Newbie 2016: Snapdragons (Game Over)

[Raya36]

Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?

I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?

Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?

How so?

Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.

72 has seemed evasive. But I'm not sure what to make of that

Can you post specifically in which posts I was evasive?

32 183 192

[Raya36]

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

Where's your vote then?

My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1

Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.

This is a bad case and very reachy.

Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.

I'll do this in my next post.

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."

For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.

Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.

Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.

Isn't most Day 1 early cases reachy? I really hate this argument
Also I see you join The Luciano wagon after I printed you to vote and someone else joined before you. I don't like this. I could argue myself that your case on him is reachy but again my case is reachy here no? Finally your case is more repreat what was already aid to give you a reason to join the wagon. While not Al we always scum indicative it's a good start.

Once I catch up my read here I will chiose where my vote goes but you are definitely setting off alarms.

Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.

I will respond to your readlist post next. I NEED to respond to this first. Is case on Blopp was from what 2 pages worth of posts? Wouldn't that have to be reachy? Do I agree it's a good case? Weird yes but not really screaming confirmed scum for me and thus my vote is not on Blopp. For an elimation to be made 5 players have to agree it's a good enough case to do so. If an elimation were to occur based on that it would be so telling for the rest of the game. Making a case on a player might not get info on the player ryou are pushing but can give Intel on other players in the wagon. Why did they join the wagon? Did they explain themselves well. If it was bad reasoning, what purpose did they have joining that wagon? Miselimnatiin or bad play? So much can be told by these situations.

Overall it has provided discussion to a slow early game and thus has actually been a very beneficial wagon.

I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.

What gives you the impression LL "just wants Blopa lynched"?

I already explained this. Go back through my cases recent in my iso

[LuckyLuciano]

Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.

I elaborated in terms of a case to generate discussion, but the points of the case were still >Rand reasons to vote Blopp today. Her site flake, with special consideration played to how she site flaked - in that she essentially deactivated her account -, is further increasing the chance that she flips mafia fair >Random. To assume that I haven't gotten more info on the slots throughout the day is to assume that I haven't been observing how players position themselves around the topic.

I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.

Who said I'm not interested in a replacement? I said that a replacement still has to defend Blopp's actions and isn't pardoned simply for replacing into a game, and that if they claim VT I'm going to continue voting them. You keep saying I wanted a quick hammer because I didn't unvote. Why would I unvote someone I think is scum? Why does it feel like you are 100% convinced that Blopp is town despite her being one of your scum reads? It feels like you have been arguing that you are allowed to scum read her but I'm not allowed to scum read her more strongly. If someone hammers her and she flips town

that gives info too

. Stop playing like a novice, you're an SE.

[Raya36]

Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.

I elaborated in terms of a case to generate discussion, but the points of the case were still >Rand reasons to vote Blopp today. Her site flake, with special consideration played to how she site flaked - in that she essentially deactivated her account -, is further increasing the chance that she flips mafia fair >Random. To assume that I haven't gotten more info on the slots throughout the day is to assume that I haven't been observing how players position themselves around the topic.

The case is reachy. Even Homura who has a lot of experience said they have never seen a newbscum completely quit due to being scumread/wagoned. And why aren't you considering other possibilities. Couldn't she have siteflaked as town due to the same frustrations she would have as scum due to a wagon? Some people regardless of alignment don't enjoy being wagoned and maybe she realized this game wasn't for her. Maybe she just went v/la or life got busy and she stopped playing or maybe she simply lost interest. There are so many possibilities and I don't get why you're set on her being scum for something I don't consider particularly AI.

If you're observing the positions of players around the topic can you explain some thoughts or reads you've gotten from it?

I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.

Who said I'm not interested in a replacement? I said that a replacement still has to defend Blopp's actions and isn't pardoned simply for replacing into a game, and that if they claim VT I'm going to continue voting them. You keep saying I wanted a quick hammer because I didn't unvote. Why would I unvote someone I think is scum? Why does it feel like you are 100% convinced that Blopp is town despite her being one of your scum reads? It feels like you have been arguing that you are allowed to scum read her but I'm not allowed to scum read her more strongly. If someone hammers her and she flips town

that gives info too

. Stop playing like a novice, you're an SE.

So basically what you're saying in that second line is unless Blopp slot is a power role you won't consider anything the replacement has to say and won't reconsider your read. That's not being interested in a replacement. You shouldn't pardon someone just for replacing into a game but a replacement can bring a lot of insight into a slot. A new POV, actual content, more active play, you can check for agenda, etc.

I'm not 100% convinced Blopp is town. I just don't trust your case on her and I don't believe it to be a good case with good intentions. The more I believe you're pushing for a mislynch the more I believe Blopp is town though. And yes Blopp flipping town does give info but why should I push for a flip on Blopp when I'm sure you're scum pushing for a mislynch on Blopp.

