Mafiascum.net

In post 846, Titus wrote:@Mafioso, if you were so concerned, why not vote BTD? You hard townreading him?

Titus is not scum.

I will defend this til the end of time.

Basically a derp clear? Or more than that?

The Internet wasn't quite working properly. Anyway, now it is fixed so I can start explaining.

First, my point about Mhsmith and Ranger likely being Town vs. scum.

In post 463, mhsmith0 wrote:

In post 217, Ranger wrote:But, I have to be completely honest here.

I lied.

I wasn't 100% sure you were scum at all.

I was actually less sure about you than I was on Music and Mail! Especially with your later posting.

I was kinda afraid I'd be getting lynched tomorrow, and then we'd be in D3 with no assured scum leads, my credibility shot, and nothing to go on.

Interesting how this comes from someone WHO WAS VOTING IV ON DAY ONE. Literally she was voting IV based on explicitly falsely stated reasons (the "100% sure" bit). So basically, rather than make any true effort to lynch her "greater" read (M&M) on day one, or try and force a "lynch that slot or lynch me" debate, she "settled" for IV, while explicitly maintaining at the time that IV was the greater read. It's the epitome of trying to line up lynches, and it's almost impossible to see this coming from an actual town perspective.

Also, note that last bit. Ranger was afraid of getting lynched D2, and yet she's currently voting herself. Why is that? Town is interested in finding the mafia; why in that context even CARE about whether you get to "survive" as a stump? Essentially, town has three mislynches before they lose the game (MAYBE four if we lynch "doused" trees or get lucky with firefighter actions). The value in finding actual mafia on day two DWARFS the value of getting to hang around post lynch. So why does town!Ranger go down this route? I really struggle to see it. Wolf!Ranger, on the other hand, can use the self-vote as a ruse to WIFOM and confuse the town while looking like she's acting from a pro-town mindset.

I'll let Ranger speak to her actions, and I don't want to give anyone the chance to lolhammer... but I feel like she's where my vote belongs today. Alpaca is also in my lynch range right now, and I'm willing to talk about Touka.

This initially got me thinking about scum Mhsmith and Town Ranger. It is possible for a scum Mhsmith to use Ranger's self-vote as an easy wagon to jump on. While I was also on this wagon (and did scumread Ranger) this is Mhsmith saying that Ranger is scum BECAUSE of the self-vote, for not voting someone actually likely to be scum. My scumread was mainly based on trying to force a lynch on IV with 100% certainty. I'm not saying Mhsmith is obvscum because of this (it's actually rather weak) but it was my first clue that there is a possible Town vs. scum situation. For the Towncred or WIFOM argument to even work one must first consider that it is possible that this could come from a Town perspective. Otherwise, if something was only ever worth doing by scum, a scum would never do it as it would expose them. Of course, this is if they do not want to be lynched. Anyway, for the WIFOM argument to work either a scum Ranger should be willing to be exposed as scum or that this can be Town.

This is just a possibility. It is rather weak but it exists, and is part of my reasoning.

In post 466, mhsmith0 wrote:

In post 92, Ranger wrote:If for some ungodly reason I read them wrong and they're town, then they can still scumhunt as invincible town who cannot be nightkilled and therefore cannot be silenced.

Win-win as far as I can tell.
Ergo, we're lynching Music and Mail no matter what.

Yep, here's the first "breeding apathy towards the consequences of mislynching" post that I found. SHOCKING that it came from Ranger

Of course, people often suggested that I was the one "breeding apathy towards consequences of mislynching" later on. However, Ranger's post seems different here to my hammer. Ranger is saying that M&M is the best lynch no matter what, in a manner suggesting that M&M is guaranteed scum. 95% is not that far off 100% and I wouldn't be surprised if that read was also fake. Ranger suggests that everyone should rush to hammer. Despite my vote actually lynching, this seems like a much more forceful attempt to lynch M&M. When I voted IV, four people were already on the wagon and willing to lynch. When Ranger did this, she was the only one on the wagon and attempted to push it to a lynch from the beginning, early-game with not much information to go on. I have to say it worked well (I sheeped because Ranger was uncannily accurate in Open 638) but not enough for a lynch.

Your comment on it though again seems a little like you know Ranger is Town and are looking for a lynch on her. I see two likely possibilities: Either Ranger is scum (which makes you Town excluding a theatre. I will get on to theatres in another post) or you are scum and Ranger is Town (again excluding theatre).

Again, it is weak and speculative, but it is something, and these add up to a noticeable link.

In post 473, mhsmith0 wrote:

In post 471, Ranger wrote:

shotty wrote:yay everyone self vote for /in-stant town cred

I already explained my reasons.
One, almost everyone is suspicious of me.
Two, I can continue to talk after I'm lynched.
Three, I'm having difficulty getting good reads this game.
Four, I promised I would to innocentvillager yesterday.

So I'll move my vote if I can actually get something productive done. Strong feelings, rather than weak or paranoid ones.

