Newbie 1389 Trouble in River City Game Over Scum win

[fferyllt]

confirm

hi guys

[fferyllt]

You should vote me, then, because I never RVS.

[fferyllt]

Well would you look at that? It's my scum day! Four years ago today I made the decision to never trust anyone ever again.

VOTE: Kueshina

Last to confirm. Obvscum. Die.

-----

btw fferyllt - lacking RVS, what is your plan for starting Day 1? RQS?

Day 1s always start fine without me RVSing.

[fferyllt]

The thing is, though, that RVS is a way to start discussion and allow players to develop reads earlier, right? It seems to me that creating a meta of "does not RVS" simply allows you to escape scrutiny on those occasions when you are assigned scum, and RVSing may prove hazardous to you.

It does the exact opposite of allowing me to escape scrutiny. Not RVSing on a site where RVS pretty much default draws attention. Usually what ensues is a discussion of why/why not RVS and a bandwagon on either me or someone who objects to my not voting ending RVS early.

And that's all good, because it's not RVS itself that provides reads. It's whatever ends RVS, why and whom it involves that gives people material for reads.

Some folks think that there's a tendency for scum to put a "random" vote down on a partner during RVS because it's some minor distancing, and votes for no reason seem easier to take back than votes that come with a case.

[fferyllt]

The thing is, though, that RVS is a way to start discussion and allow players to develop reads earlier, right? It seems to me that creating a meta of "does not RVS" simply allows you to escape scrutiny on those occasions when you are assigned scum, and RVSing may prove hazardous to you.

It does the exact opposite of allowing me to escape scrutiny. Not RVSing on a site where RVS pretty much default draws attention. Usually what ensues is a discussion of why/why not RVS and a bandwagon on either me or someone who objects to my not voting ending RVS early.

And that's all good, because it's not RVS itself that provides reads. It's whatever ends RVS, why and whom it involves that gives people material for reads.

Some folks think that there's a tendency for scum to put a "random" vote down on a partner during RVS because it's some minor distancing, and votes for no reason seem easier to take back than votes that come with a case.

^^ though I should say that once people have played with me a game or two, the novelty wears off. There are other things to do at the beginning of a game day, and I do them.

I have a tentative town read on you for instance.

[fferyllt]

For me its just a distaste for the arbitrary. All the logic behind random voting seems extinguished even on the newbie side here. Then again we need fodder to get started.

How do you usually start games?

[fferyllt]

I'm not a he.

[fferyllt]

EBWOP: "he seems" should be "she seems", sorry.
Also, do 1SBPs get told when they get saved by their ability in this setup?

From what I've seen in other matrix-6 games, I think not. But it's worth asking officially.

@Mod, does the 1SBP learn their 1S is used up if they are targeted for a NK?

[fferyllt]

For me its just a distaste for the arbitrary. All the logic behind random voting seems extinguished even on the newbie side here. Then again we need fodder to get started.

How do you usually start games?

Well, thanks for the vote of confidence, fferyllt, I appreciate that. And your argument for not RVSing does make sense, I suppose.
UNVOTE: fferyllt
The thing is, perhaps due in part to my lack of experience, I don't really know how else you'd start a game on day 1 with no information. It seems to me RVS has to at least

happen

, if only to get the ball rolling.

This pretty much. There seems to be plenty of flailing around going on, and I'll be glad to take part. I suppose if people weren't rvsing I'd most likely try to start something...

This is worded in a way that puzzles me somewhat. What is the "something" that you want to "try to start?"

Conversation. In answer to both questions. And RVS is as good as any starter I guess. I'm a noob here. So the culture of the site is new. In other online frames I've played people will open with random votes too. I just think people need to get talking. Day 1 is tough...

I still feel like a n00b in some ways too. I played a lot of games in a significantly different game format (12-24 hour days, and plurality lynch). My tactics are honed for that sort of environment, and despite playing here for nearly 6 months I still don't think I have all the necessary nuances down so that I do vote-related things correctly on near-autopilot.

But, day 1 is not as tough as all that. My main problem is that up to 3 weeks worth of day 1 gives me way too much time for second guessing.

[fferyllt]

In these games, and particularly the newbie section how much of the three weeks do the players tend to use on average before reaching consensus?

It varies. Day 1 sometimes goes for close to the whole 3 weeks. In a recent newbie game I hammered with like 4 minutes left until nightfall. I was hoping that someone would join the other bandwagon but nobody did. Fortunately both wagons were on scum.

[fferyllt]

sikon327 - thanks for your detailed response to my initial prod. In response to your questions back to me, I'll vote either randomly during a RVS if we need to instigate discussion and create info (prior to my post, sufficient info was generated that I didn't see the need for a random vote alongside my questions.) Or I'll vote when I have more conviction (I have not done enough digging yet to support any of my theories, for or against you or any other player.) So, no vote thus far.

If I may, I'd like to explain the scum tendency of leaning town on multiple people... there are a number of reasons for this. Scum know who is town, therefore they can/will be correct when it suits them (ie, later they can point back and say "Hey, my read on that guy was town... now he's dead, I was right, I'm a good guy.") Also, they can build credibility with town members by leaning/suggesting that they are town... especially with some more novice players. Very often a town player will feel validated like they are doing good, when somebody else thinks they are town. (In my experience, it's more important to find scum than for other people to think you are town. Scum will often NK the most trusted town person to maintain control.) There are a thousand other scenarios, but these are just a few, and we are of course exploring all that we can on Day 1.

A meta dive on me will show you that I post early town reads when I get them. I'll be happy to provide some links, but my wiki page has links to all my MS games, with my alignment in the ones that have completed. The BSG Micro and the Buzzword Bingo Micro that completed today would be good starts. I was a hydra (one account for two people sharing the same role) in the Buzzword Bingo game. My posts are signed with an "- f" usually.

http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=User:Fferyllt

It can be scummy, yes. But that is pretty player-specific.

[fferyllt]

My early town reads are something of a sore point atm.

[fferyllt]

Can't, entirely, because ongoing games, but the huge difference between playing with players who know my game and players who don't just doesn't get better.

So I gave you the names of two representative completed games listed on my wiki page. One where the playerlist for the most part had no idea of my meta and one where I was playing with people who know my game well. There are a couple months between the two games, and a number of the same players in the lists. In the BSG game, I came under extreme suspicion for giving out a town read after about 21 posts and was eventually mislynched. In the Buzzword Bingo game, townreads on page 2 were no big deal. That game ended today in a perfect town win. Although it takes longer, I'm not too bad a scum reads either.

[fferyllt]

Fferyllt - let me clarify. I understand the point you are making about your play style, history, meta, etc. My question to you is why did you bring it up in the first place? I made mention of a different player doing a similar thing, as part of a line of questioning to that player, and you chimed in with a defense for YOUR actions. I never mentioned you doing it, neither did anyone else that I can see.

It smells fishy to me, mostly because good guys (town) operate under the confidence of their innocence. Bad guys (scum) are forced to mask their guilt and put on a show. This subtle difference changes the nuance of some things. One of the things I look for is people who are overly defensive (which you've exhibited in this maneuver) because scum feel the need to defend and keep the heat off. A town player knows their innocence and wont be as touchy or knee jerk on defense, especially against an accusation made against a completely different player.

It was in response to the player that I tentatively townread, and appeared to be an indirect dig in my direction. It also was the post immediately after Kus putting down a vote on me with the reasoning that I was buddying sikon, so it also looked like indirect support for that vote.

Your play in this game so far seems to be oblique and indirect in some ways. I am going to make some time for a meta dive to see if that's typical of your town game.

[fferyllt]

I've had a look through his previous games -- there are two of them, one newbie, one mini normal, and in both of them, he's town. And in neither of those games does he display the hesitance to vote for possible scum that is present in this game. So why has he suddenly become cautious about voting? The way I see it, he either had some kind of epiphany in-between his previous game and this one, or he is merely playing differently now because he now has a different role -- that of the town's enemy.

I've had a chance to read his prior games this morning, and I've come to a similar conclusion about his play in those two games. My caveat is that the games are old - about 3 years old. In Mini1053 he mentioned that he played elsewhere, so it's not surprising that his games back then were aggressive. My play style 3 years ago is probably not a good indication of how I play today.

That said, as I mentioned earlier the indirect attack and indirect support for Kus's first vote pings. It pings harder than anything else in the game so far. I'm pretty deliberate with my vote when the game format allows, so I probably won't vote until after the weekend and there's more data to weigh up.

likeabauss, do you still play regularly on another site?

[fferyllt]

IC Intro

Ok, so it looks like everyone playing this game is fairly savvy about mafia, so I've delayed making an IC post so's not to make a huge wall of indigestible words right off the bat.

As the official Inexperience-Challenged (IC) player in this game. I'm here to help you get acclimated to MafiaScum-style mafia games. As someone who has played a lot of games elsewhere before joining MS, I'm advantaged in terms of knowing what sorts of things might seem alien to you, and disadvantaged in terms of knowing site meta like the back of my hand. But, I think it will work out. This is my first game as an IC, so I'm actually in learning mode, too.

If you guys have questions about mafia theory or how to play out certain situations I guarantee that I will not lie about theory or town and scum strategy regardless of my alignment. All of our roles were assigned randomly, so my chances of being town or scum were exactly the same as yours.

Additionally, I call on the 3 Semi-Experienced (SE) players to answer questions as they see fit, and especially to contradict me if they think I am off base. Some if not all of you have more MafiaScum-specific experience than I do.

I am playing for my team to win, though, so please treat me with the same skepticism in my non-IC posting that you treat everyone else.

These links may be useful, especially the commonly used abbreviations. The whole MafiaScum wiki is a wealth of information that I have been using regularly since long before I joined MS and started playing here.

Newbie Guide
Frequently Asked Questions
Commonly Used Abbreviations

[fferyllt]

Yeah, it's personal, though I looked at a few IC posts by others in thinking about what to include. Some IC's put in a lot of do this don't do that in theirs, but it doesn't look like this is a crowd that needs to be warned not to self-hammer or hammer someone without a chance to role-claim.

[fferyllt]

sikon327 - thanks for your detailed response to my initial prod. In response to your questions back to me, I'll vote either randomly during a RVS if we need to instigate discussion and create info (prior to my post, sufficient info was generated that I didn't see the need for a random vote alongside my questions.) Or I'll vote when I have more conviction (I have not done enough digging yet to support any of my theories, for or against you or any other player.) So, no vote thus far.

If I may, I'd like to explain the scum tendency of leaning town on multiple people... there are a number of reasons for this. Scum know who is town, therefore they can/will be correct when it suits them (ie, later they can point back and say "Hey, my read on that guy was town... now he's dead, I was right, I'm a good guy.") Also, they can build credibility with town members by leaning/suggesting that they are town... especially with some more novice players. Very often a town player will feel validated like they are doing good, when somebody else thinks they are town. (In my experience, it's more important to find scum than for other people to think you are town. Scum will often NK the most trusted town person to maintain control.) There are a thousand other scenarios, but these are just a few, and we are of course exploring all that we can on Day 1.

What are your thoughts on the formation of town blocs?

[fferyllt]

This thing just happened to start the day I had to go to a company picnic, hence the confirm and disappear.

As for how to start day 1, depending on the setup:

massclaim

, some PRs claim to get doc/watcher protection but others say hidden, hypocopping, in dethy and similar everyone outs their reports, if there's a bulletproof the get told that they get shot, they claim if they got shot, if there's no bulletproof but

there's a doc and no kill, sometimes they tell everyone who they saved

, etc.

I might've missed something in that mess of formatting, but I'm locking in on the ones I bolded. Where are you getting that a massclaim would ever be a good idea for Town on Day 1? "Power roles all of you claim and hope we have Doc to protect you and scum aren't pulling false roles from the open chart." Why would the Doctor

ever

reveal just to say they saved somebody? They'll get killed now.

Also not sure why you claim ffery is buddying sikon after they had a brief argument/discussion over play preference. Above anything she's the IC and sikon doesn't have a little two-letter title, that sounds like the natural place to go to ask a meta question.

VOTE: Kueshina

I just want to point out that Kueshina and imkingdavid just demonstrated real scum hunting in their most recent posts. Thoughtful insights and additions to the conversation that warrant consideration and exploration.

Could you elaborate a bit more on Kue? Both of their answers came down to "it was just RVS", but while imking brings up a legitimate point, Kue is trying to find partners based on vote analysis before anything. My issue with this is "X and Y are partners" potentially lines up "well X wasn't actually scum, but maybe Y is so let's go for that lynch."

This may be a meta thing, so two wolves typically start a wagon or copy each others' votes so hard here?

the way Morthas copied sikon327's vote on likeabauss makes me wonder if Morthas and sikon723 are scumpartners, although it also seems possible that likeabauss and sikon723 are scumpartners distancing themselves.

He's not even consistent on whether scum partners buddy or create distance in the same sentence.

Where did you go?

[fferyllt]

You just earned yourself a fucking rage post and you will see why

NO ONE IS HERE 24/7

SOME PEOPLE CAN'T POST CONTENT EVERY 5-6 HOURS

SOME PEOPLE CAN ONLY POST CONTENT EVERY 24 HOURS.

Now i will give you time stamps on my end of when my last 2 posts before this were posted

FOR FUCKS SAKE DON'T EXPECT ME TO POST WHILE I'M FUCKING SLEEPING.

Wow you are overly touchy. Not to mention dead wrong. I never complained about your posting frequency or timing. I never had any problem with you sleeping. I just pointed out you had added exactly zero to the conversation. I stand by that claim. Glad to see you up and at em now though. Welcome to the game.

Now that you are taking part it seems you are here to defend likeabauss. (Along with continue to ride my tail)

You have history with him? Or are you two somehow related in THIS game.

By the way... Lay off the caps lock. I find it personally insulting.

As per way of my learning I take it personal attacks (rage poasts lol) and profanity are acceptable here?

Responding to the bolded, over the top personal attacks and direct insults are frowned upon and in extreme cases can lead to being force-replaced from games or modkilled. Profanity is acceptable.

The newbie games tend to be a little less fractious that games in other areas, but mafia by nature is a an adversarial game and provoking reactions is a way to develop reads.

[fferyllt]

jason n' caps are town

VOTE: kueshina

Why do you think caps is town?

[fferyllt]

for 81, 85, and 97

Agree on 85 and 97. I may be too much a part of the topic to judge re 81.

You said you have a slight gut read of scum on sikon. My early impressions were the opposite, and my more recent impressions are basically oh god wallz. I'll get past that and read sikon more carefully sometime today.

[fferyllt]

I had 81 and 85 confused. 85 is the one I can't really judge.

[fferyllt]

What do you mean forming a town bloc?

It's the upside of town reads - some town players finding each other and actively working together to develop reads and push bandwagons.

Also, who do you suspect as scum? I'd love to hear your insights/thoughts/questions into this game, instead of the analysis of the way it is being/has been played. Seems like you're a very meta focused player, is that true?

I'm still developing my reads. I have you down as possible scum, but I'm worried that it could be a false positive due to your current play style/rustiness after a few years away from mafia.

I need more data from a few players.

I'm not sure about "very" meta focused, at least at MS. When I have experiential meta I use it. When I wind up with a leaning scum read based on in-thread play I like do a meta dive and look for reasons to rethink.

[fferyllt]

Since this is her first IC I think she just wrote it. It is not boiler plate yet... and I bet we see it change in the future. The fact she did not address the direct question of whether or not I am allowed to get (and discuss) a read from it makes me even more suspicious.

heh.

It will definitely change, since I can be a first time IC only once.

I decided to ignore that comment, since what I wrote is close to what I see in other IC intros, regardless of the ICs' alignment. But there's no reason for you not to discuss what you picked up and see if other players agree.

