KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
I just really wish people would stop making activity cases on me based on my talking about reads I don't have time to fully explain. Like, how am I supposed to adapt to that? Stop playing? Because I have time to play the game and participate at a higher than average rate, just not enough to explain every little thing I see. So, do I just not say that I have all these other reads so people don't eyebrow me for them? Again, that seems bad, both because I think those reads prove fairly accurate most of the time, and hiding info would throw me off behaviorally.
Feels like you guys are putting me in a pretty impossible behavioral dilemma.
Speaking of dilemmas, current conundrum is A) write an assignment contract for the next side business I'm launching where I'm meeting a guy tomorrow in an effort to get my out-of-work friend a job, B) PBPA Huntzilla, C), collapse in exhaustion since I'm 14 hours into the work day. D) Entwine.
I'm Silvercrys3467. I'm the towniest town to ever town in the whole of towndom. Hilarious because he is completely the anti-me.
My ability is unlimited Neighborizor (again), but this time the chats only last for a day. The name of the ability is lead by talking. My burnout is even better proof, but I'd really like to avoid having to claim it if at all possible.
I'm still salty that I ended up losing Mind screw to your case that consisted of "it's Hunt, lynch please."
I think it's a useless pit to flavor claim. Bur is a wily mod who planned for us to sink time in that endeavor. I'm not convinced it would help us at all.
Taking lame position on flavor-claiming plus weak joke = scummy first post. Why you ask? Because I've seen that pattern like a dozen times. It just is a thing. Lame jokes and making boring posts about mechanics is a thing scum do.
Quote from huntzilla »
I am on the fence with Osie. It feels way to early to end the day, but using the excuse "I don't wanna rock the boat (aka hide)" screams noob scum to me. I would put my vote down hard if it wasn't so early in the day.
Holy ***** though. Tare got ran up fast. That makes no sense to me.
Well sense he isn't L-2, I can go ahead with Unvote, Vote Osie
Hate everything about this post. No conclusions based on the Tare wagon, just commenting that a thing happened.
Then he transitions to this extremely poorly reasoned Osie bandwagon vote. By which point, I already wanted to kill him.
I chopped off a bunch of the other things he said, but it was also an extremely long post, that simultaneously displayed very little in the way of a townie mindset or thoughts. He just comments on stuff, but he doesn't arrive at conclusions regarding town/scum. Even on Osie, the guy he eventually votes, he has a hard time articulating a firm sense of how he sees him.
Massive post also came on the heels of being identified by meas one of my top two scum. Probably a semi-subconscious overreaction on his part to try and defuse pressure.
Shortly afterwards, he disappears for a while, hopping to fly under the radar a bit while the Tar/Osie wagons play out.
Quote from huntzilla »
Yeah, I'm reading you wrong. You aren't noob scum.
Unvote
This is his Osie unvote. Fails to explain what about that quote convinced him. Again, impossible to see a townie mindset in these posts, nothing is explained or charted out.
Quote from huntzilla »
I'm set on Az being scum for his throwing shade at me all day and then not doing ANYTHING about it until the last minute. Tom is still possibly scum in my eyes, but his ballsy "no you" in response to claiming is a townie reaction. Those two are the obvious bad jumps on my wagon. Shadow's was a head scratcher, but he's been throwing his vote around like a Nickel-Whore on a vacation. It doesn't feel malicious like the other two.
Unvote
Vote Az
This I've already dealt with. He calls me scum because I was voting for Taredas while also attacking him. But I'd already explained, multiple times, that Tar was my top scum read, and Hunt was secondary. So why's he attacking me for that?
When called on that, he tries to retcon it here:
Quote from huntzilla »
Of course you can have multiple scum reads at once. I get that. But as was pointed out previously, you had Tare sandwiched between reads, and it appeared as if I was the top read. You kept throwing my name out there as an afterthought, which feels like you were just trying to keep my name on the tip of everyone's tongue, if you will. It's a subtle mind game, to continue to name me, thus keeping me in the back of everyone's mind, and then to try and get a Chinese Fire Drill on me at end of day.
Basically, you are hunting the low hanging fruit, which for you Az, is a scum tell. Through and through.
This here is some pretty classic scum obfuscation. When Hunt flips scum, take a hard look at this, because it pretty much 100% proves me town IMO. Scum Hunt isn't sneaky enough to try to post this kind of a takedown on a partner.
This is the kind of thing you post as scum to try to make someone look bad when the facts aren't on your side. You make them out to be doing something sneaky and underhanded, even when the actual facts don't support that interpretation at all if you stop to think about it for half a second. But hey, maybe the town won't stop to think about it and you'll get away with it.
If I need to explain again what's wrong here, the man is trying to say that I was being sneaky or subtle or underhanded in my attacks on him, to quietly, subliminally push his lynch as scum.
And again, my reply to that is that there's absolutely nothing subliminal about my attacks on him. I want him dead, and I've made that perfectly plain to anyone reading my posts.
