Mafiascum.net

Friend wrote:Look, the Furcolow wagon was obviously (to me, at least) scum-driven. He was a VI, an easy target, and for people that don't have experience with him, always scummy.

That's horrible logic.

If he's "always scummy" for "people who don't have experence with him" or whatever, then wouldn't pro-town people "who don't have experence with him" think he's scum? How does that make the wagon "scum driven"?

Besides which, he lied about his role, and then changed his lie, multiple times. There's no way anyone does that day 1 and doesn't hang, in any sane town, ever.

What makes you think the wagon is "scum driven"? Why would any townie not want to lynch him?

I drove his wagon, and I don't apologize for it at all. He got himself lynched with incredibly anti-town play. I didn't see the thread after his final cop claim and before his hammer, but I don't think I would have unvoted even then.

Yos2 wrote: I drove his wagon, and I don't apologize for it at all. He got himself lynched with incredibly anti-town play. I didn't see the thread after his final cop claim and before his hammer, but I don't think I would have unvoted even then.

I wouldn't have.
He didn't nameclaim, claim Enforcer, claim his goals after the game; it was a shit-claim. FAIL.

Because he was obviously VItown. Like beyond any shadow of doubt. Maybe you don't have experience with them, Yos, but the site has changed. VIs exist, and you have to know how to read them.

I'm here. I'll catch up tomorrow.

xvart.

The site clearly has changed if that sort of abysmal play doesn't get you lynched automatically.

Yes. It has. But the point is that anti-town play =/= scummy play. People like Furc are the EASIEST for scum to pick on, and getting off a mislynch like that is like shooting fish in a barrel if you play by that attitude.

Friend wrote:Because he was obviously VItown. Like beyond any shadow of doubt.

Being a VI doesn't make one necessarily town, at all.

The reasons that almost everyone in the game suspected him have very little to do with his playstyle, and everything to do with him acting in an inherently scummy way.

Maybe you don't have experience with them, Yos, but the site has changed. VIs exist, and you have to know how to read them.

I've been playing with VI's for years, Friend. They've always existed.

Policies like "lynch all liars" exist specifically because there have always been some people making bad play decisions, and there have always been scum trying to look like people making bad play decisions. If you start letting people get away with crap like openly lying about their role and changing it multiple times, then the town's ability to get any solid information collapses, the town's ability to read anyone falls apart, and scum get away with all kinds of gambits and fakeclaims without getting called on them.

The downside is, occasionally some townie makes some really terrible lies, gets caught, and falls apart, and gets lynched. Doesn't happen that often, but it does happen, and it's frustrating. Still, scum get themselves into those kinds of "trying to lie your way out of trouble and getting caught" situations far more often then town ever do. I wouldn't say I will always lynch a liar, because I won't, but 95% of the time it's the right choice.

Friend wrote:Yes. It has. But the point is that anti-town play =/= scummy play.

100% wrong. Assuming that people are playing to their win condition, which everyone should be, pro-town play (play that brings the town closer to victory) is always going to come more often from town, and anti-town play (play that brings the scum closer to victory) is always going to come more often then scum. Anti-town is a type of scummy behavior; I don't know where people came up with the idea that it's not.

Now, is it 100% reliable? Of course not. No scumtell is. But if you want to know someone's alignment, one of the best ways is to look at their actions, and see which faction their actions seem to be helping.

People like Furc are the EASIEST for scum to pick on

That's silly, and circuluar.

Why are people who act in a scummy way "easiest for scum to pick on?" Because town also vote for people who act in a scummy way. If someone acts in a scummy way, then yes, a scum can easily start a wagon on them, but just as often, a town will start a wagon on them, because that's what you do when someone is scummy.

The whole concept that some people are "easy lynches" is backwards. If someone's an "easy lynch", if they look scummy, that makes it MORE likely that more townies will vote for them, not less.

Yosarian2 wrote:

Friend wrote:Because he was obviously VItown. Like beyond any shadow of doubt.

Being a VI doesn't make one necessarily town, at all.

