Gay Mafia II: RIDE THE LIGHTNING (Game Over)

[vollkan]

DGB attacked Gammagooey.

Gammagooey activates his trap card.

DGB's move is next.

This battle is intense.

this post hnnnggggggg

VOTE: Om

Where in the rules does it specify I have to have good humour?

Here:

remember, it's a game - keep it classy

====
I've read through the entire Trollie v Bois exchange. Apart from making me want aspirin, it's really pointless.
====
@zoidberg:

Why? Don't be dumb.

I've already outlined it. Don't be dumb.

Contrary to Om I think there's exactly one scum between Trollie and Bois. As I outlined before, to me it reads like Bois was pushing for a quick hammer using faulty meta. Especially in light of the way he STFU real quick once Trollie claimed. I notice with great intereste that you skimmed right over that part in your attempt to paint me as scum.

Sorry if I'm missing something, but the "faulty meta" was just Bois's stupid "I ALWAYS KNOW WHEN HE IS SCUM" crap, wasn't it? If so, I don't think you can fairly make out that he was really pushing a lynch. Trollie's reaction was oh-so-stupid, butt I really don't think that it could have been anticipated. And how is Bois' reaction scummy? Pointing out how dumb Trollie was is reasonable (other people had already referred to the claim).

Zoidberg+3

Vote: Zoidberg

[vollkan]

ok yeah that iso is pretty bad and I'm sure Kise won't mind.

UNVOTE, VOTE: ZOIDBERG

Why, specifically?

[vollkan]

no, what's terrible is you unvoting without placing a vote


are you that worried for pretentioushydra?

i don't even know what that means

i was in the process of typing out a reads list when i noticed there was a sudden outbreak of wrongness that could, if left untreated, have lead us to a town mislynch. once i have finished my reads list i will place a vote

don't play dumb with me, Quil, we both know you're not dumb.

you unvoted pretentious while they were in no immediate danger, which would have been fine if it weren't for the fact that it's not like you placed your vote somewhere else

i'm asking you if you voted pretentious just to be seen on the wagon, and then unvoted not because you wanted to place a vote elsewhere but because you no longer wanted to be on the wagon?

does anyone do that as scum anyway? i think not.

i've already answered that question. i unvoted because i did want to place a vote elsewhere, but was not sure yet where to put my vote. if anything, i unvoted without a revote just to show that i no longer supported the wagon.

in any case suggesting that i voted pretentious 'just to be seen on the wagon' is invalid, because i was the first vote on pretentious

So, what was your reason for "supporting" the wagon to begin with, and why did that change?

[vollkan]

no, what's terrible is you unvoting without placing a vote


are you that worried for pretentioushydra?

i don't even know what that means

i was in the process of typing out a reads list when i noticed there was a sudden outbreak of wrongness that could, if left untreated, have lead us to a town mislynch. once i have finished my reads list i will place a vote

don't play dumb with me, Quil, we both know you're not dumb.

you unvoted pretentious while they were in no immediate danger, which would have been fine if it weren't for the fact that it's not like you placed your vote somewhere else

*tumbleweed*
i'm asking you if you voted pretentious just to be seen on the wagon, and then unvoted not because you wanted to place a vote elsewhere but because you no longer wanted to be on the wagon?

does anyone do that as scum anyway? i think not.

i've already answered that question. i unvoted because i did want to place a vote elsewhere, but was not sure yet where to put my vote. if anything, i unvoted without a revote just to show that i no longer supported the wagon.

in any case suggesting that i voted pretentious 'just to be seen on the wagon' is invalid, because i was the first vote on pretentious

So, what was your reason for "supporting" the wagon to begin with, and why did that change?

[vollkan]

ok yeah that iso is pretty bad and I'm sure Kise won't mind.

UNVOTE, VOTE: ZOIDBERG

Why, specifically?

Certain posts set off gut scumdar (and a few personal scumtells).

Don't you miss playing with me, you moldy Vollkan?

Gut AND personal scumtells. Well, I'm convinced.

[vollkan]

vollkan: i didn't want a three player hydra in the game. that changed because they started being town and i had to consider whether i wanted no three player hydra more than i wanted to not lynch town

and wanting to not lynch town won

Quilford+3

The wagon was early game fluff/content-generating-RVS and in no way likely to lead to a lynch. So, you didn't need to balance those factors at all - the risk of lynching town simply didn't arise.

hey vollkan, why did you choose to respond to what you chose to respond to in your first post this game?

I responded to those posts that I thought actually had game relevance.

[vollkan]

you didn't do that--- you didn't unvote to free up your vote to place elsewhere. you just unvoted to get off the wagon.

you say you are just 'interpreting my actions'. but you are interpreting them wrongly, and i have already told you you are interpreting them wrongly.

i did not just 'unvote to get off the wagon'. i unvoted so that i could free my vote to place it somewhere else, and to make it obvious i no longer supported a pretentious wagon. the issue is that i did not immediately follow my unvote tags with vote tags, which is stupid.

How on earth does it "free" your vote? You can move your vote at any time. It's no more difficult to go "Unvote: X, Vote: Y" than it is to go "Vote: Y".

[vollkan]

i unvoted so that i could free my vote to place it somewhere else,

exactly!


EXACTLY


BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T PLACE IT ANYWHERE ELSE

See: my previous post. The more fundamental point is that the very idea that he needed to unvote to "free" your vote is pure BS.

yes it did? the guy was at 8 votes at the peak of his wagon. that's a lot for a wagon that i started based purely on the fact that i didn't want a three headed hydra. try again please.

So he was at L-5. That hardly warrants "better get off this wagon" jitters, especially when the votes were clearly non-serious.

oh, the relevance! everyone was just dying to know where in the rules it specified om had to have good humour. good job, you.

Because clearly I wasn't making a joke.

[vollkan]

EBWOP:
"the very idea that he needed to unvote to "free" your vote" should be

"the very idea that he needed to unvote to "free" his vote"

[vollkan]

you didn't do that--- you didn't unvote to free up your vote to place elsewhere. you just unvoted to get off the wagon.

you say you are just 'interpreting my actions'. but you are interpreting them wrongly, and i have already told you you are interpreting them wrongly.

i did not just 'unvote to get off the wagon'. i unvoted so that i could free my vote to place it somewhere else, and to make it obvious i no longer supported a pretentious wagon. the issue is that i did not immediately follow my unvote tags with vote tags, which is stupid.

How on earth does it "free" your vote? You can move your vote at any time. It's no more difficult to go "Unvote: X, Vote: Y" than it is to go "Vote: Y".

are you going to be absurdly technical about this? i only have one vote. therefore, i need to unvote to replace it. even by typing 'vote: y' i am still unvoting.

How is this being technical?

You said that one of your motivations for unvoting was to "free" your vote.

That HAS TO imply that voting somehow restricts your ability to change your vote.

The fact is, voting doesn't do that. Because, at ANY time, you can just unvote, vote somebody else.

So, the idea that you would ever need to "free" your vote by unvoting just makes no sense.

[vollkan]

are you going to be absurdly technical about this? i only have one vote. therefore, i need to unvote to replace it. even by typing 'vote: y' i am still unvoting.

my point is, what harm was your vote doing on pretentious if you wanted to replace it? if you no longer supported the wagon, why didn't you explain your reason for that at the time? don't you think the town should know why you felt pretentious was town?

sure, but unexplained votes and unvotes are common. the town should know why i felt pretentious was town but in my opinion the reasons weren't compelling enough to be explained.

Why did the drench read make you think they were town?

[vollkan]

are you going to be absurdly technical about this? i only have one vote. therefore, i need to unvote to replace it. even by typing 'vote: y' i am still unvoting.

my point is, what harm was your vote doing on pretentious if you wanted to replace it? if you no longer supported the wagon, why didn't you explain your reason for that at the time? don't you think the town should know why you felt pretentious was town?

sure, but unexplained votes and unvotes are common. the town should know why i felt pretentious was town but in my opinion the reasons weren't compelling enough to be explained.

Why did the drench read make you think they were town?

because it was a good point expressed with townie conviction

What is "townie conviction"?

to answer your utterly predictable next question: i did not vote drench in the same post that i unvoted because i was, like i have said, compiling a reads list that would determine whether i had a stronger scum read than drench

Okay, this makes sense now.

The "freeing" point is still false, since you could still have unvoted, but I hadn't connected it to you actually saying you were compiling a list, so it's false but now a non-issue for me.

