any weight because if you look at things in temporal order, you'd notice that my suspicion of her came

before

her suspicion of me ever came about. I feel like when a pro-scum player realizes or sees a pro-town player putting together some points about him or her, he or she uses preemptive OMGUS to make it seem like his or her attack came first and then the pro-town player's vote came next. Looking at things in the correct order shows how invalid your accusation of me actually is. Further, even if you were correct about my attack on her being OMGUS, I'm surprised that

you

of all people (the king of OMGUS regardless of your alignment) would actually use that as a point against me. Humorous really.

Incognito, why start acting dismissive again? My past meta character has nothing to do with the validity of my argument -- or are you arguing that it does??

This adds to your trend in this game of just brushing off attacks against you for irrelevant reasons or for no reason at all. Does no one else find that suspicious?

Further, you make the case she was preemtively OMGUSing you... I am replacing into a situation where you have unfairly attacked my role to the point you got her so angry you left -- and when I replace in you vote me. I presume you expected I would be suspicious of you -- it seems to me that you were preemptively OMGUSing me with that vote.

Also, I really don't understand how you could mention the following about sthar8/iLord:

iLord and sth are linked. I find both town-like, but if either showed up scum I would drastically reevaluate the other.

but then choose to boost the both of them at the same time. I mean, yes, you did mention that you found both to be town-like, but you also snuck in the possibility that if one comes up scum, you'd closely scrutinize the other, which indicates that you're at least partially worried about them being scum with one another. Why would you boost two people who you think could have a scum linkage with one another?

Before I respond to this, I want to know what you are implying -- do you find my actions suspicious, or misguided, or both? Do you want me to reply why me doing this should not been seen suspicious, or do you want me to consider whether i might be wrong, or both? If you think my action was suspicious, explain why. If you think it was wrong, explain why. I need clarification before I can answer.

Incognito: I have sifted through the two games of sl you mentioned (and a few more of her). I can see the parallel with R-1000, but I don't really see it with Nice Shot. The other games (town and scum) where fairly clean (and lurky) from her. I would have a better feeling about this meta read if there was more data (or if I understood where you think Nice Shot is comparable with this game, could you elaborate?)

Good catch.

I didn't bring up the Nice Shot! to draw a comparison between her play here and her play there because I agree with what you say about her play seeming different there from her play here. If I wasn't clear, I referenced Nice Shot! purely for Battle Mage's comment about her since he claimed to have meta-experience with her. I think R-1000 like you mentioned draws a nicer parallel with her play in this game, yes, and that's why I linked that game.

As for her posting rate, I think her posting rate here better matched her posting rate in her scum games. She was posting here at a rate of about 1 post every 3 days, which, if you look at her past scum games seems about right for her. In her town games, she seems to post at least once per day excluding weekends where her posting does seem to decline regardless of her alignment.

Boost: TDC

His posts are sometimes far in between, but they're to the point and seem pro-town to me especially this most recent post where he's taken the time to meta-game, which I think is more likely to be done by town rather than scum.

This boost seems like it could be pretty blatant buddying to me. "TDC agrees with me and helps my case? Yay! Boost!"

I am going to re-read sometime with a possible iLord--Incognito connection in mind. Incognito seems like he was going out of his way to paint a iLord--me picture. It benefits scum to tie townies to scum, and Incognito seemed to me to think that tying me to iLord was a strong point against me.

[in response to Guardian]

There's a difference in that throwing around boosts doesn't really do anything. If you put a vote on a person, then it's like putting pressure on them. What exactly does boosting someone do? If votes were kept secret, indicating that the person voted was not affected in any way, I certainly would wait til the end to vote.

Electra, I think that your reasoning here is fundamentally flawed -- boosting does efect the game. It is a game mechanic that generates reactions from others, generates debate on who to boost, and leaves a concrete trail of who people have found townie throughout the game.

It lets us discuss who to boost all day instead of a last minute dash at the end under deadline. It stimulates conversation and develops ties between players. Even if it does not directly influence the behavior of the person being boosted, it is a goal that we as town must achieve each day -- generating discussion on it is a good thing, and making a boost and seeing how people react is one of the best ways to go about doing this.

In addition, once scum start dying, it will be of some benefit to look back and see who they have boosted throughout the days. If we just wait to boost at end of the day, we rob ourselves of that analysis.

Guardian - why do you find iLord independantly pro town?

He has taken reasonable stances throughout the game, approached the game in a common sense manner, been OK with admitting he is wrong, etc.

Reading back over the game, one thing that disturbs me is that he could be buddying with sth. I am reevaluating whether their connection is really two-ways or is rather one way. Particularly post 78 I did not understand why he was defending sth. iLord?

Incognito: I have sifted through the two games of sl you mentioned (and a few more of her). I can see the parallel with R-1000, but I don't really see it with Nice Shot. The other games (town and scum) where fairly clean (and lurky) from her. I would have a better feeling about this meta read if there was more data (or if I understood where you think Nice Shot is comparable with this game, could you elaborate?)