The reasons that almost everyone in the game suspected him have very little to do with his playstyle, and everything to do with him acting in an inherently scummy way.

But he was acting in an inherently scummy way BECAUSE OF HIS PLAYSTYLE. That's what VIs do.

Maybe you don't have experience with them, Yos, but the site has changed. VIs exist, and you have to know how to read them.

I've been playing with VI's for years, Friend. They've always existed.

Policies like "lynch all liars" exist specifically because there have always been some people making bad play decisions, and there have always been scum trying to look like people making bad play decisions. If you start letting people get away with crap like openly lying about their role and changing it multiple times, then the town's ability to get any solid information collapses, the town's ability to read anyone falls apart, and scum get away with all kinds of gambits and fakeclaims without getting called on them.

The downside is, occasionally some townie makes some really terrible lies, gets caught, and falls apart, and gets lynched. Doesn't happen that often, but it does happen, and it's frustrating. Still, scum get themselves into those kinds of "trying to lie your way out of trouble and getting caught" situations far more often then town ever do. I wouldn't say I will always lynch a liar, because I won't, but 95% of the time it's the right choice.

But when people tell you "Furc does this EVERY TIME HE'S TOWN" and you continue to push hard on the lynch wagon, I find that scummy.

In this argument between Friend and Yos, I'd be more willing to lynch Yos.

Yos, you're missing a key difference. Motivation.

You have to tell if the person committing said scummy actions is committing them because they are indeed scum, or because they're a VI and despite their efforts to contribute to the town, they end up acting scummily. In Furc's case, it was clear (to me) that he was doing the latter. I'm not saying that VIs are always town, but they can be read and it's a knock on you that you couldn't - either you're scum or you're not the great player that everyone thinks you are. My vote goes for "Yos is scum," because I don't think you've built up your reputation as one of the best players on the site with VI mislynches. Honestly, I expected better from a game with this caliber of players; it really makes me think that we have some scum in those "MS elders."

ReaperCharlie, 1293 wrote:Hmmm... who better to sheep than the cop? <3

Sheeping a cop with no result is not exactly productive.

gandalf5166, 1308 wrote:I think 3 is the one we're running with. And I don't think scum have a kill. I think that zwet and ooba might be the only killing roles in the game, which destroys my ooba recruiter theory, but doesn't say that ooba can't be scum.

Could you explain your thinking here in a little more depth? Why do you not think scum have a kill? Zwet and ooba are the only killing roles in the game? Why do you think this?

gandalf5166, 1310 wrote:

ooba wrote:

Yosarian2 wrote:ooba: Why would you kill Zwet? I know you said you suspected him yesterday, but could you explain again? Because I still don't get it; he seemed obvtown.

Not to me he didn't ...

I'm not untargetable ..

This isn't an explanation, and you aren't helping your case.

What case?

ooba, 1314 wrote:A loose cannon is a one-shot limited vig/doublevoter ..
I have a bullet with me ..
If I shoot it at a player in the day, it becomes a double vote which cannot be changed ..
At night, I am one-shot vig ..

I decided to use my bullet yesterday night ..

Is your double vote announced in thread or by pm?

ooba, 1321 wrote:- Your cult can recruit or kill theory is wrong

How do you know this?

ooba, 1333 wrote:@Yos
- That's what I think the setup is - A cult which can just recruit
"Well, a lot of cult groups can't recruit either pro-town power roles,

or members of the other cult group.

"
If this was the case, then it makes even more sense to recruit early to make sure the other group fails more often later.

Seems to me you are playing both sides of the argument against each other, which doesn't work. You say the scum don't have a NK ability, but also they can't recruit powerroles (which I believe a loose canon to be). So either scum will never be able to perform a NK or your suggestion agreeing that the cult can't recruit powerroles is just smoke and mirrors.

I really don't like the way the ooba wagon developed, but because of that wagon I'm not really liking his responses.

ReaperCharlie, 1357 wrote:ITT we eat

WIFOMsandwiches™

fed to us by Yosarian2.

