VOTE: podoboq because there is no SK in this setup.
Well, that was easy.
I actually like my vote on this guy. Not only is there the "Look at me! I want to do research! I'm so Town!" angle, but it's also lazy. Assuming the "previous game" is the failed one Open 640, it's not hard to work that out.
For the record, the game you are looking for is this one: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=66642In post 34, podoboq wrote:In post 32, MURDERCAT wrote:What N-0 cop claim?It was a gambit, but people actually followed it for several pages, which I think is kind of hilarious.
O ho ho! Reassuring your scumbuddy, huh?In post 44, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Don't worry this wagon isn't to get you lynched.In post 43, karnos wrote:Thank you sir, I have an excellent view of all the scum from up on this wagon.
If you believe in high-pressure wagons, why did you take the pressure off by telling karnos the wagon wasn't to get him lynched?In post 48, drmyshottyizsik wrote:I believe in fast high pressure wagons,
Hate to be that guy, man, but that looks an awful lot like coaching.In post 52, podoboq wrote:and an inconsistency worth owning up to.
WTF? I made the point about taking pressure of in #50. #51 was unrelated, from Karnos. And that quote I said could have been coaching was in #52. Shooty didn't reply at all to #50, but you say he defended the inconsistency??? That's BS, pure and simple.In post 54, podoboq wrote:No, I'm saying that he should have owned up to it. He didn't. He defended the inconsistency, and it's the fact that he didn't own up to it that's a problem.In post 53, Chip Butty wrote:Hate to be that guy, man, but that looks an awful lot like coaching.In post 52, podoboq wrote:and an inconsistency worth owning up to.
I didn't mind the first part of the post too much - it looked like he thought you misunderstood my point and actually explained what I had in mind quite well.In post 36, MURDERCAT wrote:What's pinging me about 27 is that I'm being talked to in a way (tone wise) that usually only comes about when someone has a strong town read on me later in the game. There's of course no way to know I'm town yet, unless you are scum. I also don't like the "it's a really good catch" part (feels like a buddy) but then saying it's not worthy of a vote. But then unless you give content he's highly inclined to vote. It feels like he doesn't have a real opinion, but he's trying to make it seem like he does.
<ahem> Maruchan was responding to my post finding pod suspicious, so technicallyIn post 62, Smithereens wrote:Imo Maruchan did well to get this game rolling. You could at the very least be a tad grateful. I dislike Sircakez calling it a big ball of fluff when literally it's one of the only posts made thus far that has attempted to progress the game. Why is Maruchan a big ball of fluff but nobody else is?
UNVOTE:
VOTE: SirCakez
Are you trying to plunge us back into RVS? It was hard enough to crawl out the first time...I'm pretty sure you don't believe this reasoning. Not saying you are being scummy, but I know you like capers...In post 63, karnos wrote:Agree with the above, and...
SirCakez was scum in the original roll open 640. The *only* scum from 640 who made it into the re-roll. What are the chances that he pulled scum again?
VOTE: SirCakez
I hate this. At best, it is reachy. At worst, it is insensitive and a bit non-sensical. I mean, how many times do you think a player could pull a stunt like that, if that is what it is (Hint: it isn't)? And it seems to be saying something terrible about Shotty as a person, and I don't think there is any call for that.In post 67, DixC wrote:Sorry to hear about the dog, VOTE: DrMyShotyIzSuj. Does that have some relevance to the game? I've noticed that scum are not beneath using any and every thing to obfuscate with pathos.In post 48, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Sigh my dog just died so you can look it up your self, I believe in fast high pressure wagons, blah blah blah, watch how the machine works in response to all input, blah blah blah, I do this most games, and it's not a scum tell, blah blah blah.