I just really wish people would stop making activity cases on me based on my talking about reads I don't have time to fully explain. Like, how am I supposed to adapt to that? Stop playing? Because I have time to play the game and participate at a higher than average rate, just not enough to explain every little thing I see. So, do I just not say that I have all these other reads so people don't eyebrow me for them? Again, that seems bad, both because I think those reads prove fairly accurate most of the time, and hiding info would throw me off behaviorally.
Feels like you guys are putting me in a pretty impossible behavioral dilemma.
Speaking of dilemmas, current conundrum is A) write an assignment contract for the next side business I'm launching where I'm meeting a guy tomorrow in an effort to get my out-of-work friend a job, B) PBPA Huntzilla, C), collapse in exhaustion since I'm 14 hours into the work day. D) Entwine.
The flash of his lance projects the pure radiance of his honor.
I'm Silvercrys3467. I'm the towniest town to ever town in the whole of towndom. Hilarious because he is completely the anti-me.
My ability is unlimited Neighborizor (again), but this time the chats only last for a day. The name of the ability is lead by talking. My burnout is even better proof, but I'd really like to avoid having to claim it if at all possible.
'cause a neighborizer is "proof" of your alignment, amirite
I just really wish people would stop making activity cases on me based on my talking about reads I don't have time to fully explain. Like, how am I supposed to adapt to that? Stop playing? Because I have time to play the game and participate at a higher than average rate, just not enough to explain every little thing I see. So, do I just not say that I have all these other reads so people don't eyebrow me for them? Again, that seems bad, both because I think those reads prove fairly accurate most of the time, and hiding info would throw me off behaviorally.
Feels like you guys are putting me in a pretty impossible behavioral dilemma.
Speaking of dilemmas, current conundrum is A) write an assignment contract for the next side business I'm launching where I'm meeting a guy tomorrow in an effort to get my out-of-work friend a job, B) PBPA Huntzilla, C), collapse in exhaustion since I'm 14 hours into the work day. D) Entwine.
The flash of his lance projects the pure radiance of his honor.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Unvote I'd rather hunt was not at L-1 just yet.
I'm still interested in a flavor claim, knowing that most of the game has claimed and yet we are missing all of [iso, Az, and Sir Chris] and at this point I want to know if scum definitely got fake claims, or the people most against revealing their flavor are also the ones with those names. I'm not advocating using it as a lynch reason, I'm more interested to know what we're dealing with.
Prod received, will give 120% tomorrow night after work.
Add Iso to the "willing to lynch D1" list.
See, Iso's on the shortlist of players for whom *not posting* is a pretty good indicator of them being scum. (See also: me; Gatecrash is the most recent example.) That's been the case at least since WitchHunt, and even a cursory examination of Disinheritance indicates that this hasn't changed while I've been gone. I've had Iso on the backburner waiting to see if and when he showed up and started playing; my instinct starting the game was that Iso was likely scum if he still wasn't participating by the middle of D2, but after two "this is why I'm not posting" posts and promising to be more active after the deadline would have already passed I'm comfortable calling it now.
Also @Tare: of there's a burnout vig, isn't giving him a second shot a little swingy?
I'm not sure I believe you here.
Firing on the vig is a bad idea *unless* a kill clanks first (in which case it's a very, very good idea). It's the other 3-4 good town burnouts I'm looking to rearm.
@Tare: in 114, you say again that you still think Cyan is town. Orginally you said it was because you thought all the scum had posted already. You upped him to a strong townread, where he still apperently sits in 164. Do you have a more substancial reason now?
@Tare: What is the question in 116 supposed to accomplish?
It splits the playerbase into two groups - players who think I'm scum/would support the Tar wagon and players who don't. It's specifically phrased the way it is to sidestep "I think X is scum but Y is even more likely to be scum". There's a reason for that, but I'm not going to explain at this time.
@Tare: in 117, you ask Az to expand on Iso, DV, and Cyan. I notice Anak is missing. Do you have a read on Anak, and if so, what is it?
I thought I'd made that clear already? Anak's a weak scumread, mostly based on how he's handled his PR - his posts early felt like he was using his PR to justify not contributing rather than trying to communicate through a PR. (I'm less confident about that at *this* point, but that's based entirely on his posts since you asked this question - 275 in particular reads.)
@Taredas: Who in this game do you have experience playing with already?
Definitely played with: Az, Cyan, kpaca, Iso
Definitely modded, think I've played with* but can't remember: tomsloger, Huntzilla, Killjoy
Definitely modded, don't think I've played with*: D_V, Anak
No prior experience: You, Osie
* - Unless you're counting "was in Mind Screw Salvation where I was a postless, voteless Survivor in addition to being the mod", in which case I've played with all five.
i keep looking at tare's #201 and i dont like his treatment of shadow or huntz either
iso gets swept under the rug too, but he hadnt/hasnt done anything
@tare
how does huntz look like a deep wolf?
what is your read on shadow?
