Mafiascum.net

Why won't you respond to the last line?

↑ Ghostlin wrote:

↑ DrippingGoofball wrote:I changed my mind. Junpei is town.

Why?

He's aggressively poking hornets. NEVER a good idea when you're scum.

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

Nopoint wrote:I find the reasoning of Ludi and those who talk about how there's 0% fourseen is scum by the fast wagonning bullshit.

It's just appeal to probability. Please show evidence that he's not scum instead.

If Fourseen flips scum those will be my number 1 suspects.

In regards to the bolded –

1. You are using Appeal to Probability incorrectly. An Appeal to Probability is saying the odds of something happening are so small that they couldn’t have happened (ie a Cop scanning a Godfather N1 and a Miller N2 in a game) which is a fallacy. It’s true that Ludi is incorrect in stating outright there is a 0% chance that Fourseen is scum. Unless he has some power that tells him Day 1 that Fourseen is Town (which I don’t expect is in this game) as Town he shouldn’t be 100% sure. I don’t think Fourseen is scum but am willing to acknowledge I could be wrong.
2. Asking for ‘evidence he’s not scum’ is horrible. You can’t prove a negative, especially Day 1 in this game. What evidence is there of actual scum intent in Fourseen's play?

Nopoint wrote:I don't get why ppl discourage the leading pressure wagon but not pushing for any other wagon (Magister Ludi, slysly )

Um this is a complete lie. I know Magister is pushing warrior and I am pushing Stringer. Why fabricate statements like this?

--

OK. What I'm saying is that ML: fast wagonning = 0% scum has no basis. I find it likely for scum to grasp onto reasoning like this to defend someone, whether town or their scumbuddy. Maybe slysly didn't have much content but look at the way ML is playing. He votes people, but never follows up. He focusses more on defending Fourseen than on pushing for his reads, which I find scum-like. I would be happy to vote ML if there's a wagon on him.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:Got prodded.
Keeping up with the thread, but anything I would say, has been said already.

Unvote, Vote: ML

I'm a little more confidence that Fourseen will flip town. ML has been protecting Fourseen a little too hard. Enough to gain some crediability in the game with his reads on a claimed "bad player" when they flip town.

Somewhat agree with this

↑ RedCoyote wrote:
Be fair. ML is actively pushing for warrior. MoI is gunning for SB. spring for Junpei.

LOL no he's not. Now he's voting me and he's not actively pushing/pressuring me either. Just to show how he doesn't care about his reads.

↑ DrippingGoofball wrote:
Words are tossed around randomly in a mayonnaise base, resulting in something

intentionally

bland and cloying.

Can any fucking body on Earth tells me what this means? @@

↑ DrippingGoofball wrote:
nopoint is 100% inconsequential, stream-of-

un

consciousness white noise.

How does all of what you're saying even relate to the reason why I'm at the bottom of your scumlist? I think YOU are better than this DGB

↑ wazzatron wrote:

↑ RedCoyote wrote:

MoI 315 wrote:

wazza 381 wrote:... seriously actually place a case so that people will believe you i will say this once

to start a legitimate wagon place a convincing case that gets others to look at what they have done.

but no you have just said he is scum... sorry but i don't believe it.

I don't like this defense of nopoint out of the blue.

i'm not trying to defend anyone i'm pointing out the simple fact that no case means that i have absolutly no reason to believe the 'case' on him, which may i point out is non existent.

This is me trying to let everyone know that in order to make a case you need a case to be made to begin with.

True. really

↑ Toogeloo wrote:

↑ Bunnylover wrote:I am still in favor of Crypto been lynched, but I think FourseenCircumstance is a much more obvious choice.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:@ML: Sorry, but I disagree with you.I agree with Junpei that your taking things out of proportion.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:

Unvote, Vote: ML

I'm a little more confidence that Fourseen will flip town.

There do not seem like a town's thought process. Each of these statements reek to me.

Unvote;
Vote: Bunnylover

Er reads change over time Toog, you're quoting from very different period of time

↑ Toogeloo wrote:

↑ Toogeloo wrote:

↑ Bunnylover wrote:I am still in favor of Crypto been lynched, but I think FourseenCircumstance is a much more obvious choice.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:@ML: Sorry, but I disagree with you.I agree with Junpei that your taking things out of proportion.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:

Unvote, Vote: ML

I'm a little more confidence that Fourseen will flip town.

There do not seem like a town's thought process. Each of these statements reek to me.

Unvote;
Vote: Bunnylover

To further elaborate:

↑ Bunnylover wrote:I am still in favor of Crypto been lynched, but I think FourseenCircumstance is a much more obvious choice.