Sooooooo....you're saying I am like a puppy you are training? Maybe you can train me to salivate when you ring a bell.In post 98, Maruchan wrote: 2. Saying pointing out someone's good catch's is buddying. So we're all independently scummhunting here? there's no group cohesion?Mod go ahead and close the topic, we don't need it anymore. We can scumhunt without the rest of these fools, on our own. That whole group-process to finding scum is overhyped apparently(I guess I wasn't done with the sarcasm). Pointing out that you didn't notice something, that someone else did, and that you agree with it, encourages more content from them. It's a concept called positive reinforcement. Think of potty training a dog. I'll give three examples that are the most similar to ways I could have reacted to someone else posting good content. So, I have a new dog I'm trying to pottytrain. he goes pee in the house. Lets take option 1. Ignore it and not give positive or negative reinforcement. He has no lesson to learn one way or the other as I haven't given him a lesson. He continues to pee in the house. He pees outside. We take Option 1 again and not give a positive or negative reaction. He never gets pottytrained nad he keeps peeing inside and outside, both good and bad actions, and he never becomes a better dog. Skip to option 2. He pees inside. You scold him. You punish him. You've negatively reinforced the behavior. He goes pee outside, no reaction. He's confused. He knows you DON'T want him peeing inside, but doesn't know that you DO want him peeing outside. Maybe he thinks he just cant pee in that room, and he tries another room, still a bad action. eventually by process of elimination, he will learn that the only thing that is not negatively-reinforced is the outside. the one good option. this takes forever. Skip to option 3. He goes pee inside. You do nothing. he doesn't stop peeing inside, no lesson learned. he pees outside. you give him a treat. he goes ecstatic over that treat and wants to learn how to get more. he goes pee inside again and gets no treat. he gets a treat when he goes pee outside. OH SHIT. He's just learned the quickest way to get treats is to pee outside, and he IMMEDIATELY ceases peeing inside, because he wants fuckin treats yo! You've just pottytraiend your dog.
of coruse the most efficient way is to combine postive and negative reinforcement to back each other up, BUT IF YO UCOULD ONLY postive OR ignore OR negative, the best thign is to positive.
same thing to player participation in a game. You keep telling them they are doing the right thing, you appreciate their efforts, you want them to continue trying, you'll get good engaged, players who actively try to scumhunt.
you just keep telling them when they are wrong, they get apathetic, they lurkmoar, they proddodge, they resent you, the game stagnantes.
I think telling someone they made a Good!Post, is the best option here yeah? Not buddying. Encouraging pro-town behavior.
In post 75, Smithereens wrote:Why don't you vote SirCakez Chip? Your vote is still RVS and you've brought up some relatively good reasons to be voting elsewhere..
Why the change? Jumping onto a convenient wagon?
I think Maru's tone is a bit better here, but I want to point out that neither his nor podo's comments on karnos' #63 were exactly original. I was there first in #73, although we reached different conclusions (Well, I didn't really reach a conclusion):In post 171, Maruchan wrote:This is a good post. We were starting to slowly pull ourselves out of RVS at that point, and here comes Karnos rolling back in with a "Hey have some RVS bishes!" post, and no help to the game at all. He tries to throw a shred of validity on it by WIFOMing "what are the odds" of back to back scum rolls. Which in a game of exactly the same setup, the odds of back to back scum roles,In post 103, podoboq wrote:VOTE: karnosIn post 63, karnos wrote:Agree with the above, and...
SirCakez was scum in the original roll open 640. The *only* scum from 640 who made it into the re-roll. What are the chances that he pulled scum again?
VOTE: SirCakez
I was waiting for something....else, but no, this is still it. There needs to be some pressure on karnos to make him actually participate, because this doesn't count.are the exact same odds of any single one of us rolling scumbecause each game is played in a bubble, so outside factors do not place any pressure on the pure randomness of each game.
Also, re:probability, I think what Maru is trying to say is that, given game A followed by game B:In post 73, Chip Butty wrote:Are you trying to plunge us back into RVS? It was hard enough to crawl out the first time...I'm pretty sure you don't believe this reasoning. Not saying you are being scummy, but I know you like capers...In post 63, karnos wrote:Agree with the above, and...