---

Guardian: I know you aren't sl, but would you address this anyway? Seems odd she would replace out just when Incognito brought that up.

Re: her meta; I don't see it as appearing faked. If she does exaggerate annoyedness, and Incognito is trying to use that as a meta-argument against her/me, he or someone needs to demonstrate that she does that as scum and does not do it as town. It seemed real to me and she is town here, so I would be extremely surprised if such meta-evidence exists. I think she replaced out because she was frustrated -- I've certainly replaced out out of frustration before, it makes sense to me. Is there something I am missing?

I am unsure what to make of Electra. Honestly I do think her post would be easy for scum to do, and if there are no vanilla roles like Electra claimed to have -- that is not a problem. It is in fact better -- no one is going to counter "vanilla who gets investigation benefits if boosted" if no such role exists. I am in fact a bit skeptical that any role has in it "you get X if boosted." My role does not, I can only speculate on what boosting does. I find it surprising that a role would explicitly state "if you get boosted X happens."

I get sick of repeating this all the time, but Electra never claimed to have "investigation benefits". I understand her claim as passive "the mod will give me some information" thing.

OK. I really don't care about that distinction, except (while this is a mini theme, so there are many more role options) it makes me even a bit more skeptical of her role. She gets "some info" about the town if boosted? What kind of role is that?

I also disagree that if Electra turns out to be the only claimed vanilla that knows what boosting her does, she would be in a better position.

Well in endgame she would not be, but if she is scum, and no other such roles exists, she benefits now because then no one is going to counter claim her now, and we will only figure it out much later, if we do figure it out at all. Meanwhile she gets boosted, gets whatever scum benefit she gets from being boosted, and makes up some BS "info" she got. If she is scum her claim certainly advantages her now.

In fact, if you look at the first page of this game, there's at least one post that suggests that she is not the only one.
I also think it's quite obvious that when Electra says "people with roles" she means people that can do something

without being boosted.

I did not find that obvious, it did not even occur to me; Electra is this what you meant?

For those who ask about how I see eldarad/Incognito:

eldarad and incognito are linked.

For what it's worth, I noticed this a while ago. I also realised when I read back that it isn't all one-way, in the sense that I have (inadvertently) created some linkage back to Incog. I'd rather you hadn't mentioned it, but meh.

I think maybe some of it is that we have a similar playstyle, and some is that we were both town in the most awesome endgame I've ever played in. I have not discarded the possibility that some of it is Incog buddying up to me.

This is pretty much what I saw as well. They had some similar opinions/suspicions, and iirc I saw them defend each other at various points in the game. Incognito might have been buddying or it might be mutual.

Just so it is out in the open, Jahudo and Skillet have bugged me but I have nothing tangible to back that up. Strong gut against Jahudo though :|.

When I re-read I'll be looking at iLord/Incog more closely, and to see where my feelings about those two are coming from.

Jahudo -- why uboost me and not boost someone else? No one you find likely to be town?

[sthar8]

I don’t believe I’ve discredited her opinions. I just haven’t found them noteworthy.

This is not a sufficient answer to the question I asked you.

I wish things were this simple. There isn't one scum course of action, it depends on a multidute of factors that are very hard to define and evaluate.

What changed?

TDC: Do you have any opinions to share? Who do you think is scum? What do you think about Crazy's following the town? Who do you think we should boost?

I see a lot of questions from you, which is good, but not a whole lot of scumhunting, which is bad. You're not expressing many opinions, which makes you very hard to read. You're still sitting on the vote you made in your second serious post, with no explanation or push since then. If you have any specific questions about the Crazy case, I'd be glad to answer them, but "please explain everything" isn't going to get you anywhere, as I've already tried to explain the best I can.

I'd rather you hadn't mentioned it, but meh.

Why?

I am reevaluating whether their connection is really two-ways or is rather one way.

Note that early on the questions I was answering were directed at iLord, not myself. I don't believe there is a significant link on my part after that, and I had not intended to defend him. This may have encouraged him to create a link to me, but I'm not sure whether the motivation is more likely scum or town.

What do you think of Crazy?

Electra: Who do you suspect, beside crazy?

Need more from Mana_Ku and FL.

Top three are Crazy, iLord, RR, in that order. RR and iLord are close.

Note that anyone should feel free to answer the questions posed to TDC, but I'd especially like his views.

[iLord]

Answering arguments right now - looking at everything else later.

@ iLord - Why do you think Guardian is #2 or #3 most likely to be town?

Based on my read of SL.

Well, attacking me for backing off a point while backing off said point yourself to sound more convincing doesn't sit well with me.

What do you mean by "losing the argument"? Did your read on me change in any way or are you just "losing" because of lack of popular support?

I'm not backing off said point. I'm saying that somewhere along the line that line of questioning was dropped - I'm still working on the guilt topic, which is what the main point has delved into.

I'm losing because my case isn't convincing anyone.

I wish things were this simple. There isn't one scum course of action, it depends on a multidute of factors that are very hard to define and evaluate. The main difference is that from a scum viewpoint, it doesn't matter whether you believe your point is strong or not , but rather if that point succeeds in making you good and townies look bad.

