Mafiascum.net

are you on drugs

"You've been on all bad wagons"

I was on the Thor wagon, which you were on as well.
I was on the Dunn wagon with you.
I was on the Leo wagon early D1 IIRC, which you were on recently as well.

Now, I've been on all bad wagons, right? Elaborate?

Day1 wagons

also you were on mala's wagon, but hey good job phrasing it as if there's not a big difference between me starting wagons and you just hopping on them advantageously?

In post 1569, Thor665 wrote:

In post 1565, Egix96 wrote:I will say I really don't like the look of Thor's two posts above. He doesn't seem to be responding to the threat of being lynched the same way that he was in my first game with him.

This is not valid analysis. You might as well be saying you want to lynch me for having red in my avatar - at least that would be something we could factually talk about.
.

Explain to me how reading you based on simple meta is not valid analysis?

In Newb 1893, at the start of that game's LyLo phase, you openly recognised that you had a chance of being lynched even though you knew it would lose you the game.

Here, we're still two more mislynches away from LyLo but you're quick to say that the cases on you are "dumb" as you put it. Doesn't sit right with me.

In post 1602, rb wrote:Day1 wagons

also you were on mala's wagon, but hey good job phrasing it as if there's not a big difference between me starting wagons and you just hopping on them advantageously?

Both the latter I stated were D1 wagons.
I still want Mala lynched.

So your case is - "Whenever Auro starts/is on a wagon that I'm not on, he's scum because BAD WAGONS, and if he's on a wagon I was on he's scum because it's opportunistic!".

In post 1589, rb wrote:okay, because this game is just not working

creature, egix, mala - can the four of us just work to get on the same wagon

Creature - I think he's town but I don't necessarily agree with his reads.
rb - I don't trust them enough to want to sheep them
mala - idek

I wish I knew who was behind all this madness.

Everyone should sheep me. This "madness" is because of too many lurkers. Now is the right time to policy lynch. Either there is lurker scum, forcing town to eat eachother alive or there is lurker town and we are outnumbered anyways. Also the slot I'm on is obv scum. So feel free to sheep whenever.

Why not Malakittens?

In post 1583, rb wrote:my issue here is that i don't want to lynch the people you want to lynch, which is me/mala it seems? i'm town, mala is my 2nd best townread (after creature who if he's scum he just won at this stage) and i'm having a real hard time with 3 lower activity slots.

I've been claiming Creature is town for some time, so I don't get your point there?
Your townread on Mala is based on empty air - feel free to describe it.
I offered up Leo also if you want to lynch an inactive (while ignoring that Mala is an inactive - frankly my preferred lynch pool is 66% low output posters, so...)

In post 1593, Auro wrote:Yeah, on further thought Thor getting to lynch range with NO significant counterwagon with all scum alive implies pretty much his wagon was scum-motivated. Although I still think Thor has good scum equity, I'm not gonna vote there today.

Wow, you noticed the blatantly obvious - while complaining that I had issues with you not noting the blatantly obvious.

In post 1593, Auro wrote:@Thor, you locked on to RB being scum post flip. But isn't his Dunn push only mostly scum indicative if Mala's scum? What scum motive would he have otherwise? Also, you were scumreading Dunnstral as well, so FYPOV Dunn would have been a good vote.
If you agree with me on the first question, why weren't you pushing Mala over RB?
Also, speaking about Dunn, you scumread him for similar reasons IIRC and he flipped town. Why isn't this simply RB's playstyle?

Good work taking an RVS scumread, ignoring that late Day 1 I was trying to wagon build with him, and then complaining that I don't have a leg to stand on in calling a bad wagon bad. ::shrug::

It might be rb's playstyle, in fact I'm pretty sure I've lynched him before when both of us were town. That said - it is also a pro-scum playstyle, and since a lot of the other optimal competition are town reads I have that have nothing to do with a specific blindness toward's rb's playstyle, after the lynch he became a far more viable option.

In post 1594, Auro wrote:

In post 1578, Thor665 wrote:Any scumflip is useful - welcome to empty example #524

Eh, compared to Leodanny - that slot's basically a gamble (which should flip town more likely), and a scumflip there gives us nothing. I'd rather that a PoE lunch at this point, I guess.

Describe what info you would get from a scumflip from, let's say Mala, that you wouldn't get from a scum flip from Leo.
Then town flip each of them.
Then compare/contrast the wealth of info vs. the dearth.
I don't think you'll find much of a difference.

In post 1604, Egix96 wrote:Explain to me how reading you based on simple meta is not valid analysis?

Well, for starters, you didn't explain the meta - you just claimed i'd play different for...some reason?
Non explained meta suggests that either it is made up, or poorly conceived.

In post 1604, Egix96 wrote:In Newb 1893, at the start of that game's LyLo phase, you openly recognised that you had a chance of being lynched even though you knew it would lose you the game.

Here, we're still two more mislynches away from LyLo but you're quick to say that the cases on you are "dumb" as you put it. Doesn't sit right with me.

I agree that in these two different situations I reacted to them.
How is being aware I'd potentially be lynched in LyLo different than suggesting the case on me is dumb?
I don't get how that's different play from different alignments.