[fferyllt]

sikon, I disagree with you about Morthas. I got strong town vibes from his early posts and I'm feeling good about his replacement.

cAPSLOCK is another player I'm feeling good about. Trollie's observations were close to mine, though I intentionally set post 85 aside. I think I'm seeing some genuine town paranoia in his recent posts (especially that last one), which has outweighed a feeling from his earlier posts that there was excuse-making/set up for lurking going on.

[fferyllt]

Spoiler:

I'm town

Lol.

The game I've played are more primitive than here. But I actually weight this type of thing as a mild flag when it is done very early in the game under no pressure. I tend to watch more closely in this case.

I'm curious to see what some of you more experienced players do with it.

From what I've seen at MS, I consider it p much null.

A player I sometimes hydra with here occasionally claims scum in his first post. :/

[fferyllt]

@Mod Could you please prod Lynx_Shine if she's due one? Tks!

[fferyllt]

Hey, busy weekend (due to Father's day) and then a long day today. I'll be sure to post tomorrow evening after work.

Glad you are back.

Re my thoughts on cAPS check post 118

I'm not really into big reads lists after 6 pages of day 1. Some games I never do post a compendium about all players.

[fferyllt]

VOTE: fferyllt

That feels good.

I believe you to be scum. I have many reasons that I will share when the time is right. For now, I will wait patiently while others weigh in and share their opinions.

What say you all? Is fferyllt scum or am I crazy?

You are my strongest scum read atm. Your vote adds more doubt about the accuracy of that read. :/

[fferyllt]

Condolences sikon. Take care.

[fferyllt]

You are my strongest scum read atm. Your vote adds more doubt about the accuracy of that read. :/

I can assure you that this logic is faulty.

Please review the post #127 Lynx_Shine made and offer up your thoughts on the concerns presented about you.

Also, cAPSLOCK's post #114 rings true with me. Having reread my previous games here, you'll notice that I strung up an IC mafia goon on Day 1 on an almost identical maneuver.

I don't think you parsed my statement correctly. Your vote on me makes me think my scum read could be wrong. I've felt that your approach was indirect, and that you are basing your FoSes on what other players dig up. This is similar in that you're vauting off cAPS and Lynx' posts, but you're not being indirect now.

IME, I tend to either pick up votes in the early phases of day 1 or go more or less unnoticed until there's more data to work with. I don't usually key in on specific posts for scum reads. It's more about body of work.

[fferyllt]

@JasonWazza, your recent posts have an active-lurky feel to them.

Sunday you said you'd catch up on the game in a minute. How did that go?

[fferyllt]

Don't scumhunt until the endgame? Hardly. I'm actually pretty pleased with how often I pick out a scum or two on day 1.

Substance and quantity is a little lacking in some quarters still, and it's primarily experienced players who seem to be holding back. I'm done waiting for content.

[fferyllt]

imkingdavid - 6 posts so far

55 - Post starts with a preemptive apology for not posting as much as some people do and ends with a mild FoS on sikon. I like the stuff in the middle, mostly, but both the apology and the FoS don't sit right. I don't get an apologetic sense from sikon's early posts at all. Insecure, maybe, but I think that's par for the course for a first game at MS.

87= asking for Morthas to be prodded, is a little ironic given it's imkingdavid's 5th post in the game.

75 and 125 are more apologies for inactivity, and 125 promises content later.

scumpiled.

[fferyllt]

JasonWazza - 15 posts so far

19 Almost replied to this when I read it. I rolled scum in my first newbie game and intentionally held back confirmation for several hours so my scum partner and I could take advantage of some pre-game time on the quicktopic thread. Even so, I was not the last person to confirm. A couple of town players lagged behind iirc.

65 Genuine rage? pings a bit.

67 67 overall is a townish post, and contributed to a (now stale) town read. Pedantic digression: Example of a game that didn't start with RVS. http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=27515. First vote (post #8) was a self-vote by a town player who claimed he was anti-town. Two pages later another vote happened in post #59, and it was a "true" RVS vote. The game ended on day 2 after lynching scum two days in a row.

69 and 76 are more ragey stuff that comes off as posturing.

Most of the rest of his posts are theory. His vote is on cAPSLOCK because cAPSLOCK had unrealistic expectations of how fast replies should be showing up.

This is a mixed read, but I'm not impressed so far, especially with the vote.

[fferyllt]

Lynx_Shine

I like her two posts. Would like to see more posts and more follow-up. In the interest of promoting follow-up

This may be a meta thing, so two wolves typically start a wagon or copy each others' votes so hard here?

It varies. Experienced scum players tend to push the envelope in terms of doing "stuff scum never do". In my first game I was surprised that my scum partner hard-buddied me on day 1. And he kept it up all game. I always had him null, leaning scum. I think town could probably have made something of our lack of interaction and my lack of pushing a player I claimed not to think was town. But, I had been kind of underestimated from the start. Most players thought I was pretty inexperienced at the game and I didn't overtly correct them. So far, in newbie games I've seen that scum players tend to keep some distance regardless of their stated reads on each other. In other game queues it's more varied.

I found several posts arguing against RVS's usefulness, several about meta, spoke with Trollie a bit about reads on caps.

I don't argue against the general usefulness of RVS. For myself, I prefer other ways of initially participating in the game, and exactly how I initially participate in a given game is dependent on what other players do. Based on feedback from an an offiste game that completed this weekend, I do plan to make some changes, especially to my usual first post in games. I was struck by an observer's comment that first pots are "clean", devoid of whatever baggage comes from reactions to posts, and that there is a lot to be discerned from them. Town players come into the game with little but their own questions. Scum players come into the game from their chat on a QT. Though not intentional, my usual first post (which hasn't significantly changed in something like 2 years) is too much of a tabula rasa. I'm going to work on that.

[fferyllt]

VOTE: imkingdavid

[fferyllt]

Three scum suspects???

Dude.

[fferyllt]

Why are you voting and asking then rest to support your vote? You asked for my reasoning in an I'll show you if you show me fashion.

Why not tell us why you suspect her?

Why are you withholding info from town?

These are not rhetorical questions... Maybe you have a reason?

It is a bit unconventional, I know. Laying out a case gives the other person an opportunity to refute it. Let me replay what happened from my perspective with fferylt and demonstrate exactly how she "rebuked" a component of my case:

1) I vote, stay vague, and say I have some reasons.
2) She utters a no content response that says "I thought you were scum, but now I'm not so sure because you're voting for me." (which I initially misinterpreted.)
3) I escalate in response, and point her to your case, and that of Lynx_Shine (which she basically ignored from the get go.)
4) She responds again with another "no real content post." (correcting me on parsing, but then completely dodging the two arguments against her again.) An hour later, giving her plenty of time to respond to both, she asks somebody else to post more content.
5) At this point, I reply a bit more inflammatory, and hint at a piece of the case against her:

And in my opinion, you're trying to contribute to the thread without adding anything that's helping the town identify and hang scum. This is not pro-town behavior, and I want to hang you for it.

This is one of my key reasons I think she is scum, but how does she respond?
6)She gives me exactly what I asked for. 3 scum suspects, her reasons for all 3, and a vote for one... not before offering an excuse for why she hadn't done it yet:

Substance and quantity is a little lacking in some quarters still, and it's primarily experienced players who seem to be holding back. I'm done waiting for content.

"I'm done waiting for content." Translation: HERE COMES THE BOOM

indeed.

Now, solely by virtue of me telling her what she's doing wrong, she corrects it and continues on. Experienced mafia players are very good at this, and can be difficult to nail down. Case in point, fferyllt.

Please note, she didn't really respond to the 2 arguments against her from Lynx_Shine and yourself. (She basically dodged both, despite my asking her to respond.) She then launched into what I consider a play style change, after I called her out on behavior that is no pro town. This also stinks.

I hope that wall of text answers most of your questions. Additionally, I delayed a bit on my response to your read from her IC post. My case revolved around:

I am playing for my team to win, though, so please treat me with the same skepticism in my non-IC posting that you treat everyone else.

And on a reread, after your post, my perception was strengthened based on the other comment you highlighted (odds of drawing a scum role.) Like I said, I have picked up on similar tells in the past with success. I also wanted to see how she would respond to your case, but she choose to ignore your comment (see post 116.)

You have made accurate, though inflammatorily worded, observations about my play. So, no refutation is needed. I know my alignment, so I know that your observations are null with respect to it.

Now, look forward to post 118.

After you make an argument against her, she says "I feel good about cAPSLOCK." Hmm... this sounds vaguely familiar. Oh yeah, she did it with me later (I call her out in post 132, she responds in post 133 saying "I thought you were scum, but now I think you're town.")

Doesn't it feel REALLY scummy to anybody else for somebody accused to turn around and basically say, "Thanks for suspecting me. I think you're town now."

Discerning cAPSLOCK's alignment is of more interest to me than his opinion about my alignment. Discerning alignment will

always

be more important to me than FoSes or votes my direction. It bothers some players. My typical lack of response to pressure also bothers some players, but I am what I am, and I'm fairly effective as a town player so I'm not likely to change that aspect of my game.

How about her Lynx_Shine post? Oh yeah:

Lynx_Shine

I like her two posts. Would like to see more posts and more follow-up. In the interest of promoting follow-up...

MORE buttering up to a person that is suspicious of her.

Okay, wall of text over. TL;DR - I think fferyllt is scum. Let's hang her.

See above. drawing some suspicion doesn't trouble me. I rely on my body of work to carry the day if I make it to late game.

[fferyllt]

fferyllt - is your vote on me simply pressure or what? I see in #133 you say that bauss is your "strongest scum read" but I don't see a vote on him. I find it odd that you'd place your first vote in the game on a self-admitted inactive player rather than on your strongest suspect. Also, you're voting me, as I understand it, due to inactivity. But as others have rightfully pointed out, you've done a lot of talking without saying much (up till recently when you posted your reads on a few players). I don't see the difference between my inactive inactivity and your active inactivity.

Anyway, I won't be voting you at the moment. Inactivity is a fact and not really something you can defend against, and I don't find it strong enough to be a reason for you to be lynched, especially this early on.

That's two people who misunderstood my post about bauss. To clarify, bauss was my strongest scum read up to the point where he started making a case on me. He went from indirect to direct stance of attack, though I think his case is mostly rehashing others' comments.

I never put a vote down purely for pressure. If I vote then at that point in the game, I am willing to lynch. You have been inactive, though you've been slightly more of a presence than Lynx. But, lynx' two posts had IMO good, thoughtful content and questions. I like questions. Prior to this, though you had 5 posts, there was only one with even a little bit of content.

[fferyllt]

Lynx are you still around? I'd like to actually chat with you about Kue rather than respond to bits of your wall.

[fferyllt]

Ok, well here are some questions/thoughts for starters, Lynx. I haven't looked all that closely at Kue mostly because I dismissed the mass claim comments as something scum wouldn't bring up. So, here's a closer look.

The post about starting with mass claim - I've been thinking that this is probably a site meta thing. I'm reluctant to hit up the "scum would never do X" meme, but it seems like an odd thing for a scum player to want to bring up in this game format. However new to MS Kue is, he has a working knowledge of mafia and command of the lingo, and says he played some games on epic mafia. I played a couple games on a site once where the mods put shittons of power roles into the designs, and the players were in the habit of all but breaking the game with mass claim on day 1.

One thing about epic mafia, though - the games happen fast. I dunno about mass claims. I might hit up a friend who plays there and ask.

What do you think was the motivation for scum-Kue to bring it up?

37 and 48 come off a little defensive and I'm kinda torn. In a true-newb, defensive reaction to an RVS vote wouldn't really bother me. Kue doesn't look true-newb as I said in the previous paragraph.

54 was that vote table and the vote on sikon. Terrible trajectory on this. Prior to voting sikon, the only thing I can find Kue comment on was agreement with sikon that scum might stretch out the confirmation phase of day 1.

82 vote switch to me. Once again no trajectory, but this time there is at least a reason stated for the vote.

To me the mass claim stuff is just...null. The vote trajectory stuff could be an artifact of rapid fire chat-style mafia, but it pings a little.

[fferyllt]

The glacial pace of this game is making me seriously antsy.

[fferyllt]

Fferyllt - let me clarify. I understand the point you are making about your play style, history, meta, etc. My question to you is why did you bring it up in the first place? I made mention of a different player doing a similar thing, as part of a line of questioning to that player, and you chimed in with a defense for YOUR actions. I never mentioned you doing it, neither did anyone else that I can see.

It smells fishy to me, mostly because good guys (town) operate under the confidence of their innocence. Bad guys (scum) are forced to mask their guilt and put on a show. This subtle difference changes the nuance of some things. One of the things I look for is people who are overly defensive (which you've exhibited in this maneuver) because scum feel the need to defend and keep the heat off. A town player knows their innocence and wont be as touchy or knee jerk on defense, especially against an accusation made against a completely different player.

It was in response to the player that I tentatively townread,

and appeared to be an indirect dig in my direction.

It also was the post immediately after Kus putting down a vote on me with the reasoning that I was buddying sikon,

so it also looked like indirect support for that vote

.

Your play in this game so far seems to be oblique and indirect in some ways.

I am going to make some time for a meta dive to see if that's typical of your town game.

I didn't use the word "pings", but I certainly did indicate concern about the indirect attack and the indirect vote support. In fact, it was enough concern to do a meta dive and read his earlier games.

And the dive

did not

turn up a propensity for indirect and oblique stuff.. He was direct and aggressive in his play back then. Given the passage of time (more than 2 years) I think he may have needed a little time to get back into the groove.

bauss was much more direct and aggressive right from the start in his earlier games. His later posts in this game, which I have said make me doubt the validity of my initial lean toward scum, are more in the vein of his first two MS games from a couple years ago.

[fferyllt]

Kue's post 159 was based on an extremely shallow read of my earlier posts to and about bauss.

Shallow cases are associated with scum alignment IME, but they are also common for newer players. I'll weigh that up with my post 157 from earlier today, but I also want to do a reread tomorrow .

[fferyllt]

Lynx,

[...]

@Kue: What is your level of experience with mafia?

I've played a few games on epicmafia, but that's about it.

Right or wrong, I am taking this at face value.

[fferyllt]

Re the pace, it is somewhat slow compared to other newbie games I've played from the start. We've been playing for over a week now.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... rt_order=d

[fferyllt]

Right or wrong, I am taking this at face value.

Ended up missing that first time around, caught it on a reread just a bit ago. Which is heading in that obnoxious rut of "not sure if newb or scum." Either way I don't personally see it as full clear, just eases up the massclaim fiasco.

Pretty much. Kue comes off a mix of touchy/reactive and aggressive.

First posts are interesting. having confirmation in-thread kind of dilutes the value of first posts in terms of seeing what a player brings into a game. But, in general town bring themselves, their questions and their desire to figure out other players. Scum bring their preparations and game faces they put on in the QT thread.

Jason, I don't like your newbie-biting. If you expect all newbies to both do enough reading to know that mafiascum games start with an RVS and to notice that their confirmation is the one that starts the game, you're going to be disappointed a lot. However, this seems likely to be a nulltell rather than a scumtell.

Took Jasonwazza's posts personally.

david, I was in bed when my role pm arrived, and checking mafiascum is not the first thing I do when I get up. Besides, wouldn't it make sense for the last people to confirm to be the people with the least exciting roles, e.g. Vanilla Townie? (Not that I'm saying what role I am, except that I win with the town)
I'll VOTE: Vote:imkingdavid because this seems like bad logic.

Defensive about arrival time, claims town, implies/denies vanilla.

I'm talking myself into a scum read.

[fferyllt]

I bet you just can't wait to get to the night phase and chat with your scum buddy.

I love every minute of the day phase. A day that is down to minutes before the hammer is my idea of mafia game suspense and excitement.

I want more posts and more activity. More stuff to analyze. Not a shorter day. The glacial pace is depriving me of that. So, please keep posting!