SirCakez was scum in the original roll open 640. The *only* scum from 640 who made it into the re-roll. What are the chances that he pulled scum again?
VOTE: SirCakez
In post 44, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Don't worry this wagon isn't to get you lynched.In post 43, karnos wrote:Thank you sir, I have an excellent view of all the scum from up on this wagon.
In post 46, MURDERCAT wrote:This is weird.In post 44, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Don't worry this wagon isn't to get you lynched.
In post 47, Chip Butty wrote:O ho ho! Reassuring your scumbuddy, huh?In post 44, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Don't worry this wagon isn't to get you lynched.In post 43, karnos wrote:Thank you sir, I have an excellent view of all the scum from up on this wagon.
In post 48, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Sigh my dog just died so you can look it up your self, I believe in fast high pressure wagons, blah blah blah, watch how the machine works in response to all input, blah blah blah, I do this most games, and it's not a scum tell, blah blah blah.
In post 50, Chip Butty wrote:If you believe in high-pressure wagons, why did you take the pressure off by telling karnos the wagon wasn't to get him lynched?In post 48, drmyshottyizsik wrote:I believe in fast high pressure wagons,
PS: Sorry to hear about your dog.
In post 52, podoboq wrote:I'm with Chip on this. If your strategy is too play so aggro that it riles people up, and gets people to say something they might not have without pressure, the last thing you want to do is release that pressure. I don't think that it's scum reassuring scum, like Chip implied earlier, but I do think it's an inconsistency.In post 50, Chip Butty wrote:If you believe in high-pressure wagons, why did you take the pressure off by telling karnos the wagon wasn't to get him lynched?
It's probably excusable, all things considered (I've lost dog family, too, man. It hurts), but it's still an inconsistency worth pointing out, and an inconsistency worth owning up to.
In post 53, Chip Butty wrote:Hate to be that guy, man, but that looks an awful lot like coaching.In post 52, podoboq wrote:and an inconsistency worth owning up to.
In post 54, podoboq wrote:No, I'm saying that he should have owned up to it. He didn't. He defended the inconsistency, and it's the fact that he didn't own up to it that's a problem.In post 53, Chip Butty wrote:Hate to be that guy, man, but that looks an awful lot like coaching.In post 52, podoboq wrote:and an inconsistency worth owning up to.
Also, judging by your other posts, I think you actually like being that guy.
In post 55, Chip Butty wrote:WTF? I made the point about taking pressure of in #50. #51 was unrelated, from Karnos. And that quote I said could have been coaching was in #52. Shooty didn't reply at all to #50, but you say he defended the inconsistency??? That's BS, pure and simple.In post 54, podoboq wrote:No, I'm saying that he should have owned up to it. He didn't. He defended the inconsistency, and it's the fact that he didn't own up to it that's a problem.In post 53, Chip Butty wrote:Hate to be that guy, man, but that looks an awful lot like coaching.In post 52, podoboq wrote:and an inconsistency worth owning up to.
Now you are definitely on my scumdar.
Okay, I've reread this sequence a few times and I see what you are saying in #54 and #56 now - This, if I am reading you right: "Shotty was inconsistent in his #48 and he should have noted that, even though he believes in high pressure wagons, he had relieved the pressure on karnos".In post 56, podoboq wrote:He defends his weirdness by saying that he plays by making high pressure wagons, doesn't note the inconsistency in that statement, and doesn't own up to it. Like, I get that he hasn't talked more since then, but he should have said at some point in there "You're right, I shouldn't have told him not to worry about it, because that's inconsistent with my apparent strategy." Nothing new has come out since this post except us pointing out that it's inconsistent. We shouldn't have to explain that to him. He should recognize it on his own.In post 48, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Sigh my dog just died so you can look it up your self, I believe in fast high pressure wagons, blah blah blah, watch how the machine works in response to all input, blah blah blah, I do this most games, and it's not a scum tell, blah blah blah.