[vollkan]

vague wonder what vollkan looks like

Hmm?

[vollkan]

Quilford+3

The wagon was early game fluff/content-generating-RVS and in no way likely to lead to a lynch. So, you didn't need to balance those factors at all - the risk of lynching town simply didn't arise.

why is what quilford said scummy

He joined what was clearly a non-serious joke wagon, then unvoted purportedly because he no longer supported the wagon.

Which would be fine - except that the wagon was clearly not serious from the outset. Thus, when he said he wanted to balance A (wanting no more three-person hydra) against B (not wanting to lynch town), B shouldn't have even been a concern.

In short, the explanation doesn't fit with the nature of the wagon.

Because it'd have been better for me to not mention it?

BT+3

The point is that mentioning it achieves nothing other than serving as a placeholder/fallback. Making that post didn't add anything to the "case" against Zoidberg.

Catching up. Vollkan is trying to hard.

My questioning of Quilford consisted of 310 words, in 10 posts, over 47 minutes. I hardly think that's excessive.

In my opinion, Kuribo and Vollkan over reacted to his actions - and thus 3 pages of this thread were spent trying to build a case against someone for something small. I've noted this by the way, and because of this I have scum leans on both Kuribo and Vollkan.

Assigning +3 points and questioning =/= over-reacting.

On my points scale, a normal scumtell is 5 points, a score of 3 means something minorly scummy. The scumpoints I gave him reflected of the fact that it was "something small".

But, seeing the potential for something bigger, I questioned. That's not over-reacting, that's playing properly.

As much as it pains me to say I think Pretentious is town.

What's your reason for thinking that?

volkan just sounds like he's using a lot of words to explain small points and is basically going around in circles. The difference between him and kuribo though is that I felt that kuribo was somewhat genuine in his posting.

Regrettably and remorsefully one must attest that one has a proclivity towards the eschewal of brevity and the embrace of prolixity, notwithstanding the inevitable obfuscation so engendered.

(Seriously, though, like I said above, the Quilford pursuit was 310 words, in 10 posts, over 47 minutes. The questioning got confusing at times, but I really don't see how I was using too many words or anything - it was just that the line of questioning was kind of technical/arcane, and, to an extent, that I hadn't gotten an answer that gave me closure. When I got one, I stopped the questioning)

[vollkan]

Quilford+3

BT+3

Could someone please clarify what this means for me?

I rank people on a scale of 0 (absolute town) to 100 (absolute scum). Everybody starts at 50 (and almost nobody goes below 50, because of me being super-skeptical about the existence of towntells). Scumtells push the score up. A score of +3 is a minor scumtell, +5 is a normal scumtell, +10 is serious, etc.

Main reason I use the system is just that it better helps me track how I feel about people over time (as in, there's no reason why something which is scummy on p 10 becomes less scummy over time - a scumtell is a scumtell no matter when it happens; whereas I find that there is a natural tendency to treat the present/more recent events as more weighty). Also, the way I play is more directed at discrete tells rather than "general reads" (and I detest gut-based play) - so using the points directly ties my suspicions to specific tells (and, in turn, gives me an easy way of responding whenever people ask why I suspect a particular person).

What's your reason for thinking that?

-The case on Drench and BT I felt was legit

I followed the reasoning of the BT one, but in a nutshell, what do you understand the Drench case to be?

My questioning of Quilford consisted of 310 words, in 10 posts, over 47 minutes. I hardly think that's excessive.

But they were all pretty dumb. It's a silly case imo.

How? Quilford claimed he'd done something for X reason. X reason did not appear to make sense. So I questioned him about it.

Yes, it didn't end up being a smoking gun, but that doesn't mean it was "silly" - nor does it mean I was "trying too hard" (hint: "The Interrogator" is my title for a reason)

[quote="ThunderHog"
- I initially placed my vote due to Drench's post 385. It makes a great point which I agreed with completely.

- Move to post 421. BT tries to subtly hop on the Quill wagon with crap logic. P-hydra's post 424 addressed this issue - which cemented my vote, IMO.

- BT's post 475. He attempts to address me stating that he was not trying to build a case against Quill, when, in-fact, he was. Ythan's post 483 addressed this as well.
[/quote]

Thunder+5

UNVOTE: Zoidberg
VOTE: Thunder

1) Post 385 doesn't make any sense at all as a reason to suspect BT. BT had declared his opinion on trollie and SPB, but why does that make it scummy to ask other people for their reasons?
2) a) What part of 421 "subtly"? He had four lines of reasoning and a vote. What, exactly, is "subtle" about that? I'll tell you what is subtle though - using an emotive word like "subtly" to try and make a completely non-suspicious thing sound insidious.
b) Craplogic? Why?
c) 424 didn't actually address the issue at all. 424 was about the (valid) retreat option/fallback point.
3) Did you even read 475? here, let me quote:

Post 424 is a big one, IMO. It builds an entire case against BT with only a single sentence

Problem with that Thunderhog is that 424 isn't a case - it only interprets my moves in a particular way so of course it'd "make sense" but only that.

He isn't denying that HE was trying to build a case on Quilford - because he isn't even referring to his attack on quilford. He's saying that 424 (ie. p-dra's post against him) isn't a case but simply an interpretation of his actions.
4*) Striking thing about each your three reasons above is that in every one, you refer to other people's posts to support your own arguments. Insecure, much?

vollkan do you have any reads on people you haven't given points to? if so who (and what read?)

No, anything that I consider as alignment-relevant is captured in my points.

[vollkan]

EBWOP: massive tag fail there

Quilford+3

BT+3

Could someone please clarify what this means for me?[/quote]

I rank people on a scale of 0 (absolute town) to 100 (absolute scum). Everybody starts at 50 (and almost nobody goes below 50, because of me being super-skeptical about the existence of towntells). Scumtells push the score up. A score of +3 is a minor scumtell, +5 is a normal scumtell, +10 is serious, etc.

Main reason I use the system is just that it better helps me track how I feel about people over time (as in, there's no reason why something which is scummy on p 10 becomes less scummy over time - a scumtell is a scumtell no matter when it happens; whereas I find that there is a natural tendency to treat the present/more recent events as more weighty). Also, the way I play is more directed at discrete tells rather than "general reads" (and I detest gut-based play) - so using the points directly ties my suspicions to specific tells (and, in turn, gives me an easy way of responding whenever people ask why I suspect a particular person).

What's your reason for thinking that?

-The case on Drench and BT I felt was legit

I followed the reasoning of the BT one, but in a nutshell, what do you understand the Drench case to be?

My questioning of Quilford consisted of 310 words, in 10 posts, over 47 minutes. I hardly think that's excessive.

But they were all pretty dumb. It's a silly case imo.

How? Quilford claimed he'd done something for X reason. X reason did not appear to make sense. So I questioned him about it.

Yes, it didn't end up being a smoking gun, but that doesn't mean it was "silly" - nor does it mean I was "trying too hard" (hint: "The Interrogator" is my title for a reason)

- I initially placed my vote due to Drench's post 385. It makes a great point which I agreed with completely.

- Move to post 421. BT tries to subtly hop on the Quill wagon with crap logic. P-hydra's post 424 addressed this issue - which cemented my vote, IMO.

- BT's post 475. He attempts to address me stating that he was not trying to build a case against Quill, when, in-fact, he was. Ythan's post 483 addressed this as well.

Thunder+5

UNVOTE: Zoidberg
VOTE: Thunder

1) Post 385 doesn't make any sense at all as a reason to suspect BT. BT had declared his opinion on trollie and SPB, but why does that make it scummy to ask other people for their reasons?
2) a) What part of 421 "subtly"? He had four lines of reasoning and a vote. What, exactly, is "subtle" about that? I'll tell you what is subtle though - using an emotive word like "subtly" to try and make a completely non-suspicious thing sound insidious.
b) Craplogic? Why?
c) 424 didn't actually address the issue at all. 424 was about the (valid) retreat option/fallback point.
3) Did you even read 475? here, let me quote:

Post 424 is a big one, IMO. It builds an entire case against BT with only a single sentence

Problem with that Thunderhog is that 424 isn't a case - it only interprets my moves in a particular way so of course it'd "make sense" but only that.

He isn't denying that HE was trying to build a case on Quilford - because he isn't even referring to his attack on quilford. He's saying that 424 (ie. p-dra's post against him) isn't a case but simply an interpretation of his actions.
4*) Striking thing about each your three reasons above is that in every one, you refer to other people's posts to support your own arguments. Insecure, much?

vollkan do you have any reads on people you haven't given points to? if so who (and what read?)

