Mafiascum.net

I think his vote was decent at the time that he made it, as it wasn't really until your posts after that that I changed my mind about you. I can also buy his "L-1 takes guts" reasoning on discounting SoO relative to you. So that particular vote doesn't really push me in either reason; at most, it's less telling than other stuff.

Like, I remember starting reading your long-post after that one with a "HMMMMMMMMMMM this looks like an awkwardly-disproportionate response..." kind of mentality going in, and I didn't change my mind until I came back a second time and read it more carefully, so Ghostlin suspicion at that time per se feels pretty nullish at worst to me.

The reasons for my wagon don't make sense. Of course, that is partially because this is day one and there is no such thing as an extremely well-grounded wagon on day one.

So far, I've seen a lot of criticism of what I said to Nero Cain about MattP. I implied that he should vote MattP but did not vote MattP myself.

Why did I do that? Two reasons. First, because the bulk of the rationale for MattP's lynch came from an opinion held by Nero, not necessarily myself. That opinion was: MattP is equally likely to claim VT as scum as town. My extension of that opinion was: A town power role would never claim VT (see: don't lie as town), so we are left with MattP being VT or scum. Second, because it was very early in the day. Too early to seriously suggest an immediate lynchwagon on MattP. But not too early to highlight the topic for strategic discussion.

Later, some people (Ghostlin, possibly others) pointed out that MattP may be the type of player to claim VT as a town power role. (MattP might be the type of player to lie as town.) If this is true, my extension of Nero Cain's opinion is invalid, and MattP is not a good lynch.

Unfortunately, I feel like some of the people voting me may be doing so because they are too lazy to follow the chain of events above, yet happy to jump to conclusions. Others simply followed the trend.

I exist. Let me catch up. Fair warning I am entirely canon ignorant.

In post 177, milkshake wrote:because the bulk of the rationale for MattP's lynch came from an opinion held by Nero

yea, I never pushed for a Matt lynch.

Posts that jumped out at me and why.

In post 30, Selkies wrote:VOTE: MattP

Nope not doing theory discussion today

In post 31, Demon wrote:

In post 15, Selkies wrote:I already have my lynchlist. You guys are so transparent.

-o

Selkies elaborate. Also I really want to keep my vote on Matt right now but youir 30 is making it hard for me.

In post 32, Selkies wrote:VOTE: Demon

Better?

This exchange makes me suspicious of Selkies. Selkies is trying to shut down discussion for no valid reason. Plus, like Demon, I am immediately suspicious of them promising a "lynch list" and then not delivering or mentioning it again.

Later on, in reading, Selkies does elaborate a bit on why they didn't like the theory post, but it doesn't put me off from my original gut reaction. His stance, while more clearly stated, still makes little sense.

In post 34, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 15, Selkies wrote:I already have my lynchlist. You guys are so transparent.

LYNCH ALL LIARS!!!!

vote: selkies

This is a bad try at RVS when there's already plenty of content to discuss. Later on, Nero emphasises this by saying he actually has a town read on Selkie, but offers no more content because "it's RVS." This strikes me as odd, especially for Nero who tends to be an aggressive player.

In post 41, Selkies wrote:Wake me up when RVS is over

- f

This is a useless post in the same way that Nero's was useless; it doesn't even attempt to move the game along. I am not familiar with this player, though, so I can't draw any conclusions from this post alone.

In post 54, Selkies wrote:

In post 53, Demon wrote:Can you take a fucking stance wow, is your vote on Matt right now random or because what?

You and Matt are my scummiest reads (as I have been stating basically this whole game so far).

Stance on what?

Matt is null but I think I can figure him out.

Why are we a scumread again

This post pinged my scumdar hard. Demon is right on the money that Selkies is saying a lot without having any firm opinions, and this post (while it gets points for being unapologetic about it) only makes matters worse.

Matt is null, but I'm voting him while criticizing others for not voting scum reads, "but I think we can figure him out."

Tell me, HOW is making a vote and then declaring that you only read him as null going to help you "figure him out?" You haven't engaged Matt in any way. You are NOT trying to figure him out.

And early image consciousness.

Yup, definitely liking Selkie for scum at this point.