Hunt: Hard to explain, mostly his position in the gamestate. Best way I can put it is that most of his posting feels like it's mirroring the thread consensus except for his stances on my wagon and calling kpaca/shadow town-on-town; that's consistent with deep wolf (if he *is* deep wolf then his defense of me is for towncred and/or pocketing and kpaca/shadow is either for the same or to justify a townread on a partner) and doesn't fit as well if he's scum who thinks he has a safety blanket. Problem is, it's *also* consistent with Hunt being town going with the flow, hence the null read overall.
Shadow: I'll put it this way:
Unvote, Vote: shadow
Strong scumread, preferred lynch for the day (with the possible exception of Iso, given his continued not posting (see above) and how good of a rolehunter Iso is?) - not sure he's my *strongest* scumread, but he's close and if he's scum then there's a very good chance he is specifically the Mafia disruptive role (Roleblocker or the like):
- Shadow has claimed Seppel.
- Given Seppel flavor and how this game seems to be handling flavor I'll be surprised if shadow's role is anything other than disruptive or maybe something to do with votes (barring scum!shadow who swapped a safeclaim with a buddy). (This is contributing to my scumread on Shadow - my sense of the setup says that the kind of roles that make sense for Seppel flavor don't overlap much with the kind of roles town is likely to have in the setup..)
- I'll be surprised if the Mafia doesn't have at least one role whose main function is to interfere with town abilities, because how often do the Mafia *not* have such a role outside of very low-power games?
- Given the game's flavor, the flavor of the Mafia members is known: Azrael, Iso, and Zionite (barring the corner case where there are only two scum in which case Zionite is absent) - I'm guessing Iso is a disruptive role and Zionite is a goonish role. Furthermore, since the Mafia have flavor that identifies them as Mafia, they need safeclaims.
- *IF* Bur wanted to give the Mafia safeclaims that would match with them trueclaiming their abilities, then Seppel makes a lot of sense for the disruptive role's safeclaim given the above. Operative word "if" - scum safeclaims matching abilities is an assumption I'm making, but it's not a safe assumption and I know it. That said, it's a common enough mechanism of making safeclaims that I'm willing to make the assumption (should *probably* check whether Bur has ruin previous games and whether he used full safeclaim PMs in them - safeclaims matching true abilities is much more likely if the mod provides full safeclaim PMs).
(Why yes I *will* play outguess the mod, thank you very much!)
---
Lynch pool: shadow, Iso, tom (not sure if Tom belongs here or in the next pool given the last few pages; not clearing tom for it, got burned really badly by doing that with Proph back in the 2015 Invitational, but also not sure I actively want to lynch him toDay)
Would not oppose a lynch but not going to fight for it either: D_V, Hunt, Anak? (scumread but I'm a bit wary of lynching him toDay despite that)
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Kpaca is almost certainly town. Cyan is probably town. Shadow and Anak I'm leaning town. Iso needs to be more active. I could go either way right now on Tom. Tare iswas kinda okay but sinking down the list. Huntzilla, Killjoy, and Azrael are currently light scumreads. D_V (as usual) is a heavier scumread.
Claiming Silver seems very convenient for Huntz... not sure if I believe that claim.
Tare: What's with the bad modgaming? Harrumph...
Make that Tare is a heavier scumread. Unvote, Vote Tare
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
There are four active Council members, one is the pregame kill, that leaves three. Town win condition is to eliminate the Mafia Council, ergo Council is scum. Three possible Mafia flavor names, presumably three Mafiosos, you figure it out. (Outside chance of only two Mafia (in which case scum flavor is Az and Zionite) but I'd be really surprised by only two Mafia in a modern MTGS mini so...)
Actually, you know what? You're right. I really *haven't* paid proper attention to your posts.
Up until now, at least.
Which is unfortunate for you, because if I had been paying proper attention to you I would have noticed the full implications of a couple of posts (notably 125) a while ago.
Tares 164 makes a lot of assumptions. I feel like that makes it wholly illogical.
Your comment on my gamestate analysis is that it's illogical because it makes a lot of assumptions... and I can't follow a town thought process for that. At all. What you're saying is both factually wrong and not relevant *at the same time*. It's wrong, because deductive logic is straight up "given X then Y" and 164 (and 201) are straight-up working through "if my assumptions are correct than they have the following implications about the gamestate" and helping me figure out whether those assumptions are correct (both by checking whether those assumptions generate consistent implications - see my D_V comments in 204, where I concluded that my assumption that D_V was likely scum was less likely conflicted with the implications of some of my other assumptions and that "D_V is likely scum" is less likely to be correct given that - and by indicating results that would falsify those assumptions). (To put it another way, it's *scientific* - I'm testing hypotheses.) It's also not relevant, because I don't see how whether or not 164 is illogical has a single whit to do with my alignment. My scumhunting process and especially gamestate solving process *is not rational* - or even *conscious*, for that matter. Reasoning is for error-checking (see: 164 and 204), drawing conclusions into the conscious (see 164 and 204 again) and for convincing other players that I'm right.
What I see no evidence of whatsoever is you actually trying to figure out *why* I'm making my assumptions, and whether or not they're genuine. Let's say for the sake of argument that 164 *was* illogical... again, so what? What does that say about my alignment?
