Mafiascum.net

In post 1574, Quick wrote:

In post 1572, ready2rock wrote:Votato/mavs scumteam

Still plausible or out of the question?

In post 1573, ready2rock wrote:To clarify

My thought in looking at this is that exactly one of these two are scum, and right now I trust votato moreso than mavs, but I'm willing to hear if other people think there are scenarios where they're both town or both scum

Good thoughts.

How would you compare this with my thought that there is one Scum in VP/votato?

That's possible, I just think for a possible lynch today there's more to go off with mavs/votato because of the claims (or lack thereof)

But willing to hear counterarguments

In post 1575, ready2rock wrote:

In post 1574, Quick wrote:

In post 1572, ready2rock wrote:Votato/mavs scumteam

Still plausible or out of the question?

In post 1573, ready2rock wrote:To clarify

My thought in looking at this is that exactly one of these two are scum, and right now I trust votato moreso than mavs, but I'm willing to hear if other people think there are scenarios where they're both town or both scum

Good thoughts.

How would you compare this with my thought that there is one Scum in VP/votato?

That's possible, I just think for a possible lynch today there's more to go off with mavs/votato because of the claims (or lack thereof)

But willing to hear counterarguments

I haven't changed my vote. I would say.. keep it at votato/mav at this point. We have a lot of time left and things can develop rather quickly if this isn't a short Day.

I think it's possible that both myself and mav are town fwiw. Also the association between us is based on me not picking up on a crumb, so while you could argue that my flip gives info on mav, his flip really says nothing about me. I really want to believe that mav is town, but i have a hard time swallowing the claim and the way it was done. And while i would buy a voyeur or watcher, i wouldn't buy a fruit checker

Yeah I'm just unsure of the claim atm, it feels like something cooked together N2 if he got in trouble (since there was no indication of it before D3), and feels awfully convenient that it's a claim that's very unlikely to leave a trace, and hence very easy to fake as scum

Want to hear what some other people think though, know that a few people haven't had the chance to put their two cents in.

VOTE: Quick

I'm inclined to believe Mavs here. The claim is too detailed and breadcrumbed to be scum I think. He also reads genuine to me when he admits he messed up the role and made a bad assumption about how it worked.

Meanwhile, quick's behavior today has been quite telling. His unwillingness to answer questions around the Blair claim (particularly since he is now claiming he picked up on the investigation sooner than most of us but didn't vote Gamma or try to keep it under wraps), and now his efforts around the mavs claim to get a town mass claim (on day 2, ok what?) don't make a lot of sense as town.

He also absurdly tries to paint me as in on some elaborate fake claim plan by going to my iso and Ctrl+fing for the word "fruit" and saying I'm soft claiming because that happened to be there.... Which is probably the most contrived thing I've read in a long time.

In post 1579, VP Baltar wrote:VOTE: Quick

I'm inclined to believe Mavs here. The claim is too detailed and breadcrumbed to be scum I think. He also reads genuine to me when he admits he messed up the role and made a bad assumption about how it worked.

Meanwhile, quick's behavior today has been quite telling. His unwillingness to answer questions around the Blair claim (particularly since he is now claiming he picked up on the investigation sooner than most of us but didn't vote Gamma or try to keep it under wraps), and now his efforts around the mavs claim to get a town mass claim (on day 2, ok what?) don't make a lot of sense as town.

He also absurdly tries to paint me as in on some elaborate fake claim plan by going to my iso and Ctrl+fing for the word "fruit" and saying I'm soft claiming because that happened to be there.... Which is probably the most contrived thing I've read in a long time.

Nope. I F3'd: "not want" I think.

In post 1554, votato wrote:yeah without claiming the disloyal part there was some utility in the role even after claiming. now the role is completely useless. mav is a good player right? theres no chance that he would mess up like that?

Anyone can mess up. This is bad logic.

I can't remember all the things I searched trying to find the post you talked about PRs, but I remembered it because I thought it was important. It important since you said you never talked about PRs in the game and you had.. about yourself.. with a really obvious soft... because you know you are never getting NKed... I think that's all.

The fruit thing is just a bonus. It's actually that you just blatantly lied about talking about PRs.

