Mini 1406: Sherlock Mafia (Game Over)

[d3x]

In page 2 - ML vs sotty, I'm leaning in favor of sotty. I'm not reading ML as scummy atm, but I definitely do not agree with his points on sotty being Scum. It seems to me that ML is reaching a bit much.

even if he defends his Townreads, doing so on page 1 seems out of place

I have a bit of a concern regarding the aggressiveness of the defense as opposed to the timing. I don't see a problem with defending a Town read at any point in the game, but he did come across very strong, untowardly so. I don't read that as scummy at this juncture, but it is worthy of noting.

Many times, stopping people from voting wagons you disagree with and getting people to vote for other wagons you think are on scum causes change and gets people to move their votes. It is not by some magic of doing nothing and hoping that someone doesn't get lynched.

I do take a bit of issue with this line of thought. I think it's fine to defend a player against a Wagon that you don't agree with, but I think it's more important to have the Wagonee defend him/herself {preferrably first}. A huge part of Wagons {esp early ones} is to get a reaction from the person you're Wagoning to get a better read on them. If someone steps in and tries to crush it before getting a response, I think you are largely defeating the purpose. Supplying someone's defense =/= defending someone, imo. At this point, I'm thinking null leaning scummy on ML. Nothing really hard, but worth watching.

It is worth noting that I feel like ML is trying to paint himself as Scum in sotty's eyes. I just don't get the vibe that sotty is coming after ML, just more of debating. ML is, however, trying to say sotty is painting him scummy and building cases against him. I could be wrong here, but I'm just not seeing it in sotty's posts.

At this juncture, I'm fine

Unvoting

and I like it here...

Vote: Herodotus

Reasons to follow...

[d3x]

Re: Voting Hero

As previously stated, I don't like his entrance to the Feysal Wagon. I feel, in that vein, that a lot of his posting comes across as false. I dislike p38 talking about finding a new Wagon. It feels more like passive play than anything else. The post is more inclined to let the game unfold around him that actively ScuHunting. There seems to be a fair amount of IIoA going on. His questions to others come across as a bit too 'wet noodly' to me.

Although I'm happy with my Vote, I'm a little hesitant of the Wagon. I get an odd feeling from the other Votes as they seem to only touch on the first Hero post and not too much else. I'm curious to see where this goes...

[DeasVail]

The funny thing is that I'm close to unvoting Herod...

[d3x]

Final thoughts before bedtime-

@Mod

- Has MoI really not confirmed yet? Can we get prods on him as well as GNR, plz...

[Herodotus]

-Unwanted light RoleFish noted. Continued in p25... does not want.

For what purpose(s) do scum rolefish?

As previously stated, I don't like his entrance to the Feysal Wagon. I feel, in that vein, that a lot of his posting comes across as false. I dislike p38 talking about finding a new Wagon. It feels more like passive play than anything else. The post is more inclined to let the game unfold around him that actively ScuHunting. There seems to be a fair amount of IIoA going on. His questions to others come across as a bit too 'wet noodly' to me.

I mentioned finding a new wagon because I was ready at that point to admit that I was only voting feysal so there would be a wagon.
I haven't found anyone I'd be willing to lynch right now, but I will. In the meantime, I've done some town-hunting.
Regarding my questions:
I asked Deas about his vote on me because it was strange that he would make accusations against two players, then vote a third. Especially when feysal had a wagon he could have helped with. But apparently he suspected me more, which makes the vote choice rational. If he had said he suspected us all equally, I would have found that scummy. I decided that the lack of a stated reason was because he read somewhere that unexplained votes generate better reactions and he figured he'd be able to read me.
Most of my questions in my last post are designed to pull at the strings of the Magister/sottyrulez conflict to see whether it unravels or strengthens. I'm hoping that they're both town, and if so I'd like to see one or both of them join me on the next big wagon. I figure they might stop fighting at about the same time I decide whom to maybe-lynch. (Please don't tell them about this, or they may resent my manipulation.)
My question to d3x in post... 79... was based on my evaluation that there is no real scum angle to rob's "rolefishing". His talk almost certainly wouldn't have outed PR's.
My first question to Feysal was to explain to feysal the vote that made feysal vote me. My second question to feysal summarizes my skepticism about his explanation that he had set out to generate discussion.

I find it significant that Feysal did not respond to my questions, and didn't mention me in his latest post at all. I'm having second thoughts about unvoting.

Then there is one other non-trivial question I asked, and it was to The Mini-Librarian, but I'm not ready to explain why I asked it yet.