What it *is* consistent with is scum whose primary motive is to *discredit* me. The entire comment is a *classic* ad hominem - "he's not being logical, you shouldn't listen to him".
Let's look at the rest of your questions/comments towards me in 202:
So, I'm rereading the game and I just realized how much I dislike Tare's 68. It's kind of a roller coaster, and a little stretchy. Particularly the "if you have the name, you have a strong idea of what the role could be. Is it egregious enough to be a strawman, though? And would scum!Tare be that obvious about it?
Classic, classic scum behavior - sniping at a townie with a wagon on them without actually committing a vote and while leaving himself an escape hatch to back off if needed.
@Tare: in 114, you say again that you still think Cyan is town. Orginally you said it was because you thought all the scum had posted already. You upped him to a strong townread, where he still apperently sits in 164. Do you have a more substancial reason now?
@Tare: What is the question in 116 supposed to accomplish?
@Tare: in 117, you ask Az to expand on Iso, DV, and Cyan. I notice Anak is missing. Do you have a read on Anak, and if so, what is it?
The first two questions are... I guess the best way to put it is that they *could* come from town but I don't think they *do*? They're not *inconsistent* with a town mindset, but they're fakeable and I gutfeel that they *are* faked.
The third question is rich for somebody who's now accusing me of not reading his posts thoroughly - I made my Anak read fairly clear back in 62, and had put him in the leanscum pile back in 164. More importantly, it's a much clearer example of a question that doesn't actually help get to my mindset - how does my read on Anak help Killjoy figure out why I didn't ask Az to elaborate on his Anak read, especially when the players I asked Az about were two scumreads that Az was townreading and a townie that I considered a far stronger townread than Az did (provided that his townreads were in order of strength).
Now, let's take a look at Killjoy's original batch of questions back in 65:
I disagree that it's moving too fast. Osie is just really obvious scum.
You're pushing for Osie being town really hard, and also that "Az has a higher than usual chance of being scum" feels weird, like a toss-in. Why is that the case?
Also explain why you think all the scum are here already?
Also, what are your thoughts on Osie's behavior, independent of the wagon speed?
That first question is a scum question through and through. There's no actual curiosity, just an attempt to discredit - both through painting my Osie read as being extreme ("pushing for Osie being town really hard" - I don't know, does it count as "really hard" when it's intended to derail a wagon that a) has developed to L-2 within the first 24 hours of the game and relatedly b) is on a player that you think will flip town?) and by the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?" rhetorical trick.
And that's doubly damning in light of me being the *other* major wagon at the time, because it's absolutely consistent with the classic scum tactic of staying on the sideline and sniping at a seemingly vulnerable townie to discredit them without getting their hands dirty by committing to a vote. And that's true of absolutely everything Killjoy has posted towards me this game.
Also, explain why you think I'm "pushing for Osie being town really hard"? I thought I was pretty clear that I my thought process was less "I have a strong townread on Osie" and more "I have very strong reservations about how this wagon has developed and think Osie is more likely town than not because of it".
I don't believe it moved too quickly at all. I think the wagon speed was fine. I just think there was some bussing going on. I'm thinking one scum on the wagon, one scum off.
It is 1 minute to deadline. There are two wagons at L-1: a wagon on me and a wagon on J. Random Sleb, a hypothetical player who you have a null read on and who has no relevant interactions. You are the only player not voting, and no one else is online. Who do you hammer, and why?
Tare and Az both white knighting Osie so strongly leads me to think one of them is probably scum getting credit for a "spicy read" (I obviously think that's tare). (I currently think Osie is more likely town than scum here, but hey both seem much more confident in that read)
Yeah, that's what I'm seeing here, although I feel like that makes them less likely scum together.
I'm quoting this post in its entirety. Take a good look.
Killjoy thinks Osie is scum, with one scum on the wagon and one scum off. He *also* agrees with shadow that one of myself and Azrael is scum getting credit for a spicy read (I think, given the context, that shadow is referring to what is usually called "white knighting").
Wait, what?
If either myself or Az is scum defending Osie and Osie is scum, then by syllogism whichever of me and Az is defending Osie is defending a scumbuddy. That's not a towncred move, that's just scumteam preservation - the towncred move when your scumbuddy is being run up is *bussing*.
And yet... as far as I can tell, Killjoy is saying that he thinks that Osie is scum *and* that one of Az and myself is defending Osie for towncred. That dog don't hunt.
How does this thought process make sense as town? I can't see it.
It makes absolutely perfect sense if Killjoy is scum, though - especially scum who *knows* that Osie is town. In that case, it's a straight-up slip - Killjoy knows Osie will flip town, ergo one of Az/myself defending Osie for towncred makes perfect sense!
Except Killjoy *should* think that Osie will flip *scum*, in which case one of Az/myself would be defending a scumbuddy.
Oops.