For what it matters, I'm going to keep assuming that this is a misunderstanding on your part, rather than scum trying to throw shit everywhere hoping it sticks somewhere.
In post 44, drmyshottyizsik wrote:In post 43, karnos wrote:Thank you sir, I have an excellent view of all the scum from up on this wagon.Don't worry this wagon isn't to get you lynched.
Shotty, I know your dog had just died at this point in time, but you never did go back and explain this inconsistency, even though podoIn post 48, drmyshottyizsik wrote:Sigh my dog just died so you can look it up your self,I believe in fast high pressure wagons, blah blah blah, watch how the machine works in response to all input, blah blah blah, I do this most games, and it's not a scum tell, blah blah blah.
In post 133, Chip Butty wrote:In post 75, Smithereens wrote:Why don't you vote SirCakez Chip? Your vote is still RVS and you've brought up some relatively good reasons to be voting elsewhere..Why the change? Jumping onto a convenient wagon?
In post 134, Chip Butty wrote:Incidentally, when Smithereens posted #75, my vote was already on podo. So he's asking me there to take my vote off podo, and then later votes podo himself, with no explanation.
PP votes podo, had already posted earlier that he was thinking about it...Not awful, but doesn't announce L-1...In post 135, PenguinPower wrote:Fair enough response to tilt me over the fence.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: podoboq
...but MC does that. Seems like a sensible post.In post 136, MURDERCAT wrote:L-1
We are either all on scum or there's scum on the wagon. So let's figure out if podo is legit scum or if some of the votes look sketchy.
In my experience, this fits with Town.karnos' thinking.In post 137, karnos wrote:Yeah, that wagon was pretty damn fast, there is probably scum pushing it.
All the same , I want to see podoboq's response before I consider change my vote.
Why is he worried about how his voteIn post 138, Smithereens wrote:My vote looks sketchy~~
I had an irresistible urge to just lynch a fucker, I'm not gonna lie to you :3 I'm awful.
There's still time to unvote him and lynch someone else though...
This particular post from Shotty doesn't look too bad. Will have to go back and look at his ISO again...In post 139, drmyshottyizsik wrote:UNVOTE:
woah, l-1 legit on page 6? No no no, I'm not saying podo isn't scum but it seems more likely that this is a scum driven wagon. Could be both.
p-edit,
that post looked worse than your vote
In post 140, Smithereens wrote:interestinggg.....
Seems like a manufactured reason to vote Shotty. Probably panicking a little here, realizing just how bad his vote on podo looks.
I'd like to get more explanation of this last line from Smithereens...In post 143, Smithereens wrote:"woah, l-1 legit on page 6? No no no, I'm not saying podo isn't scum but it seems more likely that this is a scum driven wagon. Could be both."
if this isn't a guilty mindset that betrays you already knew you were voting a townie, Idk what is.
In post 116, PenguinPower wrote:Out of the more than 20 games I've played with him previously, he is only ever this quiet when he is scum. I'd like to hear from in before changing my vote.In post 115, MURDERCAT wrote:Mind explaining the Karnos read a bit more if you are sticking to it?
Is karnos now posting at a Town AI level, in your opinion? Because you seem to have dropped this without a word?In post 203, PenguinPower wrote:UNVOTE:
Need to re-read this thread...I'm torn between Smithereens due to what karnos said above, and Ranger because I just cannot believe that after 100 more posts, he reads remain unchanged given some of the exchanges.