[fferyllt]

I guess that's your post for the day, bauss. Would kinda like to get into conversational mode with you at some point in this game.

What are your thoughts about the convo Lynx and I have had about Kueshina and Sikon?

[fferyllt]

The convo started in my post 142 where I disagreed with something iamkingdavid wrote about sikon's early posts having an apologetic air to them.

The reply was in 154.

[fferyllt]

There is very little to analyze in thread. My snap-read of Morthas' early posts was town, but I have never played with him before. And I haven't played with TheTrollie either.

I did a meta dive earlier today. Here are a couple of threads I think are interesting.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=24407 I like this one because he replaced into the game. He had 400+ posts to read, whcih is more than enough usually to come up with some strong reads. And he did quickly come up with some strong reads and pursue them. The player he picked to pursue first was town. TheTrollie was vanilla town.

And here's a scum game. http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=21681

The thing that really stands out doing a quick comparison of those games is the difference in post lengths. Lots of paragraphs in that scum game. In the town game the posts are shorter and to the point, as well as taking stronger stances.

I half expected to come away from the meta thinking he could be scum because unless I recognize a play-style or mafia background similarity with a player, I am suspicious of easy town reads.

Meta is often inconclusive because players' styles evolve. I didn't come up with red flags from my meta dive. But to firm up my read, I'll need to see more posts next week.

[fferyllt]

sorry to hear that. Hope to play another game with you sometime soon.

[fferyllt]

UNVOTE: imkingdavid

[fferyllt]

Welcome to the game, CheeryDog!

I'll try not to be too annoying with the conversational stuff.

Is he still a scum read?

He's still kinda scummy looking. The tunneling seems overdone and maybe a little theatrical.

I've been playing there recently - they do massclaims via whispers (open communication) in all games that have those enabled, and sometimes others as well.

Thanks.

What do you mean by this?

On my last re-read, I was struck by the strong thread of defensiveness that runs through Kue's posts, and it's pushed my read a little scumward.

eww not conversational mode again, I'll have to somehow get non-blocked vig powers to actually kill it.

I don't think I've ever been misread by so many people in a game as that one. The dead QT embarrassed me.

I'm going to reread your opening post a couple of times with a side of coffee. Some of your reads/implied reads confuse me.

[fferyllt]

*OT*

Is there a way to change the default editor here? I have a problem when using my tablet with placing the cursor. Usually there is place in the text after which I cannot select anything past it. It's actually sort of a dealbreaker for me here. I will stay in this game, but Ill just have to post from my desktop. If i cant use my tablet it's going to slow me down some as it is my main form of browsing etc.

You can edit your board preferences so that MS detects when you are on your tablet or phone and switches automatically to the mobile skin.

There are some issues with the mobile skin, though, so I don't use it. If I need to do a lot of formatting/quoting for a post I wait until I'm at my laptop.

[fferyllt]

There are a few posts missing from this thread. Not too bad compared to some of the faster moving games.

[fferyllt]

I had posted some questions.

Will try to remember them.

@Cheerydog, I agree with you on Lynx. I have Kues leaning scum due to defensiveness. By that reasoning, I should have cAPSLOCK leaning scum as well, but I don't. I'm leaning town on him. If I hadn't meta dived trollie, I'd be null/scum on him, but this looks like his town game to me.

Why do you have jason leaning town? I've thought that aside from his all-but-tunneling cAPSLOCK, he's contributed little in the way of scumhunitng/reads and prior to Thursday or Friday he'd been a lurksack.

@trollie that's got to be the most content-free endorsement of my gameplay that I have ever seen.

[fferyllt]

Why do you have jason leaning town? I've thought that aside from his all-but-tunneling cAPSLOCK, he's contributed little in the way of scumhunitng/reads and prior to Thursday or Friday he'd been a lurksack.

His rage at being called out in less than 24 hours seemed slightly town motivated. Plus I don't think I've actually seen him get angry as scum in past history - that's not much to go on, and I think I'm going to have to actually watch him as last time we met I tunnelled him incessantly.

I'm still not liking his cAPS vote, but not bad enough that it would ruin an otherwise fine townread.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

No one else has voted you?

There is a point of opportunism when the person he quoted before voting actually has a town read on you, but I can see how he didn't realise that at the time since I never mentioned that until afterwards.

Actually I probably should be leaving you at null because my mind is trying to mput the read on you because meta, when it probably doesn't actually mean what I think it means.

This comes off pretty damn hedgy Cheery Dog.

[fferyllt]

Guys, 3 posts in 24 hours.

You're making me crazy.

Lynx, hope you are feeling better. toothaches suck.

[fferyllt]

What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of full, ranked reads lists?

This is not exactly a random question. It's relevant to player behaviors in this game.

[fferyllt]

What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of full, ranked reads lists?

This is not exactly a random question. It's relevant to player behaviors in this game.

This, like poker, is an incomplete information game. The advantages and disadvantages are intertwined... Even the same.

Lists give information. That information is useful to both town and scum. But in the end I believe it does town more good as town has much much much less info to start with. So to me, more information is always good.

I feel this way in general about mafia, but regarding reads lists I have seen some downsides, especially in games where players' relative skill levels aren't entirely clear. Specifically, I have seen that the scum teams will pore over town reads lists in choosing their night kills, and players getting huge praise for being uber town move up in kill priority, excluding whatever power-role hunting the scum team is able to do.

In games where some players' skill levels are known, then players' abilities factor into the kill and other scum-target decisions - read accuracy, ability to build bandwagons, scumhunting, etc.

I don't do ranked lists very often any more for those reasons, but my thoughts about players will definitely go into the thread.

[fferyllt]

I haven't been tunneled this aggressively in quite a while. bauss, your case is basically cobwebs from my perspective. There is literally nothing to refute when your argument is essentially that stuff I do is by definition scummy because I'm scum. Being effective is the best demonstration of alignment that I know how to do and that's what I'm focusing on.

[fferyllt]

I haven't been tunneled this aggressively in quite a while. bauss, your case is basically cobwebs from my perspective. There is literally nothing to refute when your argument is essentially that stuff I do is by definition scummy because I'm scum. Being effective is the best demonstration of alignment that I know how to do and that's what I'm focusing on.

Is this all you got from my posts against you? You're belittling my case against you as, "You're scum and you're doing scummy stuff." Really?

What is your definition of being effective? Ask questions about general concepts of game play? That's like an icebreaker game at a Mafiaholics Anonymous meeting. "Hi, I'm Fferyllt and I like town blocs. It's been 37 seconds since my last mafia post."

Like I said earlier, I know my alignment and I know what motivates my posts. It's a combination of my win condition, my personal goals in mafia, and my role as IC.

You finding scummyness in my posting behavior may be partially my fault, especially initially, but I am what I am and I believe that my motivations are visible in my post.

[fferyllt]

If you hadn't noticed, Fferyllt has been dodging a number of direct questions since I made my case against her.

I have not intentionally dodged questions. But, tbqh I probably am not reading your posts as closely as I should any more because I've got you filed under "terminal case of tunneling". I'll go back through your recent posts and see if I can spot actual questions (as opposed to narrative) today. If I miss something, please re-ask.

[fferyllt]

Ok, so...questions you asked me, bauss.

I found this one. I'm including my post that yours was in response to.

The convo started in my post 142 where I disagreed with something iamkingdavid wrote about sikon's early posts having an apologetic air to them.

The reply was in 154.

There is so little about Sikon in those posts, you've really got me scratching my head. I'm wondering if you made a little Freudian slip and are just covering.

Did you mean to mention another name?

I mean, Lynx doesn't even mention Sikon except to say "condolences." You barely mention an FoS and an apologetic tone in your post. I'd hardly call it a conversation... In fact you pointing me to it just seems like you're trying to show me that you're "Scum hunting" and get back on my good side. Sorry not buying it.

I believe that Kue is town. If anybody else wants me to articulate why, I'm happy to. But for now, I'll barter with you...

Share your analysis of Trollie with us, and I'll respond with my analysis of Kue?

And this post is actually a good example of your narrative spinning and overall tone that turns me off to the point where I'm not reading your posts so closely, myself. That's poor play on my part regardless of my alignment. I have a feeling I've brushed off some questions as rhetorical because the answers look so obvious. Sort of like this one.

This is the part of Lynx's response that was about sikon. If you read 154 again, you will see that Lynx' quote below was just below a quote of my post about sikon.

Agreed that being soft spoken isn't a scumtell on its own. Everyone's a bunch of strangers for most of us.

On to another post.

I haven't been tunneled this aggressively in quite a while. bauss, your case is basically cobwebs from my perspective. There is literally nothing to refute when your argument is essentially that stuff I do is by definition scummy because I'm scum. Being effective is the best demonstration of alignment that I know how to do and that's what I'm focusing on.

Is this all you got from my posts against you? You're belittling my case against you as, "You're scum and you're doing scummy stuff." Really?

Yes. Really. And this is another good example of your narrative spinning and overall denigrating tone.

What is your definition of being effective? Ask questions about general concepts of game play? That's like an icebreaker game at a Mafiaholics Anonymous meeting. "Hi, I'm Fferyllt and I like town blocs. It's been 37 seconds since my last mafia post."

I play a primarily reads-based game. In games with unusual mechanics and set-ups I put thought into the game design and the numbers, but that's not where my real strengths lie. My game is primarily about developing and refining reads, working with players I read as town and working to lynch players I think are scum. Effectiveness is measured by results, something we don't have on day 1, but I am confident that my alignment will be apparent to most players as the game progresses.

As IC, part of my role is to share the relation of general concepts to the current game-state. I do this in newbie games regardless of the SE/IC/Newb status of my role.

I'm going to ramp down the snark in my replies to you after this. But, I hope that pointing up why your posts to me are not getting much of my attention will suggest ways you could make your own engagement efforts more fruitful.

[fferyllt]

Why do you have jason leaning town? I've thought that aside from his all-but-tunneling cAPSLOCK, he's contributed little in the way of scumhunitng/reads and prior to Thursday or Friday he'd been a lurksack.

His rage at being called out in less than 24 hours seemed slightly town motivated. Plus I don't think I've actually seen him get angry as scum in past history - that's not much to go on, and I think I'm going to have to actually watch him as last time we met I tunnelled him incessantly.

I'm still not liking his cAPS vote, but not bad enough that it would ruin an otherwise fine townread.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

No one else has voted you?

There is a point of opportunism when the person he quoted before voting actually has a town read on you, but I can see how he didn't realise that at the time since I never mentioned that until afterwards.

Actually I probably should be leaving you at null because my mind is trying to mput the read on you because meta, when it probably doesn't actually mean what I think it means.

This comes off pretty damn hedgy Cheery Dog.

And no response. I think your experiential meta on me is pretty mixed. I left this comment alone while the vengeball game was in progress, but since it is ended, I'm coming back to it. In our first game, Donner Party, you were convinced enough of my scumminess after a day 1 where I wound up with about 2 town reads, 2 scum reads and a pile of null reads that you targeted me for your vig kill.

My alignment in that game is a matter of record now.

In the vengeball game you modded, I was much more aggressive, but given how quickly the first lynch happened (with very little input from me and my hydra partner unfortunately) I had to get aggressive or town would be in a no-win situation after the next lynch.

Both styles of play are well within the space where my town game lives.

What do you think of jason's continued low level of engagement in this game since he was out of that game?

It worries me. So does your reaction to it.

[fferyllt]

Ok. Syr made perhaps 5 posts in that game. Virtually all the in-game interactions were mine. I had no idea that wasn't obvious.

[fferyllt]

What did you mean by this?

Actually I probably should be leaving you at null

because my mind is trying to mput the read on you because meta

, when it probably doesn't actually mean what I think it means.

[fferyllt]

sikon, to me, finding town is every bit as important as finding scum. When I get a town read, it takes quite a bit to shake it.

A newbie game that started back in March completed today. Town lost. But I had been right about one of the town players since early day 1 and had argued against him being lynched repeatedly.

I started that game very aggressively and contributed to a hostile and unpleasant atmosphere, especially during parts of day 1.

That game is one of the reasons why I have softened my approach especially in newbie games.


http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=26724

The game holds the record for largest newbie game and for the most posts made on day 1, so I doubt you'll want to read it all or even all of my 600+ posts.

[fferyllt]

What did you mean by this?

Actually I probably should be leaving you at null

because my mind is trying to mput the read on you because meta

, when it probably doesn't actually mean what I think it means.

That was in regards to Jason.

and that the last game I played with him I tunnelled on him with some of the stuff he has done here. I still find it scummy, but from the previous game I disregarded it and I'm just overly confused.

I'd expect more from him than infrequent posts consisting of nothing but tunnelling a newbie player to the exclusion of everything else going on in the game.

[fferyllt]

Response

Most of my early game reads are based on nuances of communication, psychology, and logic. Mid to late game, I tend to switch over to interactions between players, vote patterns/analysis, but the reliance on the former components remains. We all play mafia differently, and I can appreciate that 100%. You and I have vastly different styles.

Sometimes my posts may seem denigrating, rude, or abrasive. Usually this is by design, to elicit a different response... like a response under duress. When heat is applied, some people reveal more of their true colors. That said, I do try to back it off if it makes the game less enjoyable for somebody (which it appears I may have done in this case with you.)

An example of nuance that piques my interest... you made mention of a

conversation

with Lynx about Sikon. There was very little content, as I pointed out, from either of you about Sikon. I reread both of your ISO's thoroughly, saw a couple very brief comments, and shared my analysis. It sounded as if you were making a mountain out of a molehill. (a full conversation vs a sentence.) In my experience, scum like to obfuscate by exaggerating, restating cases incorrectly, or generally muddying the waters. It seemed scummy, as I mentioned/narrated it, and your response did not pass my litmus test. I genuinely wondered if saying Sikon was a Freudian slip... if in fact you meant to say iamking or jasonwazza or somebody else.

As far as narrative, I can see your point. But that is my way of sharing my thoughts and reads based on my observations, digging, and analysis. Some of the concepts aren't easy to convey, so I give them context.

No need to tone down the snark with me though, I don't mind. Also, I still think you're mafia.

It was a conversation. Sometimes I use the term "exchange". When I do, it's because I feel that the players have their guards up with each other. From my side, there was no guardedness with Lynx. I was (and am) quite open to the possibility that she is town.

The back and forth with Cheery Dog is an exchange.

[fferyllt]

The participation level in this game is just...awful.

I'm going to analyze some ISOs tomorrow. It shouldn't take long, unfortunately.

[fferyllt]

Lol, yes i stuck to an RVS vote cause it landed on a scum but.

I did reply but that crash.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

Jason's last post in this game was on Monday. He has made about 100 posts since then elsewhere on the site, with the majority in other games.

Game states have a lot to do with activity levels when people are playing more than one game, but to me this looks like he's ignoring this game. And I'll speculate that he's not posting because he's been happy with the current gamestate.

In ISO the posts he's made don't look too bad, aside from his hyperfocus on cAPSLOCK, so I'm not going to quote or link to them.

Leaning scum

[fferyllt]

sikon, to me, finding town is every bit as important as finding scum. When I get a town read, it takes quite a bit to shake it.

A newbie game that started back in March completed today. Town lost. But I had been right about one of the town players since early day 1 and had argued against him being lynched repeatedly.

I started that game very aggressively and contributed to a hostile and unpleasant atmosphere, especially during parts of day 1.

That game is one of the reasons why I have softened my approach especially in newbie games.


http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=26724

The game holds the record for largest newbie game and for the most posts made on day 1, so I doubt you'll want to read it all or even all of my 600+ posts.

It just seems to me, that what's happening here is not just emphasis on townreads over scumreads, but actively attempting to build some kind of rapport with your "townreads." Your actions (starting conversations and such) seem more geared towards making yourself seem more amiable to your stated townreads than simply determining their alignments.