This sounds like Bunny is attempting to leave her options open in case momentum shifts back on to Crypto, which at the time of the post both 4seen and crypto are getting a lot of heat. There is too much justification for the vote switch, and comes off scummily.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:@ML: Sorry, but I disagree with you.I agree with Junpei that your taking things out of proportion.

Appealing to another player's read to justify disagreement. Bunny is attempting to back up possible support against ML and possibly playing town against town. If Bunny is scum, Junpei and ML are both town.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:

Unvote, Vote: ML

I'm a little more confidence that Fourseen will flip town.

Fourseen is getting a lot of backing as a bad lynch, and so Bunny attempts to jump ship here and go with her previously set up attack on ML, which at the moment seems like a park vote due to it being the only vote on ML and almost no case provided by Bunny for the vote other than, "He's WKing 4seen too much."

Just no. Fourseen, while potentially scum, is also a good gauge wagon to catch scums like Ludi

↑ Sinestro wrote:Andy here. I've got alot of catchup to do thanks to being sick all weekend (thank you Panda).

<3,

-A

Panda made you sick?

↑ diddin wrote:Junpei's scum for exactly what other people have already said: he's throwing around scumreads like crazy.

Give me one good reason why throwing scum reads make you scum?

↑ Junpei wrote:

↑ Kdub wrote:Guys, Furc is probably town. Read his first few posts again and then tell me if you think anybody fakes that mistake

if they had the opportunity to coordinate with scumbuddies before posting.

Third-party is not ruled out, but I can't see him being mafia.

...scum slip?

hmm .. maybe

↑ Magister Ludi wrote:

slysly wrote:ML tells FC to check their scum daytalk for a pointer.

I don't quite know what to make of this statement. For this entire day, you've been sitting on the wagon that I was leading on warriormode. Basically, you agree with me that warrior is scum, and forseen is not. And now you all of a sudden you call me out for defending forseen? And you try to fabricate something that is so banally stupid (first, assuming scum have daytalk, second scum A [me] posted in the scum quicktopic, and then felt it necessary to post in thread to point this out to my hypothetical scumbuddy)to call me scum? You make three separate illogical leaps to advance your point. This is circular scummy logic.

You've basically followed my reads all day here and then tried to take a swipe at the hand that feeds you.

And the rest of the post was equally as bad. Informing the game that it take 13 instead of 14 to lynch. Takes for the valuable input champ.

aww your evil plan falling out of place isn't it?

↑ Magister Ludi wrote:I know this is not concrete at all, but

in my experience I have found scum who are skating by are very quick to be reading and responding to the thread when they are attacked

, but not really otherwise. slysly had been pretty lethargically posting until I made an incorrect statement about him, and then was quick to come in and point out how I was wrong. I think I saw it reference once as 'scum damage control'. It doesn't create a read, but it certainly enforces it.

Where is the so called "experience"? All humans have a tendency to address when concerns about them are raised, except for politicians. You can't seriously be calling all politicians here town?

↑ Kdub wrote:
You sure caught me there. It's not like it's extremely standard for mafia to be able to communicate at the start of the day or anything like that...

If you're going to mention that BTW, what is your opinion of Sly Sly's references to scum daytalk that Ludi pointed out?

I don't like this. Feigned admission, excuses, deflect.

In love with Magna's 434

↑ Magister Ludi wrote:

magnaofIllusion wrote:So you’ve fired off a clearly incorrect attack. And one that was based completely on undermining the observer as opposed to refuting the observation. And when you realize this your response is ‘Hmmmmmm’ and then to do a sloppy ISO attack?

Yeah, I mixed up the names when I posted that. Not sure what you mean by 'undermining the observer', as technically thats what all attacks ever in a game of mafia are supposed to do. Attacks are supposed to get other players in the town to view the attacked player as scum. When I attack someone, I am attempting to undermine their town reads with everyone else and insert scum reads (or further scum reads, etc)

Your summary of why he is scum - “Lazy vote. Contenless posts, accusations of slips, nonsense, outrageous accusations. Not backing anything up.”

The bolded shows Cognitive Dissonance in spades. You just had posted a long rant about how everyone doesn’t have to share reasons when making accusations. Then you use that same behavior as a scum-tell on SlySly.

There is a clear difference it what I have said this game. Voting is more important than words, yes. But when you leave a very early vote on someone, promise content and then fail to actually deliver, all the while keeping your vote exactly where it is, I will take object. That is scummy play.

Trying to paint my two valid opinions here as in direct contradiction is a lazy and simplistic thought process.

Accusations of slips is Null. Both scum and Town do that. Town when they see what they perceive to be a slip. Scum to attack Town / bus a Partner. Trying to say otherwise is scummy.