In post 1607, Lamees wrote:Everyone should sheep me. This "madness" is because of too many lurkers. Now is the right time to policy lynch. Either there is lurker scum, forcing town to eat eachother alive or there is lurker town and we are outnumbered anyways. Also the slot I'm on is obv scum. So feel free to sheep whenever.

Hint: Mala is a lurker. (incidentally, so are you, so...)

Sorry been away for New Years sans wifi and still don’t have too much time
I think Lamees is correct lynch tomorrow if we mislynch today. Apart from that I need to read more and come back later sorry

In post 1610, DarkLightA wrote:I think Lamees is correct lynch tomorrow if we mislynch today. Apart from that I need to read more and come back later sorry

If we massclaim that potentially makes sense, otherwise I don't see your logic.

In post 1609, Thor665 wrote:Good work taking an RVS scumread, ignoring that late Day 1 I was trying to wagon build with him, and then complaining that I don't have a leg to stand on in calling a bad wagon bad. ::shrug::

You did say these in D1:

In post 115, Thor665 wrote:You feel kind of like you're sidelining and sticking to tearing down other things. You can also be a scumlean.

In post 212, Thor665 wrote:Probably you could infer by me saying I scum leaned Dunnstral that I scum read him also.

You're saying the above two didn't imply more than an "RVS" scumread?

In post 1609, Thor665 wrote:Wow, you noticed the blatantly obvious - while complaining that I had issues with you not noting the blatantly obvious.

In post 1574, Auro wrote:could simply imply you're being bussed, and/or have buddies within the no-vote slots.

I'll make a note here to analyze this further when I'm actually free

. I'll also note that I didn't like a couple of votes on your wagon, especially Nako's.

I never complained about your taking issue with it. I said there's a possibility you're being bussed or have buddies within the lurkers explaining the lack of a counterwagon, but noted to think about it more when I had the time. And here I am, after re-evaluating it.

In post 1609, Thor665 wrote:Describe what info you would get from a scumflip from, let's say Mala, that you wouldn't get from a scum flip from Leo.
Then town flip each of them.
Then compare/contrast the wealth of info vs. the dearth.
I don't think you'll find much of a difference.

Okay.
Scumflip Mala -> Clears {Thor/Lamees}, Scum in {S_S/Egix/RB}, very probably RB.
Scumflip Leo -> Clears Thor, doesn't point to scum. Meh
Haven't thought much about the cases where they flip town, am just comparing the information gained on scumflips.
Besides, I've given my reasons for why I think Leo is more probably town than scum, given his vote staying on a non-wagon when he was wagoned.

In post 1609, Thor665 wrote:It might be rb's playstyle, in fact I'm pretty sure I've lynched him before when both of us were town. That said - it is also a pro-scum playstyle, and since a lot of the other optimal competition are town reads I have that have nothing to do with a specific blindness toward's rb's playstyle, after the lynch he became a far more viable option.

I'm in agreement that his playstyle is pro-scum.
However, you've not answered the earlier - what's the scum motivation in trying to start a Dunn wagon so close to the deadline instead of letting the Mala lynch go through, unless he's scum *with* Mala? That's far from optimal move in that situation I think.

In post 1612, Auro wrote:You're saying the above two didn't imply more than an "RVS" scumread?

You're unironically claiming that a post made at 115 and confirmed at 212 (mostly to make fun of your inferal work) isn't?
I mean, I might suggest that's pretty early in the game where you're drawing 100% of your evidence from to support my really wild claim here.
Just saying.

In post 1612, Auro wrote:Okay.
Scumflip Mala -> Clears {Thor/Lamees}, Scum in {S_S/Egix/RB}, very probably RB.
Scumflip Leo -> Clears Thor, doesn't point to scum. Meh

Why would a Mala scumflip clear me or Lamees? Leo I could see for me, sure, but I pointedly ignored Mala until my neck was on the block, and Lamees is doing what there?
Why does Mala scum narrow the scumpool to S_S/Egix? I see your rb thought (though will explain why I doubt that's valid in a moment) but the other two?
Why doesn't a Leo scumflip offer a thought on rb and Lamees - the only two semi-valid pushes he's made?
Why doesn't a Leo scumflip suggest potential scum in people who've defended the wagon?

In post 1613, Auro wrote:However, you've not answered the earlier - what's the scum motivation in trying to start a Dunn wagon so close to the deadline instead of letting the Mala lynch go through, unless he's scum *with* Mala? That's far from optimal move in that situation I think.

Please show me the point you think this switch happened? I don't think it's remotely as potent as you're suggesting.

As to why without them being buddies? Well, simple possibility - both Dunn/Mala are town and rb is scum, in which case he could be white knighting, could be hoping to be off the wagon when Mala gets flipped, or could legit just not care and been fine if either Mala had gone through in which case he could push Dunn the next phase, or been happy to have Dunn go through in which case he could still have the Mala mislynch on the table.

I don't think these are shocking or unlikely scum plays, I assuredly do them, and have seen them a lot. You haven't?