Yes, I will actively try to build rapport with my townreads. It's a significant part of my town game, and games were I don't get strong reads of either town or scum are incredibly frustrating because I can't advance the game from either perspective.

As scum, I have to emulate that or people who play based on meta or who have played games with me in the past will quickly catch on that something is off. In this game, if I were scum, I could have probably gotten away (for a while, anyway) with playing against my meta. A single replacement who has played with me in the past, though, and that sort of ruse would go out the window.

So what I am saying is that building rapport is a strong component of my town game that I have to try to carry off when scum. It's up to you to decide whether the rapport building feels genuine or not.

Response

Most of my early game reads are based on nuances of communication, psychology, and logic. Mid to late game, I tend to switch over to interactions between players, vote patterns/analysis, but the reliance on the former components remains. We all play mafia differently, and I can appreciate that 100%. You and I have vastly different styles.

Sometimes my posts may seem denigrating, rude, or abrasive. Usually this is by design, to elicit a different response... like a response under duress. When heat is applied, some people reveal more of their true colors. That said, I do try to back it off if it makes the game less enjoyable for somebody (which it appears I may have done in this case with you.)

An example of nuance that piques my interest... you made mention of a

conversation

with Lynx about Sikon. There was very little content, as I pointed out, from either of you about Sikon. I reread both of your ISO's thoroughly, saw a couple very brief comments, and shared my analysis. It sounded as if you were making a mountain out of a molehill. (a full conversation vs a sentence.) In my experience, scum like to obfuscate by exaggerating, restating cases incorrectly, or generally muddying the waters. It seemed scummy, as I mentioned/narrated it, and your response did not pass my litmus test. I genuinely wondered if saying Sikon was a Freudian slip... if in fact you meant to say iamking or jasonwazza or somebody else.

As far as narrative, I can see your point. But that is my way of sharing my thoughts and reads based on my observations, digging, and analysis. Some of the concepts aren't easy to convey, so I give them context.

No need to tone down the snark with me though, I don't mind. Also, I still think you're mafia.

It was a conversation. Sometimes I use the term "exchange". When I do, it's because I feel that the players have their guards up with each other. From my side, there was no guardedness with Lynx. I was (and am) quite open to the possibility that she is town.

The back and forth with Cheery Dog is an exchange.

The point bauss raised here was about why you said the conversation was about me (i.e. when I was only briefly mentioned, and there were other players who had come up more prominently in it), not why you used the word conversation. Explaining the semantics of how you use the word conversation seems like you're dodging the question. That further undermines my confidence in you.[/quote]

To me, our conversation about you, though short, was important. I disagreed with Lynx's take on your posts and I wanted her to rethink. The number of sentences or number of posts that mentioned you was not significant.

[fferyllt]

^^ Messed up the quote tags. The last paragraph after the 2nd quote block is my reply.

[fferyllt]

VOTE: sik

shhh....I'm lurking

Hey, if you stop lurking maybe we could talk about the game?

[fferyllt]

Cheery Dog

Prior to his replacing in, I had put my vote on his predecessor, iamkingdavid. My iso analysis of iamkingdavid is here: 142. I did a partial reset on the slot with Cheery's arrival.

Cheery's catch-up post 183 is pretty long for such a short game thread. He commented it may be his longest catch up post ever, which given the thread length strikes an odd note. He was also pretty indirect about most of his reads. I pointed this out, and he clarified his reads in post 195.

In 203 he says that he doesn't like jasonwazza's caps vote. his read of caps is null-ish.

216, 223 he engags with bauss, who he is voting.

Other than interaction with bauss and with me (which I initiated and which I keep going) his one post to another player was to answer capslock's question about vote counts.

His involvement in the thread is better than that of his predecessor, which is not saying much.

I'm still leaning scum on this slot.

[fferyllt]

Jasonwazza

I'll be honest there is something about this game that just makes it meh to read.

How does this fit in with your activity observation?

IME demotivation and lack of involvement is more often scummy than towny. Jason's early activity level wasn't bad. He raged about getting called out for not making a post overnight, but nearly 5 days without a post is ridiculous. He should have been prodded 2 days ago, but with all the confusion after the site crash, a lot of stuff is slipping through the cracks.

[fferyllt]

For starters are you still townreading jason?

[fferyllt]

I don't think you did.

What made you lose the townread?

[fferyllt]

I don't think you did.

What made you lose the townread?

well this post

Ok since that rage post is out of my system i will re-read what i missed and post content.

is very town but his earlier posts were iffy. when i reread i realized that he wasnt obvtown

yeah, I thought he looked pretty town at first, too. It's mostly the tunneling capslock to the exclusion of others and the low level of engagement that bother me about him.

what is it about sikon that looks scummy to you?

[fferyllt]

I wanted to let Trollie respond to that before saying anything, but my read of his post was that he meant you were distancing from your reads/opinions. Same with the "I'm not actually accusing you blah blah" part.

IC stuff below the line.

------------------------

As a rule of thumb, try not to answer questions directed at other players, especially directed at something they posted, because the Q&A is useful for getting reads on the players. And if the question has scumhunting intent someone else answering it is messing with their line of pursuit.

It should be a mafia axiom.

[fferyllt]

sikon, I want to clarify one thing. I participate during RVS. I discuss. I banter with people who vote for me, I comment on reactions to votes, etc. I just don't random vote. When I put a vote down, there's a reason. I find that following my policy of never putting down essentially meaningless votes means that my early votes have more weight, shine more attention on the player I vote, and get more reaction from the player I vote. All of that stuff is essentially meaningless when playing with people who don't know me, but I keep the policy because we will probably play together again.

[fferyllt]

ebwodp

i'm sorry. that was a ragepost. I probably shouldn't have just started lashing out like that. Let me put this more diplomatically.

I have realized that I do not actually fully understand the current gamestate and my place in the current game.

My actions as of late have done more to draw animosity towards myself from fferyllt and theTrollie, it seems, than to actually assist in the effort to find scum.

For all of the effort I'm putting into my posts, it doesn't seem that they're actually contributing effectively towards the hunt for scum at the moment. I am frustrated by my inability to have a meaningful impact on the game at the moment. This frustration is clouding my judgement, and causing me to act in a way that doesn't seem to be helpful to the interests of the town. It seems that other people here have a better idea of how to scumhunt than I do, so I am just going to step out of their way, let them do their thing, learn from their example, and hopefully come back strong once I better understand how this game is played, if not by the end of this game, then in future games that I am involved in.

fferyllt, I accused you of being scum for spurious reasons borne of my own failure to understand how this game is actually played in practice, and a mistaken belief that if I acted aggressive and more certain than I actually was, then everything else would just fall into place. TheTrollie, my overzealous attempts to be a "leading force" in this game in spite of having not been involved in most of it have been distracting to the game as a whole, and my complaining about how you play has only further distracted from what is actually important. I'm sorry to both of you.

I'm going to lurk for a while until I have my head on straight again. I'm sorry for that too.

There is no reason to apologize. Mafia is all about paranoia and trust. Sometimes the paranoia is unjustified. Sometimes the trust is misplaced. Give it a rest for a little bit and have a reread.

Sometimes it helps me to do a full reset and pretend that I just replaced into a game that isn't making any sense to me. It's not possible to completely set aside my prior impressions, but I do sometimes see the game in a different light.

[fferyllt]

For all of the effort I'm putting into my posts, it doesn't seem that they're actually contributing effectively towards the hunt for scum at the moment. I am frustrated by my inability to have a meaningful impact on the game at the moment. This frustration is clouding my judgement, and causing me to act in a way that doesn't seem to be helpful to the interests of the town. It seems that other people here have a better idea of how to scumhunt than I do, so I am just going to step out of their way, let them do their thing, learn from their example, and hopefully come back strong once I better understand how this game is played, if not by the end of this game, then in future games that I am involved in.

I believe you could carry on attempting to hunt in your own style, I probably haven't commented much as I haven't seen where exactly to comment in arguments and suchlike I don't have strong reads on the people involved.

But I now do have a strong town read on you after that rage post. I guess I may have another look, but nonetheless just stopping hunting helps less that seemingly hunting badly.
(even if it's just on how people are attacking you and how that may help reads on them later in the game)

This post mitigates a lot of my concerns about you.

[fferyllt]

VOTE: jasonwazza

[fferyllt]

Happy Scumday, Cheery!

@Mod have prods goine out? If replacements are needed would it be possible to get a deadline extension?

[fferyllt]

When you assume you make an ass out of u

Seriously that's not even what it implys.

Aside from Vengeball, we've never played together before this game. However, I've watched a couple of your newbie games in real time because of other players. I'm remembering a Bork newbie that you replaced into at about the same time as I was playing the other Bork newbie. You were active and aggressive from the mioment you hit the game thread.

UNVOTE: jasonwazza

If you're ready to play, then let's figure this out.

[fferyllt]

I did forget that game.

(I'd like to keep it that way)

Were we alive at the same time? I can't even remember.

[fferyllt]

jason, to me sikon comes off painfully newbtown.

[fferyllt]

Not for long that i can remember.

What are your thoughts on my sikon vote?

P-Edit: Why is it newb town over newb scum?

newbscum don't get butthurt over their cases being ignored.

[fferyllt]

Welcome NS! And thanks to you both! <3

[fferyllt]

This question still relevant? I generally like reading them, and they're some of my favorite things late game after players are dead and some scum is confirmed through role flips, huge advantage on that since they're harder to leave out scum partners. Disadvantage PR Townies can be just as likely to lie about their reads as scum are, don't want to point out the whole scum team before Night. I don't think refusing to post a full reads list is scummy on its own.

Not really. I just wanted to point up that reads lists basically consolidate a lot of info that scum would otherwise have to dig around for, and it's info that informs the night kill choice. Town players usually go back and look on a one-by-one basis as the cardflips happen, or to check for consistency and trajectory leading to votes/unvotes. Scum need to use the aggregate data to determine their night actions.

I agree that Town reads are just as important. But there's a bigger issue that Scum reads are worth from any player, while Town reads are harder to prove to most people and it's harder to tell how sincere. Town reads are important but worth less unless the player is confirmed Town, partially (I think) because it's easy and safe for Scum who knows allignments to point and say "I think x is Town" early on, and be seen as Town-hunting right out of the gate.

I had a lot of trouble putting those words together, if it doesn't make sense I'll clear it up when the painkillers kick in.

Town reads lead to town cores and ultimately to town consensus and strategy. The danger of town cores is that scum will do their best to join them, and that really screws the consensus and strategy aspect. People who can find town and form a decent core have a big impact on how a game evolves. In one of my first games at ms, a player recommended a core on day 1. He picked up every town power role among his town reads. The town core didn't quite get its act together on day 1, but by day 3 it was basically a juggernaut and had control of the game until it was won.

I actually totally disagree with this. The early game is where a bunch of people who probably haven't played together try to get comfortable and almost everybody is guarded, late game is when scum has to keep track of lies and try not to backpedal too obviously.

I recently played on another site that runs a different style of newbie game. The players there put a tremendous amount of attention on early, and even first posts. One player put it something like this: Town players enter the game with nothing but their questions. Scum players enter the game with their QT discussion. Sometimes it's possible to spot the difference. I've been working on that aspect of my town game since I saw some of those players in action in a newbie game here - looking for the difference and resolutely sorting obvious town from players it will take longer to sort.

[fferyllt]

Not for long that i can remember.

What are your thoughts on my sikon vote?

P-Edit: Why is it newb town over newb scum?

Hey, where'd you go?

[fferyllt]

Town cores scare me quite a bit, mostly from a bad experience. I've seen them in two games so far, one of them the game was canceled early Day 2 from player action. The other, the town block was actually four or so Wolves who recruited a Townie or two and took a near-flawless win. Considering how paranoid everyone can be, it seems risky and takes a lot of widely-accepted pro-Town/Town-hunters. It sounds like a good idea if it's pulled off though.

Yeah, bad town cores are bad news. Even a good town core is not easy to put together, and when I am playing with people I know I can read and we want to make it happen sometimes it's still not possible because consensus just won't emerge.

[fferyllt]

That's not the only reason I am townreading sikon.

But, lol I was delighted for my day 1 countervote to get more or less ignored in my first newbie game.

[fferyllt]

Unofficial Vote Count

kuishina (3) - lynx, trollie, sikon
fferyllt (2) - kueshina, bauss
bauss (1) - cheerydog
sikon (1) - jason

We have a little under 2 days before nightfall

[fferyllt]

I decided to go back and reread the first 5 or so pages of the game this morning to remind myself why I had the reads I started with and think about whether they are justified. This is from my handwritten notes, and I'm not going to bother with post links. For the most part I'm not talking about later developments here - just the first 5 or so pages unless there wasn't enough content early on.

Sikon - post 22 struck me as town mindset. post 29 she seemed gratified at getting a tentative town read from me. She had good trajectory on her first non-RVS vote, and again on bauss for FoSing with no vote early on.

capslock - post 25 seems empty of real content. post 27 seems hedgy about rvs of all things. 43, 44 make excuses. 56 puts down a vote for lynx not posting (makes it clear that's why - oh the futility of pressure votes that are basically labeled as such). 78 more excuses. I liked that he questioned my IC post comment that I'm as likely to be scum as any other player, thought it was interesting that people read that as emphasizing I'm as likely to be town as any other player. Agree with trollie about the football metaphor, but on reread his contribution is comparatively weak.

kueshina - right off the top, a "townslip", not realizing scum can communicate via QT prior to the game starting with 7 confirmations. The only way this would happen if scum, I think, would be if kues was coached to make a townslip. 31 is a lot of theory. I feel like kues' general theory stuff kept getting read as suggestions about this game. Overly defensive about kingdavid's rvs vote, and in general pretty prickly and defensive. I keep reading this as paranoid town, but could be confirmation bias. kues looks worse as the game day progresses and doesn't seem to be advancing their reads.

morthas/trollie - morthas looked town as fuck to me. To the extent he gave reads, I agreed with them based on what was in the thread up to that point. His vote on bauss made sense to me. If I had wanted to put a vote down in the thread that early, I would have put it on bauss. He liked kues for town. Trollie's posts, aside from not including a lot of support, also look good to me. When I ask for support what he says makes sense. I can see his reasons for voting (and unvoting) sikon and then kues.

bauss - initially posts questions, including leading questions and foses without votes. In 51, reacts to morthas. oblique, indirect series of posts about buddying. Sometime after 70 he starts tunneling me, and since then his posts have been worthless for discerning alignment. I guess I can't tell town tunneling from scum tunneling when I'm the object, not without priors and some idea of whether my play style is by default scummy looking to him.

king david/cheery - KD's posts were substance free with one exception when I first ISO'd him. Lots of excuses for why he wasn't posting substance. Cheery's better, but he's not taking strong stances about other players. Vote is currently on capslock.

Lynx - votes kues in 64. posts have good content.

jason - I've posted about him several times, mostly with concern about his tunneling capslock. But, my capslock read has suffered a bit since going back over the first 5 or so pages. I like his content since returning. feel kinda unsure about his sikon vote.

[fferyllt]

After my review this morning, I'm willing to lynch within (bauss, capslock, cheery). Would vote kues to avoid no lynch but am not enthused about their wagon.

[fferyllt]

Cheery/IamKingDavid have been anything but vocal scumhunters, bauss. It's why they are currently in my list. Cheery can change that by getting into this game and doing shit.

[fferyllt]

That post, though, it does nothing to settle my worries about you. You're either oblivious to the game state due to your blind tunneling, or you're scum.

[fferyllt]

Cheery/IamKingDavid have been anything but vocal scumhunters, bauss. It's why they are currently in my list. Cheery can change that by getting into this game and doing shit.

Strongly disagree. Cheery replaced in and started slinging shit right away. He's got more genuine insights in 14 posts than half of the players in the game.