[Herodotus]

Sorry, I was wrong. So it was the characters being misguided idiots that you thought lowered morale? (@Herodotus)

If you're playing mafia, the people on your team have roles. If someone says that the roles are misguided idiots, that doesn't make you enthusiastic about righteously destroying the other team. As far as I'm concerned, within this game, Sherlock Holmes is a fugitive criminal who will presumably murder someone each night. Anyone who wants to bring him to justice is doing the right thing.

[sottyrulez]

I feel like sotty7 is accusing Magister of doing silly or useless things, not of being scum. I want to see her reads.

By her reads you mean me as in Sotty right? I pretty much do think ML is being ridiculous with his attack on us. Is it useless? No. Is it silly? Eh, a little. I find the fact he calls Feyasl a town read before he posted scummy. I do get the feeling he likes to hear himself type, so I am trying to decide if he is SCUM outright, or if he has the case of the egos. For example keeps rattling on about his being "manipulative" and "slimy" when we can say the same thing about him. It's all pretty terrible but I'm watching to see how he adapts so I can form more of a solid read on him.

Hero, what's your Rob opinion?

Okay I see I have to be a little clearer about this this. Feyasl, what do

you

think of ML's defense of you before you had even posted and his subsequent attacks on us as a result?

~Sotty

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Vote Count 1.3

Herodotus (4)

- DeasVail, Feysal, Rob13, d3x

Feysal (3)

– Sottyrulez, Herodotus, The Mini-Librarian

Gummybear (1)

- Guy_Named_Riggs

Sottyrulez (1)

- Magister Ludi

Magister Ludi (1)

- Jabberwock

Not Voting (2)

- Gummybear, MagnaofIllusion

Deadline: Thursday January 10 @ 10:00 AM Eastern
Countdown: (expired on 2013-01-10 10:00:00)

[Magister Ludi]

Spoiler: Herod quote

@Magister, regarding your sottyrulez case: In your experience have scum contradicted themselves significantly more often than town? Had reads on other players that are in a quantum state of both town and scum, more often than town do? To me, "contradiction" is often as much of a buzzword as "chainsaw".
I don't see how sottyrulez asking feysal his opinion of your defense is scummy. And I assumed that the question to rob was designed either to test how much knowledge rob had of the scum role PM's, to make rob doubt his town read on feysal, or both.

I would say so, yes. I tried not to make it a buzzword by showing clearly what I had an issue with. My issue was when they called me out for hedging, say, and then hedged on two reads. The original accusation to me seemed ingenuine. I also don't think some of the things they accuse me of they gave me a fair shake to explain or gave a fair attempt to understand what I was doing.

I will say I might have read their tone wrong at some point in thinking they were accusing me of scum when they haven't been. So sorry if that was the case.

Spoiler: d3x quote

I do take a bit of issue with this line of thought. I think it's fine to defend a player against a Wagon that you don't agree with, but I think it's more important to have the Wagonee defend him/herself {preferrably first}. A huge part of Wagons {esp early ones} is to get a reaction from the person you're Wagoning to get a better read on them. If someone steps in and tries to crush it before getting a response, I think you are largely defeating the purpose. Supplying someone's defense =/= defending someone, imo. At this point, I'm thinking null leaning scummy on ML. Nothing really hard, but worth watching.

I disagree. Having a wagon isn't the only way to get a read on someone. In this particular case, I think providing a small meta defense of feysal and than a stronger one was warranted. It allowed people to judge him fairly. A large part of mafia is the interplay of opinions and actions

Spoiler: Sotty Quote

By her reads you mean me as in Sotty right? I pretty much do think ML is being ridiculous with his attack on us. Is it useless? No. Is it silly? Eh, a little. I find the fact he calls Feyasl a town read before he posted scummy. I do get the feeling he likes to hear himself type, so I am trying to decide if he is SCUM outright, or if he has the case of the egos. For example keeps rattling on about his being "manipulative" and "slimy" when we can say the same thing about him. It's all pretty terrible but I'm watching to see how he adapts so I can form more of a solid read on him.

I don't think my attack is being ridiculous. I point out a few things I have issue with, explain why those actions come more often from scum than town, than I follow with the vote. Also, Feysal posted before I commented on him. I only type enough to get my point across, It's not egotistical at all, I actually prefer typing less. As for claiming "manipulative" which I don't think I ever used, I tried to back up what I was saying with quotes and clear examples. If you think I am being the same way, tell me and I can clear up the confusion and tell you what I meant.