I'm rating Anen nullTown for now. I don't know if this is just me, but I am struggling a bit in this game. By this stage I usually have a few players I have strong reads on - either Town or scum - but so far I haven't been able to really get a handle on what is going on here. Even Shotty is only a moderate scumread for me atm. Part of that is because I haven't put enough time in, so hopefully get it together here fairly soon.In post 218, Aneninen wrote:F-cking town: Murdercat, ChipButty, Karnos
Townish: SirCakez, Smithereens, Ranger
No idea yet: Transcend, DixC
Ghhhhhhh: Maruchan, Shotty
Scummy and needs to meet pigeons: Penguin, Podoboq
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Podoboq
In post 338, Ranger wrote:Because it has people I'm suspicious of on it, while being on a player I do not find suspicious.SirCakez wrote:Why aren't you happy with the Smithereens wagon?
...Find a townflip guaranteed, we will!Maruchan wrote:If lynch within smithereens ranger and shotty at this point
{karnos, Aneninen}
{SirCakez, Smithereens}
{shotty, Chip Butty, Murdercat}
{DixC}
{Maruchan, Transcend}
{podoboq, PenguinPower}
On the basis of Ranger's readlist, which bears some similarity to Anen's, I'm nullTown reading her also. She hasn't posted enough for this to be a strong read, but I have found that in games where we are both Town, her rankings look quite similar to mine. I haven't completed doing my reads yet, but I would say of both Anen's and Ranger's lists that they look "the right side up".In post 218, Aneninen wrote:F-cking town: Murdercat, ChipButty, Karnos
Townish: SirCakez, Smithereens, Ranger
No idea yet: Transcend, DixC
Ghhhhhhh: Maruchan, Shotty
Scummy and needs to meet pigeons: Penguin, Podoboq
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Podoboq
It has to be said that you gave a kind of nothing reason for moving on...In post 421, karnos wrote:WTH is this?In post 345, karnos wrote: My vote on smithereens is feeling stale, time for a change.
I finally unvote him, and then everyone else decides to hop on the wagon?
Need to re-read and review.
That was my first impression, reading through. But I'm v. tired now and I don't do good reads when I'm tired...In post 547, MURDERCAT wrote:Pretty confident about Trans as town now.
Scum only have night talk; it's in the sample Role-PMs:In post 561, podoboq wrote:It's a guess. The way he unvoted the wagon looks like potential daychatting scum to me. If it's scummy, it's too coordinated to be otherwise. I've yet to play a game here without day chat, but as I've learned in another game recently, I think mods are supposed to make that public knowledge.In post 560, MURDERCAT wrote:Do we know this setup has or does not have day chat? I looked but didn't see. Is this a slip?In post 558, podoboq wrote:it's possible that this is a plan communicated between the two over day chat.
@davesas: Does mafia have daychat in this game?
In post 0, davesaz wrote:
Mafia Goon
Welcome, [Player Name]. You are aMafia Goon, along with your partners, [Player Name] and [Player Name].
Abilities:
Factional communication: During thenight phaseyou may talk with your partner here [QuickTopic link].
Factional kill: Each night phase, one of you or your partner may perform the factional kill.
Setup Information: You know that there are exactly X number of Docs in the game and Y number of Cops.
Win condition:
You win when all members of the town have been eliminated or nothing can prevent this from occurring.
Not so much a vanity wagon as a procrastination wagon, in that I was hoping Smithereens would stop being weird and put his vote on who he thinks is scum, rather than himself. It MIGHT be a scum ploy on his part, but I'm thinking prob not.In post 587, podoboq wrote: ChipButty, your vote on shotty is a vanity wagon at this point.
@podo: I don't think we need to buy that you and Maru are opposite alignments. That actually sounds like scum trying to protect themself/their scumbuddy in case one of them gets lynched. Having said that, you're not looking as scummy as you were earlier. If you and Smithereens are the only viable wagons as we get near deadline, I'll consider voting you to avoid a mislynch but other than that, I'm not enthusiastic.In post 587, podoboq wrote: People on my or Maru's wagons, you should probably just pick one, and take it to L-1. I already made the argument for how we're almost definitely the same alignment, (if one of us were scum, we would have joined the other's counterwagon regardless of Smith's alignment), so it shouldn't matter that much. Maru is V/LA, so putting him up is probably just going to waste our clock. So probably just vote me.