Not at all. I rarely see town accuse other town of inside information. A larger majority, say 66% vs 33%, is scum falsely accusing town of inside information, when in fact they have the inside information. It's something I have noticed in my games playing. How is making that accusation, which I based entirely on my own experience (which is how everyone scumhunts in any way shape or form, from experience), scummy. That is to say, how is what you are accusing me of more likely to come from scum than town?

The rest of your reasons are either Null tells (Lazy votes) or subjective opinions (contentless posts, outrageous accusations).

Things aren't null because you say they are, and Everything is subjective. I'm surprised you're accusing me of this. I find things scummy, I call them out. You find things scummy, you call them out. I happen to think my post had very valid points, and I was quite happy with my isolation of slysly.

Overall a scumtastic series of posts. Magister you can go swim in the Scum pool.

So it's scumtastic because you disagree with it? I'm not sure how you came to this conjecture, and I'm not sure I like it at all, Magna. You've basically take the same thing you have accused me off (being subjective), and applied your own (subjective) tells to it, and called me scummy for it.

And here our friend Magister Ludi immediately addresses the accusation against him with a big post, up for some ol' Magna?

↑ projectmatt wrote:

↑ Stringer Bell wrote:

↑ EtherealCookie wrote:
@ Stringer Bell
You’re not off the hook. Who else do you think is suspicious? You can’t have just gotten ONE PERSON from this entire thread. Nice job hopping onto that wagon gaining steam, by the way.

Scum list:
Fourseen-it seems this wagon is slowly dying, just like all early D1 wagons. Not everyone has jumped off yet, but I just can't see this going to a lynch.

Just a wait a second here, Stringer. You don't say why Fourseen is scum, but instead you comment on "that his wagon has died down like most d1 wagons and you can't see a lynch happening". What in that makes him scum? Is it the fact that the wagon HAS died down, is it the fact that he's made bad posts? Please explain your scum read on Fourseen more in depth.

Agreed

↑ Junpei wrote:Stringer, everyone who thinks Fourseen is scum should be voting him, he can be our lynch today if people don't go "doesnt look like it's happening", advocate for it, don't let people switching around votes for pressure and what not deter you from what you want to do.

MORE FOURSEEN VOTES PLEASE!!!

Hey let's not waste more time on the lurker, we've got much bigger fishes out there. We can come back to him when he posts more content.

Magna: Could you summarize your case on Stringer? Though I'd be much more willing if we lynch Ludi today.

DP, do you have an ode for Junpei or ML?

So, yeah. I find Stringer’s response to my question rather odd. He quickly switched off his wagon and moved onto another because of pressuring for him to give some reads.
In fact, he wasn’t very convinced about his Fourseen wagon at all. It lost steam, so he hops off. There’s no actual reasoning for him being on that wagon, beyond everyone else was on it, it isn’t happening anymore, time to get off.

I think these posts were an intentional screwup to seem like a townie who hadn't read the rules. In his mind, he's probably thinking, "No scum would blatantly screw up the rules like this; they'll definitely think I'm town!" I don't like it. Also never answered the question posed by MoI about why he did this. I'd love to see what he could come up with for reasoning.

This line of reasoning just isn’t sound with me at all. Yes, I understand Furcolow was being silly, but thinking that it’s a scum type of move is sorta odd, if you ask me. I’m getting a town vibe from him, albeit slightly misguided because DGB seemed somewhat townish to me.

I've had a scum read on Fourseen since his crypto vote/unvote (ISO #2 and #4). Like I said before, that's about as blatant as it gets. A little pressure, and he backs off? That screams scum to me. I still believe he's scum, but his wagon is dying down and it seems like his lynch isn't going to happen today. Therefore, I voted a different suspect, Furcolow.
- Stringer Bell

So, yea, whoa. He’s scum, but instead of trying to pressure people into voting for him, you’re going to back out? Seems like a half-hearted bussing strategy so if he does flip scum you gain town cred.
You’re screaming scum to me more than Diddin or Fourseen at the current moment. That’s bad.

This is how you decide: does intuition tell you that scum would do this more than ideal town? If not, then it's not a scum tell. I can't comment on "flimsy votes" because the adjective 'flimsy' has no basis in my view. I don't know what post you guys are talking about, please link to posts (don't quote it... that just makes a big wall, link it using [url] tags). – Junpei

I’d have to say at least 30-40% of the players I’ve played with were not ideal town, but still town. Players have different play styles. There needs to be some sort of scum behavior rather than reliance on gut feelings. I think there’s an importance difference between scummy play and “appearing scummy.” I’ve seen a lot of town do the latter by their attitude.
Anyways, what’s your opinion on SB? You point out that he should not just jump off the wagon because people are jumping off. Is that not scummy itself?