In post 1614, Thor665 wrote:You're unironically claiming that a post made at 115 and confirmed at 212 (mostly to make fun of your inferal work) isn't?
I mean, I might suggest that's pretty early in the game where you're drawing 100% of your evidence from to support my really wild claim here.
Just saying.

Unless you TR'd Dunnstral later in the day, you don't get to call the wagon bad.
You never explicitly stated a TR on him later.
I'm not buying that wagon-building with him implied a TR.

In post 1614, Thor665 wrote:Why would a Mala scumflip clear me or Lamees? Leo I could see for me, sure, but I pointedly ignored Mala until my neck was on the block, and Lamees is doing what there?
Why does Mala scum narrow the scumpool to S_S/Egix? I see your rb thought (though will explain why I doubt that's valid in a moment) but the other two?
Why doesn't a Leo scumflip offer a thought on rb and Lamees - the only two semi-valid pushes he's made?
Why doesn't a Leo scumflip suggest potential scum in people who've defended the wagon?

1. Effectively clears you because I don't imagine scum!her bussing you, and you don't bus ever (or so I've read ). Lamees also was proactive on the Mala wagon (861), in fact she started it -- so she effectively gets cleared.
2. It's not narrowing the scumpool to exactly that, but I'm confident on finding scum there. S_S because of his strong continued TR on Mala, and Egix because I recall he avoided the Mala wagon but jumped on to Leo and Dunnstral pretty fast.
3. Can see RB, but I'm not confident his pushes clear either of them as strongly as in (1) or (2).
4. It could, but again, pretty less confidence. IIRC Mala was the only other person apart from me who sorta defended the wagon, but she's who I want to lynch anyway.

In post 1614, Thor665 wrote:Please show me the point you think this switch happened? I don't think it's remotely as potent as you're suggesting.

As to why without them being buddies? Well, simple possibility - both Dunn/Mala are town and rb is scum, in which case he could be white knighting, could be hoping to be off the wagon when Mala gets flipped, or could legit just not care and been fine if either Mala had gone through in which case he could push Dunn the next phase, or been happy to have Dunn go through in which case he could still have the Mala mislynch on the table.

I don't think these are shocking or unlikely scum plays, I assuredly do them, and have seen them a lot. You haven't?

https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.p ... #p10621114
Mala and Leo were the two wagons, Leo wasn't going forward, Dunn had a lot of lynch energy, so yeah.
I'm aware of the possibilities, I accused you of the same in our last game when you moved off Volx at L-1 to Trendall and the slot got mislynched.
Thing is, starting and pushing a Dunn lynch knowing that it flips town gains him scum equity and he would *know* that. White-knighting is definitely possible, but if he aimed to just stay off the wagon, he needn't have a Dunn wagon, he could've simply stayed where he was. I think this makes it less likely he's scum unless with Mala.

I note that the entirety of your rebuttal to every point I made can generally be summed up as 'well, yeah, but here's why I'm not choosing to think that even though I admit it's a valid alternate view'
At which point I don't get why you're walling at me still - you know I'm being valid on all these points, and I'm way not as excited as you to try to theoretically be 'right'.
I already know I am

I'm admitting possibilities, I'm debating the probabilities.

In post 1593, Auro wrote:Even grosser because everyone else seems to be lurking their butts off.

Hey I'm trying to do something, but it's hard with 1-2 slots being replaced and 2-3 others prod-dodging.

In post 1593, Auro wrote:Yeah, on further thought Thor getting to lynch range with NO significant counterwagon with all scum alive implies pretty much his wagon was scum-motivated.

Are scum lurking

or not

?

In post 1595, Auro wrote:

In post 1583, rb wrote:but we're pre-flip and logic dictates that scum are gonna be in you/auro/S_S

What is this "logic"?

@Creature, RB has mostly only been yelling reads without any real justification for anything - and when asked, the most you'd get out of him is "wow too much effort", and I bet he's going to respond to my above question the same friggin way. Which part of his play screams "reasonable" to you?

I don't think his play is reasonable. Just irreasonable town.

In post 1619, Creature wrote:Are scum lurking

or not

?

If Thor's scum and the lack of counterwagon is due to scum lurking, both scum have to be hard lurking so much that they didn't even drop in to cast a vote.

The lurkers prolly contain scum, but "Thor's wagon isn't fishy cos his buddies are lurkers!" isn't so likely.

In post 1509, Creature wrote:He was one of the players doing reasonable stuff rather than just vomiting walls.

Really? You said this^, what "reasonable stuff"?

In post 1610, DarkLightA wrote:Sorry been away for New Years sans wifi and still don’t have too much time
I think Lamees is correct lynch tomorrow if we mislynch today. Apart from that I need to read more and come back later sorry

Agreed, so let's not lynch today

In post 1623, Lamees wrote:

In post 1610, DarkLightA wrote:Sorry been away for New Years sans wifi and still don’t have too much time
I think Lamees is correct lynch tomorrow if we mislynch today. Apart from that I need to read more and come back later sorry

Agreed, so let's not lynch today

Lynch town* today