No, anything that I consider as alignment-relevant is captured in my points.

[vollkan]

How? Quilford claimed he'd done something for X reason. X reason did not appear to make sense. So I questioned him about it.

Yes, it didn't end up being a smoking gun, but that doesn't mean it was "silly" - nor does it mean I was "trying too hard" (hint: "The Interrogator" is my title for a reason)

It was dragged out far too long for how little sense it made as a push.

Time-wise, it lasted 45 minutes.

If you want to talk about things that don't make sense lasting too long, maybe try looking at the first 15 pages of this game.

More constructively:
- Quilford's 343 contained two relevant points:
1) Impliedly, that the p-dra wagon had a risk of going to lynch; and
2) Expressly, that Quilford had decided p-dra was town.

- 1) above was plainly false and 2) was unexplained
- In 350, quilford then added that the reason for the unvote was to "free" his vote. This doesn't make sense because, like I said, you're just as free to move your vote to a player when you are voting somebody else as you are when you are not voting anybody
- 355: I respond to Quilford's argument that the wagon was getting high (It wasn't)
- 361 is just me clarifying the same point about "freeing" (which Quilford argued was being too technical)
- 369: he explained at least the fact that he was compiling the list, so I ended pursuit there.

[vollkan]

How? Quilford claimed he'd done something for X reason. X reason did not appear to make sense. So I questioned him about it.

Yes, it didn't end up being a smoking gun, but that doesn't mean it was "silly" - nor does it mean I was "trying too hard" (hint: "The Interrogator" is my title for a reason)

It was dragged out far too long for how little sense it made as a push.

Time-wise, it lasted 45 minutes.

If you want to talk about things that don't make sense lasting too long, maybe try looking at the first 15 pages of this game.

More constructively:
- Quilford's 343 contained two relevant points:
1) Impliedly, that the p-dra wagon had a risk of going to lynch; and
2) Expressly, that Quilford had decided p-dra was town.

- 1) above was plainly false and 2) was unexplained
- In 350, quilford then added that the reason for the unvote was to "free" his vote. This doesn't make sense because, like I said, you're just as free to move your vote to a player when you are voting somebody else as you are when you are not voting anybody
- 355: I respond to Quilford's argument that the wagon was getting high (It wasn't)
- 361 is just me clarifying the same point about "freeing" (which Quilford argued was being too technical)
- 369: he explained at least the fact that he was compiling the list, so I ended pursuit there.

You can stop explaining. I understand it I just think it's stupid.

Look, Ythan, I get that the swaggering/macho behaviour is part of your schtick, but this is just ridiculous.

An argument is either right or wrong - there's no separate third category of "it's stupid". The reason I kept explaining it is to see whether or not you actually had any logical reason for disagreeing with me - and it's clear that you don't.

Insecure? No, not at all. I've just never played in a game this large before - not only that, but I'm lazy. It's kinda hard to produce something new and original when there's a bunch of other players trying to do the same thing. So, yes, if I find something that I genuinely agree with then yes I'm going to use the words of others to place my vote. Why should I simply repeat something that's already been said without quoting it? Seems pointless.

And the laziness/inexperienced risk is the reason why it's not a damning tell, but that doesn't change the fact that the apparent absence of any original analysis in your attacks is suggestive of you trying to cover your arse.

Ahh. Honestly, didn't see that. Really thought Vollkan and Kuribo, who had just got done grilling him for a small thing, were both voting him.

Either way, it wasn't very difficult to use their arguments to try and start one.

ThunderHog+3

Starting a wagon is completely different from questioning, and trying to conflate them by saying that the questioning made it not very hard to start a wagon is just a weak means of trying to conflate the two. You got proven wrong on this, and your response is to merge the two things to defend your original, refuted, claim.

UNVOTE:

have at it kuribo and vollkan; with 40 pages i don't even know who to place a vote on

What do you think of my ThunderHog case?

This game is a spamfest, but there IS alignment-useful content scattered gem-like throughout. It's just a shame that 99% of it is spam from BS personality clashes.

How? Quilford claimed he'd done something for X reason. X reason did not appear to make sense. So I questioned him about it.

Yes, it didn't end up being a smoking gun, but that doesn't mean it was "silly" - nor does it mean I was "trying too hard" (hint: "The Interrogator" is my title for a reason)

It was dragged out far too long for how little sense it made as a push.

Time-wise, it lasted 45 minutes.

If you want to talk about things that don't make sense lasting too long, maybe try looking at the first 15 pages of this game.

More constructively:

- Quilford's 343 contained two relevant points:
1) Impliedly, that the p-dra wagon had a risk of going to lynch; and
2) Expressly, that Quilford had decided p-dra was town.

- 1) above was plainly false and 2) was unexplained

- In 350, quilford then added that the reason for the unvote was to "free" his vote. This doesn't make sense because, like I said, you're just as free to move your vote to a player when you are voting somebody else as you are when you are not voting anybody
- 355: I respond to Quilford's argument that the wagon was getting high (It wasn't)
- 361 is just me clarifying the same point about "freeing" (which Quilford argued was being too technical)
- 369: he explained at least the fact that he was compiling the list, so I ended pursuit there.

Here's something I was looking for.

This answers one of your questions Quilford.

1. wasn't plainly false to me, call it the heat of the moment
2. unexplained =/= reasonless. it just happens that i didn't put my reasons in the unvote post, because i didn't think it was worth the effort.

THEN SUDDENLY I AM SCUM FOR UNVOTING WITHOUT REASONS WHOOPS

Quilford+3

1) is a very evasive answer. "wasn't plainly false" does NOT at all mean the same thing as "You believed it to be true". Heat of the moment/not thinking it, I can accept, but that doesn't invalidate the argument (just qualifies the extent of scumminess)

MattP is obvtown

Why?

Iece, you'll note I never said fate/nuwen scumslipped, just that their posting was akin to a scumclaim. There was no "slip" and Kats was sticking to the fake that he slipped plan at that point in town, which is obviously not going to work now.

That doesn't make him any less scum, but no, there was no scumslip like HEY GUYS NICE MAFIA QT. Just some scummy scummy posts

Somebody used the word "slip" before, but whatever. If Fate said something super scummy, then just explain what the nature of it was. In simple, clear language.

So much freaking ink has been spilled over this, when the easiest thing to do would just be to post a proper explanation and let everybody else weigh in,.

The QT makes it clear that Fate's description of what was going on was basically accurate. There's no way that that entire mentality came from town. The next step is to identify which hydra is scum.

TownKatsuki actually faked an (inaccurate) guilty on me once as town, so I can imagine Katsuki just being a mean asshat town player with an inflated opinion of his own skill. I don't know if CHESSKID has ever done or contemplated something so stupid as town, but he has the kind of ego where I wouldn't totally put it past him.

TownFaraday would not have let that happen, let alone propose it, and if he meant the proposal as a joke (regardless of alignment), as town he would have stopped it before things got out of hand. The fact that he let it go like that totally changes my read. I think he's the most likely hydra scum.

Vote: One Direction

OneDirection+5

Sheeping

[vollkan]

Unvote

BT's stoicism is convincing me of his towniness. A scum provided with the kind of BS that I threw at him would be actively trying to cut my head off. It's true that he's currently voting me, but the fact that he's been quiet for this long and not trying to get more people on my wagon is what I'm going on here.

ThunderHog+3

This reads like an attempt to mollify an attacker. The idea that scumBT would be "actively trying to cut [his] head off" is untrue. If anything, it would be the other way round - if BT genuinely suspected Hog, you'd expect him to be more dogged in his pursuit.


Other than that, well you have a brain, don't you? Use it.[/quote]

[vollkan]

You're not supposed to care about it, just like you're not supposed to care that I made an amusing mafia song based on one direction lyrics. I do stuff like that all the time anyway, it's mostly for my own self amusement.

THe difference between the two is that one is an obvious irrelevant/joke thing, whereas the other is something that you should have no reason for mentioning in a town game

[vollkan]

lets play some fuckin mafia eh

I could ask this question probably about 90% of what you've said this game - but, restraining myself, what was the point of making that post? If it had no point, why make an already nigh unreadable game even more bloated with meaningless crap?

[vollkan]

Zoidberg has the right idea.

@p-dra: What are your thoughts on ThunderHog?