Is jumping off the wagon because others are scummy? Oh boy, I really have no other way of explaining this other than going into some theory, so I'll make it brief:

Town rationale:
I see people are jumping off the wagon, it is losing steam, and I have another good scum read, so I will vote that to advocate for the wagon which weighs my highest probability for success with probability for scum.

Scum rationale:
I see people are jumping off this wagon, I should...

i) take the oppurtunity to get off my buddy
ii) blend in, and vote someone else

So... now we need to decide if there is i) a way to differentiate or ii) a large balance of likelihood (that is to say, the town rationale being far more likely than scum rationale in terms of practicality). Well, I think that we can't really tell if someone is just voting someone else to vote someone else or if they're really doing it to achieve the town rationale. Unless we knew that they were fake scumhunting, in which case this whole tell is worthless. I think the town rationale is very common nowadays, but the scum rationale is also very viable.

So, I conclude it is a null tell. Hopefully that will give you some insight into my thought process on tells. I don't think every tell out like this, but I have a good feel I think for what I do and do not like as far as tells generally go. I find SB scummy, but I don't have a case for you, I just have noticed many things throughout the game that have been scummy, I'm too tired to remember but yeah, he's a solid scum read.

Magna wrote:Why is Warrior scum BTW? You never mentioned or questioned him before your vote at 140 and aside from a weak mention later that he’s a good wagon I see nothing in your ISO re that scum read.

Why is NoPoint scum, other than DGB pushing on him?

Frankly, when I called warrior scummy, it was based on gut feeling about his posts that I'm sure I elaborate on, but really don't feel like elaborating on.

ML-town is because I feel like his play here resembles his play in sexy sedilla (towngame) more so than his play in PYP 5 (scumgame). This is based on gut; but there was something about his early play in PYP5 that just felt very off. His play here doesn't feel off.

Oh, and nopoint was basically just looking at the first few posts of his ISO (he only had like 3 then iirc) and thinking that they felt like they were structured oddly. I wasn't even necessarily calling him that scummy; i was saying that I'd be willing to wagon him and see where it goes.

↑ implosion wrote:Oh, and nopoint was basically just looking at the first few posts of his ISO (he only had like 3 then iirc) and thinking that they felt like they were structured oddly.

I wasn't even necessarily calling him that scummy

; i was saying that I'd

be willing to wagon him and see where it goes

.

What? Can you explain the rationale here, because wagoning a non-scum read for fun makes no sense. Hell, wagoning a non-scum read makes no sense.

nopoint wrote:He focusses more on defending Fourseen than on pushing for his reads, which I find scum-like.

Thats because If I didn't fourseen would have been lynched. That ends the day. I can hardly get who I want lynched if there is someone lynched already. Plus, I've been pretty clear about who I've suspected here, and pushed it.

Warriormode, for multiple reasons. Magna, slysly, after isolation, and yourself.

↑ Junpei wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:Oh, and nopoint was basically just looking at the first few posts of his ISO (he only had like 3 then iirc) and thinking that they felt like they were structured oddly.

I wasn't even necessarily calling him that scummy

; i was saying that I'd

be willing to wagon him and see where it goes

.

What? Can you explain the rationale here, because wagoning a non-scum read for fun makes no sense. Hell, wagoning a non-scum read makes no sense.

Why should whether or not something makes sense be relevant?

Though in seriousness: wagons are good. Just in general. They give the best kind of information by forcing scum to take stances. The Fourseen wagon feels kind of stagnate-y atm.

nopoint, what part of bunny's post do you agree with?

You know what,
UNVOTE:
VOTE: diddin

Inconsistent opinion on crypto/FC behavior, failure to provide relevant meta to justify not suspecting FC, blatantly sheeping other people's reasoning on the Junpei wagon and accusing him of not scumhunting when diddin himself has done basically nothing all game.

↑ Junpei wrote:Kdub; lets say that Furclow is i) prone to make that mistake as town ii) not likely to come up with that plan as scum. Isn't it still very realistic to think that maybe another one of the scum members told Furclow to at some point do that? I hadn't thought of that at first, but if they know his meta, they could suggest it.

It's always a possibility, but I don't see it as a particularly likely one. Again, knowing what I do about the type of player Furc is, I think it's much more likely that he simply misunderstood the mechanic.

↑ Bunnylover wrote:@Kdub:
1) I think ML is over defending FourSeen. Its not what Fourseen has done that changed my read on him, it what other people have done.
2) Scum defending scum. Ok. How does this change my vote on ML? I am still voting scum right? Also scum defending scum wouldn't be for townie credit. I would be leaning on Fourseen been more town then my previous read, but that doesn't mean everyone else read will change.
3) I can do a lot more then I've shown. The problem is, that I am not an outspoken person. So I could have recognize the situation before in a previous game, but not spoke about it because I thought it was stupid. I'm trying to change that about my play, and be more outspoken. But I understand why you think that.
Question though: Do you agree or disagree on the scenario that I posted. That last statement (Number 3), makes me believe you see/agree with the scenario, but I don't want to put words in your mouth.