You're allowed to scumread her. I don't see how you think I'm arguing that you can't scumread her. I think you're scum pushing for a mislynch. That's what I'm arguing.

If you're so happy with flipping town and you're actually town why not let us flip you. We'll get more info from that than Blopp's flip.

[Nahdia]

Now seeking replacement for Blopp.

[LicketyQuickety]

LicketyQuickety - Null, need to

hear more

.

Hear away:

[Raya36]

LicketyQuickety - Null, need to

hear more

.

Hear away:

Hm not bad. This earns a townlean

[LicketyQuickety]

LicketyQuickety - Null, need to

hear more

.

Hear away:

Hm not bad. This earns a townlean

Spoiler: I will fail you

[Raya36]

LicketyQuickety - Null, need to

hear more

.

Hear away:

Hm not bad. This earns a townlean

Spoiler: I will fail you

Pretty good. Closer to my genres. Kinda reminds me of Disturbed and Breaking Benjamin. I hope the title isn't telling though... slightly higher townlean

[Raya36]

Allow me take a turn at attempting to pocket

[LicketyQuickety]

Allow me take a turn at attempting to pocket

It's alright. I tend to like music a little more on the aggressive side.

Given the bands you've listed, you might like this (I have the demo).

[LicketyQuickety]

For example, this is more my speed:

[LicketyQuickety]

Lead singer of ^ that has a side project.

[JamSV]

I wonder if this game just has quiet people or if certain posts simply kill it. Of course the answer with just the above bit is obviously the latter.

[LuckyLuciano]

Raya, your positioning WRT Blopp is odd. I was okay with the sheep vote in 39 because you seemed genuinely interested in the case. Somewhere down the line the same case you found worth pushing you have decided is worth scumreading for having been pushed. 45 is odd in retrospect. You say that you won't move your vote from Blopp to Clark because you want to hear from Blopp, but you also concede that we're not going to get info out of Blopp's responses anymore because Clark addressed my case for her (47). If Blopp has had an out provided to her already, what's the point of keeping your vote on her?

67 is also really weird. Why is there a scumlean on me for not removing my vote on someone that I scumread and not a scumlean on the player who replaced in, put Blopp at E-1, and invited a quickhammer? It feels like Raya's setting up to push me later for this and doesn't feel at all like a genuine read. In 106 you call a 2-line post that I prefaced with "Perhaps it is a coincidence" in 63, "Bad and reachy." Why did you consider my speculation a case at the time? What sort of content did you expect 63 posts into the game that would push the game forward while not being, to some degree, "bad and reachy"? Further, in 67, you scumleaned me for not unvoting but said nothing about 63. Further, you keep calling my push reachy. What about being reachy is scummy? Do you believe that my goal D1 as town is to find an elimination target that has an >Random chance of being scum? Even if my stance on Blopp is reachy, do you not believe that it represents scum equity in the Blopp slot that is >Random? You yourself have continually scumread Blopp

the entire game

while simultaneously pushing me for scumreading her. Why do

you

scumread her? Your initial vote on the slot was a sheep vote, which you yourself admitted was only cast to "see where this goes." Blopp never responded, therefore it never went anywhere, yet you progressed into constantly calling her slot scummy while illustrating none of that progression publicly. And despite you insisting that I'm pushing a mislynch, you hold that you think her slot is scummy.

Why did you ask 72o if his thoughts of Blopp had changed at all in 148 when Blopp has been MIA since his initial vote? Why would his thoughts have changed, and why did you have a special interest in hearing his thoughts on the Blopp slot rather than others, like the slot you have been pushing: me? Your stance on Blopp honestly feels like you tried to distance early and are not awkwardly trying to defend her (anyone else hear the distant revving of a chainsaw) while maintaining your early, unexplained scumread on her to appear consistent. In 181 you have decided that the

only

reason Blopp is scummy is lack of content. This seems to be a deterioration in your read on her since your earlier scumlean on her 67. What reason did you have to scumlean Blopp in 67, and why did it disappear by 181. She hadn't been gone for long enough for lack of content to be a reason to scumlean her, and it was early enough in the game that other slots had just as little or less content. So please, educate me on your thought process here.

Let's move on to 182. You say that my case is scummy because I'm pushing a spot that isn't around to respond, but my case is premised on

why

that slot isn't around to respond. Do you believe it is possible that I believe in my reads? If so, why is my push scummy? Do you stop pushing a scumread because they leave the game or choose not to respond? Later on your argument against me more clearly becomes that you believe I'm pushing a miskick (218). How do you differentiate town pushing town from scum pushing town? What about my push on Blopp indicates that it is a push I would make as scum but wouldn't make as town? If you are still holding Blopp as scummy, how can my push so obviously be a miskick? I can only clearly be pushing a miskick if I'm pushing an obvtown slot, no? Please explain to me how you know I'm pushing a miskick on a slot you scumread.