Yes, good insights, though maybe a little shallow.

The one thing he did that impressed me, though, was townreading sikon for the post she made out of frustration.

But no effort to move things along, refine his reads, etc.

Like I said, he can change my impression by getting into the game.

[fferyllt]

^^ he, not she.

[fferyllt]

The one thing he did that impressed me, though, was townreading sikon for the post she made out of frustration.

Hasn't everyone bar Jason done that?

You and trollie.

[fferyllt]

Kue, I'm not accusing you of saying those things are valid ways to start the game. It just doesn't make sense to bring them up at all, most of them were for setups that were so vastly different that no one else would have thought of them if you hadn't mentioned them. And anyway, that's really just a minor thing.

My greatest issue with your play, Kueshina, is that your arguments for people being scum have consistently required blatant logical errors.
Your case on Kingdavid required you to assume that Vanilla Townies are more likely to confirm last. This one

would

be excusable on its own.
Your case against me was based on the fact that I was on two different "wagons," ignoring the fact that not only was each wagon only two votes, but I actually started the one I was currently on.
Your case against fferyllt seems to have required you to have read a post where ff references an earlier post where she said bauss' play was suspicious, read that earlier post, see that she's saying bauss' behaviour is suspicious, and then willfully misinterpret it.

Every single one of your scum cases has depended on or prominently featured a blatant logical error somewhere in it. It's the consistency with which you have been doing this that bugs me here.

Sikon, bad logic is just that - bad logic. It doesn't necessarily indicate scum-motivation. Bad logic can be part of a case, there's usually more to it than that. I don't have Kues in my townpile. I think part of their problem is that they write in a roundabout fashion.

The one thing that Kues has not done that I would have liked to have seen was retract that accusation about me not saying that a post had pinged. That one was weird, but it could be just extreme literal-mindedness.

[fferyllt]

Thanks for the deadline extension NS/Rach <3

VOTE: likeabauss

[fferyllt]

Post 313 was the tipping point.

[fferyllt]

THAT IS L-1

DO NOT VOTE WITHOUT POSTING INTENT TO HAMMER AND GIVING LIKEABAUSS TIME TO ROLE CLAIM.

[fferyllt]

That bandwagon sprang up fast. It's close to nightfall, but still.

It would be good for Lynx and Kues to post before nightfall.

[fferyllt]

Thanks for the second post Sikon.

[fferyllt]

Trollie, why do you think Kues is scum?

[fferyllt]

UNVOTE: likeabauss

So we all have time to think about the advisability of a bauss lynch without risk of a hammer.

[fferyllt]

trollie, caps was actually a recent addition to my scum list. I'll go into more detail on why later today.

[fferyllt]

@ff and whoever else thinks this is scummy: its not, its just wrong. This looks like newbtown more than newbscum. newbscum is usually too cautious to make these types of pushes, especially on D1, and especially when there is resistance to the lynch they are trying to push (which, I at least am being resistant to).

I want to respond to this. He's not newbtown. By his own account, he's rusty due to not playing for a couple years, and I don't dispute that.

In his first newbie game at ms he tunneled the fuck out of the IC. And he was right, in that game the IC was scum. So, maybe this is following his previous winning strategy or something. And I've been pretty much willing to assume that he's confirmation-biased out the wazoo and let him be. But, I recognize that there's a possibility he could be trying to emulate that game as cover in this one. The meta a person knows about himself (and he knows this about himself, he brought it up as a reason for following him) is useless for determining alignment.

[fferyllt]

ff, ill re-read caps, also what happened to the jason scum-read some of you had? ill ISO him too. My town read on caps was really strong but because of that i havent been paying much attention to him at all, so im willing to change that read if i find something in the ISO

Jason's looking at the whole game again and he's participating. In fact it's clear that he's watching the game closely because he helicopters right in when something changes the game state. That feels townish to me. I think scum Jason would be a little more ahint the door when it comes to appearances, but that's me applying a very sketchy scum-Jason model.

i get what you are saying about bauss's strategy. it makes sense BUT i think his town story makes more sense. Also, your reasoning for what he is doing is equally applicable to town-bauss who is trying to replicate his winning strat in his last game

Yeah, this is all true. One of the reasons I unvoted is because I want to give myself time to cool off and think things over because as the target of the tunneling it's difficult to be objective and I don't want my vote decision to be based even a little bit on just wanting someone to stfu.

[fferyllt]

bauss, nolynches destroy the next day's bandwagon analysis and are a bad idea except in rare circumstances. So of course I'd vote someone I'm not reading as scum rather than nolynch.

That's in response to the bold. I'll read through the rest of your wall and reply in a bit.

[fferyllt]

Townreading bauss? I don't think so

The relevant parts are bolded. spoilered because quotewallz

Spoiler: My posts about bauss' alignment

Fferyllt - let me clarify. I understand the point you are making about your play style, history, meta, etc. My question to you is why did you bring it up in the first place? I made mention of a different player doing a similar thing, as part of a line of questioning to that player, and you chimed in with a defense for YOUR actions. I never mentioned you doing it, neither did anyone else that I can see.

It smells fishy to me, mostly because good guys (town) operate under the confidence of their innocence. Bad guys (scum) are forced to mask their guilt and put on a show. This subtle difference changes the nuance of some things. One of the things I look for is people who are overly defensive (which you've exhibited in this maneuver) because scum feel the need to defend and keep the heat off. A town player knows their innocence and wont be as touchy or knee jerk on defense, especially against an accusation made against a completely different player.

It was in response to the player that I tentatively townread, and appeared to be an indirect dig in my direction. It also was the post immediately after Kus putting down a vote on me with the reasoning that I was buddying sikon, so it also looked like indirect support for that vote.

Your play in this game so far seems to be oblique and indirect in some ways. I am going to make some time for a meta dive to see if that's typical of your town game

.

I've had a look through his previous games -- there are two of them, one newbie, one mini normal, and in both of them, he's town. And in neither of those games does he display the hesitance to vote for possible scum that is present in this game. So why has he suddenly become cautious about voting? The way I see it, he either had some kind of epiphany in-between his previous game and this one, or he is merely playing differently now because he now has a different role -- that of the town's enemy.

I've had a chance to read his prior games this morning, and I've come to a similar conclusion about his play in those two games. My caveat is that the games are old - about 3 years old. In Mini1053 he mentioned that he played elsewhere, so it's not surprising that his games back then were aggressive. My play style 3 years ago is probably not a good indication of how I play today.

That said, as I mentioned earlier the indirect attack and indirect support for Kus's first vote pings. It pings harder than anything else in the game so far. I'm pretty deliberate with my vote when the game format allows, so I probably won't vote until after the weekend and there's more data to weigh up.

likeabauss, do you still play regularly on another site?

What do you mean forming a town bloc?

It's the upside of town reads - some town players finding each other and actively working together to develop reads and push bandwagons.

Also, who do you suspect as scum? I'd love to hear your insights/thoughts/questions into this game, instead of the analysis of the way it is being/has been played. Seems like you're a very meta focused player, is that true?

I'm still developing my reads.

I have you down as possible scum, but I'm worried that it could be a false positive due to your current play style/rustiness after a few years away from mafia.

I need more data from a few players.

I'm not sure about "very" meta focused, at least at MS. When I have experiential meta I use it. When I wind up with a leaning scum read based on in-thread play I like do a meta dive and look for reasons to rethink.

VOTE: fferyllt

That feels good.

I believe you to be scum. I have many reasons that I will share when the time is right. For now, I will wait patiently while others weigh in and share their opinions.

What say you all? Is fferyllt scum or am I crazy?

You are my strongest scum read atm. Your vote adds more doubt about the accuracy of that read.

:/

You are my strongest scum read atm. Your vote adds more doubt about the accuracy of that read. :/

I can assure you that this logic is faulty.

Please review the post #127 Lynx_Shine made and offer up your thoughts on the concerns presented about you.

Also, cAPSLOCK's post #114 rings true with me. Having reread my previous games here, you'll notice that I strung up an IC mafia goon on Day 1 on an almost identical maneuver.

I don't think you parsed my statement correctly. Your vote on me makes me think my scum read could be wrong. I've felt that your approach was indirect, and that you are basing your FoSes on what other players dig up. This is similar in that you're vauting off cAPS and Lynx' posts, but you're not being indirect now.

IME, I tend to either pick up votes in the early phases of day 1 or go more or less unnoticed until there's more data to work with. I don't usually key in on specific posts for scum reads. It's more about body of work.

fferyllt - is your vote on me simply pressure or what? I see in #133 you say that bauss is your "strongest scum read" but I don't see a vote on him. I find it odd that you'd place your first vote in the game on a self-admitted inactive player rather than on your strongest suspect. Also, you're voting me, as I understand it, due to inactivity. But as others have rightfully pointed out, you've done a lot of talking without saying much (up till recently when you posted your reads on a few players). I don't see the difference between my inactive inactivity and your active inactivity.

Anyway, I won't be voting you at the moment. Inactivity is a fact and not really something you can defend against, and I don't find it strong enough to be a reason for you to be lynched, especially this early on.

That's two people who misunderstood my post about bauss.

To clarify, bauss was my strongest scum read up to the point where he started making a case on me. He went from indirect to direct stance of attack, though I think his case is mostly rehashing others' comments.

I never put a vote down purely for pressure. If I vote then at that point in the game, I am willing to lynch. You have been inactive, though you've been slightly more of a presence than Lynx. But, lynx' two posts had IMO good, thoughtful content and questions. I like questions. Prior to this, though you had 5 posts, there was only one with even a little bit of content.

Fferyllt - let me clarify. I understand the point you are making about your play style, history, meta, etc. My question to you is why did you bring it up in the first place? I made mention of a different player doing a similar thing, as part of a line of questioning to that player, and you chimed in with a defense for YOUR actions. I never mentioned you doing it, neither did anyone else that I can see.

It smells fishy to me, mostly because good guys (town) operate under the confidence of their innocence. Bad guys (scum) are forced to mask their guilt and put on a show. This subtle difference changes the nuance of some things. One of the things I look for is people who are overly defensive (which you've exhibited in this maneuver) because scum feel the need to defend and keep the heat off. A town player knows their innocence and wont be as touchy or knee jerk on defense, especially against an accusation made against a completely different player.

It was in response to the player that I tentatively townread,

and appeared to be an indirect dig in my direction.

It also was the post immediately after Kus putting down a vote on me with the reasoning that I was buddying sikon,

so it also looked like indirect support for that vote

.

Your play in this game so far seems to be oblique and indirect in some ways.

I am going to make some time for a meta dive to see if that's typical of your town game.

I didn't use the word "pings", but I certainly did indicate concern about the indirect attack and the indirect vote support. In fact, it was enough concern to do a meta dive and read his earlier games.

And the dive

did not

turn up a propensity for indirect and oblique stuff.. He was direct and aggressive in his play back then. Given the passage of time (more than 2 years) I think he may have needed a little time to get back into the groove.

bauss was much more direct and aggressive right from the start in his earlier games. His later posts in this game, which I have said make me doubt the validity of my initial lean toward scum, are more in the vein of his first two MS games from a couple years ago.

I decided to go back and reread the first 5 or so pages of the game this morning to remind myself why I had the reads I started with and think about whether they are justified. This is from my handwritten notes, and I'm not going to bother with post links. For the most part I'm not talking about later developments here - just the first 5 or so pages unless there wasn't enough content early on.

Sikon - post 22 struck me as town mindset. post 29 she seemed gratified at getting a tentative town read from me. She had good trajectory on her first non-RVS vote, and again on bauss for FoSing with no vote early on.

capslock - post 25 seems empty of real content. post 27 seems hedgy about rvs of all things. 43, 44 make excuses. 56 puts down a vote for lynx not posting (makes it clear that's why - oh the futility of pressure votes that are basically labeled as such). 78 more excuses. I liked that he questioned my IC post comment that I'm as likely to be scum as any other player, thought it was interesting that people read that as emphasizing I'm as likely to be town as any other player. Agree with trollie about the football metaphor, but on reread his contribution is comparatively weak.

kueshina - right off the top, a "townslip", not realizing scum can communicate via QT prior to the game starting with 7 confirmations. The only way this would happen if scum, I think, would be if kues was coached to make a townslip. 31 is a lot of theory. I feel like kues' general theory stuff kept getting read as suggestions about this game. Overly defensive about kingdavid's rvs vote, and in general pretty prickly and defensive. I keep reading this as paranoid town, but could be confirmation bias. kues looks worse as the game day progresses and doesn't seem to be advancing their reads.

morthas/trollie - morthas looked town as fuck to me. To the extent he gave reads, I agreed with them based on what was in the thread up to that point. His vote on bauss made sense to me. If I had wanted to put a vote down in the thread that early, I would have put it on bauss. He liked kues for town. Trollie's posts, aside from not including a lot of support, also look good to me. When I ask for support what he says makes sense. I can see his reasons for voting (and unvoting) sikon and then kues.

bauss - initially posts questions, including leading questions and foses without votes. In 51, reacts to morthas. oblique, indirect series of posts about buddying. Sometime after 70 he starts tunneling me, and since then his posts have been worthless for discerning alignment. I guess I can't tell town tunneling from scum tunneling when I'm the object, not without priors and some idea of whether my play style is by default scummy looking to him.

king david/cheery - KD's posts were substance free with one exception when I first ISO'd him. Lots of excuses for why he wasn't posting substance. Cheery's better, but he's not taking strong stances about other players. Vote is currently on capslock.

Lynx - votes kues in 64. posts have good content.

jason - I've posted about him several times, mostly with concern about his tunneling capslock. But, my capslock read has suffered a bit since going back over the first 5 or so pages. I like his content since returning. feel kinda unsure about his sikon vote.

I have never townread you. I backed you down from top scum read due to ambivalence over my objectivity when being obsessively and irrationally tunneled.

[fferyllt]

The rest of your case is, as I have said before, gripes about my town game which can be meta'd to death at MS. Some things vary, including how aggressively I play, because that's dependent on the game setup and on the player list.

[fferyllt]

bauss,

If I were scum and if you are town, I'd leave both fferyllt and bauss in the game so it could fill up with our 1v1 and leave a pile of chaff in the air to hide behind.

I still am not liking cheery's level of involvement. Lynx needs a really close look tomorrow. One thing that she and cheery both have done is put down votes without putting much effort into seeing them through to lynch, and had little but friendly dialog with their other scum read.

^^ consider that my last will and testament if I'm dead tomorrow, btw.

[fferyllt]

he's at L-2. cheery, jason and sikon have votes down atm.

[fferyllt]

I can't remember you building much of a sikon case. If it's not in your iso already, why do you think sikon is scum?

[fferyllt]

bauss, I agree with a lot of what you posted in 375, except:

sikon's posts come from a newbtown motivation to me, including the aggressive reactions to FoSes. There's a reason newbtown players get mistaken for scum a lot.

morthas' ade some strongly town-motivated looking posts and trollie's posts have mostly built on that. The one thing that worries me about him is how much WKing of me he's done.

I'm not liking your lynch so much right now.

[fferyllt]

also, jason couldn't be further from newbsauce town.

And I disagree about cheery not having an opportunity to get into a groove. I've replaced into games with far less time to deadline, gotten up to speed, and had a positive impact on the day and on the game.

[fferyllt]

I really liked Morthas' exchange with you here, bauss.

Very strong gut feeling about this
You post like someone trying to stir up trouble while keeping yourself out of it.

I find this comment very interesting. What is your opinion of what a town person should do? Sit by idly, just reading, and not try to find scum? I like to question and dig, in an effort to obtain information, or "stir up trouble" as you put it. Please explain a bit more.