[Magister Ludi]

These two leading wagons could not be on finer fellows at them moment. I've been reading Herod, and I don't agree with any of the reason that take him to four votes, and the feysal wagon looks like residue that has stuck around from the beginning. If this isn't the case I would like to know. (fun fact, herod and feysal have cross voted).

I was going to say that If I unvoted sotty I would hop on Deasvail, but I changed my mind. I didn't like d3x's last couple of posts. He's my next choice to vote.

But, I will notice that 25% of this game is not playing at all (magna, gummy and guynamed). Could be scum in there. Post damn it you scurvy rats.

[Herodotus]

Hero, what's your Rob opinion?

I'm waiting for one more post from him. He started out giving a newbie town impression, but he hasn't been useful. I'll be looking for one or two specific things in his next post.

I will say I might have read their tone wrong at some point in thinking they were accusing me of scum when they haven't been. So sorry if that was the case.

I meant sotty as opposed to zach.

[Jabberwock]

But, I will notice that 25% of this game is not playing at all (magna, gummy and guynamed). Could be scum in there. Post damn it you scurvy rats.

He's adorable, isn't he? Omg guyz there could be scum among these V/LA people and this guy who always flakes look at how concerned I am with lurkers.

His Sotty case is a pile of preconceived BS and he's spinning every-freaking-thing the hydra says into scum motivation. Look at how he keeps adding to the case from every post. Sounds dutiful Town? No, that's scum going with crappy reasoning and hoping quantity will mask the fact that there is no actual Town thought put into his posts.

On tablet, actual post tonight. But you fine folks should sheep us, dis guy be the scumz.

[Jabberwock]

Hey Ludi. What exactly didn't you like about d3x's posts?

[Jabberwock]

d3x: Can you explain why you felt the need to post 76 as a different post from 75?

[d3x]

On phone, full post tonight...

@Jabberwock- I referenced it in p74, I could no longer read what I was typing.

[Jabberwock]

Oh hey, I missed that. Considerably more entertaining than what theories I might concoct.

Ask about it in the Help! Forum, I guess.

[Magister Ludi]

He's adorable, isn't he? Omg guyz there could be scum among these V/LA people and this guy who always flakes look at how concerned I am with lurkers.

His Sotty case is a pile of preconceived BS and he's spinning every-freaking-thing the hydra says into scum motivation. Look at how he keeps adding to the case from every post. Sounds dutiful Town? No, that's scum going with crappy reasoning and hoping quantity will mask the fact that there is no actual Town thought put into his posts.

Please. It's one line, and its not as if its the only line I posted in this whole game. And I am probably correct anyways. That's 25% of the playerlist.

Can you point out how and what is preconceived BS? I've been pretty clear for anyone to see. I don't add to it in every post, and I'm not spinning everything into scum motivation, that's false and a lie.

[Magister Ludi]

Hey Ludi. What exactly didn't you like about d3x's posts?

Do you think he's town or scum?

[Jabberwock]

What makes you think I'll answer that before you answer my question?

[Magister Ludi]

I wanted to see if you were going to make an effort or not to communicate with me here.

Look, I've tried as clearly as possible to explain where I'm coming from regarding all my reads. You asked for more explanation, I gave it, then you complained I typed too much. You've commented multiple times that I've been unclear, despite me asking what specifically, or just straight up ignored or brushed over what I posted. And you've misinterpreted what I said and fabricated accusations (for instance, I kept adding to my sotty case every time).

You're not trying to engage in any sort of dialogue here. You've ignored multiple multiple questions of mine as I try and determine your alignment. I see no reason why you couldn't answer my question simply, and I have no idea why I must answer first for you to possibly comment on another player in this game.

[Rob14]

Jabberwock - Where did you think ML's defense of Feysal started looking scummy? Post #14 or Post #36?

[Jabberwock]

That's cute. Again.

You said you didn't like d3x's posts. We asked why. Obviously we have no interest in expressing my opinion on the d3x slot before you explain what is it that you did not like from his posts, because doing so is an easy way out for you. Stop dodging and whining; no one ever said that we need to engage in a dialog with you. Unlike you, we do not make major appeals to our biggest scumread for that scumread to read us as Town.

You've ignored multiple multiple questions of mine as I try and determine your alignment.

pfffahahaha

Oh, you poor long-suffering thing. It's funny how you have yet to express any kind of read on us (omg we are not entering in a dialog with you how will you

ever

form a read on us if we do not answer your really impressive and important questions), and just

whinge

about how we are not cooperating with you. Remind you of something? Oh, that's right, that's the way you are treating sottyrulez as well. Good luck making a scumcase on us!