In post 1578, ready2rock wrote:Yeah I'm just unsure of the claim atm, it feels like something cooked together N2 if he got in trouble

(since there was no indication of it before D3)

, and feels awfully convenient that it's a claim that's very unlikely to leave a trace, and hence very easy to fake as scum

Want to hear what some other people think though, know that a few people haven't had the chance to put their two cents in.

Ummm, what? So sure, I get the skepticism cause as of now there’s no real confirmation (which would be the case without any sort of “fruit checker” and me being like “yo, you got any fruit?”) but the bolded part here is kinda absurd. Oh, you mean you think I’m fake claiming rather than keep my PR a secret and only claiming at L-1 with intent to hammer? Yea, okay, you’re right? Get outta here with this crap.

Here is an exercise that I did yesterday and I think is worthwhile everyone doing: Pull back to a 30,000 foot view and try to sum up what Quick has done to actually help town in this game. What actions has he taken that have had a net positive outcome?

When I did this and set aside the fine level detail of being a very active poster (which I think many of us have gotten town vibes off of, but upon closer view may not be a meta tell at all), I had a very hard time coming up with a good list.

A lot of town negatives came to mind though:

-Quick helped push an NPOM mislynch.
-He's outted power roles and role fished, all while trying to pretend those are pro town.
-He has offered lots of absolutist opinions that he claims are unquestionable because of The System (votato and VPB must be a scum source because of a simulpost!), all while proving very little with said system (see NPOM mislynch above, missing Gamma scum, and now inexplicably sticking with what could be a Mavs mislynch).
-Promises that if we just keep him around to late game, he will deliver scum on a silver platter.
-The weird "go ahead and lynch me then!" when there weren't even any votes on him.

A pairing of Quick/Gamma isn't outside the realm of possibility and I'm having less and less of a good feeling about him . I'd like other players to consider the above thought experiment and try to see how they think Quick has actually helped town after several days of play and results.

In post 1584, VP Baltar wrote:Here is an exercise that I did yesterday and I think is worthwhile everyone doing: Pull back to a 30,000 foot view and try to sum up what Quick has done to actually help town in this game. What actions has he taken that have had a net positive outcome?

When I did this and set aside the fine level detail of being a very active poster (which I think many of us have gotten town vibes off of, but upon closer view may not be a meta tell at all), I had a very hard time coming up with a good list.

A lot of town negatives came to mind though:

-Quick helped push an NPOM mislynch.
-He's outted power roles and role fished, all while trying to pretend those are pro town.
-He has offered lots of absolutist opinions that he claims are unquestionable because of The System (votato and VPB must be a scum source because of a simulpost!), all while proving very little with said system (see NPOM mislynch above, missing Gamma scum, and now inexplicably sticking with what could be a Mavs mislynch).
-Promises that if we just keep him around to late game, he will deliver scum on a silver platter.
-The weird "go ahead and lynch me then!" when there weren't even any votes on him.

A pairing of Quick/Gamma isn't outside the realm of possibility and I'm having less and less of a good feeling about him . I'd like other players to consider the above thought experiment and try to see how they think Quick has actually helped town after several days of play and results.

You're acting in bad faith. Plus, does lack of Town utility actually = Scum or is this just an excuse to get votes on me?

In post 1585, Quick wrote:You're acting in bad faith. Plus, does lack of Town utility actually = Scum or is this just an excuse to get votes on me?

How am I acting in bad faith? All of those things are very clearly true.

My case is that you have actually done things to hurt town, and are a possible alignment to Gamma...I think there is a decent chance you are scum, and yes people should vote for you. It is certainly a better move for us than lynching Mavs when his claim is far too detailed to likely be fake.

Also, it's quite funny to hear you say I'm acting in bad faith when you're making up outlandish theories about how me using the word fruitful means I'm probably scum with Mavs.

In post 1586, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 1585, Quick wrote:You're acting in bad faith. Plus, does lack of Town utility actually = Scum or is this just an excuse to get votes on me?

How am I acting in bad faith? All of those things are very clearly true.

My case is that you have actually done things to hurt town, and are a possible alignment to Gamma...I think there is a decent chance you are scum, and yes people should vote for you. It is certainly a better move for us than lynching Mavs when his claim is far too detailed to likely be fake.

Bad faith = painting me solely in a negative light. Hence, it's either confbias or you are Scum because there is zero nuance to your read on me.