But wait, there's more! While I'm here, let's take a look at a couple of Killjoy posts *not* involving me:
Taredas* - Taredas is the kind of formiddable player who isn't necessarily easy to get a face-value read on. In looking over his posts, you see a lot of longer analysis posts that are more difficult to accurately parse. I saw only a small number of tells that I'd view as confirmatory town, and I had some concerns that he might be being a little slick at several points. For instance, he started off voting for AI very strongly, but backed off of AI citing an explanation for AI's behavior that he didn't want to explain. I'm pretty sure I know what he's suggesting there, but I don't know that I agree that it was reasonable for Taredas to think that. Taredas, why did you unvote AI?
It's not an exact match by any means. But it feels similar, morphologically (and if you don't understand morphological thought process, you don't understand me). And I think the key point Az raised against me in Gatecrash also applies to you here: your unvote is slick. It's not really supported by your thought process - it's just "this isn't going to work out, I need to leave the wagon now".
It's also not the first time this game you've bailed off a wagon like this:
Damn it. Her tone is completely different in Avalon.
Sigh. Unvote.
---
TL:DR:
- Killjoy's questions towards me are not consistent with town trying to sort me and *are* consistent with scum trying to discredit me.
- Killjoy's overall position in the gamestate is consistent with being scum: he's pushed on popular wagons on easy mislynches (Osie, tomsloger) while sniping from the sidelines at the strong player who drew a wagon (me) without committing to the attack.
- The way Killjoy has bailed off of *both* major wagons he's been on has been artificial.
- Post 65 is a mindset breach and scumslip: Killjoy thinks that one of Az and myself is white knighting Osie despite having a scumread on Osie.
- Okay, so apparently I will be trying to use mindset analysis this game after all.
Unvote I'd rather hunt was not at L-1 just yet.
I'm still interested in a flavor claim, knowing that most of the game has claimed and yet we are missing all of [iso, Az, and Sir Chris] and at this point I want to know if scum definitely got fake claims, or the people most against revealing their flavor are also the ones with those names. I'm not advocating using it as a lynch reason, I'm more interested to know what we're dealing with.
I feel like that goes without saying. The flavor of this game involves the scum being specific people. Not giving them fake claims means that a simple flavor claim just wins.
Firing on the vig is a bad idea *unless* a kill clanks first (in which case it's a very, very good idea). It's the other 3-4 good town burnouts I'm looking to rearm.
No, I'm saying that giving a vig a second shot in a 12 player game is particularly good, as it adds several more lynches to the town's repetior.
Quote from Tare »
Yes.
Well, thank you for answering my question so throuoghly.
I'd assumed you would infer what I was actually asking here, but I will explicitly state it for your benefit.
Why is Cyan a strong townread now?
It splits the playerbase into two groups - players who think I'm scum/would support the Tar wagon and players who don't. It's specifically phrased the way it is to sidestep "I think X is scum but Y is even more likely to be scum". There's a reason for that, but I'm not going to explain at this time.
Or it's specifically worded to figure out who wants you lynched, but have other purposes too.
Quote from Tare »
I thought I'd made that clear already? Anak's a weak scumread, mostly based on how he's handled his PR - his posts early felt like he was using his PR to justify not contributing rather than trying to communicate through a PR. (I'm less confident about that at *this* point, but that's based entirely on his posts since you asked this question - 275 in particular reads.)
I actually agree here, mostly. My thought is that he could be doing more. Like, we get one line per post to analyze from him. Like, if he's so sure shadow is scum, a case would be nice? Like with quotes from shadow, and more from Anak for us to try and interpret.
IDK it feels like he's riding the line between skating by because PR and actually doing stuff.
... Why is this important? What does this tell you?
...it tells me that your argument is based in a lot of assumptions (instead of facts) and is therefore illogical.
Yes, there's a logical train of thought in that 'if->then->else' train IS a logical process. But it is theorycrafting. It's a hypothesis. It's not 'because->then->else'.
You're thinking, which is good, but I feel like it's a lot of work on no actual, provable reads.
Definitely played with: Az, Cyan, kpaca, Iso
Definitely modded, think I've played with* but can't remember: tomsloger, Huntzilla, Killjoy
Definitely modded, don't think I've played with*: D_V, Anak
No prior experience: You, Osie
* - Unless you're counting "was in Mind Screw Salvation where I was a postless, voteless Survivor in addition to being the mod", in which case I've played with all five.
---
See, THIS is why I was saying you weren't reading my posts. I literally said I was scum in Gatecrash not earlier today. It was like, last page or something. So how could you not remember? You remembered that you lurked in Gatrecrash, but not who your buddies are?
Unvote, Vote: shadow
Strong scumread, preferred lynch for the day (with the possible exception of Iso, given his continued not posting (see above) and how good of a rolehunter Iso is?) - not sure he's my *strongest* scumread, but he's close and if he's scum then there's a very good chance he is specifically the Mafia disruptive role (Roleblocker or the like):
- Shadow has claimed Seppel.
- Given Seppel flavor and how this game seems to be handling flavor I'll be surprised if shadow's role is anything other than disruptive or maybe something to do with votes (barring scum!shadow who swapped a safeclaim with a buddy). (This is contributing to my scumread on Shadow - my sense of the setup says that the kind of roles that make sense for Seppel flavor don't overlap much with the kind of roles town is likely to have in the setup..)