On to 228. The first thing you do is appeal to authority with Homura. That's laughable because I have more experience than Homura, so if you are using experience as a reason to accept or deny my push, you should be taking my side. Moreover, it's not that I haven't considered other possibilities for Blopp flaking. It's that among all possible explanations, I believe that the explanations leading to scum!Blopp hold more equity than those leading to town!Blopp. I think the deletion of her avatar answers back

many, if not all

of the NAI explanations for her flaking, and when left with only scumAI and townAI explanations for a newbie dipping after getting immediate pressure from multiple players in response to a post they made, my experience leads me to believe that there are far more prevalent scumAI explanations than townAI. Further, you say in the same post that you don't find Blopp's behavior particularly AI. Again, explain to me your earlier scumread on Blopp if her behavior suddenly isn't AI.

A particular line I feel warrants a response,

So basically what you're saying in that second line is unless Blopp slot is a power role you won't consider anything the replacement has to say and won't reconsider your read.

Yeah. That's pretty much what I'm saying. The goal D1 is always to find a slot that has a >Rand chance of being scum and voting there. The goal D1 is not to solve the game. If a slot with high scum equity claims VT, you eliminate them. You don't go searching through slots with lesser scum equity and get more claims, either outing a TPR or further limiting the pool of TPR for scum to choose from for their NK. It's called best practical play.

I'm not 100% convinced Blopp is town. I just don't trust your case on her and I don't believe it to be a good case with good intentions. The more I believe you're pushing for a mislynch the more I believe Blopp is town though. And yes Blopp flipping town does give info but why should I push for a flip on Blopp when I'm sure you're scum pushing for a mislynch on Blopp.

Either you think I'm scum pushing for a miskick or you don't. If you are so convinced that I'm scum pushing for a miskick, why would you say that you are not 100% convinced Blopp is town. Even if it is a true statement, what compelled you to throw it out there. It feels a lot like building a safety net for Blopp being kicked, either today, or tomorrow if I were to be kicked today. At some point that slot

will

flip, and when it does you need to have already saved face, and this is part of you trying to do that.

Also, anyone who doesn't read this as scum is a joke of a player,

If you're so happy with flipping town and you're actually town why not let us flip you. We'll get more info from that than Blopp's flip.

[72offsuit]

I wonder if this game just has quiet people or if certain posts simply kill it. Of course the answer with just the above bit is obviously the latter.

Yep. Quick pretty much did the same thing in Newbie 2017. No surprises scum won that game.

https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=83106

[72offsuit]

EBWOP: Newbie 2007

[TheThirteenthJT]

I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.

So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.

[TheThirteenthJT]

I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.

So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.

[72offsuit]

I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.

So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.

Ye, pretty much this ^

[JamSV]

I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.

So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.

I don't understand why it would cause her to remove her avatar. Okay, people don't like pressure, this can cause some people to give up on games, and occasionally to stop playing mafia, but I don't see how it could / would cause somebody to remove their avatar. I think its a bit far fetched to be honest unless there's something I'm forgetting completely.

[72offsuit]

The avatar removal just feels like an account deactivation. Seems like she decided forum mafia wasnt her cup of tea.
Question is, what it due to !scumher having to explain her way out of a hole, or just disliking the game overall.

[JamSV]

The avatar removal just feels like an account deactivation. Seems like she decided forum mafia wasnt her cup of tea.
Question is, what it due to !scumher having to explain her way out of a hole, or just disliking the game overall.

See this is why I think we should wait for a replacement for her overall, I think we should give the replacement the benefit of doubt for a while after they replace in, give them a few posts to understand their town, and the intonations and such of that new player will help us work out which one it was.

[TheThirteenthJT]

The avatar removal just feels like an account deactivation. Seems like she decided forum mafia wasnt her cup of tea.
Question is, what it due to !scumher having to explain her way out of a hole, or just disliking the game overall.

See this is why I think we should wait for a replacement for her overall, I think we should give the replacement the benefit of doubt for a while after they replace in, give them a few posts to understand their town, and the intonations and such of that new player will help us work out which one it was.

In the mean time I suggest looking at the interactions around this. Raya and Homura and have struck out the most for me.

Also hypothetical question. If someone comes into the game and says they are scum and leaves. Does it matter what the replacement says? Do we give them the benefit of the doubt. I know you don't think the flake is scum indicative, I am starting to feel it's to closest thing possible a scum tell. At this point when the replacement comes in and catches up, gives us summaries of what they think, I would suggest putting them on L-1 with intent.

[TheThirteenthJT]

Edit: Fllake isn't scum indicative