Wait, now your stance is even more confusing. I had thought you had changed your read and now think Fourseen is town because Ludi was defending him. But if you think Ludi is scum, then he has very different motivations for defending Fourseen depending on whether Fourseen is his buddy or not. In that case, saying "I'm still voting scum, right?" is a non-answer because your Ludi vote doesn't have anything to do with why you changed your opinion of FC. You think Ludi is scum, but you haven't explained why that implies FC is town. Furthermore, your reasoning (as far as I can see) for Ludi being scum is that he has been defending FC too much. Again, there is the same problem. You are setting up a situation where you have a scum read on Ludi no matter what. If FC is town, Ludi is scum for trying to get town credit by defending him (you've straight up said this). If FC is scum, then Ludi is protecting his buddy (strongly implied by your non-answer to #2). You can't have it both ways.

I actually find bunnylover's ultra simplistic and circular reasoning town. And it shows an attempt at independent thought. (Re: leaving the forseen wagon, and looking for a better target) It looks town.

nopoint, on the other hand, basically says "yup, these terrible reasonings are a good case, let me agree and sheep"

nopoint wrote:OK. What I'm saying is that ML: fast wagonning = 0% scum has no basis. I find it likely for scum to grasp onto reasoning like this to defend someone, whether town or their scumbuddy. Maybe slysly didn't have much content but look at the way ML is playing. He votes people, but never follows up. He focusses more on defending Fourseen than on pushing for his reads, which I find scum-like. I would be happy to vote ML if there's a wagon on him.

basically a regurgitation of bunnylovers points. (not that they were valid to begin with). He also never expands on why it is likely for scum to grasp onto "the reasoning" he says is scummy, or why in fact that is more likely to come from scum than town. Plus the rest of his post are just lies.

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

Spring wrote:All arguments I have seen on Fourseen is low zone scumhunting, the guy is derp at best. I can't fathom how people can form read on him, except to bet on an easy lynch.
The whole back and forth between stringer and MoI is bad, with similar bad reasonings.

IIoA right here Spring. You make dismissive comments yet don’t take a stance that says anyone you are deriding is scummy. Who is scum in the ‘low zone’ scumhunters ( besides Junpei)? Are either Stringer or I scum?

IIoA? What is IIoA in what I have said?
1. You are obviously wrong in saying that 'i'm not taking a stance' because I'm currently voting Junpei who is on the fourseen wagon which I think is the scummiest wagon.
2. I don't think either you or stringer is scum atm. What is this 1v1 mentality crap? Your argument about Stringer was townish when it was made but it has been overstated for very many pages now. I'm not buying it. I think stringer's defence is ok and don't think that his unvote warrior stuff is as scummy as you make it out to be.

Everybody on the fourseen wagon is using crappy arguments. Junpei is the scummiest because he tried to pass his call policy lynch for something more than what it was and trying to actively defend that stance when called on it. The only thing that is townish about him is activity, but when you plough through it, it's just noise with everyone whom he seems to be suspicious of being what I identify as weaker players. Read back his replies to me, I don't like how he handled it. I'll venture to say now that the diddin vote looks like a bussing vote.

– You seem to have missed the question that Slysly put to you at 466. Or specifically didn’t answer it. I’ve quoted it here for ease of response. If you don’t respond I’ll just assume you want to continue dodging.

This is twice now that you have attacked me with a blatant lie. Please quote what I said that you interpreted as me saying Magna is scum and is your
scumbuddy.

--

NoPoint wrote:OK. What I'm saying is that ML: fast wagonning = 0% scum has no basis.

This I agree with 100%.

Also … I think you butchered the quote pyramid regarding wazzatron’s ‘defending’ you. I never said ‘I don’t like this defens of nopoint out of the blue”.

NoPoint wrote:And here our friend Magister Ludi immediately addresses the accusation against him with a big post, up for some Cognitive Dissonance ol' Magna?

Can you elaborate on exactly what you are saying here? I’m not sure I get where you are going.

If you are saying that Magister has a case of CG for having attacked someone for responding immediately to a case and then doing it himself I don’t think that holds up. Magister is calling out lurkers / low performers who do that. Active players responding quickly to a case is a much different scenario. I don’t see any world where you can call ML a lurker.

NoPoint wrote:Magna: Could you summarize your case on Stringer? Though I'd be much more willing if we lynch Ludi today.