[vollkan]

@Zoidberg: Zoidberg, why not ThunderHog?

related

[vollkan]

You're not supposed to care about it, just like you're not supposed to care that I made an amusing mafia song based on one direction lyrics. I do stuff like that all the time anyway, it's mostly for my own self amusement.

THe difference between the two is that one is an obvious irrelevant/joke thing, whereas the other is something that you should have no reason for mentioning in a town game

Yet I do mention things like that in town games all the time! Why didn't you give me + scumpoints for it though if you think I should have absolutely no reason to mention it?

I don't think it's scummy because "OD just scumslipped" seems far less likely than "OD is being an annoying spammer". However, I highlighted it as an instance of the spam being potentially alignment-confusing.

[vollkan]

JacobSavage and zoraster should die whenever, like seriously.

Can you elaborate on your reasons for these two scumreads?

[vollkan]

JacobSavage and zoraster should die whenever, like seriously.

Can you elaborate on your reasons for these two scumreads?

Zoraster complained that people were accusing him of lurking, went on to lurk, and is now voting Thunderhog because Thunderhog complained about spammers.
Jacob comes in every once in a while and snipes random shit, isn't actually making the slightest effort to scumhunt but is making an effort to coast.

I understand the frustration with them, but both of those are basically just lurkers rather than scummy players.

[vollkan]

Because after the Zoid-splosion that took place God-only-knows how many pages back, he actually started calming down and making sense of things. However, he hasn't really done anything really scummy since - I replaced my vote using precedents.

ThunderHog+5

So, you unvote because he is less scummy. You admit he hasn't been scummy since then. And then you revote because a player who once got a "Best Town Performance" award says so?

I want people's opinion on Kawaii

Reading his posts is:

a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.

(Null read who posts too much)

[vollkan]

vollkan what about the recent wagons? (DGB/OD/Wyrd)

I agreed with part of the OD (see: the points I gave him), but the others I either don't agree with or don't understand (and I'm not sure which)

[vollkan]

JacobSavage and zoraster should die whenever, like seriously.

Can you elaborate on your reasons for these two scumreads?

Zoraster complained that people were accusing him of lurking, went on to lurk, and is now voting Thunderhog because Thunderhog complained about spammers.
Jacob comes in every once in a while and snipes random shit, isn't actually making the slightest effort to scumhunt but is making an effort to coast.

I understand the frustration with them, but both of those are basically just lurkers rather than scummy players.

Those two specifically are the only lurkers that really, really bother me. Dramonic is cheeky as fuck and blatantly not posting anything useful most of the time, but he does have aggressive moments and does seem like he's scumhunting sometimes. NS hasn't posted anything I can read yet, and drench is strange but still probably town. Zoraster and JacobSavage just need copious amounts of death.

Granted, but that's really just different ways/extents of lurking. The fact of the matter still remains that neither Zoro nor JS has actually committed positive scumtells.

hey nacho what's your read on vollkan

I don't like that he's focusing so hard on the BT/Thunder/Zoid trio, but I can't really blame him. I'd like to see him do his thing a little more before reading him better, though.

JacobSavage and zoraster should die whenever, like seriously.

Can you elaborate on your reasons for these two scumreads?

Zoraster complained that people were accusing him of lurking, went on to lurk, and is now voting Thunderhog because Thunderhog complained about spammers.
Jacob comes in every once in a while and snipes random shit, isn't actually making the slightest effort to scumhunt but is making an effort to coast.

I understand the frustration with them, but both of those are basically just lurkers rather than scummy players.

Those two specifically are the only lurkers that really, really bother me. Dramonic is cheeky as fuck and blatantly not posting anything useful most of the time, but he does have aggressive moments and does seem like he's scumhunting sometimes. NS hasn't posted anything I can read yet, and drench is strange but still probably town. Zoraster and JacobSavage just need copious amounts of death.

hey nacho what's your read on vollkan

I don't like that he's focusing so hard on the BT/Thunder/Zoid trio, but I can't really blame him. I'd like to see him do his thing a little more before reading him better, though.

why is it terrible? It seems pretty accurate.

I am not listening to DGB because she is scum and she is playing to her scum meta of being useless then having shit reads until late game is stupid for many reasons. First, not listening to someone because they bitched at you for spamming is useless because plenty of people yelled at chesskid for spamming. DGB shouldn't be special. The meta thing is stupid because he puts forth a meta point, states that it's different from usual scum meta, and calls it scum anyways. The shit reads thing is stupid because who the fuck knows who has good reads and who doesn't? It's day 1, don't care if you think you're a good scumhunter, you won't know if you're having a good game or an off game until people start dying.

I also don't see where DGB has put her reputation on the line by lynching us?

Let's do One-Direction today. I'm 100% on this. I'm rarely this certain. Have faith in my legendary scumdar.

As scum, she's basically giving up her mislynch power to kill one person, and guaranteeing that a whole bunch of lazy people are going to hop on her wagon because of backlash. It's not like she's giving up her reputation for the rest of her career, sure, but it's one of those things that she can't dismiss with "oh he was just being a scummy fuck".

How do you think DGB!scum would respond to me voting her anyway? Try to placate me? (That seems like a recipe for disaster since I despise things like that)

I expected DGBscum just to dismiss you. There's no reason why she specifically has to push you as scum for that. But I'll do a little research in my SPECIAL TIME REREADS to see what she usually does.

HEY YOU GUYS.

THUNDERHOG IS SERIOUSLY HITTING EVERY SCUMTELL THAT I KNOW OF FOR NEWER SCUM PLAYERS AND I'M QUITE CONFIDENT THAT HE'S SCUM.

gamma I hope you have more than one read and I'm just not remembering your other awesome posts.
because even if you're right, you can do better than one read.

I honestly considered replying to the comment with, "No." However, I figured that that would put me under even more criticism and suspicion than simply complying.

Newbies has this tendency to worry too much about how people will perceive certain actions. But when they are this transparent about it, they are usually town.

Well I figure that my vote on you among numerous other votes on you would constitute a wagon but I guess not.

By my count it's just you, Ythan and scumderhog.

I want to murder you in spirit.[/quote]

[vollkan]

JacobSavage and zoraster should die whenever, like seriously.

Can you elaborate on your reasons for these two scumreads?

Zoraster complained that people were accusing him of lurking, went on to lurk, and is now voting Thunderhog because Thunderhog complained about spammers.
Jacob comes in every once in a while and snipes random shit, isn't actually making the slightest effort to scumhunt but is making an effort to coast.

I understand the frustration with them, but both of those are basically just lurkers rather than scummy players.

Those two specifically are the only lurkers that really, really bother me. Dramonic is cheeky as fuck and blatantly not posting anything useful most of the time, but he does have aggressive moments and does seem like he's scumhunting sometimes. NS hasn't posted anything I can read yet, and drench is strange but still probably town. Zoraster and JacobSavage just need copious amounts of death.

Granted, but that's really just different ways/extents of lurking. The fact of the matter still remains that neither Zoro nor JS has actually committed positive scumtells.

[vollkan]

One of them is asking? Pardon me, but I happen to have some knowledge in proper English and grammar, but I don't see a single question mark at the end of any of those sentences. Not a single one of them is a question. Try again...

You're focussing solely on the semantics here.

Zoidberg was asking/requesting/whatever-it-doesn't-matter people to vote you because you are scummy. That's completely different from voting a player whom you admitted was no longer scummy.

Well, I'm sorry to burst your bubble but it indeed does make a difference. You're simply rearranging the same exact words into ways that make them sound different. You're putting a whole color system to something that is simply black and white to try and prove a point that doesn't actually exist.

Also, I'm nitpicking for a damned good reason. I'm nitpicking the very logic that you're using to justify your vote on me. Dare I say this, but try again... but please, try to keep the name calling to a minimum.

Oh, FFS. The fact that Zoidberg TOLD people to vote (for the sake of this argument, I'm going to avoid using the word "asked") is totally irrelevant. The issue is that you voted a player whom you admitted that you had no rational reason to vote.

Also note that I had already addressed my reasons as to why I did it. To reiterate, it's simply something that can just as easily be undone therefore I saw no harm in actually doing it.

Yes, a vote can be easily undone. However, that absolutely does NOT justify just voting a person you apparently don't suspect.

[vollkan]

I was voting TH before it's likely I may again after I review things. It wasn't a judgment on him being not-scummy or anything

What was the reason you unvoted though?

[vollkan]

Voting Pdra NOW avoiding TH wagon for horseshit "RL excuses" ?