Let's rephrase - what would most scum do or what would you predict scum would do once they were called on a point they knew was weak. The scum does not know the effectiveness of his point, only that its weak basis is being attacked.

Turning this into a matter of not believing you is a nice twist, but every contradiction in this game can be explained by "from my point of view, the two don't contradict" which creates the same "trust" dillema. The only way I have to determine whether I believe you is according to how convincing your explanation for why your points don't contradict each other is, and since that explanation (two - now possibly three - very similar backing offs being "inherently different" and giving you completely opposite reads in a way that just happens to correlate with your case for me being scum) is imo completely unconvincing, your case appears contrived to me and I "don't believe you". Therefore this totally is a matter of how convincing your definitions are, since that is the only way I have really to determine if I believe you hold them.

Don't act as if I'm twisting your argument - I've merely established that the crux of our argument is not based on disagreement or misunderstanding, but reads. You don't believe that the way I presented my case and explanation is convincing, and I have done my best to explain them. If you could point out where you specifically find my definitons fail, then by all means point them out and I'll do my best to explain them.

Okay, I got your sthar8 point (That part of the reason I think he is town as well), which I get, so that takes out my backing-up point. I was under the impression that it was something sthar8 did recently, and not on the first few pages, hence my confusion. Dunno how I missed it though.

1) I still feel like iLord's reads in his 21st post look really contrived. Reasoning:

a) I can't see how he can list me as his second scummiest read but then use a point I brought up with respect to fuzzylightning to determine he's third towniest. He's tried to explain this a number of times, but I really don't buy the explanation.
b) Despite what me mentioned about his towniest to scummiest list not being as etched in stone as it looks, he still created one, and I still have a hard time determining how he was able to place people like fuzzylightning, Crazy, TDC, and Jahudo who had not really contributed much at the time in such a rigid order.
c) His points are inconsistent. He didn't like Raging Rabbit because he mentioned that RR kept pushing the same weak point over and over again (Raging Rabbit responded to this well mentioning that he was repeatedly asked to clarify this point and that's why he kept mentioning it), but he listed springlullaby as one of his towniest despite the fact that iLord conceded that SL's points against me were mostly weak. There's a discrepancy there.

I've repeated a) over and over again. It's part of the incorrect ongoing "motive weakens points" dogma that seems to be floating around in this game.

b) is just weak - I've already explained that they are not rigid.

c) Why is that a discrepancy? Are you saying that you can take a set list of scumtells that you can apply to each person and situation? Each situation must be evaluated individually - the key to good scumhunting is not to look at the action, but whether or not townies would actually do what they do, including mistaken townies or learning townies. I'm not very good at this yet, but I feel that I'm on the right track this game.

2) I didn't like iLord's coaching of springlullaby, and his goading of our argument from the sidelines. I can think of no pro-town reason for a player who supposedly doesn't know another player's alignment to coach another player on how to attack someone. I look at coaching as a major scum tell because I think the only way you can coach someone in a game of Mafia is if you have inside knowledge about the coached player's alignment (whether it be town or scum).

What about wanting the coached player's case to succeed?

3) His initial opinion about Electra's claim (in which he even went so far as to vote eldarad for siding with Electra) dramatically changed from his current opinion (in which he mentions that he basically agreed with the points the person he previously voted for for accepting her claim so readily brought up).

Motive doesn't weaken points, and Eldarad's correct logic both eliminated my suspicions and changed my view on Electra.

Damn, that must have been a quick read. What did you think of those links?

Haven't read them yet.

Um, I think scum and town could draw conclusions without looking into the info but scum know who's not scum and have to make them look scum somehow.

But you said that I was drawing poor conclusions.

Someone remind me to comment on this after rr/iLord does.

Rawr.

Reading back over the game, one thing that disturbs me is that he could be buddying with sth. I am reevaluating whether their connection is really two-ways or is rather one way. Particularly post 78 I did not understand why he was defending sth. iLord?

I was defending sthar8 because his action wasn't scummy, and I was under the impression that RR was pushing an attack against him for that point. sthar8's post was not a scum freaking out to a baseless attack - it was a player (I believe to be town) apoligizing for doing something antitown.

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

Maybe post later, but due to CPU Error, I could only look at the last page and couldn't click on any of thel inks.

[iLord]

This is not a sufficient answer to the question I asked you.

I must be missing something then - I believe you asked why was I discrediting her opinions?

[Incognito]

Incognito, why start acting dismissive again? My past meta character has nothing to do with the validity of my argument -- or are you arguing that it does??

That's the only portion of what I talked about that you respond to?

I referenced your meta because I think you of all people should know better than to use OMGUS as a scum tell because you know as well as I do that OMGUS isn't something that's a universal scum tell. You should know this because you have a tendency to be OMGUS-y regardless of your alignment, so I was a bit surprised when you used that as a point against me despite the fact that it wasn't even true to begin with.