In post 74, Ghostlin wrote:

In post 73, Nero Cain wrote:eh, Matt's vt claim is prob some sort of gambit as he supposedly does them as either alignment.

I tend to treat such tactics as townish, since attention whoring reaction tests, while can be done by scum, don't usually get done because they attract attention and require an amount of...sticking your neck out and misinterpretation.

That said, could you link me to some scum meta where he's pulled off this gambit?

This is a HUGELY waffling post. "I tend to treat such tactics as townISH, but quick, give me an excuse not to!"

In post 105, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 96, Selkies wrote:As far as scum go, I'm not liking Nero Cain too much for town. And milkshake's entrance was a little unsettling as well.

This Milkshake wagon is going a bit fast and its making me worry...

In post 106, Selkies wrote:(while fery murders bolivian children...)

Nero, if Milkshake flips town, who's scum?

I actually really like this response by Selkies. It's exactly what I would have asked.

Nero's original question pings my gut as scum with the combination of arrogance and distancing himself from a wagon he's on (which scum tend to do when they're on town wagons). That being said, arrogance can also be town indigence, and town are more likely to take a post by an opponent that names themselves and someone else as scum and poo-poo the other person's leading wagon.

Which brings me to the wagon itself.

I don't agree with the majority, it seems. Milkshake strikes me as town, and I absolutely followed her reasoning. She 'sa little hesitant and awkward but I think that's just posting style.

She was picking up on some things from Nero that I also picked up on (hesitance to commit to an opinion) and while she seemed to view this less negatively than me, she was harrying Nero to commit just the same, which is what I would have done in her shoes.

And how Nero only voted milkshake after Matt struck me as a bit disingenuous, though I'm still on the fence about him.

In post 118, Ghostlin wrote:

In post 105, Nero Cain wrote:This Milkshake wagon is going a bit fast and its making me worry...

The odds of one scum being on that wagon are good. Probably Milk's buddies if she's scum are treating her like a toxic asset hoping for a later deflection off the wagon, and if she does unlikely flip town...well, then at least one or two scum are making that push. SOO's vote seems to be a follow the leader vote--I've got my eyes on him and Nic next for scum.

If milk is town, then Ghostlin is a good bet for scum. Notice the casual cognitive dissonance in this post. Milk is "unlikely" to flip town, but SOO's "follow the leader" vote is suspect? Treating her as town while calling her scum.

In post 137, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 133, Selkies wrote:I dont' understand this, and I would have asked the same question. It's not protown to sit on your ass like you were, leaving your vote on a person you think is *town*. It seems a legitimate question, and I don't see why it's scummy at all. It didn't seem to me like milk was trying to bait you into voting Matt, rather it was an honest question as to why your posts seemed contradictory

So I should have just switched my vote over and over like you did? Why are you so upset over a RVS vote? This also looks like mad backtracking here. In 97 you guys did vote for Milk, so if you thought it was a legit question and not scummy at why, what were you guys doing voting Milk?

As per 115, you joined this Milkshake wagon to "get information" which I don't exactly buy. This also makes 115 look like a lie since you claimed that I was NOT your #1 suspect and yet you are now claiming that what Milk did in 75, 79 and 81 was not scummy. So you're basing your entire Milkshake scum read on 72? Ok but if you actually believed that Milk was scum why then do you not think that 75, 79, 81 were not from a scum perspective?

But then on page 6

In post 125, Selkies wrote:milkshake's page 4 posts ping pretty hard.

So to the other head does think 75, 79 and 81 were scummy....

Hydra dis is more annoying than scummy but could deff be used as a scum tactic.

The was no contradiction in my post. I have no reason to consider a Matt P lynch (other than utility) today and me claiming that I might consider him a viable lynch candidate down the road has nothing to do with today.

I like this post by Nero, conflicting me further.

In post 144, Belisarius wrote:

In post 128, Ghostlin wrote: My gut right now says town, but I don't listen to it.

Even on D1? Whyever not?

These were addressed while I was reading through but after I popped them into notepad, but I'll leave 'em in for emphasis.

In post 131, GoodCop_BadCop wrote:Also see a scum-mentality from 87.

Looks neutral to me, and I play scum a lot. How is that scum-thinking?