I'm sorry but I really believe in this, I've caught a lot of scum with it, and most recently in Ladies Night. Check out Telo and Amrun in particular.

With a 3-headed hydra, there is even more reason to believe in a strategic choice rather than actual RL hindrances.

The thing about RL excuses is that you are beating potential attacks to the punch by making statements that are unverifiable to excuse past, present and especially future behavior. In Amrun's particular case, you can add pulling at heartstrings - she's now done this twice in games with me when she was scum.

I do think that Thunderhog IS scummy, similarly for beating potential attacks by using a "careful" playsstyle as an excuse.

I could have voted either right now, but P-dra's very blatant RL-excuses scumtell was just too gross for me to let it pass.

And then my mason is hot to vig him so... he's not voting for him either.

Except, what was the strategic advantage in doing so? I mean, I get that three heads all vanishing immediately looks odd, but I can't think of any reason why Pdra-scum would decide: "Hey, let's all disappear right now and claim an RL excuse!". I mean, it's hardly like Pdra is a lurker who might otherwise rely on an RL excuse to pad out the length of acceptable lurking time.

[vollkan]

Looking over TH, the main new stuff I see is that his posts are very defensive and can have a tone that doesn't seem very town-oriented (mocking Gamma as a "seeker o' scum" in 1610 is a big one). I can see that, but I also think a handful of what he's down is kinda newbtownie. For example, I don't see the scum motivations in his votes for Wyrd or Gamma. I guess it could just be bad scum play.

I'd be OK with Thunderhog at deadline if need be. I don't think he'd be a very tragic mislynch as the WCS. Still, but I'd prefer a hydralynch. I think we have a decent shot of hitting scum from any of those three. It's more high risk/reward, but I think it's worth it given what transpired, and Faraday's "wouldn't do that as scum" stuff doesn't convince me (e.g., as it ignores why he'd do it as town).

The case against TH was not "tone" based. His "tone" certainly wasn't a towntell, but it also was far from the only scumtell committed by him.

I feel like there are gonna be a few scum bussing ThunderHog, that was a nice easy wagon imo

In a game this size, it isn't even necessarily bussing so much as just it can just be multiple scumgroups picking on low-hanging fruit (by the end of it, TH was obvnewbscum). What particularly surprised me was that the wagon basically had a hockey-stick pattern (in that it rapidly accelerated in size).

[vollkan]

Why is TheTrollie on your scum list?

Because T-Hog never mentions Trollie. I have to check if the both ignored each other, if they did, I would move him.

ON QUILFORD:

I have also arrived at the conclusion vollkan is town.

Don't wanna lynch ThunderHog. Someone made some very salient points on him being newbtown (was it Gamma?).

I feel like there are gonna be a few scum bussing ThunderHog, that was a nice easy wagon imo

Quilford goes from boldly not wanting to lynch T-Hog because Gamma(?) made some VERY SALIENT points on him being newbtown, to viewing the T-Hog wagon as few scum bus'ing on it because it's an easy wagon. Quilford does not vote T-Hog.

There are several turnarounds here. First, he blames Gamma (a townie, it turns out) for a convincing town-read on his buddy. This town read is based on noobness so it's nice to excuse T-Hog for future mistakes/bad-play that he's bound to make.

But here's the kicker: Quilford, who has a noobtown read on THog borrowed from Gamma-town, now suggest that THog is an easy wagon with lots of scum on it... scum that is bus'ing!!!

WHAT???? THog was an easy wagon because the scum decided to bus,

en masse

??? It was a easy wagon because scum bus'ed their buddies with only few townies voting THog??? WHAT???

I was going to say I didn't agree with this analysis (and I don't, in part).

But, going back through the post history, I found this, which is interesting:

buttonz its gonna be okays.

Also thunderhog is the biggest wagon right now and I'm one of the main dudes behind that so if you want a quick summary of it then just go through my iso.

But post 1800 was

after

TH's death.

There's no inconsistency in saying, before lynch, that the suspect is newbtown and then, after, saying that, in light of the knowledge that they were scum, they were probably bussed. It's textbook scum play that, when a newbish team member is under heavy attack, as TH was, you join the wagon.

DGB+5

, both for the fact that this doesn't make any sense (which is highly uncharacteristic) and the fact that your language is very drama-building ("several turnarounds", "kicker", building to the "WHAT?"s)

VOTE: JacobSavage

This is the obvious choice for today.

Because.....?

[vollkan]

is it in dgb's townmeta to implode like this? y/n

I don't remember ever seeing DGB - town or scum - act this way. So, I think it's basically a nulltell.

The read isn't manufactured. There are reasons behind it. Basically her little "freakout and all her reads are something that I fail to see any scum motivation for and lots of town motivations for.

What town motivation is there for freaking out? It's a nulltell.

[vollkan]

Ahhh that actually makes sense... thanks.
That's my playstyle unfourtanly but I'll probably start posting some more now we haves a few flips.

Name me 5 players whom you think are most likely scum, and if possible rank them.

[vollkan]

For Vollkan.

Town

Vollkan:

His playstyle is very transparent, that coupled with him actually wanting

Om of the Nom:

Not taking the easy route and just hopping on my wagon, actually attempting to scum hunt and understand the reasons behind wagons.

Pretentiousdra:

Actually bothered to go out and look at a meta case, and came to a different conclusion that the one he started with. Scum wouldn't do this sudden turn around unless they sensed that they were fighting a losing battle, which given that I was pretty universily suspected at the time makes this a very town move.

DrippingGolfball

Leaning Town

Dramonic
Wyrd
Zoraster
Ythan
Iecerint

Null

Slumberpartybois
One Direction
The Trollie
Mini-Liberian
TheButtonman

Leaning Scum

3. Qualiford
4. DeltaWave
5. Bella

Scum

1. Zoidberg:

Joining my wagon with a very weak reason

2. BT:

Possible Hard-Bus by ThunderDog

I suspect that my wagon isnt all town, and out of all them Zoidberg seams to attempting to come up with a reason, but its so weak that it's just useless. Of course if someone is pressuring me that I am not doing enough, I'll step it up. Its how I roll

VOTE: Zoidberg

You're saying that (TH aside) the scummiest thing in the game so far was Zoidberg's vote for you just two posts ago - in a game 84 pages long?

Jacob+5

- there's more than a hint here that your reads are manufactured.

[vollkan]

Why did you hop on the Wyrd wagon? Do you still think DGB is town? These are the kind of things I want answered from you.

It seemed like a fair wagon at the time, and I wanted to see what they'd do. Yes I do think she is town.

What do you mean by a "fair wagon"? That's basically a tautological answer - "Why did you join this wagon?" "Oh, because it seemed like a fair wagon"

BT: Not understanding why people view him as a possible TH buddy, think TH’s vote on him in #407 (his opening post) at a time when BT was drawing a lot of heat seems more like trying to capitalize on a ML opportunity rather than a bus. I think it’s further reinforced by the bullet points of reasoning TH offers in #697 and some of the exaggerated language he uses to build up his case (e.g., “BT has been completely inconsistent nearly this entire game, and it's rather blatant.”). Normally, I find that noob-scum don’t make cases like this on their partners but they do when they want to jump on an easy wagon on town. Back and forth with TH starting in BT’s #867 also points against BT being on his team as I think the frustration he shows towards TH seems unlikely to be directed at a partner (e.g., “If you're referring to the first two posts STILL then 1) you're bad and 2) I already explained this horrible inconsistency because really it wasn't.”) Think BT getting cold feet over TH starting at #1517 is pretty genuine too and comes in well before the TH wagon took off (I believe at the time we were the biggest wagon and TH was in no serious danger of getting lynched).

I agree with this. The other point to add is TH's 1468:

Unvote
BT's stoicism is convincing me of his towniness. A scum provided with the kind of BS that I threw at him would be actively trying to cut my head off. It's true that he's currently voting me, but the fact that he's been quiet for this long and not trying to get more people on my wagon is what I'm going on here.

If TH was bussing, he would NOT be making this sort of post. With the benefit of knowing that TH was scum, it really reads more like an attempt to placate TH than anything else. My conclusion here might be less definite if TH had done this for the purpose of simply jumping to another wagon. However, although he votes in his next post, it's to vote Zoid, who doesn't even have a wagon (beyond 2 votes) at that time, so there isn't even a clear a strategy of "wanting to change votes".