Jabberwock - Where did you think ML's defense of Feysal started looking scummy? Post #14 or Post #36?

#14, thus our questions on Post 15. We were more interested in Feysal at the time, but Feysal can wait. Ludi is obvscum doing a number of Posturing 101.

[Rob14]

Alright. The reason I asked is because I read your #15 as confusion, and I would have considered it scummy if you had tried to state you genuinely were asking for more information in Post #15 and then you turned around and attacked him for defending Feysal too exhaustively. That would be criticizing him for elaborating on a defense you asked him to elaborate on. If you asked because you understood but wanted to see if he continued giving the same scummy vibes you got from the first post, that's a bit different and not as bad in my book. It shows you were more consistent in your read.

------

I didn't fully understand Jabberwock's case against him originally, but I think I have it figured out now. Re-read ML and tried to ignore effort and look at substance. I've done a more-or-less 180 on my opinion of him. Noted a few things.

I think it is pretty scummy, mainly because it stifles any kind of open discussion around that player or wagon and instantly closes things down. It lets everyone know SERIOUS TIME has started and people play a lot tighter.

Nothing is really closed down.

These two leading wagons could not be on finer fellows at them moment. I've been reading Herod, and I don't agree with any of the reason that take him to four votes, and the feysal wagon looks like residue that has stuck around from the beginning. If this isn't the case I would like to know. (fun fact, herod and feysal have cross voted).

If nothing was closed down by your defense, then the wagon on Feysal wouldn't be just residue, no? I'm starting to see where Jabberwock is coming from when he says your defense was ill-timed. Even if you have a town-read on Feysal on page one, it can't have been a strong one. I mean, it's page one. So why not let him react so that you (and everyone else) has more to go off of? You kind of responded to this here:

The defense was ill-timed and ill-done, and the way you expressed it makes no sense for someone

who apparently has a meta read on Feysal's skills but needed to check a tell you didn't see as viable for Feysal's skills to begin with.

The train of thought is all wrong and it makes a lot more sense coming from a scum perspective than a Town one, regardless of Feysal's alignment (it works as a buddy defense and as buddying).

How was it ill timed at all? Would you have preferred until after his was dead and lynched for me to post it?

But that's not a fair binary to create. You're suggesting your choices were to defend him before he defended himself or when he was already dead. You could also have waited and defended him after he defended himself but before the lynch occurred. You had a third option. This is a false dilemma. Not only do you deprive yourself and others of Feysal's response by doing what you did, but you also deprive yourself of the responses of others to Feysal's response. Even if you 100% knew Feysal was town (masons or w/e), you as town would

still

want to let him defend himself to see how his wagon adjusts. You can see if anyone is tunneling, using bad logic, looking for a quick and easy lynch, etc. As scum, you don't care much for all that jazz, so you don't mind as much cutting off discussion with an early defense.

Vote: ML

[GummyBear]

Aggghhhh

sick + travelling + reckoning + moving in =

We are V/LA for the next few days.

Sorry! We'll read/post if we get a chance to.

-quadz

[d3x]

For what purpose(s) do scum rolefish?

They RoleFish in an effort to draw out information on the Town make-up {not just PRs, as you later state}.

My question to d3x in post... 79... was based on my evaluation that there is no real scum angle to rob's "rolefishing". His talk almost certainly wouldn't have outed PR's.

That's fine that you feel this way. I feel differently. As there was an ongoing discussion about what is/is not common flavor knowledge, I see this as a potential attempt by a newer player to gleen some information that would not otherwise be available to him.

I disagree. Having a wagon isn't the only way to get a read on someone. In this particular case, I think providing a small meta defense of feysal and than a stronger one was warranted. It allowed people to judge him fairly. A large part of mafia is the interplay of opinions and actions

Like Hero, you are entitled to disagree. I'm not saying that is the

only

way to gain a read on someone. In fact, I'm not even saying that is the only way to get reads from a Wagon, nor is that close to what I'm saying. I clearly stated...

A huge part of Wagons {esp early ones} is to get a reaction from the person you're Wagoning to get a better read on them. If someone steps in and tries to crush it before getting a response, I think you are largely defeating the purpose.

I'm clearly speaking to the purpose of Wagons as opposed to the ways to read a player. I'm speaking to the fact that we're obviously disagreeing with the importance of Wagons, reads, and the timing of defenses. It does feel to me that you're trying to turn what I'm saying into a different debate, but I'm not really sure why.