- I'll be surprised if the Mafia doesn't have at least one role whose main function is to interfere with town abilities, because how often do the Mafia *not* have such a role outside of very low-power games?
- Given the game's flavor, the flavor of the Mafia members is known: Azrael, Iso, and Zionite (barring the corner case where there are only two scum in which case Zionite is absent) - I'm guessing Iso is a disruptive role and Zionite is a goonish role. Furthermore, since the Mafia have flavor that identifies them as Mafia, they need safeclaims.
- *IF* Bur wanted to give the Mafia safeclaims that would match with them trueclaiming their abilities, then Seppel makes a lot of sense for the disruptive role's safeclaim given the above. Operative word "if" - scum safeclaims matching abilities is an assumption I'm making, but it's not a safe assumption and I know it. That said, it's a common enough mechanism of making safeclaims that I'm willing to make the assumption (should *probably* check whether Bur has ruin previous games and whether he used full safeclaim PMs in them - safeclaims matching true abilities is much more likely if the mod provides full safeclaim PMs).
(Why yes I *will* play outguess the mod, thank you very much!)
See, I have a problem with this. Like, you think he's scum because he claimed Seppel and you assume that if Iso ->mafia disruptive && that Seppel is a good fakeclaim for that. Yes, the game is flavorful but the reviewers weren't born yesterday. Such an obvious connection is very unlikely to have made it by them.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
@D_V: If you are in fact town, then if you're gonna claim, just go ahead and claim. Otherwise, we might as well assume that your page 1 mystery claim was a scumclaim, especially given this post:
I'm beginning to feel like Tare is one of those people who you figure out is scum based on how his buddies act towards him, because it's, like, really hard to tell if he actually believes what he's saying.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Your comment on my gamestate analysis is that it's illogical because it makes a lot of assumptions... and I can't follow a town thought process for that. At all. What you're saying is both factually wrong and not relevant *at the same time*. It's wrong, because deductive logic is straight up "given X then Y" and 164 (and 201) are straight-up working through "if my assumptions are correct than they have the following implications about the gamestate" and helping me figure out whether those assumptions are correct (both by checking whether those assumptions generate consistent implications - see my D_V comments in 204, where I concluded that my assumption that D_V was likely scum was less likely conflicted with the implications of some of my other assumptions and that "D_V is likely scum" is less likely to be correct given that - and by indicating results that would falsify those assumptions). (To put it another way, it's *scientific* - I'm testing hypotheses.) It's also not relevant, because I don't see how whether or not 164 is illogical has a single whit to do with my alignment. My scumhunting process and especially gamestate solving process *is not rational* - or even *conscious*, for that matter. Reasoning is for error-checking (see: 164 and 204), drawing conclusions into the conscious (see 164 and 204 again) and for convincing other players that I'm right.
What I see no evidence of whatsoever is you actually trying to figure out *why* I'm making my assumptions, and whether or not they're genuine. Let's say for the sake of argument that 164 *was* illogical... again, so what? What does that say about my alignment?
What it *is* consistent with is scum whose primary motive is to *discredit* me. The entire comment is a *classic* ad hominem - "he's not being logical, you shouldn't listen to him".
Um. No.
What I actually said was that your argument was illogical. You're basing your worldview within the perview of this game on theory, and following it like it's fact. That is what I'm saying here. You are basing this on the assumption that I said or implied that this was alignment indicative. I don't believe it is. I find it null and confusing.
So, I'm rereading the game and I just realized how much I dislike Tare's 68. It's kind of a roller coaster, and a little stretchy. Particularly the "if you have the name, you have a strong idea of what the role could be. Is it egregious enough to be a strawman, though? And would scum!Tare be that obvious about it?
Classic, classic scum behavior - sniping at a townie with a wagon on them without actually committing a vote and while leaving himself an escape hatch to back off if needed.
@Taredas: Why is wanting to do something because it's fun a reason that warrants a vote? This game was designed to be flavorful.
Because I think your *actual* reason is because you're scum trying to push a plan that will benefit scum and your "because it's fun!" is just public justification now that I called you on it.
Especially after this post, because mindset dissonance much? I mean, let's walk this through:
1) You explicitly note that this game was designed to be flavorful.
2) If this game is flavorful, then presumably the roles are flavorful - that is to say, if you have a player's role name, then you have a strong idea about what their abilities are.
3) Ergo, full name claiming D1 is probably pretty close to a D1 massclaim - and I'd expect some sort of counter to that in the setup, if nothing else then because D1 massclaim breaking the game is something that is supposed to be considered in setup review. (Actually, I suspect straight-up D1 massclaim would be *better* for town than a D1 nameclaim - nameclaim has the downside of a massclaim [giving scum a pretty good idea of who the strong town power roles are] without the upside of locking scum into claims and coordinating town abilities.)
This is an insane jump in logic.
1) Shadow: "Lets flavorclaim because it's fun!"
2) Shadow notices game is flavorful.