No I meant "I lurk a lot as town so I would guess I would do the same as scum which could be backed up by my play that one time I rolled SK"

This IS valid. I mean, whether or not there is proof he lurks as scum, the existence of proof that he lurks as town makes it clear that the lurking isn't strategic scumlurking. He's handled this is in a stupid way, but my read on JS is only slightly-scummier-than-average null lurker.

[vollkan]

vollkan while you're here your opinion on TBM would be appreciated.

Brazen lurker, so null read. I don't see the shift on third party being a backflip, since from the outset it was: "If anything I'd peg him as third party rather mafia." The "if anything" is inherently non-committal.

[vollkan]

vollkan while you're here your opinion on TBM would be appreciated.

Brazen lurker

You are aware I just replaced in? I have about 3 posts per day that I've been in this game?

What the hell is your definition of lurking?

I was going by content rather than time. I opened up your ISO, because I had null on you, and saw more or less a string of short, non-contentful posts.

Lurking doesn't just mean "not posting"; it includes "not posting content".

[vollkan]

vollkan while you're here your opinion on TBM would be appreciated.

Brazen lurker

You are aware I just replaced in? I have about 3 posts per day that I've been in this game?

What the hell is your definition of lurking?

I was going by content rather than time. I opened up your ISO, because I had null on you, and saw more or less a string of short, non-contentful posts.

Lurking doesn't just mean "not posting"; it includes "not posting content".

Yeah okay there Cpt. Backtracks

It's hardly a backtrack - it's fairly well recognised that lurking isn't just people who don't post at all.

I'm doing the kind of blatant lurking where you make you thoughts on every single last one of the fucking wagons today clear? That kind of blatant scum lurking where you try to form your own fucking wagon rather then ride one of the popular ones? The kind of blatant lurking where you post a lot? That kind of blatant lurking?

Your case on Zoidberg is "I have read the game and zoid is consistently scummy through out". And aside from the conclusion that JS is flailing, not once have you come close to showing any actual analysis

I'm sorry? Did you and DGB think you can fucking railroad me with shitcases simply because you use buzz words and repetition? Are you and her even bothering to read the game?

I'm sorry? Since when was I railroading you?

I said you were a lurker, which is a null read. And I hate lurker lynches.

[vollkan]

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

I HAVE HAD IT WITH ALL THESE MOTHERFUKING MORONS IN THIS MOTHERFUCKING THREAD

COP HERE GUILTY ON YTHAN

LRN 2 BREADCRUMB KTHXBAI

Vote: Ythan

Hammered in 2 pages or [removed]

Vote: Ythan

[b/]

The claim is weird as hell, but there's no apparent scum-motivation for it (this early on in a large game). My real concern is that this is simply pdra being silly for lulz, particularly given that the crumbing was far from clear.

[vollkan]

EBWOP:

Vote:Ythan

[vollkan]

Tentative +7 on Zoraster in the event that Ythan is scum. The reason for this that Zoraster has avoided actually stating a position one way or the other on the claim, and has instead just questioned the manner in which it was made

[vollkan]

Vote: Ythan

i actually agree with fate here. i dont think bella protected pdra and its more likely, from her posting/crumbing, that she protected fate

Highly unlikely. Whatever her view about sheeping Fate, it's just sheer terrible play NOT to protect the claimed cop - especially when the cop's claimed guilty doesn't die on being lynched.

[vollkan]

I really don't see DGB on the same team as Ythan.

For what reason?

[vollkan]

Sorry, having computer problems and internet access issues right now. I've skimmed the past 10 pages, and can see there's an issue with claims. Can somebody please summarise for me what's happened?

[vollkan]

Sorry, having computer problems and internet access issues right now. I've skimmed the past 10 pages, and can see there's an issue with claims. Can somebody please summarise for me what's happened?

It's best if you read it yourself, but here are the facts. I'll leave the nuance to you.

-DW claims not to have seen SPB's Dreaming God claim during D1 (posted in the hydra QT made public).
-DW counterclaims Dreaming God.
-SPBs claims a watch on Pdra N2, won't say what results were
-DW claims a watch on Wyrd N2, says nobody visited Wyrd.
-DW claimed D1 that Ythan was probs town.
-DW later claims that N1 he used an ability on Ythan that he thought would kill him.

Aren't those last two directly contradictory?

[vollkan]

Okay, trying to catch up as much as I can while computer is not stuffing up (basically, old one died, had to buy a new one, and new one has a faulty video card which causes regular freezing etc)

We have guilty on OD. yes him. the guy who flipped town.

Seems likely you were redirected, then. Did you confirm it wasn't mod error?

How is that redirection, though?

Redirection would be P-dra receives a result telling him the alignment of somebody else - not a false result.

Neither Dreaming God claim seems manifestly implausible, and the two roles (John Waters and Elton John) both make sense to be included. That said, it seems to be a very powerful combination. Since fake-counter-claiming doesn't make sense for scum, the only possibilities I can think of are that they are both telling the truth, albeit one of them could be scum.

At bottom of page 110, and it's taken me almost 10 minutes to get through the page due to crashing...I'll try again later

[vollkan]

I'm heading out now, so keep this in mind: if I'm lying about SPB, then that will be obvious if we lynch SPB and he flips town. Killing SPB is the right move here.

I'm not scum: at the start of this day, I was nowhere near getting lynched. I don't think I had even more than a vote or two on me since Day 1 (not going to check). You think I would give that up just to suicide on SPB and get 1 town for 1 scum? I could see that being plausible if I was under mega-suspicion and it looked like I was going to die anyway, but it makes no sense under these circumstances.

Also, keep in mind that zoraster's flavor confirms mine. If I flip scum, then that means Zor would be probably be scum with me. There's probably not more than 4 mafia in this game, so do you really think that I would out the entire scum-team just to kill SPB?

I have a feeling that town is going to lobotomize themselves anyway, but I might as well throw it out there. If you want to ignore all of the above because "omg delta said ythan was town but changed his mind two weeks later, let's hold him to his very first reads of the game forever" or "herp derp delta was happy that his 100% super strong gut read was right so let's lynch him" (in relation to my comment about hoping to kill Ythan), then fine. It's just idiotic and hurts the town to ignore all reason and try to hop on ridiculous "scumslips."

I understand that Special Dan is still butthurt from an argument we had D1 but that doesn't excuse the rest of you.

This makes sense, only question I have though is what made you change your mind on ythan?

And iece's 2824 makes it pretty clear that if ythan had become your number #1 suspect, you weren't acting that way come D2


Up to 115

[vollkan]

Okay, trying to catch up as much as I can while computer is not stuffing up (basically, old one died, had to buy a new one, and new one has a faulty video card which causes regular freezing etc)

We have guilty on OD. yes him. the guy who flipped town.

Seems likely you were redirected, then. Did you confirm it wasn't mod error?

How is that redirection, though?

Redirection would be P-dra receives a result telling him the alignment of somebody else - not a false result.

Neither Dreaming God claim seems manifestly implausible, and the two roles (John Waters and Elton John) both make sense to be included. That said, it seems to be a very powerful combination. Since fake-counter-claiming doesn't make sense for scum, the only possibilities I can think of are that they are both telling the truth, albeit one of them could be scum.

At bottom of page 110, and it's taken me almost 10 minutes to get through the page due to crashing...I'll try again later

WAIT WHAT IN THE FUCK WHO CLAIMED ELTON JOHN

Oh :/ I misunderstood the Elton John SONG Dreaming God claim.

[vollkan]

@ Zoidberg

You can check The Sopranos Mafia, an ancient large theme modded by Mastermind of Sin, but that's after I'd been doing wagon analysis for a while. It's one I remember off the top of my head.

Oh DGB.

Wagon analysis is not my problem. My problem is your seemingly purposeful misinterpretation of the

implications

of your wagon analysis. You are claiming that I have ~140% probability of being scum based on where I voted.

1. You didn't formulate those probabilities correctly
   
2. You are attempting to pass them off as fact
   
3. They are based on assumption

I have no doubt you use this technique all the time. But pointing at the analysis itself and saying "I do this as town therefore I am town" is not proof that you are town. The act itself means nothing. The conclusions you draw and the implications you make are telling.

Furthermore, why aren't you voting me if I have the most imaginary scumpoints on your silly scale?

I don't explain everything in detail every time, it gets tedious. Most of the time people have already seen this.