In post 1588, Quick wrote:Bad faith = painting me solely in a negative light. Hence, it's either confbias or you are Scum because there is zero nuance to your read on me.

I don't agree. I think I've actually seen you in a quite favorable light for most of the game, and given you the benefit of the doubt many times, even when I found your reasoning lacking.

That being said, I never give anyone a free pass, and when I started looking wholesale at what you've done this game, I did not see a lot of positives. I also think you've responded very poorly to what I initiated as a genuinely open minded questioning of your reasons for outting Blair.

If I'm off base, then make the case of how you've benefited town and had town goals in mind. Painting any questioning of your motives as inherently scummy is something I don't find persuasive.

Mostly though, I would like to hear from others (especially those on the Mavs wagon).

In post 1590, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 1588, Quick wrote:Bad faith = painting me solely in a negative light. Hence, it's either confbias or you are Scum because there is zero nuance to your read on me.

I don't agree. I think I've actually seen you in a quite favorable light for most of the game, and given you the benefit of the doubt many times, even when I found your reasoning lacking.

That being said, I never give anyone a free pass, and when I started looking wholesale at what you've done this game, I did not see a lot of positives. I also think you've responded very poorly to what I initiated as a genuinely open minded questioning of your reasons for outting Blair.

If I'm off base, then make the case of how you've benefited town and had town goals in mind. Painting any questioning of your motives as inherently scummy is something I don't find persuasive.

Mostly though, I would like to hear from others (especially those on the Mavs wagon).

I didn't say that. I said you don't have a nuanced view on my slot. That's a different thing than Town/Scum or even like/dislike.

But do what you got to do. I already think you am mav are the Scum team. That should be pretty obvious at this point. Still, you misrep me rather than actually addressing my points. That just gives me more reason to SR you, honest. And no, that has nothing to do with you not having a nuanced read on my slot. You've mostly been quiet on how Towny/Scummy I am. Probably because you knew you would have to push me at some point.

Given I haven't given up the ghost yet, what are you going to do if you can't get my lynched?

You have not countered anything I've said, so how am I misrepping you? What is the specific nuance I'm missing in what I've said?

These are very vague defenses to pretty specific points. Even now, I'm open to hearing what you have to say. I don't claim to be perfect. But you need to actually offer something more than "poor me, I'm being maligned" if you want to convince me.

In post 1591, Quick wrote:Given I haven't given up the ghost yet, what are you going to do if you can't get my lynched?

Considering no one but us has talked about this, I think this is a premature hypothetical.

This is the equivalent of me saying, what are you going to do if you lynch Mavs and he flips town?

In post 1593, VP Baltar wrote:You have not countered anything I've said, so how am I misrepping you? What is the specific nuance I'm missing in what I've said?

These are very vague defenses to pretty specific points. Even now, I'm open to hearing what you have to say. I don't claim to be perfect. But you need to actually offer something more than "poor me, I'm being maligned" if you want to convince me.

In post 1591, Quick wrote:Given I haven't given up the ghost yet, what are you going to do if you can't get my lynched?

Considering no one but us has talked about this, I think this is a premature hypothetical.

This is the equivalent of me saying, what are you going to do if you lynch Mavs and he flips town?

Your read on me is simple and my play is not. Hence, I sense shenanigans.

You're basically forced to make a case against me here because I've already picked you and mav as the remaining Scum. Instead of showing how that isn't viable (because you can't) you say I haven't defeated your case. That's fine but I believe I had you as a possible Scum long before your case on me that is honestly very weak for this stage of the game. D1, sure, I think people could buy that. But D3? I don't think it's a good case because you haven't actually shown you are Town this game. Your play seems to be skirting around making reads and only really making reads when you have to. Am I wrong?

Also, it does seem like if I were you and I was Town I would be trying to lynch votato and not me because honestly, what is votato hanging on to that makes them Town in your eyes? That ofc gets upset when I say things like, "There is one Scum in votato/VP." So you are really painting yourself in a corner either way. If I were you and I was Scum, I would really, honestly, be trying to lynch mav at this point given he is Town. But you are barely looking at mav. What gives? Is mav Town? Based on what? Will you even answer these questions? Time will tell.

I have very clearly explained why I think the mav case is bad. His claim is far too specific and breadcrumbed to be coming from a scum on the fly pushed to L-1. Now, is it possible he planned all this? Sure. But I find that is way more complicated than scum usually are.