Further, you make the case she was preemtively OMGUSing you... I am replacing into a situation where you have unfairly attacked my role to the point you got her so angry you left -- and when I replace in you vote me. I presume you expected I would be suspicious of you -- it seems to me that you were preemptively OMGUSing me with that vote.

Guardian, I was already suspicious of her before she ever reacted the way she did and had already had a vote on her for a large portion of Day 1. Her reaction made me think even worse of her, and I metagamed her even further, so I placed my vote back on her (you) because I think she (you) have a strong chance of being scum. How could you possibly claim that I was preemptively OMGUS-ing you when I could have had absolutely no clue what you would think about the game following your read? This argument is awful.

Before I respond to this, I want to know what you are implying -- do you find my actions suspicious, or misguided, or both? Do you want me to reply why me doing this should not been seen suspicious, or do you want me to consider whether i might be wrong, or both? If you think my action was suspicious, explain why. If you think it was wrong, explain why. I need clarification before I can answer.

I am implying that your boosting of those two at the same time makes absolutely no sense and yes, I find it suspicious. I said so as much later on in that post you just quoted and gave my reasons why. I can't understand how someone who suggests there could be a positive link between two players that could suggest a scum linkage between them could then

choose

to boost those two players who could be

positively

linked as scum at the exact same time. You seriously don't see anything wrong with this?

I am going to re-read sometime with a possible iLord--Incognito connection in mind. Incognito seems like he was going out of his way to paint a iLord--me picture. It benefits scum to tie townies to scum, and Incognito seemed to me to think that tying me to iLord was a strong point against me.

Are you kidding? I had repeatedly asked springlullaby to comment on this double standard a few times throughout the thread, and she repeatedly avoided it, which made me even more suspicious about it. Also, please note, that you were the first person to begin explicitly tying people together (you tied sthar8 with iLord and me with eldarad). And now it's wrong for me to suggest that I think a link might exist between you and iLord when you did the same just now and after I had repeatedly tried to get springlullaby to comment on her own double standardization? And I guess that sthar8<->iLord link (which included a town read of iLord) just gets thrown out the door now because I noticed a connection between you (springlullaby) and him that makes you want to suddenly look into me<->iLord?

I really don't want to get into a back and forth with you as I've done this back and forth stuff enough this game. I've already put my points out there so anyone who needs further clarification on them can ask. The game must be hard enough to read as it is for replacements and any further back and forths will just make the game even more difficult to read afresh and reread further down the line on subsequent days. I'd like responses to what I've mentioned above and if you have any additional, brand new points you'd like to bring up, I'll respond.

[Guardian]

What do you think of Crazy?

I don't have much thoughts about crazy. I see that you find him suspicious -- can you refer me to the post where you outlined why so I can start from there? I will make a note to examine Crazy next time I re-read.

Reading back over the game, one thing that disturbs me is that he could be buddying with sth. I am reevaluating whether their connection is really two-ways or is rather one way. Particularly post 78 I did not understand why he was defending sth. iLord?

I was defending sthar8 because his action wasn't scummy, and I was under the impression that RR was pushing an attack against him for that point. sthar8's post was not a scum freaking out to a baseless attack - it was a player (I believe to be town) apoligizing for doing something antitown.

Regardless of what you thought -- why not let him defend himself?

Incognito, why start acting dismissive again? My past meta character has nothing to do with the validity of my argument -- or are you arguing that it does??

That's the only portion of what I talked about that you respond to?

I feel like it might be fair that SL was OMGUSy, and that might have tainted her judgment, which in a vacuum would be suspicious if that is how she acted. However, you dismissed my argument, as you dismissed hers -- I find this dismissive-ness suspicious, and felt like pointing that out.

I referenced your meta because I think you of all people should know better than to use OMGUS as a scum tell because you know as well as I do that OMGUS isn't something that's a universal scum tell. You should know this because you have a tendency to be OMGUS-y regardless of your alignment, so I was a bit surprised when you used that as a point against me despite the fact that it wasn't even true to begin with.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding/misrepresentation of the issue. I have a meta of OMGUSy-ness

precisely because

normally when someone OMGUS-es it is scummy.

A "meta" is a representation of someone's tendencies and explanation of how they deviate from the norm. I have that meta because

normally OMGUS is scummy

. The reason some people think of that meta for me is because for me it is less of an indicator. For most people, and as far as I know of for you, OMGUS is an indicator for scum-likelihood. The fact that this specific tell (may, according to my past-meta) applies less to me does not mean it does not apply to you, nor does it imply that my bringing it up against you is invalid.

Further, you make the case she was preemtively OMGUSing you... I am replacing into a situation where you have unfairly attacked my role to the point you got her so angry you left -- and when I replace in you vote me. I presume you expected I would be suspicious of you -- it seems to me that you were preemptively OMGUSing me with that vote.

Guardian, I was already suspicious of her before she ever reacted the way she did and had already had a vote on her for a large portion of Day 1. Her reaction made me think even worse of her, and I metagamed her even further, so I placed my vote back on her (you) because I think she (you) have a strong chance of being scum. How could you possibly claim that I was preemptively OMGUS-ing you when I could have had absolutely no clue what you would think about the game following your read? This argument is awful.