"Keeping myself out of it" - I don't mind "some trouble", because sometimes we apply heat to players to find out if they break down and the facade becomes known. Please note though... in this game, town and scum alike are avoiding "real trouble" (being hung or NK'd.) So your suggestion that avoiding trouble is a reason to vote for me is not logical... every player in this game (town and scum) is trying to avoid being killed.

And lastly, if you don't mind, I'd like to hear about some of those other things you said you noticed as you read through the posts thus far.

Finding scum priority which is why I voted for you. I had a feeling your priorities lied elsewhere
No sorry, I really don't care whether I die or not and will not withhold something in case someone finds it scummy.
I think Kue is town. His train of thought doesn't match with that of scum. I may post quotes tomorrow.

^^ Based on your early play, this post was dead on. It's the early indirect and oblique stuff that I've referenced repeatedly. You pushed back at his vote and short reason why, and he pushed right back at you. He was the first to call you on this IIRC.

[fferyllt]

So I'm seeing likeabauss:
-Accusing fferyllt of changing her playstyle. It never really changed. It's been focusing on her interest in forming a town-group since the start of the game. She gave reads because you bugged her about it. I don't think that's something that's solidly scummy. Honestly if there's anyone here who's completely changed their playstyle it's you, bauss. You started this game flinging accusations in random directions without committing, multiple people took issue with your noncommittal nature, and then at some point you went into full tunnel mode on ff. The only difference is you didn't do it as a direct response to any specific accusation, but the correlation is still there, at least enough to make your accusation seem hypocritical.

-Misinterpreting fferyllt's willingness to lynch outside her personal scumreads to avoid a no-lynch as a desire to lynch townies. Nobody wants a goddamn no-lynch. That's tantamount to giving the scum team a free kill in exchange for another two weeks to argue fruitlessly.

-Interpreting all uncertainty on fferyllt's read on him as somehow scummy.
-Interpreting fferyllt's uncertainty about your three-year-old meta as somehow scummy. Would you prefer that she declared meta to be law and threw all logic to the wind?

sikon, where did you learn about this?

[fferyllt]

On that Morthas exchange, I disagree because "stirring up trouble" is a perfectly viable scum hunting playstyle. I might be off because him and I never got to finish that conversation and my suspicion lingered as a result... But he didn't do enough to earn a town read in my book. Also, derailing lines of questioning/digging always feels scummy to me. Why not wait/watch and see what shakes out? Why break something up before it develops? You can always go back to it later... But steering the conversation away from something and towards something else never sits right with me.

I don't see where you get derailing from that exchange.

[fferyllt]

Trying to derail me from stirring things up. If somebody calls you out on something, a lot of people stop doing that something. Maybe I was questioning a scum buddy. Maybe he didn't want me shitting up the thread. Maybe it just looked shady to him. But to me, his play though short, felt lurky. And it read like he was implying I should stop "stirring things up", like its a bad thing.

The key phrase was "while keeping yourself out of it".

That is classic scum behavior IMO.

[fferyllt]

I am pretty sure this was the post that got Morthas' attention, since it also drew my attention for similar reasons. One, you walked into the middle of an exchange between kues and imkingdavid, which could have (oh ho!) derailed their attempts to develop reads on each other or tangle the other up into a scummy-looking knot, depending on their alignment.

Kueshina, thanks for the reply. Again, I'm confused by your response though. Let me clarify a bit...

imkingdavid, to paraphrase, said "vote you, because you were the last to confirm." I think we all realize that during the RVS, people just toss votes around frivolously without any true belief, and his vote + reasoning seems to be of that nature. You then responded defensively to imkingdavid's accusation against you, even though it wasn't serious. Now, when I myself have made no accusations, your response has a defensive tone again. I only asked why you responded defensively to his vote, not why you voted for him.

This post, which came after Morthas' vote post was more of the same. This was the one that I called a ping. The second paragraph looks like indirect cheerleading/support for kues' vote on me while keeping your own hands clean of a vote or an actual direct FoS for the nonce.

sikon327 - thanks for your detailed response to my initial prod. In response to your questions back to me, I'll vote either randomly during a RVS if we need to instigate discussion and create info (prior to my post, sufficient info was generated that I didn't see the need for a random vote alongside my questions.) Or I'll vote when I have more conviction (I have not done enough digging yet to support any of my theories, for or against you or any other player.) So, no vote thus far.

If I may, I'd like to explain the scum tendency of leaning town on multiple people... there are a number of reasons for this. Scum know who is town, therefore they can/will be correct when it suits them (ie, later they can point back and say "Hey, my read on that guy was town... now he's dead, I was right, I'm a good guy.") Also, they can build credibility with town members by leaning/suggesting that they are town... especially with some more novice players. Very often a town player will feel validated like they are doing good, when somebody else thinks they are town. (In my experience, it's more important to find scum than for other people to think you are town. Scum will often NK the most trusted town person to maintain control.) There are a thousand other scenarios, but these are just a few, and we are of course exploring all that we can on Day 1.

[fferyllt]

phoneposting. guys, don't do this again. no matter how it turns v out. Will be at laptop I'm about .5 hour if the thread is still open I'll have more to say.

[fferyllt]

I really didn't think I needed to keep warning about derphammering in this crowd. I'm going to annoy the fuck out of the players in the next game I IC.

Don't instalynch tomorrow. Whether or not you decide to go after capslock for the hammer, still, use the time well to scumhunt and look at other players, especially players who were low on content day 1.

There's no reason for bauss to lie after the hammer, so yeah, almost certainly vanilla town.

pedit - Yes they are. We can post until the thread is closed. So, keep posting your thoughts.

[fferyllt]

There no friggim way my question to Kue at that point derailed imking. It was an RVS from him. He wasn't pursuing anything. I was opening a new line of questioning to Kue. Why did Kue make a big deal out of an RVS and cop a defense? Totally unrelated.

And no way. The town reads as a scum tendency post was directly related to my conversation with Sikon at the time. I suggested that early town reads could be a form of buddying or a scummy tendency in my first post as I began my questioning to him. I wanted to explain the scenario and clarify because his response to me didn't seem to understand the point.

You're taking those posts out of context or deliberating misstating what was said.

Go back through those exchanges.

The irony.

That's always the risk. Mafia is a game of paranoia and trust. Once paranoia rears its head, it's really difficult to do a reset.

[fferyllt]

I think cAPS is just retarded or disinterested. Mafia wouldn't hammer without a claim if they could go no lynch. So just dumb town play there.

People, you have to read what other people write in this game. Don't restate, misquote, or otherwise obfuscate. If you have a question, ask for clarity... Don't fly off the handle like you just won the lottery.

Scum needs to kill PR's and trusted active townies... So keep that in mind as you analyze night moves. Not really any trusted townies at this point, and enough wtfery from me to play off of. Plus the cAPS hammer. They can take a shot in the dark at hitting a role holder and let the chaos deliver a mislynch on D2. Use your brains. If you're a townie and you aren't making time to post here, sub out. Seriously.

Fferyllt, you cant ignore the context and you have to consider the motivation behind the action. If it isn't clear, ask. If the response doesn't make sense, then you might be on to something... But don't get ahead of the logic.

Welp. Backatcha. Maybe next time we play together we'll have better baselines on each other.

[fferyllt]

Well, if you are town Fferyllt, then focus on Trollie, Lynx, Jason.

I could be wrong, but I am less worried about trollie. jason, yeah. And I'm not as sanguine about cheery dog.

You sound like you've rethought sikon.

[fferyllt]

Somebody else get on Trollie then.

I re-read Sikon a bunch. Could just be noob play, and/or a younger player... Like late teens, early 20's. If you're town, and Sikon is town, Kue town and Caps town... You've got a short list to sort through.

A short list and not many mislynches available.


I want to say this in case I'm not alive to say it on day 2. When you get MYLO (either 4-2 or 3-1 depending on if scum are lynched tomorrow) that is the time to consider a no lynch.

If you have one confirmed town or all but confirmed town, then no lynch is probably not a good idea, because that player will be dead on the following day.

Also, once a town PR flips, then scum will know the game set up. If there are two goons, then there will only one PR and they will know that as well as knowing which PR to claim based on the matrix in this thread's OP. Be highly suspicious of any breadcrumbs that postdate the PR flip.

[fferyllt]

Bauss's flip has me side-eyeing ffery,

You've been side-eyeing me since just about your first post. What did bauss' flip add to the mix? And what did you think about his other reads?

[fferyllt]

For all of the effort I'm putting into my posts, it doesn't seem that they're actually contributing effectively towards the hunt for scum at the moment. I am frustrated by my inability to have a meaningful impact on the game at the moment. This frustration is clouding my judgement, and causing me to act in a way that doesn't seem to be helpful to the interests of the town. It seems that other people here have a better idea of how to scumhunt than I do, so I am just going to step out of their way, let them do their thing, learn from their example, and hopefully come back strong once I better understand how this game is played, if not by the end of this game, then in future games that I am involved in.

I believe you could carry on attempting to hunt in your own style, I probably haven't commented much as I haven't seen where exactly to comment in arguments and suchlike I don't have strong reads on the people involved.

But I now do have a strong town read on you after that rage post. I guess I may have another look, but nonetheless just stopping hunting helps less that seemingly hunting badly.
(even if it's just on how people are attacking you and how that may help reads on them later in the game)

This post mitigates a lot of my concerns about you.

How?
In that read on him you provided you hardly voiced any concrete concerns (as I mentioned earlier), but please tell me how this relates to 249.

Oh for cryin out loud your catch up posts.

Because his earlier read of sikon was inexplicable to me if he's town. It boggles my mind when experienced players misread newbs who are so clearly town.

I am feeling kinda similarly about jason at the moment.

My best guess of the scum team is 2 of cheery, jason and Lynx.

[fferyllt]

For all of the effort I'm putting into my posts, it doesn't seem that they're actually contributing effectively towards the hunt for scum at the moment. I am frustrated by my inability to have a meaningful impact on the game at the moment. This frustration is clouding my judgement, and causing me to act in a way that doesn't seem to be helpful to the interests of the town. It seems that other people here have a better idea of how to scumhunt than I do, so I am just going to step out of their way, let them do their thing, learn from their example, and hopefully come back strong once I better understand how this game is played, if not by the end of this game, then in future games that I am involved in.

I believe you could carry on attempting to hunt in your own style, I probably haven't commented much as I haven't seen where exactly to comment in arguments and suchlike I don't have strong reads on the people involved.

But I now do have a strong town read on you after that rage post. I guess I may have another look, but nonetheless just stopping hunting helps less that seemingly hunting badly.
(even if it's just on how people are attacking you and how that may help reads on them later in the game)

This post mitigates a lot of my concerns about you.

How?
In that read on him you provided you hardly voiced any concrete concerns (as I mentioned earlier), but please tell me how this relates to 249.

Oh for cryin out loud your catch up posts.

Because his earlier read of sikon was inexplicable to me if he's town. It boggles my mind when experienced players misread newbs who are so clearly town.

I am feeling kinda similarly about jason at the moment.

My best guess of the scum team is 2 of cheery, jason and Lynx.

There was no mention of his read on sikon anywhere when giving comments about Cheery Dog in 249. Why would you not include something that afterwards sounds pretty crucial to you?

Those two posts by sikon - the angry/exasperated one and the immediately apologetic one - were unmistakeably what they were - a new player floundering in a way that new town players flounder. Other players mistook sikon's earlier play, so I can accept that the towniness didn't shine through for everyone the way it did for me. But those two posts? No.

One of the things I've been working on in my own game in the Newbie format is getting better at sorting new players. I'm not as good at it as I'd like, but I've improved a lot.

If cheery had ignored or mislabeled sikon's reaction, my scum read would have solidified considerably. While his play bugs me and sets off alarms, it's not for solid and easy to describe reasons.

[fferyllt]

bauss, I agree with a lot of what you posted in 375, except:

sikon's posts come from a newbtown motivation to me, including the aggressive reactions to FoSes. There's a reason newbtown players get mistaken for scum a lot.

morthas' ade some strongly town-motivated looking posts and trollie's posts have mostly built on that. The one thing that worries me about him is how much WKing of me he's done.

I'm not liking your lynch so much right now.

also, jason couldn't be further from newbsauce town.

And I disagree about cheery not having an opportunity to get into a groove. I've replaced into games with far less time to deadline, gotten up to speed, and had a positive impact on the day and on the game.

I have to admit these two posts completely go against everything I've seen so far, which does make me waiver a bit.
But at this stage, fferyllt knew a Cheery Dog lynch was out of the question anyway, so no big risk there.
Claiming the likeabauss-lynch is not to your liking anymore without offering any reasonable alternative is not exactly trying to stop his lynch.
This is just really good scumplay, well thought-out positioning in a likeabauss-lynch thaty you knew was inevitable at that point.
Really well done.
But I'm on to you.

Here's the problem with your theory. I am not a super-skilled scum player. At best, my scum game could be described as not totally incompetent.

[fferyllt]

Here's the problem with your theory. I am not a super-skilled scum player. At best, my scum game could be described as not totally incompetent.

425

And that is basically an emoticon worthy response.

[fferyllt]

Ok, still not done apparently, you guys sure kept busy.

Trying to derail me from stirring things up. If somebody calls you out on something, a lot of people stop doing that something. Maybe I was questioning a scum buddy. Maybe he didn't want me shitting up the thread. Maybe it just looked shady to him. But to me, his play though short, felt lurky. And it read like he was implying I should stop "stirring things up", like its a bad thing.

The key phrase was "while keeping yourself out of it".

That is classic scum behavior IMO.

Another gentle nudge here, despite having claimed on the same page you did not like a likeabauss-lynch that much anymore. One-line statements like that stand out and with an approaching deadline it's all certain people need to place that hammer. cAPSLOCK was "certain people".

I mean, maybe I shouldn't have quoted all of it, but it is CLEAR who the drivers behind likeabauss' lynch were, and it is CLEAR that they had dubious intentions.
Couple that with strange inter-Cheery-feryllt-dynamics, and you've got yourself an obvscumteam.

Associative tells work so much better when you know one player's alignment.

Don't drop your Cheery read when you figure out that your read on me is wrong.

[fferyllt]

What did you think of Cheery Dog's case on likeabauss?

He had no case.

[fferyllt]

Why was this not a problem to you before?

He's difficult to engage, and his play is ambiguous enough that any alarms he sounded were pretty mild. I am the only player who directly questioned him at all, and keeping the engagement going wasn't easy. He seemed off the radar screens of other players. There were really only 2 likely lynches yesterday, once the replacements were plugged in and the game sort of recovered from the server outage. Maybe a sikon wagon could have gained steam, but I tried to keep the wheels kicked off of that wagon.

[fferyllt]

Who is "both"?

[fferyllt]

Who is "both"?

You and Cheery Dog.

I repeatedly stated my reasons for suspecting him at various points of day 1. My post 354 pulled most of it together after he (erroneously) said something about my having town-read him all game.

His post 313 put him over the top, and is what led to my eventual vote.

[fferyllt]

You clearly did not read my entire catch-up. I've been through 17 pages of posts and now I can't expect to be read myself?

No, I actually have read every post you made. Your characterizations of my posts doesn't change what I meant by them.

[fferyllt]

Grim baby, you don't need to convince the scum they are scum.

VOTE: jasonwazza

Because you are not doing shit in this game.

[fferyllt]

Please comment on this, fferyllt, it's the post where I voted you so that should tell you it includes crucial information. A so-called tipping point perhaps. Why did you not bother to reply to it?

jason, to me sikon comes off painfully newbtown.

How visciously unfair.
Sikon's posts and reasonings were anything but newbisch. They were very well thought-out, elegant, well-elaborated and, as far as I can see, accurate.

What on earth made him newbtown to you? And even painfully so?

You're just furthering what you did in 272. Further confirming his already damaged self-esteem.

Even if you're not scum this post was wrong. This is not a thing you should be saying as an IC.

I'm going to move my vote to you if only because of that. Cheery Dog will have to be next.