To quote you: Time will tell.

In terms of why I wouldn't push votato, I said earlier that I was finding him more town...and the simulpost doesn't mean a lot to me. I know I'm town and what my intentions were there. It was a freak thing he posted at the same time. Doesn't mean he is clear of anything, but it also doesn't guarantee there is a scum there. That's just faulty logic.

And saying my case against you is D1 level is BS. I'm looking at the totality of your actions from day 1 to now. That is exactly the type of case that should be made if you want to holistically catch scum.

Your case on Mavs amounts to "I don't believe his claim" and "his voting record isn't great". Well the first part of that is subjective and the second part...well you are one to talk. So if you think that case is a better quality than what I've made against you, that's cool. Eager to see where the rest of the people come down on that comparison.

In post 1595, VP Baltar wrote:I have very clearly explained why I think the mav case is bad. His claim is far too specific and breadcrumbed to be coming from a scum on the fly pushed to L-1. Now, is it possible he planned all this? Sure. But I find that is way more complicated than scum usually are.

To quote you: Time will tell.

In terms of why I wouldn't push votato, I said earlier that I was finding him more town...and the simulpost doesn't mean a lot to me. I know I'm town and what my intentions were there. It was a freak thing he posted at the same time. Doesn't mean he is clear of anything, but it also doesn't guarantee there is a scum there. That's just faulty logic.

And saying my case against you is D1 level is BS. I'm looking at the totality of your actions from day 1 to now. That is exactly the type of case that should be made if you want to holistically catch scum.

Your case on Mavs amounts to "I don't believe his claim" and "his voting record isn't great". Well the first part of that is subjective and the second part...well you are one to talk. So if you think that case is a better quality than what I've made against you, that's cool. Eager to see where the rest of the people come down on that comparison.

Nope. All wrong. Want me to point out why?

Yeah

In post 1595, VP Baltar wrote:But I find that is way more complicated than scum usually are.

Would you mind offering your comment on this:

In post 1289, Quick wrote:This progression from mav is wacky - especially if mav is SvS with Gamma... Not seeing that clear analytical process from mav here... looks more like panic.

It was a freak thing he posted at the same time. Doesn't mean he is clear of anything, but it also doesn't guarantee there is a scum there. That's just faulty logic.

Good thing my case on there being Scum in Vp/votato has zero to do with that then... You are assuming at best and manipulating at worst.

And saying my case against you is D1 level is BS. I'm looking at the totality of your actions from day 1 to now. That is exactly the type of case that should be made if you want to holistically catch scum.

I'll watch while you make your case on me. I will go toe to toe with you if you want to 1v1.

Your case on Mavs amounts to "I don't believe his claim" and "his voting record isn't great". Well the first part of that is subjective and the second part...well you are one to talk. So if you think that case is a better quality than what I've made against you, that's cool. Eager to see where the rest of the people come down on that comparison.

There's more to it than that, surely!

In post 393, mavsfan41 wrote:

In post 336, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 331, Quick wrote:Okay, Effort for donkey just means he is Town. That is all I am saying.

I'll bite. Give me the case on Blair.

So at the time of this question, Blair’s VC was 2, NPOM and Quick. NPOM voted Blair way back in 189. Quick voted Blair closer to this post in 270 while baiting “feel free to ask me for my reasoning” which makes me believe that VP Baltar is directing the above at Quick.

In 376, VP Baltar says he’s pretty sure Quick and Blair are town. I don’t think town!VP Baltar asks his TR Quick about their case on TR Blair. Town!VP Baltar would only asks this if he’s scum reading at least one of Quick/Blair.

His town read post came after a Blair vs Quick so it’s possible he read that as TvT since, but that means he was scum reading Blair since he was town reading Quick in 317.

He never makes a push on Blair prior to this or expresses any sort of scum read on Blair. I think the above is disingenuous and he looking for town to eat itself here.

Vote: VP Baltar

@Quick: so this was an early game distancing ploy? This is your VP Baltar/R2R thingy all over again. Where does this above fit into Quick’s formula of Non-Alignment scum solving strategy? VP was also one of the people I surmised could potentially be scum and had votato as town (when I had him as town thinking he was the complimentary role to mine) and you had a mavs/votato scum pairing then.