If me replacing in had nothing to do with your vote why did you say that it did? Why vote for me only after I replaced in -- you posted between her last post and before I replace in, why not vote then?

Before I respond to this, I want to know what you are implying -- do you find my actions suspicious, or misguided, or both? Do you want me to reply why me doing this should not been seen suspicious, or do you want me to consider whether i might be wrong, or both? If you think my action was suspicious, explain why. If you think it was wrong, explain why. I need clarification before I can answer.

I am implying that your boosting of those two at the same time makes absolutely no sense and yes, I find it suspicious. I said so as much later on in that post you just quoted and gave my reasons why. I can't understand how someone who suggests there could be a positive link between two players that could suggest a scum linkage between them could then

choose

to boost those two players who could be

positively

linked as scum at the exact same time. You seriously don't see anything wrong with this?

I considered it when I voted, but those are the two people I found most townlike. I could be wrong, they could be scum, but they were my primary town suspects, ergo I boosted them.

I can see you bringing it up as something for me to reconsider, but I think that you are reaching in saying that it is suspicious of me.

Guys, Incognito's argument that I have inconsistent thoughts about the game, and it is a huge stretch to say he finds me scummy for it.

I find them possibly tied and then still vote for them. For me to be scum doing that, for it to be scummy, I would have to have forgotten I found them tied -- in the same post where I said I found them tied!! If I were scum I could just omit I found them tied, or not boost both or either them -- I boosted them because I find/found them both most likely to be town, regardless of the chance that they are tied! I find it extremely implausible to find me suspicious for this, because I would have to have less than half a brain to not realize what I was doing as scum. I don't find it suspicious at all.

Unwise? Possibly. I am going to reevaluate, especially iLord, whenever I re-read. Scummy? Definitely not.

I am going to re-read sometime with a possible iLord--Incognito connection in mind. Incognito seems like he was going out of his way to paint a iLord--me picture. It benefits scum to tie townies to scum, and Incognito seemed to me to think that tying me to iLord was a strong point against me.

Are you kidding? I had repeatedly asked springlullaby to comment on this double standard a few times throughout the thread, and she repeatedly avoided it, which made me even more suspicious about it. Also, please note, that you were the first person to begin explicitly tying people together (you tied sthar8 with iLord and me with eldarad). And now it's wrong for me to suggest that I think a link might exist between you and iLord when you did the same just now and after I had repeatedly tried to get springlullaby to comment on her own double standardization? And I guess that sthar8<->iLord link (which included a town read of iLord) just gets thrown out the door now because I noticed a connection between you (springlullaby) and him that makes you want to suddenly look into me<->iLord?

You are not coherent here. Your thoughts are heated and your arguments are not making clear sense. You've spent three or four paragraphs trying to tie me and iLord, and claim to have started doing so before I replaced in. Now you say I am the first one trying to make ties?

Also, I had one sentence about two different ties, observations others could look into and think about. You are trying to argue that we are tied, and that it is a strong point against me that we are tied. There is a clear and distinct difference between the two actions. You think we are definitely tied, and find it to be a scum tell against me. I tentatively think that there is a tie between those two pairings. I find it implausible that you cannot see the difference here.

I really don't want to get into a back and forth with you as I've done this back and forth stuff enough this game.

I find that statement to be a mild scum tell. "This argument is bad for me. Let's avoid it."

I would like everyone to let the group know what they think about

• Incognito's dismissive-ness of arguments against him in general
  
• My recent points against Incognito
  
• Incognito in general

I find him highly suspicious and think a wagon on him at this point would be very productive.

The one caveat to this is he has been a frequent poster -- and I absolutely hate when towns punish frequent posters because there is more room for them to slip up. When I re-read I might also re-read the less active players individually to see what I can find against them if anything.

Also, I think people should boost sth. There are multiple reasons that he seems the most likely to be town to me. I also caution against boosting electra for the reasons I've mentioned.

[Incognito]

Guardian, you keep on mentioning that you're going to reread the thread. I'm curious: how much and to what level of detail did you actually read when you first replaced in? I'd also like for you to do a player-by-player (a short blurb or two) when you get a chance.

[TDC]

Re: her meta; I don't see it as appearing faked. If she does exaggerate annoyedness, and Incognito is trying to use that as a meta-argument against her/me, he or someone needs to demonstrate that she does that as scum and does not do it as town. It seemed real to me and she is town here, so I would be extremely surprised if such meta-evidence exists.

Have you looked into R-1000? It does looks similar. But as I said before, one game is not that much to construct a meta based on it.

Well in endgame she would not be, but if she is scum, and no other such roles exists, she benefits now because then no one is going to counter claim her now, and we will only figure it out much later, if we do figure it out at all. Meanwhile she gets boosted, gets whatever scum benefit she gets from being boosted, and makes up some BS "info" she got. If she is scum her claim certainly advantages her now.

What I was trying to say is, if every "vanilla" that exists in this game had no information on how boosting them works, page one would've not gone the way it has.
If there are vanillas that know what boosting does, chances are very good that Electra is town and one of them.