3)if game is flavorful->roles are flavorful->role names provide strong clues to abilities
4) Full nameclaiming ~= massclaim, giving scum strong clues to town PRs
5)"And the only reason you give (for wanting to out all the PRs) is "because it's fun!"
You are drawing lines from these thoughts shadow himself may not have drawn. It's entirely plausible that shadow didn't think through the potential implications.
Lets use a non-mafia example, in story mode (because I'm listening to Storytime by Nightwish, and am in a Storytime kinda mood):
Rosebud
Killjoy and Tare are hanging out in the snow, skipping along, having a grand old time. MAybe we made some snow angels, built a snowman, whatevers. Along the way, Killhoy slips on some ice.
"Gee willikers, Tare, it sure is icy out here today. Hopefully someone doesn't hurt themselves on such a common hazard." Killjoy whimisically muses to Tare.
So a while passes. More skipping happens, mostly from Tare, because he likes skipping. The jolly pair come to a hill. "Hey, Tare, lets go sledding! That sounds like fun!"
Tare gasps! "You're trying to kill me!" Tare exclaims. "See, you noted earlier that the snow was icy, and dangerous. Now you're suggesting we go sledding, possibly hitting an ice patch and dying!"
End.
This is your argument, Tare. Yes, it's possible that shadow does want all those things you said. It's possible you're right there. But you didn't question him nearly enough to prove it. You asked him once. There are several ways that could go, btw.
For instance, that the game is flavorful and he doesn't want to wait until the end to hear what flavor is around. That comes to mind.
And that is why your argument is a stretch. It is a stretch in the literal sense of the word, as well as the coloquial sense. You literally stretched his argument past what he (may) have intended. That doesn't mean you're delving into his mind... you're just exploring one possible path from the starting point of "because it's fun". It's like you saw what he said as scummy in a vaccuum and jumped all over it.
@Tare: in 114, you say again that you still think Cyan is town. Orginally you said it was because you thought all the scum had posted already. You upped him to a strong townread, where he still apperently sits in 164. Do you have a more substancial reason now?
@Tare: What is the question in 116 supposed to accomplish?
@Tare: in 117, you ask Az to expand on Iso, DV, and Cyan. I notice Anak is missing. Do you have a read on Anak, and if so, what is it?
The first two questions are... I guess the best way to put it is that they *could* come from town but I don't think they *do*? They're not *inconsistent* with a town mindset, but they're fakeable and I gutfeel that they *are* faked.
The third question is rich for somebody who's now accusing me of not reading his posts thoroughly - I made my Anak read fairly clear back in 62, and had put him in the leanscum pile back in 164. More importantly, it's a much clearer example of a question that doesn't actually help get to my mindset - how does my read on Anak help Killjoy figure out why I didn't ask Az to elaborate on his Anak read, especially when the players I asked Az about were two scumreads that Az was townreading and a townie that I considered a far stronger townread than Az did (provided that his townreads were in order of strength).
I just felt it was weird that Anak, a player who hasn't done much this game, would be missing from a request to expand on players. But actually, why didn't you ask Az for a read on Anak? That actually hadn't occured to me until now.
I disagree that it's moving too fast. Osie is just really obvious scum.
You're pushing for Osie being town really hard, and also that "Az has a higher than usual chance of being scum" feels weird, like a toss-in. Why is that the case?
Also explain why you think all the scum are here already?
Also, what are your thoughts on Osie's behavior, independent of the wagon speed?
That first question is a scum question through and through. There's no actual curiosity, just an attempt to discredit - both through painting my Osie read as being extreme ("pushing for Osie being town really hard" - I don't know, does it count as "really hard" when it's intended to derail a wagon that a) has developed to L-2 within the first 24 hours of the game and relatedly b) is on a player that you think will flip town?) and by the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?" rhetorical trick.
And that's doubly damning in light of me being the *other* major wagon at the time, because it's absolutely consistent with the classic scum tactic of staying on the sideline and sniping at a seemingly vulnerable townie to discredit them without getting their hands dirty by committing to a vote. And that's true of absolutely everything Killjoy has posted towards me this game.
I... don't understand why you say "there's no curiosity". Like, really. What do you mean?
I was tunneling a bit on Osie, so I was a bit intense in my language there. Reread the whole of my time on the Osie wagon. You'll see it if you do that.
Also, in what world are you 'vulnerable'? You seem to believe, as I do, that you're extremely rational and could probably argue his way out of a lynch if he wanted to. So, saying I was picking on basically 'low hanging fruit' in you is... well IDK what it is. It's... WTF?
Tare broke the next quote of mineso I'll just leave a link to it here. (125)
I'm quoting this post in its entirety. Take a good look.
Killjoy thinks Osie is scum, with one scum on the wagon and one scum off. He *also* agrees with shadow that one of myself and Azrael is scum getting credit for a spicy read (I think, given the context, that shadow is referring to what is usually called "white knighting").
Wait, what?