Quick bullet point summary of Stringer –

1. Fourseen RVS unvote with no revote – suspicion from multiple players – immediate jump back onto Fourseen when he posts ‘bad posts’.
2. Cognitive dissonance regarding speed of Warrior wagon compared to speed of Fourseen wagon.
3. Response to pressure – lowers activity when pressure slowly builds, avoiding commentary other than vague defense of his position. When I call him out for such his activity immediately spikes (this is a new element … but go look at the post where I call his lurking out possible pressue and then look at his sudden activity).
4. Possible role-fishing of Toogeloo early (not strong alone, but given what else I am seeing it is additive to the case).

I'm also waiting patiently for his response to my latest batch of questions.

--

Spring wrote:IIoA? What is IIoA in what I have said?
1. You are obviously wrong in saying that 'i'm not taking a stance' because I'm currently voting Junpei who is on the fourseen wagon which I think is the scummiest wagon.
2. I don't think either you or stringer is scum atm. What is this 1v1 mentality crap? Your argument about Stringer was townish when it was made but it has been overstated for very many pages now. I'm not buying it. I think stringer's defence is ok and don't think that his unvote warrior stuff is as scummy as you make it out to be.

It’s IIoA for precisely this reason – That post had lots of information but added exactly zero to scum-hunting. You just said you were already voting Junpei and that post doesn’t expand on that ‘case’ any. You don’t call anyone else scum in the post. It’s a large post that looks very much like active lurking fodder.

Who said anything about 1 v 1? No-one’s called for that or couched anything in the game as such. I specifically asked you for reads on both Stringer and I given you commented on how you didn’t like out back and forth and that is was bad on both sides. Bad indicates the possibility of scumminess in the vacuum of actual commitment to a position.

I just glanced through your ISO. The only solid suspicion I see is Junpei. You had early votes for Magister and Warrior but I don’t see any strong indication you think they are scummy. Who at this stage are your scum reads beyond Junpei?

--

implosion wrote:Frankly, when I called warrior scummy, it was based on gut feeling about his posts that I'm sure I could elaborate on, but really don't feel like elaborating on.

Ok, so you really can’t other than gut. Fair enough.

implosion wrote:ML-town is because I feel like his play here resembles his play in sexy sedilla (towngame) more so than his play in PYP 5 (scumgame). This is entirely based on gut; but there was something about his early play in PYP5 that just felt very off. His play here doesn't feel off.

So it is gut combined with a very limited meta read. Please go look briefly at his play in Blackest Night Mafia and Cthulufish Mafia and tell me how those games affect your meta-read.

--

– Ok, let’s go down the list of reads you provide –

...DGB. Check.

Agreed. Saying you are going to enjoy pushing for the lynch of a player Day 2 rises to the level of of a scum-read.

We're at six. Already.

Agreed. Clear list of Toog, Stringer, ML and diddin and the obvious suspicion on Fourseen.

Seven. Although I'd almost say seven and half here with the mention of Toog, but that's not what you're asking for.

Agreed on Sinestro. That’s seven. You can’t count Toog as a half since he’s already on the list.

This is pretty close to half a suspicion right here--he couches it in 'too soon to tell', but I'd hope this wasn't the only thing he had on Red. Surely?

Disagree with this. That doesn’t read as active suspicion to me. Junpei clearly states he doesn’t like Red’s posting but it is playstyle driven. The ‘too soon’ actually makes my read stronger – that’s saying he will be judged by voting and other factors. That's exactly what Town should do when faced with a playstyle they find inherently scummy - look at voting patterns, relational tells, and look back for motivations as flips occur.

I'd count this at eight, but even if you discard the rest of the 'questionable' ones, he's suspected (FoS or direct vote) seven people, and infered at least two others are scummy (Red Coyote's catching up, Kdub's "scum slip".)

These are all from his ISO. I didn't fabricate them.

I’m not giving credit for that on kdub. There’s a difference between having an actual scum read and commenting on a post that seems scummy. I’ve commented on posts by Slysly, kdub and others that I find possibly suspect or scummy. Doesn’t mean I have a scum read.

So Junpei’s seven scum reads you found are – DGB, Toog, Stringer, ML, diddin, Fourseen, Sinestro.

Do you think having seven scum reads well into Day 1 in a Large Theme game with 25 initial players is unreasonable? General rules of thumb puts total scum (all kinds) at 6 to 8 depending on the setup.

Do you think any of the reads are unreasonable or unsupported?

Now that we’ve got this out there I can see the core of your reasoning.

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

Spring wrote:IIoA? What is IIoA in what I have said?
1. You are obviously wrong in saying that 'i'm not taking a stance' because I'm currently voting Junpei who is on the fourseen wagon which I think is the scummiest wagon.
2. I don't think either you or stringer is scum atm. What is this 1v1 mentality crap? Your argument about Stringer was townish when it was made but it has been overstated for very many pages now. I'm not buying it. I think stringer's defence is ok and don't think that his unvote warrior stuff is as scummy as you make it out to be.