---

TDC: Do you have any opinions to share?

I think I'm already sharing my opinions. If you think I haven't commented on a specific topic, just ask.

Who do you think is scum?

Didn't like how skillit ran a really poor attack on Electra and then tried to make it look as if it never happened. (Which was, as you recall, my reason for voting him).
He subsequently disappeared literally in the midst of a post. I'm fine with my vote on him until I hear from his replacement.

I don't like how iLord is pushing the RR case relentlessly, because I don't really see the point in it.
RR attacked you for this debatable guilt thing and subsequently unvoted citing your massclaim reasoning. I can't follow how that's a case that merits pages upon pages of discussion.

Guardian's entry (trying to discredit Electra, continuing sl's tunnel vision on Incognito) doesn't manage to destroy the "springlullaby is more likely scum than Incognito" lean I got from metaing her.

As you can probably tell, none of this is really solid. I don't have a very strong idea of who's scum right now, but if I had to lynch someone right now, I'd be up for either of the three mentioned above.

I guess I could use a re-read, but I don't have the time for that at the moment.

What do you think about Crazy's following the town?

I don't know what you actually mean with this. I don't think this was ever part of your case.
Is it his skillit vote (the, at the time, largest wagon?).
He hasn't done anything in the last two weeks and is now being replaced.

Who do you think we should boost?

Unlike many others, I actually have two boost votes going.
I mean them.

If you have any specific questions about the Crazy case, I'd be glad to answer them

Not a question, but I'd advise you to meta him.

[Raging Rabbit]

What changed?

Nothing. Just because I can look back at an action, find it scummy and think of other things that in the same situation I wouldn't think scummy, does not mean I can tell ahead the "scum" course of action in a given situation. There's no objective "scum course of action", scum play differs in a million different ways depending on the player and all the small details of a situation. I can think of some reactions that I'd perceive as scummy, but "what would scum do?" is a question to which there simply isn't a clear answer.

I'm not backing off said point. I'm saying that somewhere along the line that line of questioning was dropped - I'm still working on the guilt topic, which is what the main point has delved into.

But if I was trying to make you drop that line (how?), and you "caught on to that", why allow it to get dropped and not pursue it?

Let's rephrase - what would most scum do or what would you predict scum would do once they were called on a point they knew was weak. The scum does not know the effectiveness of his point, only that its weak basis is being attacked.

See above. If you want reactions I'd perceive as scummy, some obvious ones are to jump drop the case point blank without explanation and start attacking someone else, or to continue pursuing the same subject but with completely changed reasoning you. Again though, this is not something I "predict scum would do". I can't predict what scum would do.

If you could point out where you specifically find my definitons fail, then by all means point them out and I'll do my best to explain them.

Again, the part that doesn't make sense to me the most is:
Backing off after being questioned = town
Backing off after being "seriously" voted for = scum
Backing off after a vote that hasn't yet been proven serious = also town, or at least way town-er than the former case

I severely doubt your to have such an extreme distinction between very similar actions, that just happens to correlate with your case on me. I think you came up with those distinctions as a defense for my original attack on your contradiction.

I'd like you to commnet more on what makes such minor differences comepletely change your "read".

Boost TDC

for consistnat use of solid logic and giving me quite a strong pro-town vibe, more on Guardian-Incog later.

[Incognito]

iLord, I think you mentioned you played Mafia previously on MTG. Can you link to some games where you were scum and those where you were town?

Mana_Ku, how's the read coming along?

[Guardian]

Incognito, any chance of you responding to the questions/arguments I bring up in my post? Many of them are new/original.

Guardian, you keep on mentioning that you're going to reread the thread. I'm curious: how much and to what level of detail did you actually read when you first replaced in?

I read with normal detail...? I read every post once, and kept a few notes while doing so when a post caught my attention. I then went back and read some posts I made notes about. I did not go back and analyze each player individually which I often like to do; I wanted to "get into the game" first.

I'd also like for you to do a player-by-player (a short blurb or two) when you get a chance.

1) Electra:

Claim could easily come from scum. No huge read either way. Misguided thoughts about voting and boosting.

2) Mana_Ku (replacing Skillit):

All over the place. Does not appear to have a logical playing style. Hard to get a read on, something about his jumpyness disturbs me.

3) Raging Rabbit:

Seems townish early but then some of his later arguments seem stretching.

4) iLord:

Seems to be approaching the game fairly/reasonably, I am unsure about how I feel about his treatment of sth.

5) TDC:

Makes insightful posts but I am not sure I see much scum hunting. Unsure.

6) Crazy:

Nothing really stuck out about this one.

7) Incognito:

Attack on SL seems very ill founded. Often dismissive of arguments against him, continues to change the topic and/or resort to ad-hom whenever he is attacked.

8) eldarad:

Nothing sticks out one way or the other, seems like might be linked to Incognito.

9) sthar8:

Far and above most townlike player in the game for various reasons. Should be boosted today, obviously.

11) Jahudo:

He makes me suspicious but I cannot get a finger on why.