If you have particular questions, I'll take the time to explain it to you, but bear in mind that I'm playing badminton tonight and I'm leaving in 15 minutes, and when I come back I like to shower and I can't guarantee you'll get your answer before morning unless you ask me rIght nOW.

i know ive often ranted against VCA in the past, but putting that aside - why is it that i rate so high? if its due to minimal voting, keep in mind that, as i think you well know, thats part of how i play

@pdra 2969: okay that makes sense



ive now caught up reading wise (access is still an issue but). i dont really see the case against DGB at all

[vollkan]

@ Zoidberg

You can check The Sopranos Mafia, an ancient large theme modded by Mastermind of Sin, but that's after I'd been doing wagon analysis for a while. It's one I remember off the top of my head.

Oh DGB.

Wagon analysis is not my problem. My problem is your seemingly purposeful misinterpretation of the

implications

of your wagon analysis. You are claiming that I have ~140% probability of being scum based on where I voted.

1. You didn't formulate those probabilities correctly
   
2. You are attempting to pass them off as fact
   
3. They are based on assumption

I have no doubt you use this technique all the time. But pointing at the analysis itself and saying "I do this as town therefore I am town" is not proof that you are town. The act itself means nothing. The conclusions you draw and the implications you make are telling.

Furthermore, why aren't you voting me if I have the most imaginary scumpoints on your silly scale?

I don't explain everything in detail every time, it gets tedious. Most of the time people have already seen this.

If you have particular questions, I'll take the time to explain it to you, but bear in mind that I'm playing badminton tonight and I'm leaving in 15 minutes, and when I come back I like to shower and I can't guarantee you'll get your answer before morning unless you ask me rIght nOW.

i know ive often ranted against VCA in the past, but putting that aside - why is it that i rate so high? if its due to minimal voting, keep in mind that, as i think you well know, thats part of how i play

@pdra 2969: okay that makes sense



ive now caught up reading wise (access is still an issue but). i dont really see the case against DGB at all

[vollkan]

i know ive often ranted against VCA in the past, but putting that aside - why is it that i rate so high? if its due to minimal voting, keep in mind that, as i think you well know, thats part of how i play

People who score high are on lots of wagons where few scum have already flipped and many town have already flipped, especially if they were "easy" wagons. DGB doesn't correct for voting volume at all, so low voting volume will tend to make your score show up lower rather than higher. She thinks scum vote for wagons more, anyway, so it doesn't bother her.

Taking the numbers game this seriously (AFAICT) is probably a towntell for DGB. I've been scum with her where she fakes it as scum, and the difference is usually pretty clear (e.g., she'll minimize how much junk she presents and only use the parts that supports whatever she wants to happen). I haven't played with DGB-scum in ages, though. Anyway, I've had a mild town read on DGB all game, and it's promoted to a stronger one now.

I don't agree with her lynch targets, though, mainly because I don't think one of SPB and DW is necessarily scum. The main "spooky" thing about them is that their roles are so similar, but the fact that both abilities have been corroborated makes this less spooky than it might otherwise be. I think it's more likely that there are two similar roles in the game than that Reck gave a duplicated rolename as a fakeclaim (or that scum ignored a fakeclaim).

Dram is a good lynch. Refer to my posts earlier today.

Vote: dramonic

i reread as much as much as i could, and this is relationally a strong tell.

Dram+7

mainly for post 992 in which he suggests BT/TH as comparable lynch targets (ala the vote/FoS tell) and declaring strong suspicion on TH without making args or actually pushing TH's lynch

-----------------
I dont see the basis for the TBM push - just seems like a lurker lynch

[vollkan]

ebwop:

Dram+7

[vollkan]

This game is totes fab!

I received a PM from mod at the start of today - I am voteless today. I'm almost certain that this has nothing to do with my role, so I suspect this means I have been targeted.

[sung to the tune of "Dancing Queen" by ABBA]

@DGB: You expect me to believe that without you claiming why or how you got this info?

I don't know why and how, therefore I do not trust it entirely myself. It might come from scum.

If its fake, that's verging on bastard mod territory. The few times Ive seen scum messaging mechanics, the message is normally clearly not from the mod (eg somethin like "you found a note on the ground which states: 'Kawaii is scum.' "

that said, the way DGB is acting is very over the top about this

[vollkan]

[Sung to the tune of "I Dreamed a Dream" from Les Miserables]

VOTE: DGB

Unless someone claims to be cause of that "message" to her, this is the play.

I got a message night 3 as well, and no one claimed that one. I'm not sure why anyone would own up to the most recent one, but if they did, it would be most appreciated.

*flips feather boa*

The message was just an ASCII dick, so a little HARDer to interpret than the nigh 4 message.
.

*oh em gee*
that doesnt really help too much in relation to the new message, but I think it does make the new message less likely to be something we can treat as proper mod confirmation

why didnt you mention the ASCII dick first up though?

[vollkan]

why didnt you mention the ASCII dick first up though?

I thought the mod was coming on to me.

I was waiting for someone to mention it first, which didn't happen. Also it was peculiar that no one mentioned receiving messages on prior nights.

It didn't seem wise to mention this when Wyrd and his scummy minions were spending all their energy trying to discredit me and lynch me - especially when the dick had no effect that I could observe.

Not to change the subject,

Where is SPB??????

It's a freaking lurking HYDRA.

YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA, YMCA, you got to stay at the YMCA.

How would it discredit you? Messaging mechanics tend to be a role given to scum (the fact that that it clearly wasnt being used seriously only adds to that).

Also, you are using the word 'scummy' WAY too often - and, though I will need to check this when I get proper computer access again, it seems to have gotten worse more recently

[vollkan]

Also, you are using the word 'scummy' WAY too often

How many points that get her?

fabfabfab

No explanation, so:

dgb+5

[vollkan]

I received a PM last night like the one DGB described. it was an ASCII dick and asked for my asl

Voolkan stats

Number of times Wyrd is mentioned:

0

Number of times SPB is mentioned:

1 indirect

"1) Post 385 doesn't make any sense at all as a reason to suspect BT. BT had declared his opinion on trollie and SPB, but why does that make it scummy to ask other people for their reasons?"

Number of times TH is mentioned:

Numerous times

Number of times Ythan is mentioned:

Numerous times


I find the below a suspicious lining up of a townie to the gallows if vollkan was Ythan's buddy, and vollkan knew that Ythan would flip scum.

Tentative +7 on Zoraster in the event that Ythan is scum. The reason for this that Zoraster has avoided actually stating a position one way or the other on the claim, and has instead just questioned the manner in which it was made

for the past three weeks or so, ive only been able to play on mobile devices. which is why my play has been so narrow, iioa, etc

i just gavent been able to properly read and track through things.

as for that last point, i think my argument was valid. i get that in retrospect itcan be interpreted that way, but the point itsekf was entirely legit.

Beyond that his contribution to the game drops off the map, and is all just asking questions and doing nothing with it. No analysis, no real stances. Claims voteless D5, but that's really no excuse.

See, that's not the vollkan-town that I know and love. Sure he's aloof with his arm's-length, opaque number system, but he's not usually this shifty and uninvolved. Was he even voted once? I don't think anyone has ever voted for vollkan. For someone with such powerful towncred potential he's done shockingly little.

except you know full well that vollkan-scum is just as active/aggressive as vollkantown - and vollkanscum distances a lot.. my play being off cilour here is entirely due to RL factors (ie no computer)

[vollkan]

And vollkan-SK? What's that like.

A scumtell that's panned out really well for me recently (when I discovered my own tendency to do this as scum), is people using RL or technical excuses for lurking.

As you have just done.

You have failed to explain your huge 7 point on zoraster conditional scumminess about Ythan, something you have failed to follow up on.

You have failed to submit point totals, too. I get it; they tend to get you flak. But that's never stopped you before.

I think ive only been SK once, and I dont remember it.

i never fabricate rl excuses - i consider it unfair

what about it needs explaining?

[vollkan]

I think ive only been SK once, and I dont remember it.

Not an argument.

i never fabricate rl excuses - i consider it unfair

You're an honest guy, I would actually trust you on this one.

what about it needs explaining?

Your normal playstyle does involve a certain scarcity of posts but in this game you've been singularly uninvolved and the quality of your posts is uncharacteristically very, very poor.

It's not stuff you can argue away logically, we're talking about meta reasons.

I'd still like to see what you'd come up with if you plunged in the pool. Any chance you can do this during this game-day?

all going well, i get my new computer tomorrow evening. realistically speaking, though, i just wont have the time to do a complete reread or anything (frankly, apart from everything else with tech issues lately, i just dont have the same time available that i used to back at uni - but ill at least be able to catch up properly

[vollkan]

should be getting new computr tomorrow (delvery delayed)

[vollkan]

Okay, computer access is restored. Catching up now

[vollkan]

Main case on Trollie I see is that he's not dead despite his D1 softclaim. You could explain it away with the other claims up to a point, but it's starting to get a little zany, especially once you're reminded that his softclaim came out during a back-and-forth with SPB (i.e., so it's unlikely scum would miss/forget it).