It’s IIoA for precisely this reason – That post had lots of information but added exactly zero to scum-hunting. You just said you were already voting Junpei and that post doesn’t expand on that ‘case’ any. You don’t call anyone else scum in the post. It’s a large post that looks very much like active lurking fodder.

Who said anything about 1 v 1? No-one’s called for that or couched anything in the game as such. I specifically asked you for reads on both Stringer and I given you commented on how you didn’t like out back and forth and that is was bad on both sides. Bad indicates the possibility of scumminess in the vacuum of actual commitment to a position.

I just glanced through your ISO. The only solid suspicion I see is Junpei. You had early votes for Magister and Warrior but I don’t see any strong indication you think they are scummy. Who at this stage are your scum reads beyond Junpei?

You are selective quoting me in that post.
Once you have acknowledge it, how much of what you have said above can be conceived as a relevant and weighted argument?
You post a lot, and your cases are getting progressively more over the top. I don't remember you being that much fuzzy and all over the place from that future/past game.
Right now I think Junpei and diddin are scum, and probably together. The rest is yet unwashed. Not disclosing town reads.
Btw I'm kinda thinking that disclosing town read may be more hurtful than in normal games since it helps scum guess cycling choice.

@Kdub:
If Fourseen is scum, then I wouldn't be too sure what to think of ML. I don't think ML as scum would defend his scum buddy so hard. So at best, I would say they are at least not on the same scum team (assuming 2 scum team in this situation). Not sure why I didn't just answer it like that.

Spring wrote:You are selective quoting me in that post.

Once you have acknowledge it, how much of what you have said above can be conceived as a relevant and weighted argument?

Your point? I eliminated the second paragraph of 489 because it wasn’t germaine to my original point. That paragraph, for the record was –

Everybody on the fourseen wagon is using crappy arguments. Junpei is the scummiest because he tried to pass his call policy lynch for something more than what it was and trying to actively defend that stance when called on it. The only thing that is townish about him is activity, but when you plough through it, it's just noise with everyone whom he seems to be suspicious of being what I identify as weaker players. Read back his replies to me, I don't like how he handled it. I'll venture to say now that the diddin vote looks like a bussing vote.

None of that has anything to do with the IIoA nature of the post I questioned you on. That’s further elaboration on your Junpei read. It is good that you elaborate but doesn't impact my questioning on the first post in the least. I don't quote pyramid just for the sake of it. Despite what people may believe I specifically try to save as much space in my quoting without changing context.

Spring wrote:You post a lot, and

your cases are getting progressively more over the top.

I don't remember you being that much fuzzy and all over the place from that future/past game.

The bolded is generic. Please specifically show what cases you are referring to that are ‘progressively more over the top’.

Spring wrote:Right now I think Junpei and diddin are scum, and probably together. The rest is yet unwashed. Not disclosing town reads.
Btw I'm kinda thinking that disclosing town read may be more hurtful than in normal games since it helps scum guess cycling choice.

So your only other scum read this far into Day 1 is diddin.

When did I ask you to disclose Town reads?

MoI, who are you trying to convince, and of what?

↑ DrippingGoofball wrote:MoI, who are you trying to convince, and of what?

My main goal is to convince people to vote Stringer at this juncture. I'm also doing some scum-hunting on the side trying to get reads on slots.

Isn't that what Mafia is about? Should I include more non-sequiters about pasta salad or something?

Well I don't like to feel like I'm listening in on private conversations...

I'm not really seeing Stringer as particularly scummy.

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

Stringer wrote:How does anyone look at this and not think that FC is scum?

Because despite how obviously derp it was I can’t see any viable scum motivation for it. What does he gain by attacking one of the most active and non-Newb players who had pretty much dormant wagon as opposed to hopping on Warrior or picking someone with almost no votes but lurking (take your pick, plenty out there) and call them scummy for lurking?

I disagree. I think that FC, in trying to look town, tried to pick a fight with one of the most active players. Because crypto posted so much, I think that FC thought he could find something in all his posts that made crypto look scummy. Hopping on a bandwagon after being largely inactive would have just gotten him a lot of suspicion, so I think he decided to go for crypto in lieu of jumping on a bandwagon.

Stringer wrote:This is where you have questions. You think that I succumbed to the pressure of Junpei needing a vote from me, and hence voted FC. You think that this is similar to how FC voted crypto and succumbed to the pressure of Junpei, crypto, and projectmatt and unvoted. Here is the difference:

I did not take a crap case and vote FC just because Junpei asked me about why I didn't vote somebody after unvoting.