12) fuzzylightning:

I don't remember anything about him at all whatsoever.

TDC, why does your read that SL is more likely scum than Incognito come from meta-ing her? You said in the same post that one game is not much to construct a meta from.

TDC, why does my being more likely scum than Incognito make me your third choice of who to lynch? Do you think one of us must be scum? Are we about equal and he is fourth? Or why?

Why is trying to discredit Electra suspicious? What makes you think I have SL-like tunnel vision?

All:

I asked for people's thoughts about three specific things about Incognito. I would appreciate hearing them.

[Incognito]

Incognito, any chance of you responding to the questions/arguments I bring up in my post? Many of them are new/original.

No problem.

If me replacing in had nothing to do with your vote why did you say that it did? Why vote for me only after I replaced in -- you posted between her last post and before I replace in, why not vote then?

I'm assuming you're talking about this:

Plus, Guardian is always scum in games I'm in. QED.

This was pretty clearly a joke. My real explanation for shifting my vote

back

to the player I had it on was directly above this QED stuff. You haven't lost your sense of humor, have you?

Further, I asked her a question after she requested replacement that I wanted a real answer about. After she said "FUCK YOU" to me, I responded with a "ban plz" and then voted for you after you were announced as the replacement. Either way, I don't see what's scummy about me voting for you when you replaced in when I already had been voting springlullaby throughout the day. What difference would it truly make as to when/if I shifted my vote back to you when even after I switched my vote to iLord I mentioned that I still thought springlullaby (you) were scum? You're arguing that my vote on you was preemptive OMGUS but like I mentioned before, how could I possibly know that you would read the game and come to the exact same conclusions as springlullaby did regarding my alignment to be able to preemptively OMGUS you? This argument is crap logic.

I find them possibly tied and then still vote for them. For me to be scum doing that, for it to be scummy, I would have to have forgotten I found them tied -- in the same post where I said I found them tied!! If I were scum I could just omit I found them tied, or not boost both or either them -- I boosted them because I find/found them both most likely to be town, regardless of the chance that they are tied! I find it extremely implausible to find me suspicious for this, because I would have to have less than half a brain to not realize what I was doing as scum. I don't find it suspicious at all.

Unwise? Possibly. I am going to reevaluate, especially iLord, whenever I re-read. Scummy? Definitely not.

You're missing the point that I've been making with my problem with your simultaneous boosting of iLord and sthar8.

I already mentioned a number of times within thread that I noticed a couple of double standards going on between iLord and springlullaby that made me think that if one is scum, then the other might be scum as well, though I never mentioned my thoughts about this linkage explicitly until

you

pretty explicitly connected sthar8 and iLord. Therefore I find it strange that you would suggest a link exists between sthar8 and iLord, the person I think might hold a link to you (springlullaby) due to the double standardization thing I pointed out between the both of them, while you simultaneously boosted the both of them. Like I mentioned before, it looks to me like you might know sthar8 is town, and you're coupling your boosting of your potential scum buddy (iLord) with your boosting of a potential sthar8-town so that the link between you and iLord could be less obvious and the link between sthar8 and iLord could be more prominent. It's sorta like a sleight of hand magic trick.

Now you say I am the first one trying to make ties?

I said that you're the first one to do it

explicitly

. When I was asking springlullaby about her double standard treatment of me and iLord, and I was asking iLord about his double standard treatment of Raging Rabbit and springlullaby, I never explicitly said that I think iLord and springlullaby could be scum with one another. I wanted an explanation from the both of them to see their reasoning for doing this, but I never wanted to explicitly say anything about it until I could get definitive answers from the both of them. iLord ended up answering on his own behalf and springlullaby kept dodging the issue. Therefore you can see why I thought your entrance to the game and direct suggestion that iLord and sthar8 could be linked without providing evidence for this might have caught my attention.

I really don't want to get into a back and forth with you as I've done this back and forth stuff enough this game.

I find that statement to be a mild scum tell. "This argument is bad for me. Let's avoid it."

I like the way you cut off the rest of what I said, btw. I specifically mentioned why I didn't want to do this back and forth stuff anymore. It has nothing to do with whether this argument is bad for me or not. I know what I am, and I find it pointless to continue a back and forth argument that's not going to accomplish much besides making the thread more unreadable than it already is.

[Incognito]

And just to get this question out in the open:

@sthar8:

What do

you

think of Guardian's linking of you to iLord?

[sthar8]

sthar8: What do you think of Guardian's linking of you to iLord?

I definitely see it. As I pointed out, it started with me (inadvertently) connecting myself to iLord, which is rather funny since he was one of my top suspects then, and still is. Since then, I think the connection is mostly one-sided on his part, with him defending me and attacking my attacker, while never directly challenging me and frequently referring to me as townie. This could be buddying, but I'm not sure since my behavior was so similar. I'm not going to push a case against him, because one of my major reasons for suspecting him is based on nonpublic information and another is based on speculation about someone else's alignment. Town would be foolish to trust these points. He remains in my top three, though.