Yeah I don't buy this as a real town process, especially given the doubling down. No townie WANTS to get lynched. This seems WAY likelier to be a fake town process designed to create confusion and "Ranger wouldn't do this if she was mafia" artificial town reads.
VOTE: Ranger

L-1

Again, "Ranger wouldn't do this if she was mafia" doesn't work. Town generally avoids doing thigs that are pro-Mafia but Mafia can do practically anything. A scum can easily get other scum lynched or even get themselves lynched if it benefits their team or makes Townies look bad. It's again likely that one os scum and one is Town.


This is a sample of the Mhsmith-Ranger interactions. Listing everything would be a huge wall and would take far too long to analyse fully. I will, however, try to show this again from Ranger's ISO. After that, here is a list of topics I have to cover:

Mhsmith as scum (individually)
Mhsmith-Ranger theatre
Kappy
Shotty
Titus
Town Mafioso
Alpaca

I will cover these, ideally toDay.

I'll look through Btd's stuff more later but for now...

Your comment on it though again seems a little like you know Ranger is Town and are looking for a lynch on her.

Explain how you arrive at this conclusion instead of the more obvious "I think ranger is mafia and am looking for a lynch on her". If there is something specific that suggests I KNOW that ranger is town, you should be able to zero in on what that is and why it suggests that. Otherwise it looks like speculation at best and a made up conclusion/accusation more likely.

Ps as far s the "ranger couldn't have done this as Mafia" attitude I was talking about, see iv's http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 5#p7978305
For an example of this. If this was a process designed to WIFOM and confuse townies in order to deflect responsibility from a BADLY oversold lynch case, then it seems to have worked on IV.

In post 853, mhsmith0 wrote:I'll look through Btd's stuff more later but for now...

Your comment on it though again seems a little like you know Ranger is Town and are looking for a lynch on her.

Explain how you arrive at this conclusion instead of the more obvious "I think ranger is mafia and am looking for a lynch on her". If there is something specific that suggests I KNOW that ranger is town, you should be able to zero in on what that is and why it suggests that. Otherwise it looks like speculation at best and a made up conclusion/accusation more likely.

Of course, if you are Town then of course you are scumreading her and not looking for a mislynch. I was scumreading you both so I thought that at least one was likely scum, so if you were Town I would be more likely to believe you. However, if you are scum then (excluding theatre, which is a special case) I find this to be the most reasonable explanation. This only applies if you are scum, since Town you is almost certainly not trying to line up mislynches. Anyway, I hope this clears things up a bit.

Doesn't clear it up at all. You said that my comment suggested specifically that I KNEW she was town. Not that I looked scummy or whatever, but that I had specific knowledge as to her alignment, and that my comment in particular implied this. You seem to be back tracking now from your original assertion. Why is this?

In post 856, mhsmith0 wrote:Doesn't clear it up at all. You said that my comment suggested specifically that I KNEW she was town. Not that I looked scummy or whatever, but that I had specific knowledge as to her alignment, and that my comment in particular implied this. You seem to be back tracking now from your original assertion. Why is this?

"Seems a little like". I never said you certainly knew (and were therefore scum). I said that knowing her to be Town seems more probable.

You said that the specific comment suggested this to be the case. Again, how did it suggest this?

Here's an example of the logical flow I'm looking for, applied to this situation.

Your continued unwillingness to clarify what in my comment "seems a little like

Prod dodge not feeling well. Across all games.

I don't particularly like the fact that smith has continually been telling BTD to get better and post more reasoning if he's town, it almost looks like coaching or smith trying to get towncred for BTD's almost inevitable mis/lynch.

Instead of goading him to "stop being scummy and be more genuine", just tell everyone why he's scum. I don't see how this is a town mindset. If smith is town and BTD was really scum, all BTD needs to do is follow smith's coaching suggestions to be appear townie again.

@IV: that only applies if BTD's reads are genuine and founded on actual reasons. If BTD's reads are bullshit, and are founded on nothing, then explaining them in more detail will probably just result in further screwups. My concern is that BTD may simply be mislynch bait, and I'm trying to get better info to figure out whether I'm looking at mislynch bait or actual mafia. I admit I'm not all that good at telling the difference.

^edit: "that" referring to "all BTD needs to do is follow smith's coaching suggestions to be appear townie again."

In post 862, innocentvillager wrote:I don't particularly like the fact that smith has continually been telling BTD to get better and post more reasoning if he's town, it almost looks like coaching or smith trying to get towncred for BTD's almost inevitable mis/lynch.

How would he get towncred if it was a mislynch?

By looking like "the reasonable one" or the like, presumably.

My response would be that I'm actively trying to determine Btd's alignment, and if "coaching" is what it takes to get the info I need then so be it.

Ps alpaca, where's your head space at lately? Both wrt btd and everyone else?