It wasn’t just Junpei that suggested you were scummy for unvoting with no vote – RedCoyote also did and it dinged my scumdar when I read it.

Actually – I think you did just what the bolded says. You saw a derp posting series and pounced with a vague ‘as bad as it gets’ statement attached.

You see a derp posting series, I see scum backpedalling off their poorly placed vote.

Stringer wrote: 153-I look at the vote count and see that I still have my vote on FC. At this point, FC still hasn't done much of anything, so I take it off. I don't supply any other reads or another place for my vote.
159-In answer to Junpei's question, I did not, at that time, have a place to put my vote. I wasn't sure of the warriormode wagon, I didn't want to quicklynch him.
186-FC comes in with his terribad reasoning and votes crypto
196-FC unvotes, with the reasoning that crypto is an active player. My view of this is stated earlier in this post.
204-I vote FC, with the reasoning of "that's about as blatant as it gets."

1. Why did you bother to unvote FC in the first place then? In the time you posted 153 he had a whopping two votes. No danger of a ‘quicklynch’.
2. Why didn’t you supply other reads or place the vote then? Is it your contention that nothing scummy had gone on?

1. I unvoted FC because there was no reason to have my vote on him. We were past RVS, I saw where my vote was, and I unvoted.
2. I saw the votecount and just unvoted. I didn't have the time to sit down and look for scum, I just checked the thread and unvoted when I saw that my RVS vote was still on FC. When I sat back down to look for scum, it was right there in front of me.

Stringer wrote: Not at the moment, I'm not sure of the warriormode wagon and don't want it to get out of hand this early in the day.

Nothing worse than quicklynching day 1.

This is your quote from 159.

Warrior got his first vote at post 40. He topped out the speed portion of his wagon at 6 votes by 147. So he gathered 6 votes in 108 posts (18 posts per vote gathered)

Fourseen, with no votes, makes the first of his bad posts at 186. He’s gathered 8 by post 213 from wazzatron. That’s 8 votes in 28 posts.(3.5 posts per vote gathered).

Is your stance that Fourseen’s wagon, which exploded at a rate approximately 5 times the pace of warrior’s wagon, isn’t a quicklynch?

Does your Day 1 quicklynching stance from 159 only apply to players you don’t think are scum?

I did not want to quicklynch warrior, I didn't really see the case on him, and quicklynching a bad case D1 didn't seem like the right play to me. I agree with you, Fourseen would have been a quicklynch if he had gotten the necessary votes, but I think that this is a good case, which is the difference between him and warriormode. You obviously disagree, as do a majority of players in the game, since Fourseen didn't get lynched, but I believe that what we've seen from Fourseen is enough to warrant a vote and a lynch. But if enough people don't see that Fourseen is scum by now, then (unless he shows up and starts being scummy again) there is no reason to keep my vote on him, so I moved it to another player who I thought was also scummy. We still haven't heard from Furcolow, so I'm still waiting on either a defense from him or some scumhunting.

↑ Junpei wrote:.....

What should town Fourseen have said? 186 shouldn't have even came about, as it is a pretty poor post in itself.

188 shouldn't have happened, it is basically "im sheeping MoI".

196 also shouldn't have happened, if he was town he'd have a good reason for his crypto vote that isn't the reason for his unvoting.

What town Fourseen should have posted cannot be found in those posts, they are:

real reads
real analysis

instead we got backtracking through a contradiction when pressured, and... that's it.

Poor vote early game on an annoying player? What town player would ever do that?

Sheeping town MoI is perfectly acceptable if you believe him to be right. Sheeping scum MoI is bad. The key is to figure which one he is.

But since he did vote for crappy reasons in 186, if he realized he was wrong or changed his mind, if he is town, what should he have done?

You are basically saying he is scum for doing X. So I'm asking you if not X, then what?

tl;dr- Fourseen debacle is null, as town would take the same action.

↑ wazzatron wrote:easy post 186 would have consisted of

vote diddin
FOS crypto

there is no reason in the first place he should have voted crypto with his post.

Why would he vote diddin?
You were voting Crypto, why is his vote bad?

↑ wazzatron wrote:
next town foreseen would have gone

blablabla heres actual reasoning that isn't sheeping

Answered this in post to Junpei.

↑ wazzatron wrote:then finally he would have went

oh shit some pressure (i'm not gonna back pedal like a retard)
projectmatt lynched information = blablabla
i have a town read on MoI therefore his scum read on crypto is relevant
junpei you need actual reasoning (this was before back pedaling hard)

theres a bunch of townie answers that could be put in
first instead of being moronic don't do it or at least have your own case.

Probably true. My point is that in this game it's hard to come out and say "I was wrong" without looking scummy. Yet never admitting you were wrong seriously hampers effective scumhunting.