The back-and-forth itself didn't look faked to me, though, so I don't think SPB and Trollie are scum together. I like your case on Zoidberg better. Trollie could be the SK possibly, but I'd rather deal with someone who's more likely to be mafia unless the SK is way disproportionately probable.

This theory is a little shaky in a scum+SK game, particularly one which is PR-heavy. Plus, Trollie has been under suspicion, so the odds of him appearing an attractive target for scum are significantly reduced.

See, here's why your argument is bogus:

THE INFORMATION YOU NEED TO DECIDE IF MY CLAIM IS LEGIT OR NOT IS ALREADY OUT THERE. I WAS ALREADY ROLE CONFIRMED BY 2 PEOPLE.

Continuing to harp on about "withholding information" is a convenient way to pretend to scumhunt.

That's just as stupid as saying "I claim roleblocker, you got roleblocked N1 and he got roleblocked N3, therefore I dont need to tell you who I targetted N2, 4 and 5.
Information is being withheld, even if you're "confirmed"

I'm not trying to scumhunt here?

I really do not see Zoidberg as scummy for this.

He wasn't "withholding information" in any meaningful sense. Yes, it isn't ideal play, but if he's claimed a useless role anyway, there's little incentive for scum-Zoid to stonewall about who he targets. It's not pro-town play (because ideally he should be giving rationales), but there's minimal scum incentive for it. It's minorly scummy at best, but I'm not convinced of that.

It's completely different to a roleblocker - where who you target necessarily reveals info (I'm not ignoring the prospect that the role actually may do something else, but in this game I am not at all surprised for there to be a purely silly role)

Is that really all that ever came of the D1 Zoidberg wagon? I guess it's just that I wanted to lynch him during the first half of my readthrough.

Here's the Ythan stuff. The gist is that he does devote a lot of posts to Zoidberg, but a lot of it is pretty coach-y AFAICT, so I dunno if volume is where Magua was coming from, but.

Spoiler:

ALL I HAVE IS HAMMERS
SO I'M DISHING IT OUT LIKE ITS CHRISTMAS MOTHER FUCKING DAY

ALL I HAVE IS HAMMERS
AND WHEN I HAMMER IT IS GOING TO BE FABULOUS

so don't let nobody get to L-1
nobody

like, don't pull any L-1 claim business no
in this game there's an intent to L-1
because as soon as that L-1 comes, I'm on it
might be gay but i AINT NO BITCH

You can stop breadcrumbing now.

I don't even get the point of this post.

Holy fuck the signal:noise ratio in here is REALLY low.

Or this one.

hey zoidberg what do you think about the whole trollie v. bois thing

Honestly I'm still trying to parse it, and it's making my head hurt. Currrently I'd stand in line for an SPBz lynch before a Trollie lynch, though.

Why?

well dont keep it a secret darling, share them with us! i am very interested in every single one of your reads : )

+1

For someone who complains about noise and +1s transparency you're not being very useful.

Ythan what are these profile activity observations actually achieving?

Nothing, unless he srsly expects the first 8 pages of drivel to yield much.

This is bad.

vote Zoidberg

Why?

Because I find bois to be marginally more scum than Trollie? I would think that would be self-evident.

Why? Don't be dumb.

Why? Don't be dumb.

I've already outlined it. Don't be dumb.

Contrary to Om I think there's exactly one scum between Trollie and Bois. As I outlined before, to me it reads like Bois was pushing for a quick hammer using faulty meta. Especially in light of the way he STFU real quick once Trollie claimed. I notice with great interest that you skimmed right over that part in your attempt to paint me as scum.

Your read is fabricated and your attempt to smear me is pathetic.

Also I directly referenced the incident you're referring to here btw.

Don't just jump back to the one post suggesting you not be lynched it just looks like you're not even taking the game seriously.

Post more irrelevant stuff about who was online when.

Not one post I have made in this game was less relevant than this one of yours. You're just lashing out with no useful motivation.

I notice with great interest that you skimmed right over that part in your attempt to paint me as scum.

This is literally a scum claim are you even serious.

Here's Thunderhog's. The gist is that he voted Zoidberg for unclear reasons and then revoted him when I asked him who he thought was scum.

Spoiler:

Yeah, this post can die too.

Huh?! How can a post die? Not sure

exactly

what you mean...

Bad.

If this is what you were trying to say Kuribo, then now I understand. Could've just went all caveman and said it like this...

p-edit 2: Geez guys, shut up so I can post!!! As much as I think BT is scummy, I'm soon going to be willing to move my vote to Zoid. I'll readdress my case against BT at a later date if need-be.

Soon but not now?

Good point.

Unvote: BT; Vote: Zoid

(1) Large theme
(2) Reck game

(3) NS has basically fessed 3rd party

(4) A hammertime alternative wincon

I'm assuming multiball until proof I'm wrong.

Wait a minute... In reference to the bolded part, did you mean "NM", or did you actually mean NS? If you meant NS, can you point out where, cuz I'm not seeing it...

I mean, NS said he was town and that his blatant sarcasm was 'role-related'. No where did he mention third party...

and...

If you actually meant NM, then why can't NM just be a town with only hammers?

I've already started falling behind in this and finals are mon-thurs so I'm anticipating it's only gonna get worse, so

V/LA til Friday

Aren't you a hydra though? You're telling me that both / all of you are V/LA until Friday? I find that rather difficult to believe...

Other than that, have some one-liner and random reads:

OD = Town lean - I really don't see why there are so many votes there.
NM = Town slightly-further-than-leaning - Despite low post count, actually seems to be scumhunting. Seems to be one of the only ones too...
Kawaii = An arrogant jerkoff. I'm gonna put you in the same column as P-dra.

Since Iec seems to demand I place a vote, I'm going to put it right back where it was before.

Vote: Zoid

[/area][/spoiler]
Magua, please specify what I am missing.[/quote]

In ISO, Ythan looks bad, but looking at Ythan as a whole, his interactions with Zoid don't seem that out of character. TH is more interesting in that they only players he calls "scummy" are Zoid and Wyrd, which could be a case of the newbscum "use hyperbole against teammates" tell, but it's

Zoid+3

worthy only.

@ vollkan

Remind me please what day your vote was taken away.

I lost my vote on N4, and was voteless for D5

shut up.

I'm town.

I'm double voter. but i steal the vote from someone else.

But you were on record as saying you thought I was town. Why did you think it was pro-town to steal my vote?

[vollkan]

Hey, vollkan, a statement of who you actually think is scum would be faaaaaaabulous right about now.

Zoidberg: 53
Magua: 53
DGB: 60

All else at 50.

Needless to say, none of those suspicions is especially strong

[vollkan]

Zoidberg: 53
Magua: 53
DGB: 60

All else at 50.

Needless to say, none of those suspicions is especially strong

I'm going to assume higher numbers are scummier. If so, fabulously well done on, at *Day 6*, standing up and saying, "Guiz, I've got no firm scumreads."

I mean, if you were town, I'd expect you to be doing shit, like trying to figure out who scum is. Thank you for making it so much easier for me by not doing anything like that.

Thing is, when I kept up with things (D1), it was fine. But Mafia is a game, especially in Large Games, where falling behind just gets compounded. I've fallen behind badly - I know in broad, blobby terms what's happened, but either there are no scumtells that I consider major (possible) or, more likely, things have just slipped by me.

Short of it is that I probably haven't kept track nearly as well as I should have, and I'm really doubtful I will have the time to do so. If that's lynchworthy, so be it, but for the sake of not doing this later on in the game, I'd suggest doing it now.

[vollkan]

Okay the way I see it, the only other viable lynch seems to be Zora at this point. I wouldn't have placed Zora among the remaining scum. If I don't get lynched today, it just means I get lynched tomorrow, which is far worse. It infuriates me that I have nothing to contribute, but I'm trying to be realistic about this. I've stuffed up, but that's the best way to salvage it.

My parting word would be that something about DGB's play this game has bothered me (I think that was partly behind my points earlier), but I can't work out what.

[vollkan]

I see I'm at L-1.

I am Esteban the Power Bottom. I am 1-shot bulletproof.