In post 862, innocentvillager wrote:I don't particularly like the fact that smith has continually been telling BTD to get better and post more reasoning if he's town, it almost looks like coaching or smith trying to get towncred for BTD's almost inevitable mis/lynch.

But wouldn't being the guy who pushed a mislynch be bad? Even if it were for good reasons I don't see it as making you more towny

Well I guess that BTD explained things but because of the massive amount of time it took him to finally post it I see it as more of he needed the time to come up with plausible reasoning and that was the best he could do and so I will keep watching him. But I would think this no mater what reasoning he posted. Titus just had a lot of info but I wasn't feeling much of anything else coming from him. Mafioso seems to be town reading titus for not paying attention which seems weird to me. I haven't been thinking about Ranger recently. I am leaning town on IV after his recent posts. I am kind of not liking Kappy looking at some of his posts since most don't seem to be on trivial details, jokes or fluff

Where was this Alpaca earlier?

I dunno but alpaca is leaning town on IV

Normally I'd talk about possible derp clearing but this specific one could just be a sign of made up reads.

Ps @alpaca: leading a ml for good reasons >>> leading one for bad raesons. The idea is to figure out if it was just a screwup, or if it was active wolfing.

I do indeed want an environment where everyone is responsible for their posts. However, I do not want an environment where it is OK to quote-mine and misrepresent people. That is what you are doing.

It looks more suspicious than you regularly scumreading her as your tone suggests several things:

First, your tone seems sarcastic, suggesting that you are implying that Ranger regularly breeds apathy towards mislynching. I personally deny this but perhaps you could have a different meta experience. However, it also suggests that you are scumreading Ranger for this, and simply accusing her of something that can be shown to not be scummy, while also being part of Ranger's meta. As such, you seemed to be scumreading in a way suggesting that you are scum and are looking for reasons to scumread a known Townie, when you can't find genuinely scummy reasons.

Of course, like every individual point of mine, it's rather weak. When everything is taken together, though, my reads become stronger.

@btd...
1) sarcasm isn't wolfy

2) I was suggesting ranger was taking advantage of this setup to breed apathy. I don't think there was any meta component to that point; what posts suggested there was?

3) quote mining (if you mean citing quotes for evidence) is normal. Misrepping is not. Where and how did I misrep? Or are you seriously suggesting that my SARCASM itself implies a meta read if her? How would that even work?

4) breeding apathy towards mislynches is flagrantly anti town, and is wolfy other than by village idiots. Ranger is not a VI. I also highly doubt this is part of her normal meta, especially her town meta (i haven't researched it, I simply think it'd be dumb).

In post 872, mhsmith0 wrote:@btd...
1) sarcasm isn't wolfy

2) I was suggesting ranger was taking advantage of this setup to breed apathy. I don't think there was any meta component to that point; what posts suggested there was?

3) quote mining (if you mean citing quotes for evidence) is normal. Misrepping is not. Where and how did I misrep? Or are you seriously suggesting that my SARCASM itself implies a meta read if her? How would that even work?

4) breeding apathy towards mislynches is flagrantly anti town, and is wolfy other than by village idiots. Ranger is not a VI. I also highly doubt this is part of her normal meta, especially her town meta (i haven't researched it, I simply think it'd be dumb).

1. True, but it can imply things. Taken together with everything else, I read it as scummy. Of course, the sarcasm by itself is NAI but with everything else you implied it made other things seem scummier to me then.

2. "SHOCKING that it came from Ranger" suggests that you were not at all surprised to see Ranger being the first to breed apathy, thus suggesting that you know Ranger has a history of this. I'm not saying that I now still think you do, but I am saying that that is the impression I got from your post.

3. Quote mining is selecting very specific quotes while ignoring the context, thus ignoring everything else that doesn't support your point. From your post I got the impression that you ignored everything else in my point.

4. Suggesting what happens even if there is a mislynch is not in itself scummy. Here a mislynch does indeed carry less cost than in other games, as in other games there is the additional cost of losing a contributing player. There has to be a probability of a scumread at which the benefits of lynching correctly outweigh the cost of mislynching. This should not be 100%, which forces Town to No Lynch without Cop claims, for example. I see nothing scummy in pointing out that this probability is reduced for this game. For example, 70% for me would probably not have been enough for me to hammer in a Normal game, but in this game it was, as the required probability was reduced.

1 I think you need to be careful about how you read into things if this is actually your honest process.

2 I had an existing wolf read on ranger, saw a specific behavior as wolfy, and my comment connected the two after seeing ranger was guilty of it. Thinking that's a meta read is super weird; I feel like what I meant was obvious.

3) I'll go back and look.

4) THE POINT is that breeding apathy is anti town, and as soon as crap like "well u can still scum hunt" becomes acceptable voting rationalization, then scum hunting is near impossible, because it's easy for wolves to hide their insincerity. Votes should always have reasons, those reasons should be aligned towards finding wolves, and through that process, sincere townies and insincere wolves can be found. Mafia 101.