Om nom nom.

Actually you were the one that made the WIFOMsandwich. Yos just explained the recipe you used.

Lord Gurgi wrote:Regarding the Yos thing: RC has been pushing this wagon too hard and too long without any analysis of play. It would be interesting if he were a recruiter and chose to push this wagon early in the hopes that the other team would recruit him. I just think he's scummy and prefers to lynch someone based on their reputation rather than his play. I'm up to lynch him.

Or maybe RC is trying to lynch someone that be on the other cult team.

Friend, 1383 wrote:But he was acting in an inherently scummy way BECAUSE OF HIS PLAYSTYLE. That's what VIs do.

It is not possible for someone inherently scummy to actually be scum? I don't see why you are arguing so much for not being on the Fuculow wagon than actually arguing for the accused scum on his wagon.

Friend, 1385 wrote:Yos, you're missing a key difference. Motivation.

You have to tell if the person committing said scummy actions is committing them because they are indeed scum, or because they're a VI and despite their efforts to contribute to the town, they end up acting scummily. In Furc's case, it was clear (to me) that he was doing the latter. I'm not saying that VIs are always town, but they can be read and it's a knock on you that you couldn't - either you're scum or you're not the great player that everyone thinks you are. My vote goes for "Yos is scum," because I don't think you've built up your reputation as one of the best players on the site with VI mislynches. Honestly, I expected better from a game with this caliber of players; it really makes me think that we have some scum in those "MS elders."

How is it so obvious? What exactly about his mututally agreed upon scummy play made you 100% certain he was town? Especially yesterday you only called him probably town? I think you are scum and were playing the odds yesterday that he wasn't the recruiter and wouldn't be recruited N0.



xvart.

Friend wrote:Yos, you're missing a key difference. Motivation.

You have to tell if the person committing said scummy actions is committing them because they are indeed scum, or because they're a VI and despite their efforts to contribute to the town, they end up acting scummily. In Furc's case, it was clear (to me) that he was doing the latter.

His motivation was quite clear. He was lying about his role to get pressure off of him. He even admitted that that's what he was doing.

You can call him a "VI" as much as you want, but at the time it looked like he knew exactly what he was doing; he semi-claimed a lie to get the pressure off of him, and then recanted once the pressure went away so he didn't have to prove the claim. That doesn't make him dumb, that makes him reasonably clever scum.

Now, apparently what actually happened was the original claim was true and then the recanting was a lie to try to avoid being nightkilled, but that didn't even occur to me at the time, because that's a completely illogical play.

I'm not saying that VIs are always town, but they can be read and it's a knock on you that you couldn't - either you're scum or you're not the great player that everyone thinks you are.
My vote goes for "Yos is scum," because I don't think you've built up your reputation as one of the best players on the site with VI mislynches.

Oh, please. I never claimed to be perfect. A great player is one who's right perhaps 50% of the time on day 1. A decent town player is right perhaps a third of the time on day 1, and the town as a whole actually tends to lynch worse then random on day 1. I clearly had a good read on several players alignment; I was right that Zwet was town, I was right that Dramonic was town (and I managed to prevent him from being lynched, which took a great deal of effort even after he claimed a power role). But "Yos was wrong on day 1, so he must be scum" is one of the worst arguments I've heard.

This is the situation, friend. You apparently had a pro-town read on Furc, based on gut or meta or something. That's fine, in fact, that's a good thing when you can get a read on someone like that. But you could never explain why you had that read (other then vague comments like "He always acts like this"). When you make comments like that and can't back them up, and no one else agrees with you, you can't expect your unsubstantiated opinion of someone to convince anyone else; we don't know your alignment, and we don't know if you're right, so we're not all going to just drop a wagon just because you say so.

if you're so keen on meta, then feel free to look at mine. I will nearly always lynch someone caught in a lie about their role, because it's nearly always the right thing to do, and I will generally lynch people who are acting in an anti-town way. Especially on day 1, when you don't have any bandwagon analysis to go on. The mistake a lot of people make is to assume that people don't know what they're doing; I always at least consider the possibility that people actually do know what they're doing, and try to figure out what their motives are for it, and it works quite often.