VOTE: fferyllt

Sikon was a self-declared newb, though IMO he absolutely was playing a strong game. I don't mean "painfully" as in doing terrible stuff. I mean painfully as in so earnestly and obviously both newb and town.

[fferyllt]

This might have been a breadcrumb.

...Hm. I... didn't even realize there was a gap in likeabauss' meta. Frankly, I'm embarrassed. Guess that's a null point.

I decided to take a look through everyone's ISOs to reevaluate my case on likeabauss. His early play was not as scummy as I made it out to be. But I still find some things he has stated, which I now find to be distinctly strange, aside from his unorthodox scumhunting tactics:

"Keeping myself out of it" - I don't mind "some trouble", because sometimes we apply heat to players to find out if they break down and the facade becomes known. Please note though... in this game, town and scum alike are avoiding "real trouble" (being hung or NK'd.) So your suggestion that avoiding trouble is a reason to vote for me is not logical... every player in this game (town and scum) is trying to avoid being killed.

In this post, bauss states that scum and town alike are both trying to avoid "real trouble," and extols the importance of self-preservation. The problem I have with this is that self preservation is indeed more important to mafia players than to town players. Even a town lynch (though unfortunate) can provide useful information on the possible identities of scum if the voting patterns and attitudes of the other players with regards to the lynch, and if that information leads to a town victory, then the dead player still wins with the town. The mafia, on the other hand, lose substantially from having one of their precious few members killed, and since they are already in a superior position in terms of information, gain nothing that isn't gained via their own guile. A townie that prioritizes his own survival too greatly, if he is not a PR or something,

may

cripple the town.

Some may argue this is a weak point on its own -- certainly being lynched is no fun. But it's still worth noting.

Furthermore: though I accept my point about his meta to be null, I find it strange that, even though it was easily rebutted by fferyllt and JasonWazza by the simple observation that I didn't even have access to any of his actually relevant meta, likeabauss completely failed to make this argument.

sikon - I'm glad you're invested in this game, active players make it more fun for all of us. Did you notice in both of those games here on mafiascum, that I found scum on Day 1 and successfully lynched them? (this is why I find Morthas's comment so confusing... when he suggests that stirring things up does not help to find scum.) It was nothing more than subtle nuance and cues that I observed and explored in both cases. I can assure you that my methods of interrogation and observation can be very productive. In those two games, I picked up on something very early and was correct. My interrogation yielded responses that didn't satisfy my suspicions, and we hung bad guys.

(...)

Also, do you feel threatened (are you scum?) Is that why you voted for me and then went to research my prior games? Or is that your typical level of involvement in mafia? I'm not one to dive too deeply into meta history as it can be changed by an experienced player, or maintained to illustrate consistency and pseudo alignment.

He completely ignores the point that I was making about his meta, which is that his playstyle in this game is completely different from the earlier games I observed (where he found scum on day 1). He chooses to point out his skill in finding scum in those previous games (where he used a more aggressive, vote-centric playstyle than this one), and to cast suspicion on me for choosing to peruse his meta, EVEN THOUGH it would have been a much more effective defense to point out that the games in his meta were 3 years old and that most of his play history was on another site!

If likeabauss had pointed out what fferyllt and JasonWazza would proceed to point out later,

it would have shut me down in my tracks!

Instead, he made the strange decision to simply talk past my argument, and accuse me of being scum. I would like to know why he chose to do that.

I realize that was an unwieldy wall of text, so I will explain my points in tl;dr-mode, for those who are lost:
1. likeabauss claims that both town and scum have self-preservation as a high priority, even though it is actually a much, much higher priority for scum than it is for town.
2. likeabauss fails to point out an important error in one of my accusations, even though it would have shut me down more effectively than simply casting a shadow on my motivations.

And in any case, before I am willing to turn my attention elsewhere, I want to hear him respond to the questions I asked him in my previous post:

Why, exactly, do you "lack conviction?" Why is it that you believe that you don't have enough evidence to vote me? Statements like "it contradicts your goal of lynching a townie," "do you not like logical play," "do you feel threatened," "are you scum" do not sound like the rhetoric of someone who "isn't sure." What is it that you're afraid will happen if you vote me "prematurely"?

Why use rhetoric that centers around the idea that I am scum trying to lynch a townie if you aren't actually convinced that I'm scum?

I would prefer to hear the answers to both of these questions. And I want to hear them from him. His responses will determine how I proceed from here. Hopefully, his response will clear up this whole mess.

[fferyllt]

Going to have to ask for the Obvious here but: Did you just find that after thetrollie asked for it, or had you noticed it earlier?

I didn't notice it earlier. When he asked, I ISO'd and searched for "track".

[fferyllt]

Grim baby, you don't need to convince the scum they are scum.

VOTE: jasonwazza

Because you are not doing shit in this game.

Does that make me scum now?

Bad vote is bad.

This is a pretty good example of you not doing shit. Your earliest posts in this thread were good content.

[fferyllt]

To be honest, I find both your responses and the ones of Cheery Dog rather "meek" when it comes to my catch-up. I was expecting some kind of flaming, or some exposé on how I was wrong about everything, or how I was tunneling, starting off with one conversation and then going into the tunnel head-first.

I have seen none of that, just some selection of some of the things I said, and a halfhearted refutation of what was selected.

So I really think I'm on to something here, even moreso than before.

Why is this game so dead? Is there some kind of holiday going on?

I generally don't flame. You've imputed a lot of motivations to my posts, things like trying to tear down sikon's confidence, that couldn't have been further from my mind. Arguing that kind of stuff comes down to "nu uh", "uh huh", though, and isn't going to be very productive in finding scum. Bad enough that there's no real scumhunting happening outside of your focus on me (and to a lesser extent Cheery).

What you are seeing in my behaviors today are a calculation of town's chances of winning if there is a second mislynch - another one that isn't me. If there is going to be a second mislynch I prefer that it be me. I am almost certain that you aren't scum. I believe Trollie is town. Kue is leaning town. That leaves Cheery, Lynx and jasowazza. If I can eliminate one of them from the collective scumpile today, then even if I am mislynched today, town still has a good chance at winning.

Ruling one of them out means interaction. So, let's see who's willing to interact.

[fferyllt]

Wanna know what i see fferyllt?

Scum Fferyllt, cutting down Town Grim's weakest points and then attempting to shift the attention.

Her arguments for me scum right now are pathetic.

Pretty sure she earlier refered to me as a possible town read (when i got back into the game) Now that i suspect her after Grim's Posts (which are very convincing) and blatantly sheep him, she instantly votes me based on "no content you MUST BE SCUM"

Me not doing shit in this game =/= Me being scum in this game.

Fferyllt, when you come up with a better argument, i will address it.

If you *are* town, then start towning. That is completely separate from where your vote is. Even if you are town and are certain I am scum, not looking at other players is a waste of a game day. And that is why you look scummy to me. Aside from your capslock focus on day 1, you did very little but sheep other players.

[fferyllt]

Grim's Town
Lynx is Probably town.
Kues is probably town.
Trollie, is trollie, i'm unsure about him but it's not as if he will do much as is evidated by him just asking about the bread crumb (which by the way you found WAY to easily.)
Cherry is probably your partner.

Your saying i'm scum for not looking at other players, but your yet to realize, i look at other people, i just focus on the one i'm looking at right now.

Why do you have Lynx as probably town?

Cheery isn't my partner, but I am leaning pretty strongly scum.

Found way too easily? dude. ISO, find on page "track". If I hadn't found a hit, then I would have looked for "follow" and other synonyms. Anybody can do that, once they know what they are looking for.

[fferyllt]

Cheery isn't my partner, but I am leaning pretty strongly scum.

Then why aren't you voting him?
Looking at your reasons for voting JasonWazza, it doesn't look like you have a strong scumlean on him. Simply "not doing much" at least doesn't look like a signficant reason to me.

Because he has been in the thread and I am trying to refine my read. Based on day 1, I think it takes a vote to get his attention.

[fferyllt]

That's because she is scum with him Grim.

Your thinking is very one dimensional.

[fferyllt]

Well your reasoning is pretty shit.

Maybe so. Can you answer my question about your town read of Lynx?

[fferyllt]

Lack of answer to 2nd prompt is noted.

[fferyllt]

Pretty sure she earlier refered to me as a possible town read (when i got back into the game) Now that i suspect her after Grim's Posts (which are very convincing) and blatantly sheep him, she instantly votes me based on "no content you MUST BE SCUM"

So about you telling us which parts of Grim's posts are what caused you to want to sheep him so much.

Cheery isn't my partner

I thought you were calling yourself a mislynch before - now there's something about you not having me as a partner.

I am wanting to L-1 you with all this WIFOM about you being a mislynch and not actual defence though, except that I'm not having doing that when Kues hasn't posted yet today and not much else from Trollie (not really surprising) or Lynx.

I knew that would get your attention. Now, why are you reading me as scum? You never went into detail on day 1.

[fferyllt]

Lack of answer to 2nd prompt is noted.

Keep your fucking pants on.

Also it's because i just get town vibes, i'm sure i can dig up why, but i don't see the need to.

It's not like anyone but you has requested them, and i think your scum so it's no use for me to dig shit up for scum.

I don't care what you say about me. All I care about is figuring out which of you are scum. Right now, when I flip it's going to be with a heavy duty FoS pointed at you, Jason. All the associative shit Grim thinks he has figured out will evaporate. And all that will be left are my confirmed town reads.

This is not a bad place to be IMO. Not on day 2. Day 3 I'd have to fight every step to avoid lynch. It's not a concern today.

[fferyllt]

I knew that would get your attention. Now, why are you reading me as scum? You never went into detail on day 1.

Right now, it';s because you've turned on the AtE with saying you're a mislynch and other non-actual defence.

I can't remember day 1 well enough to describe what my thoughts on people were then.

It's fact. not emotion. Who is my partner?

[fferyllt]

It's not fact for anyone but you (if it even is fact) don't try to do that Fferyllt.

You too. Who is my partner?

[fferyllt]

I will re-read soonish.

Fucking read, maybe.

I'm not doing the re-read right now, but CD seems town enough for now.

You have no preliminary thoughts at all about who a scum-fferyllt would be partners with. I don't believe you.

[fferyllt]

Actually I do believe you. That is not really what you are avoiding. Because I believe you know that I have no partner at all.

[fferyllt]

Now your stretching, I had thought CD would be a viable partner, his reaction was too town to be faked in my opinion.

If i had to guess off my head, it'd probably be Trollie, but again this is without a re-read with the thought of CD probably being town.

So quit trying to re-direct suspicion when your fucking trapped in the spotlight.

The spotlight isn't bothering me. Why are you worried about my suspicion of you? You're town right? And I'm going to flip scum and you're going to have a glorious celebration. Right?

[fferyllt]

I'm not worried, i just think your showing your colors of how your trying to direct the spotlight on ANYONE you can.

Your scum, you have no defense, you've been caught, so what do you do, try to fake it by cutting down the most minimalistic points there are, and then try and shift the spotlight before someone points it out.

My defense is my alignment and it gives me all the resolve I need. Due to a combination of things, including my own posting style and behaviors in this game, I am too much of a liability to be anywhere near LYLO, so I am satisfied to be today's lynch. On my way out, though, I will go after players I think are scummy and see what I can shake loose. The stance you are taking does not allay my concerns about you and I am going to keep at you until I'm satisfied that I have your alignment correct. Right now, I don't care whiether you are scum or not. I care about figuring which you are.

Your counters are all of the "lol u scum" variety. Which is weak. And you know it.

[fferyllt]

BUT WE CAN'T READ YOUR ALIGNMENT QUIT PLAYING THAT SHIT AND START PLAYING LIKE TOWN THAT WANT'S TO LYNCH SCUM

Fucking hell woman.

What is this?

[fferyllt]

It's fact. not emotion. Who is my partner?

It's an appeal to trigger my emotions - regardless of what you're trying to do with it - it's still something that you're appealing with and it's aimed at emotion of worry.

I'm not doing partner hunts currently. I'm not convinced enough to have you on L-1 with other players absent - why should I therefore know who you partner is?

You don't understand where I am coming from at all, then. The only players I am interested in worrying are scum. And I think you may be scum.

[fferyllt]

BUT WE CAN'T READ YOUR ALIGNMENT QUIT PLAYING THAT SHIT AND START PLAYING LIKE TOWN THAT WANT'S TO LYNCH SCUM

Fucking hell woman.

What is this?

It's quit accepting your lynch if your actually town and start fucking scumhunting PROPERLY.

better.

UNVOTE: jasonwazza

VOTE: cheery dog

[fferyllt]

Huh, I didn't expect more than maybe two pages while I was gone. My original plan was to get all my homework for this month's unit done all at once (it's a year-round trade school, no summer break for me) so I can be online consistently this month instead of leaving for homework at random times. I'll be on more frequently, no more homework (and hell if I'm going to take the time to study so none of that either).

inb4 someone comes in calling for my prod three minutes before I post

You've been side-eyeing me since just about your first post. What did bauss' flip add to the mix? And what did you think about his other reads?

Nah, I'd been going with you as probably Town the last week or so of Day 1? We agreed on quite a few things, I wouldn't call you the most definitive scum-hunter but you look pretty okay. Then we lose an experienced player and active scum-hunter Day 1 primarily due to your pushing the wagon when we were all on someone else less active (if Kue is Town he's harmless to Scum and an unprofitable lynch), and he comes up Town. His other reads I already said I don't like Trollie, I'm obviously not going to agree with the accusation that I'm scum, and Jason I've been null-to-light-scum. Sorta active-lurky, throws fairly emotional accusations at times, seems honest enough when he actually does post, if tunnelish.

I would have liked to know what I did, because unless I missed the post I only saw "focus on Trollie, Lynx, Jason." If it was something other than my less-than-stellar activity, I'd personally love to know what he thought about it.

It's what you haven't done, which is dig into this game and make any sort of difference. You had zero impact on the two main bandwagons from yesterday, and hence zero impact on the lynch. Zero. And yet you are an obviously experienced player. Life happens, but the game day lasted over three weeks.

This guy was obvtown and got lynched, there's most definitely scum on that wagon, and it's obvious it's experienced scum because there's no way newbies could have set him up like that. Damn.

QFT and I'm not going to quote your entire series of posts, but I like you. Was borderline on cAPS-scum but this is good. There's not much I could add in beyond "yes I agree on ffery and I can't believe I missed that post while I was leaning her Town."

I think you missed it because you are scum, knowing the player who posted it was town, and therefore did not react to it the way a player unaware of alignment would react.

My best guess of the scum team is 2 of cheery, jason and Lynx.

I find it painfully convenient that bauss tells you to go after three specific players, and your current scumreads are the two players from that list that post more than two sentences apiece, and the guy grimgroove has a case against that isn't you.

What I don't like is ffery and Cheery specifically targeting each other. There's distance, and then there's "I really want you to go after this guy even if you do lynch me." I'm torn on it because on one hand both are scum pulling risky distance. On the other, we lynch one, and it turns out they just lined up a Town lynch. This kind of WIFOM just isn't for me, damn.

If you are scum, then it's a real shame you arrived after there was a slight momentum shift.

VOTE: jasonwazza

Because you are not doing shit in this game.

Calling Jason Town if we lynch ffery and she flips Scum. Trollie hasn't really done shit either, nor has Kue. But bauss says "hey ffery target Jason" and now you can safely follow the conftown.

Nice set up there, but Jason's reactions have him back in my town pile. My flip is going to be inconvenient for scum.

I believe Trollie is town. Kue is leaning town. That leaves Cheery, Lynx and jasowazza.

How is Jason different from Kue and Trollie? I don't disagree that it's possible one of the three is scum (only one of the three, no more if not none and we ended up with inactive low-content Townies). Other than them posting too little for a proper read, but I'd go null/irrelevant there before calling Town. Is grimgroove overeager Scum or obvstown from his opening posts?