In post 133, Selkies wrote:This is dumb as hell considering it was, y'know, nero cain that had his vote sitting on a townread.

Nero went from an RVS read to a stated scum read. I don't see him voting a town read ever.

Actually, he said Selkies was a townread and then continued to keep his RVS vote on them for a while. So he did. Just correcting.

In post 160, milkshake wrote: I don't mind Ghostlin's last post. I find it somewhat good. I still think Ghostlin is scum. I think it is quite telling that all he/she summons all of his/her resources NOW, when someone has voted him/her. Also, although the post contained good logic on points unrelated to Ghostlin's alignment, the parts pertaining to my points about alignment were not good arguments.

From this perspective, literally every discussion with two viewpoints is a schoolyard argument. This point from Ghostlin, intended to refute my reasons for thinking that he is scum, is vaporous.

I like this larger post by milkshake a lot, and it goes a long way to demonstrate why I think milkshake is being genuine and therefore town. Ghostlin is milkshake's top suspect at a time when milkshake is leading in votes, and yet he says, "I find [Ghostlin's last post] somewhat good." I follow his reasoning 100% on the post in question as well.

In post 164, Nero Cain wrote:opps, forgot this.

In post 150, Ghostlin wrote:

In post 147, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 143, Ghostlin wrote:Also, Nero, do you often try to find buddies this early like you did in #120?

Yes. I don't think there's any reason to not speculate.

Can I have a tiny chunk of your meta as town doing that?

NO!!! I'm too lazy to go through my games and quote all the times that I've said "these players are buddies, etc. Its tedious and uneeded so you can either trust me or go look at my past games. Also, I've played with several of the players in this game, most notably Iece, Thad and Matt, I think they'll vouch that I don't shy away from suspecting multiple people at the same time.

I can vouch that the behavior in question is normal for Nero Cain.

My top two scumreads are Ghostlin and Selkies. NC I am conflicted about.

However, even though there is more evidence against Selkies (and also some that conflicts it), my gut sings more strongly for Ghostlin.

Where did I say that I had a town read on Selk?

In post 80, Nero Cain wrote:

I'll always be wary of Matt. Him lying/gambiting/reaction fishing is null but I'd strongly consider his lynch in a few days if we seem to not be hitting on scum. My vote is on Selk and yea it was RVS.

I wouldn't consider a Selk lynch at all.

I haven't found anything to yell at yet hence why I'm sitting on my RVS.

I interpreted that as a town read, as only people I read as town are people I "wouldn't consider a lynch at all."

No. I had no reason to suspect Selk yet. They weren't a "town" read but they weren't a scum read and I try to lynch my scum reads and not my null reads.

In post 181, Amrun wrote:She was picking up on some things from Nero that I also picked up on (hesitance to commit to an opinion) and while she seemed to view this less negatively than me, she was harrying Nero to commit just the same, which is what I would have done in her shoes.

I'm like 99.9% that I voiced on opinion on Matt in 78. I read the situation totally different then you. In 79 it does look a heckva lot like Milk is try to get me to vote Matt when I already said that I wasn't interested in lynching Matt today. I feel like she was not trying to get me to "commit to an opinion" but trying to get me to move my vote off of Selk. Considering that you have a scum read on Selk, do you not find it just a little strange that she doing this? Or do you think it was a whole coinkydink and its less likely they are scumbudz?

I understand how you or someone else might see it that way, but I don't. It's that simple.

I see it as a perhaps-misguided move that is easily exploitable by scum (and may be misinterpreted by town).

But to attempt to address it beyond the simple disagreement, your voiced opinion on Matt was fairly useless / noncommittal in and of itself, and your vote on Selk was a self-avowed RVS vote that you had no intent of pursuing. If they were scumbuddies, as you posit, your vote presented no threat and therefore required no transparent machinations.

In post 181, Amrun wrote:If milk is town, then Ghostlin is a good bet for scum. Notice the casual cognitive dissonance in this post. Milk is "unlikely" to flip town, but SOO's "follow the leader" vote is suspect? Treating her as town while calling her scum.

Jesus Christ.

You're treating two things that aren't really alignment indicative of each other as cognitive dissonance.

SOO's vote almost exactly echoes the reasoning provided by the rest of town. In that, it's completely unnecessary, Amrun.