ReaperCharlie wrote:In this argument between Friend and Yos, I'd be more willing to lynch Yos.

Ugh.

Just when I was starting to think you might be town after all, you make a comment like this.

Why does "Yos and Friend are arguing" imply that the town would want to lynch one or the other of us? Neither of us are even voting for each other at this point.

Xvart, I'm confused by your case on me.

Xvart, there were no NKs that couldn't be accounted for by the loose cannons. I said zwet and ooba because they were the only claimed ones and I didn't know they were oneshot. Now I think there are probably a few of them, but I still don't think scum has a NK.

This is why bringing Mafia Discussion into games doesn't work. Leave the theorycrafting outside the game, and we don't have clutter.

Normally, this would lead to a Yosarian2 vote, as he was the first to rev up this discussion. However, Yos2 as a player would bring in discussion in both cases of his alignment, and thus it's an unsatisfying nulltell.

ReaperCharlie is clearly less aggressive. Change in play = recruitment.

Bah, but does that mean we should lynch him?

Dammit, I think we can only afford to lynch the recruiters themselves. Granted, there could be a limit to the number of recruits they can have, and then they turn into a regular Mafia, with guns and killing and stuff.

Everything I was going to say has already been said. And I don't feel like repeating things other people said.
inHim, why wouldn't we lynch a recruit, if we can't get a recruiter? It at least is the equivalent of blocking one of their recruits. I mean, I agree that it would be best to lynch recruiters, but why should we be against lynching recruits?

Friend, 1389 wrote:Xvart, I'm confused by your case on me.

Why is it so obvious today that Furculow was obviously town when yesterday you were only "pretty sure" he was town?

gandalf5166, 1390 wrote:Xvart, there were no NKs that couldn't be accounted for by the loose cannons. I said zwet and ooba because they were the only claimed ones and I didn't know they were oneshot. Now I think there are probably a few of them, but I still don't think scum has a NK.

So who shot dramatic or Andrius? A town loose canon?

xvart.

Pretty sure that was zwet, from his play yesterday I wouldn't be surprised if he shot dram.

gandalf5166, 1395 wrote:Pretty sure that was zwet, from his play yesterday I wouldn't be surprised if he shot dram.

So it is not possible by any sense of the word that scum tried to kill the claimed investigation role and hit the bodyguard who was instructed to protect Andrius from the NK? Which seems more likely? Your highly speculative assumption of dead zwet's play yesterday or scum wanting to kill the claimed investigator?

xvart.

Yes, but there are two scumgroups. Of course, it's possible that we got a roleblock. It's just a feeling. Plus, wouldn't it make sense? Balancewise?

*wonders why gandalf5166 and xvart are only selectively paying attention*

inHimshallibe wrote:This is why bringing Mafia Discussion into games doesn't work. Leave the theorycrafting outside the game, and we don't have clutter.

You make it sound like I'm talking about some random theory unrelated to the game. That couldn't be farther from the truth.

If I'm attacked for something that I did, I'm going to explain what it was that I did and why I did it. Everything I do as town, I do in order to help the town, and if questioned or attacked I'll explain why what I did is a logical pro-town action, in as much detail as necessary.

The idea that there's something wrong with talking about theory in games is wrong. If you're doing something and you don't know why, then you're doing something wrong. Otherwise, you should be able to explain all of your actions, and that's what I was doing. If that means I have to explain in mafia theory terms why voting for someone who acts in an extremely anti-town way is usually the right move for town, then I'll do that.

Normally, this would lead to a Yosarian2 vote, as he was the first to rev up this discussion. However, Yos2 as a player would bring in discussion in both cases of his alignment, and thus it's an unsatisfying nulltell.

Heh. Fair enough, I can't argue with that being my meta, I do. Because it's the right thing to do in this situation.