I'm using the experiential meta I have with Jason. And this also is outdated. I provoked what I believe is a town reaction from him and unvoted him.

I knew that would get your attention. Now, why are you reading me as scum? You never went into detail on day 1.

"I didn't slip it was a gambit."

I'll add a Cheery vote if he doesn't hit L1 before I actually post this.

This is the only part of your post that makes me wonder if you could be town. But, by this point, if not when you started this post, you are aware of the momentum change. Not that it can't swing back.

[fferyllt]

I don't assume you were lurking.

I'm pretty Cheery's scum. Based on the two flips, I thought either you or Jason would be his partner, because I don't thiink Kue would catch that breadcrumb. Trollie...maybe. He's shown a lot of perceptivity when he posts more than a sentence. Jason's reactions to me eventually tipped over into extremely exasperated town, with no opportunism showing through.

So, I'm open to the possibility that you are town. But, I'm skeptical, because I'm pretty happy with my Kue and trollie reads from day 1.

[fferyllt]

I don't assume you were lurking.

I'm pretty Cheery's scum. Based on the two flips, I thought either you or Jason would be his partner, because I don't thiink Kue would catch that breadcrumb.

Why do you think the kill was the result of scum finding that breadcrumb? Like you said, it's easy to find if you know what you're looking for, but other than that?
I think it's safer to say that sikon got killed because of the way he showed robustness in his argumentations.

Maybe, but sikon didn't look like he'd have the gravitas to lead town no matter how good his reads or his argumentation. I expected an experienced player to die on night 1 because all things equal, an experienced town player is more dangerous to scum. There were 5 experienced players going in to night 1.

Sometimes scum do the counter-intuitive thing intentionally. Who would have felt threatened by sikon's presence in the game without factoring in the PR?

[fferyllt]

Why do you think the kill was the result of scum finding that breadcrumb? Like you said, it's easy to find if you know what you're looking for, but other than that?
I think it's safer to say that sikon got killed because of the way he showed robustness in his argumentations.

Yeah I'm doubting anybody saw the generic phrase and said "we must be in a Tracker setup NK him!" He was a mostly Town-read player with several accusations out, I'd be more worried about that than whether somebody rand ctrl+f "track" on every player for a crumb.

Exactly, and the way fferyllt tries to play this down doesn't sit right with me. She is too intent to show she was not scared of him, both before and after the nightphase.

I don't understand what you mean about "not scared of him". His read on me changed a couple of times during day 1, but he had a town read on me at the end of the game day. I'm not playing anything down. But, I do see the game through the lens of my own experience, skills and predispositions.

If I were scum, I would have been on the lookout for PR tells more than actual breadcrumbs. tbh I still find the way players crumb and fake-crumb their roles at MS to be a little alien.

In my last post I asked you who you thought would want sikon dead if you take the PR out of the equation. Although MS site meta kinda discounts night action analysis, I think it's sometimes worthwhile to consider.

[fferyllt]

You're trying to steer me into looking at who he suspected and who he didn't, notably at the end of the daystage. But that's all WIFOM and useless. Why do you insist on relaying the information to me that he townread you at the end of the day, just before he died?

That's not really what I'm doing. It is WIFOM, but to me, killing sikon looks more like a who would be incriminated thing than a who would he go after thing. And I say that in the full knowledge of where I stood with him at the end of day 1.

All I know is that scum wanted him dead, and given I have both you and Cheery Dog down as my scumreads, my answer to your question is Obvious. But I don't suspect you just because he's dead. He seemed like a general townread, so the kill might have just been the result of that.

Maybe. It really depends on the composition of the scum team. Being in the position of knowing my alignment, my list of possible scum by necessity differs from yours. We do agree on Cheery, though.

It does work though. Like I said before, the lynch on likeabauus has shown you weren't exactly sad by his passing away, even though he showed great potential to find scum. Instead, both you and Cheery Dog pushed his lynched, each in your own way. No matter how much distancing you get done during this daystage, this will link you forver.
I saw great similarity between likeabauss' play and sikon's, apart from sikon's uncertainty. But there was no guarantee this uncertainty would persist. In fact, it probably wouldn't have. Some support from any other player for his arguments would have put him back on the right trackagain. So you killing him makes perfect sense.

bauss and I had a very frank talk about our scumreads at the end of day 1. I took quite a bit of what he said on board. Lynx just accused me of sheeping him over it. The linkage is a mirage. Today's lynch has to be one of Cheery or me. I'm still on the fence about whether my flip today would do town more good than Cheery's, because your linkage theory is obscuring other players, one of whom is scum.

[fferyllt]

This game is pretty badly stalled.

How is the catch-up coming along TIP?

Re this:

bauss and I had a very frank talk about our scumreads at the end of day 1. I took quite a bit of what he said on board. Lynx just accused me of sheeping him over it. The linkage is a mirage. Today's lynch has to be one of Cheery or me. I'm still on the fence about whether my flip today would do town more good than Cheery's, because your linkage theory is obscuring other players, one of whom is scum.

This makes so little sense I can't help but consider this an AtE. I can't see any reason why you would prefer a lynch on yourself over a lynch over someone you think is scum just because there is some possible confusion about how the two of you are aligned.

If the "mirage" is still there tomorrow, you can still deal with it then. Having yourself lynched as town now just for the sake of clarity is such a stretch I can hardly imagine this coming from town.

Though death wishes are generally bad in mafia, I'm somewhat prone to them when I foresee a strong chance that I could be a late-game mislynch. I've just come off a game where exactly that happened this weekend, and I could see it shaping up from fairly early on.

[fferyllt]

Also while you at it, explain how how me rage voting you has any clear motivation whatsoever.

That was a rage vote? You have a very narrow reaction continuum.

[fferyllt]

I closed my tab directly after posting it to calm down, so maybe not that much rage, just getting fed up. (can't have been that bad when I was able to explain it slightly 10 minutes later)

Ah. Ok. Been there done that. My posts are usually still pretty terse when I come back after 10 minutes.

[fferyllt]

You see? That right there is Town frustration. Don't lynch him.
VOTE: fferyllt
Insurance

If you want something to happen with this you should probably present a case or yell "EAT ROPE" or something.

I think you're wrong about cheery.

[fferyllt]

Compelling arguments ft.

ISO me. I'm not repeating myself.

[fferyllt]

Well, the wagon on Cheery Dog is shit for two reasons:
1. It practically grew overnight and you three put him to L-1 without any prior discussion. The fact that ffery voted and then you all followed asserts to me that either Jason or Grimgroove is scum.
2. Let's see the reason for ffery's vote in the first place, alright? Lemme see... Oh! There is no reason. You guys voted CD for shit because he was lynch bait and all of you know it.

I was at L-1, wasn't I? Why would they move off me if they are scum?

Or do you think I am scum too and scum would vote as a bloc so early?

[fferyllt]

Yes, you missed some stuff.

Enlighten me, Sensei.

I was at L-1, wasn't I? Why would they move off me if they are scum?

Or do you think I am scum too and scum would vote as a bloc so early?

WIFOM. You see, questions like that do not sit well with me. I do not see the Town motivation behind them. Why would they unvote? I do not know, ask them. Do I think you are scum? Possibly. My reads are shaky at the moment.

I don't think it's WIFOM. They were on me. One of them posted pages worth of walls about how scummy I am. That's a hell of a trajectory to just walk away from if he's scum. I was at L-1. I voted Cheery. They followed. Now Cheery's at L-1.

How the hell was I the momentum-changer at L-1?

[fferyllt]

So the wagon just developed on its own? You started the wagon, ffery. You are to blame. You poked Cheery into L-1.
You poked Cheery with your stick, ffery.

And your first few lines are part of my suspicion exactly. Why would they follow a scumread on whom they had "pages worth of walls"?

Because town players generally don't give a fuck about what their trajectory looks like. They care about finding scum.

[fferyllt]

Trajectory happens.

And there is a trajectory in GrimGrove's posts. If he were scum, I think that trajectory would be considerably more developed from a quantity perspective - lots more points along the way, though the connections might be relatively sparse.

[fferyllt]

"Town players generally..."
WIFOM bats you down.
If Cheery Dog were scum, his trajectory would be significantly different from his current trajectory.

How would it differ?

[fferyllt]

It would be more emotional (not ragey as it is now) and begging. He would plea for everyone's forgiveness and would actually try to keep the spotlight off of himself.

You have seen him do this as scum?

[fferyllt]

Yes, you missed some stuff.

Enlighten me, Sensei.

I was at L-1, wasn't I? Why would they move off me if they are scum?

Or do you think I am scum too and scum would vote as a bloc so early?

WIFOM. You see, questions like that do not sit well with me. I do not see the Town motivation behind them. Why would they unvote? I do not know, ask them. Do I think you are scum? Possibly. My reads are shaky at the moment.

I don't think it's WIFOM. They were on me. One of them posted pages worth of walls about how scummy I am. That's a hell of a trajectory to just walk away from if he's scum. I was at L-1. I voted Cheery.

They followed.

Now Cheery's at L-1.

How the hell was I the momentum-changer at L-1?

I didn't follow
You see, and that's where your distancing fails again. Trying to take credit for this Cheery Wagon, while you barely had any arguments developed against him before I called you out on it.

fferyllt-Cheery Dog scumteam? Oh yes.

I didn't look back at the order. I just remember voting and then at least one following vote, which surprised me.

[fferyllt]

It was Jason and that makes a sort of sense.

I go back and forth about him being scum. I've meta'd a bunch of games trying to figure out if he's more likely to rage-post/post provocatively as town or as scum. It's a mixed bag. The post that led me to unvote him did seem to come from a town PoV.

[fferyllt]

It's got nothing to do with the order. Even though I did vote after you did, I never "followed" you in any way and you know it. Yet you failed to clarify this to TIP and instead promoted the idea that you pulled the wagon.

chronology and motivation correlate sometimes but it's not necessarily a causal thing.

I am still surprised that my wagon dissipated.

It makes me wonder about Cheery's alignment. If neither you nor Jason are scum then I think one of the wagons should have gone through if he's town. And mine should have too, though maybe it collapsed too quickly.

Majority wagon mechanics is not my forte. I learned mafia and played for years in a plurality lynch format. One of you guys ought to be able to come up with alternate hypotheses if I'm wrong.

[fferyllt]

It's got nothing to do with the order. Even though I did vote after you did, I never "followed" you in any way and you know it. Yet you failed to clarify this to TIP and instead promoted the idea that you pulled the wagon.

chronology and motivation correlate sometimes but it's not necessarily a causal thing.

What? Does that even mean anything?

heh. One of my hydra partners characterizes my posting style as terse, vague, uncertain and/or paranoid. That's both terse and vague. Follow is a bad word for how that played out.

I am still surprised that my wagon dissipated.

You were there when it happened. I stated reasons for changing my vote. And I said from the beginning both you and Cheery Dog were good scum-options. Fake surprise much?

No, not fake. I've been kind of frozen into a stance for the last week or so because the game kind of stagnated. Any fresh input at all can change that stance, and did.

If the wagon fades off Cheery, it will mostly likely land on me again. I think my posts this game day make it pretty clear why I don't see that as necessarily a bad thing. But, I'd like for town to do a hard-reset after my flip and not just proceed to "next on the list".

It makes me wonder about Cheery's alignment. If neither you nor Jason are scum then I think one of the wagons should have gone through if he's town. And mine should have too, though maybe it collapsed too quickly.

You just called Jason scum, didn't you? Since you just townread me for my trajectory, it's the only logical conclusion.

Jason is maybe scum, yes. But I think you missed the key idea in that sentence. "one of the wagons should have gone through if he's town" He being Cheery. My wagon may have faded too fast to take advantage of. But the Cheery wagon has been sitting stagnant for a while, which bolsters my scum read of him.

I'm highly unlikely to vote Jason today unless my own read on Cheery changes. And the wagon's stagnancy goes against a read change.

Why all this between the lines stuff? Because you're about to join the wagon started by your supposed scumread Cheery Dog?

It's how I post. My thoughts usually look like a fairly straight line from this side of my keyboard.

Majority wagon mechanics is not my forte. I learned mafia and played for years in a plurality lynch format. One of you guys ought to be able to come up with alternate hypotheses if I'm wrong.

Wrong about what/who? I have trouble discerning the central message from your post.

This: Would the wagon stagnate this way if Cheery is town and zero to 1 scum are currently on it?

[fferyllt]

fferyllt, if Cheery Dog is scum, you think his scumpartner is not on his wagon right now?

If his scum partner is on the wagon, it's Jason.

I don't like to predict scum behavior at MS based on what scum-me would do because my scum game was developed in a plurality-lynch environment. That said, if I were scum with the lynch leader in this game, I would probably be sitting back and waiting to see if his wagon would dissolve. If it didn't, I'd be planning an epic hammer vote.

[fferyllt]

I'd like to hear why you want to vote Grim, Trollie.

[fferyllt]

Yeah, I think that slot is town. very town. I didn't get where you were coming from with the early post.

[fferyllt]

tip you are doing that reflective thing. I always want to lynch that reflective thing with fire. :/

[fferyllt]

What reflective thing, fferyllt?

where you do the mime-in-the-mirror thing to whatever someone says to you. Bad habits die hard.

[fferyllt]

Hmm. Interesting that you state you're above newbie level. I'll keep that in mind. If you think I'm pushing you to hammer, don't you think I would have hammered? This point makes little sense, if any. I have the tools to do what you supposedly say I'm pushing you to do. Therefore, I am not pushing you into anything, and your statement is false. Why do you need other people's approval? Are you concerned of your figure if Cheery flips Town?

When I see posts like this, I always want to say something snarky about "read the thread". With lots of adjectives and extremely improper nouns.

[fferyllt]

I'd like for whoever intends to hammer to give Cheery time to claim. A lot of players don't claim without that, even at L-1. And in newbie games that protocol tends to be more closely followed than elsewhere on the site.

Though, I think nearly every time I've ever posted iintent to hammer someone else hammered before I got around to it.

[fferyllt]

And even though she has worked her way into people's hearts again, I'm still very wary of fferyllt. There's something I don't quite like about the way she's going after TheIrishPope. 676 sounds like the setting up of an easy lynch, with a fairly cheap excuse. In post 680 she seems to have realised this, and adds an afterthought on the same post that is too emotionally laden for being an afterthought.

At the risk of sounding repetitive: Still got fferyllt pinned down as my second scumread.

tbh I am not sure if I think TiP is scum or not. But, that exchange with Lynx reminded me of this game: http://www.forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopi ... 84&t=28429. He was lynched on day 1.

However, there was another game going on at the same time that he and I also played. http://www.forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopi ... 84&t=28260. Here too, he did the reflective thing. He was town.

Then he stopped doing it. I was meta-ing another player for a game, and noticed that he stopped partway though this popcorn game. http://www.forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopi ... 51&t=28626

Since then, in games we've played, I haven't seen that behavior again until last night. So it didn't used to be indicative of his scum game. It was more indicative of being under pressure than anything, I think. And now it shows up in a situation where he's under no credible pressure at all.

The offness of my tone can mostly be attributed to beer, though I was feeling pretty snarky about mafia most of Sunday.

[fferyllt]

What reflective thing, fferyllt?

where you do the mime-in-the-mirror thing to whatever someone says to you. Bad habits die hard.

I seriously don't know what you're talking about.

I've called you out for it before. Someone FoSes you for something. You turn that exact FoS back on them. Someone tunnels you. You tunnel them for the same reasons they give for tunneling you. I've seen you do it as scum and as town. But, you mostly stopped doing it during/after the Popcorn game.

Now it's back. And I wonder why.

[fferyllt]

And you fferyllt?

I'd kinda like for TiP to answer this before I do.