If Milkshake is scum, then SOO could very easily be bussing her as scum.

If Milkshake is town and I don't believe she is, then SOO could be scum to get her wagon off.

Either way, I feel that he didn't share anything we didn't already accuse Milkshake of, and I feel he could be smart enough to USE L-1 in that manner.

Any particular reason why you feel that's cognitively dissonant is a complete misrep on your part.

In fact 118 is BW analysis. I was figuring out which player was more likely jumping on the wagon to push it forward and I like the idea of SOO. His explanation post for voting for Milkshake didn't move anything forward and looked more active than it was.

Either way, I don't have to tell you that scum like to bus if they feel their buddy's going down. The initial reasoning that Milk used is bad--Matt's reaction fishing with the VT claim so just lynching a VT claim because you don't have to worry about hitting a PR is in and of itself anti-town. Which is where we started this argument.

Yes, scum like to bus, but the way you phrased it framed milkshake as town while you were saying the opposite.

I like your analyses, Amrun. Welcome to the game.

orcinus takes some getting used to. by some accounts, so do I. My RVS joke was to let folks know that it was orcinus moving our vote around earlier. I don't do RVS. Our first serious vote was on milkshake, but we changed our minds pretty quickly based on his response to the quick pile of votes. Our current vote is also serious.

- fferyllt

In post 181, Amrun wrote:The odds of one scum being on that wagon are good. Probably Milk's buddies if she's scum are treating her like a toxic asset hoping for a later deflection off the wagon (1), and if she does unlikely(2) flip town...well, then at least one or two scum are making that push. SOO's vote seems to be a follow the leader vote--I've got my eyes on him and Nic next for scum.

Here, Amrun let me diagram this for you. Because I've said anything of the sort of knowing Milkshake is Town.

1) Milk has buddies=Milk is scum. Also, I said 'if she's scum'.

2) Unlikely=not very likely=I don't find this very likely. I would type Milkshake is scum over and over in the thread only I'd probably be accused of knowing her alignmeny and BEING SCUM for THAT.

Also, I'd like to hear Beli's reads, and thoughts.

The amount of times you don't get it is kind of funny, Ghostlin.

In post 180, Nero Cain wrote:

In post 177, milkshake wrote:because the bulk of the rationale for MattP's lynch came from an opinion held by Nero

yea, I never pushed for a Matt lynch.

I know you didn't, but it followed from what you had said at that point that you SHOULD have. To demonstrate this, we can take a look at post #133 by Selkies where they express the same opinion.

Also this quote from Amrun where they also say the same.

She was picking up on some things from Nero that I also picked up on (hesitance to commit to an opinion) and while she seemed to view this less negatively than me, she was harrying Nero to commit just the same, which is what I would have done in her shoes.

--

Speaking of Amrun, hello Amrun!

@Ghostlin and Amrun: Normally, I wouldn't consider it scummy to consider "what if the person I'm voting is town," because I have that thought all the time. I didn't actually think that original post was particularly scummy. However, this post #192

I've never said anything of the sort of knowing Milkshake is Town.

We know you aren't stupid enough to say something about knowing I'm town. Who is that stupid? But the fact that YOU think WE think you are that stupid might indicate that there was actually a possibility of you being that stupid, because the knowledge is actually there in your mind. You're just smart enough to ignore it.

No, the amount of times you don't get the English language is hilarious, Amrun. I'm not my meaning in anyway.

But, actually, of equal importance is your reaction to Selkies #191. See if you caught what I did.

In post 196, milkshake wrote:We know you aren't stupid enough to say something about knowing I'm town. Who is that stupid? But the fact that YOU think WE think you are that stupid might indicate that there was actually a possibility of you being that stupid, because the knowledge is actually there in your mind. You're just smart enough to ignore it.

How many games have you played on this site? Because I've actually seen people go 'how do you know X is town/scum? If you know X is town/scum, you must be scum because only scum would be the only ones to know THAT.

Now the idea is stupid, it's almost on par with too dumb for scum. However, my of that never happening EVER will not come true anytime soon.

I didn't say you were hiding anything. You clearly don't have any clue what I'm saying. I think that others will, so I won't bother with it anymore.