TDC: Thanks for the answers. That's exactly what I was looking for.

I know it probably doesn't help you much on Skillit, but I can say without doubt that his early play is very typical of him. I am certain that his attack on Electra was meant as a joke, and I know that he never intended it otherwise. This all comes from a strong familiarity with his personality that I acquired when he and I worked together in meatworld, before he moved away to go back to college. I can also say, because I have a limited knowledge of his schedule, that his flaking was likely the result of overcommitment near the end of the semester.

None of this is indicative of alignment, however. I can point you to several examples of his scum play, but Skillit has only once received a town PM to my knowledge. I'm eager to hear Mana_Ku's opinions on the game as well.

What do you think I will learn from a Crazy-meta? My time is limited and I'd like to focus the search if possible.

As for his "following the crowd," Crazy's vote, his support of eldarad, support of Electra, and support of Incog over SL all tag along with the majority of opinions expressed before him. I think this is happening too often for coincidence.

Boost: TDC

Guardian:
119 gives my initial thoughts on Crazy and Skillit. 205 and 253 contain relevant answers to questions asked about my suspicions.

I would like everyone to let the group know what they think about

Incognito's dismissive-ness of arguments against him in general

My recent points against Incognito

Incognito in general

The jury is still out on Incog. Overall, his posts seem like they are looking for the kind of information I want as town, but I've seen a few examples of fallacy or emotional and strategic manipulation that make good sense for scum. I don't like his attack on SL/guardian, partly because I'm not convinced that SL would have seen enough suspicion to warrant "preemptive OMGUS" in the vague questioning that Incog was doing at the time. I definitely see goads and dismissiveness in some of his posts, but I'm not convinced that they are being used to scummy purpose.

Side note: I was considering an Incog-SL scum team a bit ago, but I dismissed the idea when what I read as possible bussing became too personal. I could see an Incog- iLord connection, but I'd need more evidence to pursue.

iLord:

I must be missing something then - I believe you asked why was I discrediting her opinions?

No, I asked :

But why bring that up, if not to discredit her opinions?

Everybody: I know that there is something I wanted to talk about that I missed, but I'm pressed for time at the moment. I'm packing tonight to go camping tomorrow, I'll be out of town until sometime monday, when I'll figure out what I've forgotten.

[iLord]

asdfasdf

Regardless of what you thought -- why not let him defend himself?

I do believe that I was defending as part of my attack against RR. I think he said something about how sthar8's post was panicking and that justified his attack, and then I said that it wasn't panicking.

But if I was trying to make you drop that line (how?), and you "caught on to that", why allow it to get dropped and not pursue it?

I can't remember where it was dropped - or even who dropped it. Now that I've realized it, I've resumed pursuing it.

See above. If you want reactions I'd perceive as scummy, some obvious ones are to jump drop the case point blank without explanation and start attacking someone else, or to continue pursuing the same subject but with completely changed reasoning you. Again though, this is not something I "predict scum would do". I can't predict what scum would do.

I'm trying to get your specific opinion on how scum would react to such a situation. You don't have to be scum to answer that question - to make it that you can answer how would you react if you were scum.

Again, the part that doesn't make sense to me the most is:
Backing off after being questioned = town
Backing off after being "seriously" voted for = scum
Backing off after a vote that hasn't yet been proven serious = also town, or at least way town-er than the former case

I severely doubt your to have such an extreme distinction between very similar actions, that just happens to correlate with your case on me. I think you came up with those distinctions as a defense for my original attack on your contradiction.

I'd like you to commnet more on what makes such minor differences comepletely change your "read".

Okay, now we're getting somewhere.

Backing off once a point is proven to be weak, once you realized that you've done something wrong, or once you realize that your point is weak, is town (you've agreed on this point). Signals are this are acknoledging your point is weak, and pointing out how you are wrong and how you realized.

Backing off after being attacked (the player thinks your scum) is a scummy action and looks completely different from backing off of a weak point. Some ways that it is different is like when you pointed out another point as a reason to back off, and when you mentioned that you are looking in hindsight.

I don't understand the where the last of your listed backing off comes into play.

iLord, I think you mentioned you played Mafia previously on MTG. Can you link to some games where you were scum and those where you were town?

I will later - really busy right now.

All: I asked for people's thoughts about three specific things about Incognito. I would appreciate hearing them.

Didn't see this - later as well, after I read up on the Guardian/Incognito stuffs.

But why bring that up, if not to discredit her opinions?

I was mentioning my view - I didn't read her as scummy or town, but as a new player.

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

More to come after I catch up in other games.

[iLord]

Basically all of my games that I've played (I'm not really proud of the last few - they were my first games )

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=121904

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=113118

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=110096

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=114888

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=113118

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=104980

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=105561

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=98861

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=102909

[iLord]

asdfasdf

FOS for the very quick boosts.

Another example of a newb tell. This is a classic example of looking for scumtells and not scum.

Probably no more today.

[Incognito]

Bleh. There's no way to see posts in isolation on that forum? x_x

Hmm, sthar8, didn't realize you actually knew Skillit off MS.