Yeah, and my connection got reset while I was writing my last post, so I missed a whole lot of Ninjas...In post 608, Smithereens wrote:Chip..ugh. I'll explain in end game. Suffice to say I know what to do with my vote and no I don't actually feel the need to commit suicide. I think you're just catching up though.
See where my vote is? There.In post 607, MURDERCAT wrote:Where do you think we should be voting though Chip?
Yeah, looks that way...but I'm not that keen on podo or you.In post 611, Smithereens wrote:Chip Butty that wagon... clearly isn't going to happen >.>
Chipderp. My mind isn't even nearly 100% on this right now, and in fact I have to go take care of something. Be back to reread in a few hours with any luck...In post 615, podoboq wrote:You're misunderstanding me. I'm saying the opposite. Maru and I almost certainly must be thesamealignment.
In post 694, karnos wrote:Why is the claim of all things what convinced you?
I don't think podo is scum for other reasons, but you should know everyone is going to claim either doc or cop, and claiming a late night is the perfect scum cover because they won't have to share results until the game is likely over.
I've been thinking along these lines too, but I think N5 Doc would be an even safer claim. WIFOM: But, then, scum might be reluctant to claim the very safest claim simply because it is way too obvious, so yeah claim N5 Cop. And Shotty's comment doesn't do anything to make me think my vote on him is misplaced.In post 695, Smithereens wrote:May I present to you the safest scum claim:
COP N5
They already know every affiliation, and by claiming night 5, they might not even get to use their role. Podo even revealed that that was his thought process.
In post 707, Smithereens wrote:Don't worry guys, you can shit all over me if it goes wrong, just put your votes on with confidence~
In post 710, Smithereens wrote:Podo -> Trans -> Maru -> Aneninen. Use this flow chart in case I die tonight. Maru and Trans are interchangable. Avoid introducing new names into the lynch pool without objective scum tells orthe approval of Ranger.
In post 712, Smithereens wrote:My scum reads are irrelevant. My controversial actions stirred up enough people to drop a deliciously large amount of AI material for us to read through. I'm happy with the results, you would be happy too if only you were town.
Smithereens, you are confusing the fuck out of me. You seem def on your scum reads but see the bits in pink. And are you saying you def read Ranger as Town? Why? I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but I need to see reasons.In post 715, Smithereens wrote:I've dropped the assumption that my reads are correct.What are we left with? Pages of posts you've made that betray everything from your desire to lynch a person you've prior recognised as town to you attempting to reach for more reasons to substantiate a scum read that was falling apart.
And not just on you, Trans and Maru have dug themselves into pits as well.
No, I AM reading. You say you are dropping the assumption your reads are accurate, but then - based on the input of podo, Maru, Trans - you read them as scummy, IN THE VERY SAME POST. That is what is confusing me.In post 762, Smithereens wrote: Oi, you're not reading. Podo asked me to pretend for a moment that my reads were irrelevant, and while I don't believe that to be the case, for that conversation I told him 'let's pretend my reads don't mean anything.'
Of course I don't subscribe to this position. You could read that clearly from the posts. So why did you create this? ^^
MC and Anen: If you think Shotty is scum, how come you wouldn't vote him with me, but jumped on the Penguin wagon right away?In post 801, Aneninen wrote:I too think Shotty's scum.
Conflicted on Podoboq. Because of his lame claim and the whole Smith/Podoboq situation. (In case of one town, one scum there, there would have been a lynch by now.)
I'm not sure whether we're doing the right thing but a NoLynch would definitely be worse.
What does it matter who asks? Everyone will read what you say, regardless...In post 819, PenguinPower wrote:Not for you. Nothing for you or podo.In post 816, MURDERCAT wrote:claim please