If either myself or Az is scum defending Osie and Osie is scum, then by syllogism whichever of me and Az is defending Osie is defending a scumbuddy. That's not a towncred move, that's just scumteam preservation - the towncred move when your scumbuddy is being run up is *bussing*.
And yet... as far as I can tell, Killjoy is saying that he thinks that Osie is scum *and* that one of Az and myself is defending Osie for towncred. That dog don't hunt.
How does this thought process make sense as town? I can't see it.
It makes absolutely perfect sense if Killjoy is scum, though - especially scum who *knows* that Osie is town. In that case, it's a straight-up slip - Killjoy knows Osie will flip town, ergo one of Az/myself defending Osie for towncred makes perfect sense!
Except Killjoy *should* think that Osie will flip *scum*, in which case one of Az/myself would be defending a scumbuddy.
Oops.
Again, tunneling.
I wasn't in the headspace of "defending a scumbuddy is stupid". I was tunneling like crazy, and therefore obviously people who thought the confirmed scum!Osie was town was scum as well. You couldn't both be scum, since both of you defending your buddy would just be silly.
Taredas* - Taredas is the kind of formiddable player who isn't necessarily easy to get a face-value read on. In looking over his posts, you see a lot of longer analysis posts that are more difficult to accurately parse. I saw only a small number of tells that I'd view as confirmatory town, and I had some concerns that he might be being a little slick at several points. For instance, he started off voting for AI very strongly, but backed off of AI citing an explanation for AI's behavior that he didn't want to explain. I'm pretty sure I know what he's suggesting there, but I don't know that I agree that it was reasonable for Taredas to think that. Taredas, why did you unvote AI?
It's not an exact match by any means. But it feels similar, morphologically (and if you don't understand morphological thought process, you don't understand me). And I think the key point Az raised against me in Gatecrash also applies to you here: your unvote is slick. It's not really supported by your thought process - it's just "this isn't going to work out, I need to leave the wagon now".It's also not the first time this game you've bailed off a wagon like this:
unvote. I've decided I like Tom's reaction to his wagon.
Lean town. Also I need to think.
This was the progression. I vote tom, he doesn't claim (which is risky for scum to do), then he's all defiant and posts that "do this when I die" post which read to me as sincere. So I unvoted, as it was a townie reaction to being wagoned.
And re:Osie, again... tunneling. There's a bit more to it as well, actually. I'm usually really good at spotting newb town. Like REALLY good. It's one of the few reads I'm always confident on. So then Osie is new and not acting like town. I thought I had her. That's part of why I was so attached to that wagon; I was sure that newb town didn't act like that. Turns out though, that she was just a late bloomer. Her noobtown started showing later than most does, instead of RVS/early game like I'd expected.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Unvote
Okay, so unless we have some weird moment where scum flips with Zionite flavor, I don't actually think that was a scum slip from Tare. I do think that either scum or town could have not read the OP, so it doesn't town clear him either, but I don't feel strongly that he's scum.
I've skimmed the Taredas/KJ stuff, I'm going to try and delve into that later on today as I don't really have time right now.
People who have already flavor claimed, weigh in on whether or not you think everyone should.
People who haven't, I really would appreciate if you did. DV, confirm that you flavor claimed Iso? (Your post 35 you suggest lynching actual Iso, meaning you're flavor Iso? If not, I really don't know who you claimed)
I'm ready to just go ahead and lynch Taredas now, both of his huge wall posts in this last page come across as throughly scummy to me. Unvote, Vote Taredas
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
So D_V has straight-out scum-claimed as Gentleman Johnny, I guess? Okay... That's easy. Unvote, Vote D_V.
Uhhhh
GJ's not on the council.
What?
How did I claim GJ?
Oops. Confused GJ and Sir Chris. You're right. GJ has that line about no lynch in his signature... Hmm. Weird. Sorry, D_V. Back to Unvote, Vote Taredas...
I see what you did there...
I just don't think the story really precludes him from being scum here. V/LA can happen to both scum and town.
any goodwill from telling a personal story is removed by spending time doing that instead of explaining a read or two
AtE not really my department though. ymmv.
Hunt started the game with a RVS of Azreal.
And now is back on Azreal and lurking before the deadline.
I think Hunt is scum. Largely for a couple of reasons and add that with the Tom Hunt Analysis TM we got a good thing going.
Azreal is the one we should look at next IMO.
Vote Hunt
Feels like you guys are putting me in a pretty impossible behavioral dilemma.
Speaking of dilemmas, current conundrum is A) write an assignment contract for the next side business I'm launching where I'm meeting a guy tomorrow in an effort to get my out-of-work friend a job, B) PBPA Huntzilla, C), collapse in exhaustion since I'm 14 hours into the work day. D) Entwine.
I'm Silvercrys3467. I'm the towniest town to ever town in the whole of towndom. Hilarious because he is completely the anti-me.
My ability is unlimited Neighborizor (again), but this time the chats only last for a day. The name of the ability is lead by talking. My burnout is even better proof, but I'd really like to avoid having to claim it if at all possible.
Taking lame position on flavor-claiming plus weak joke = scummy first post. Why you ask? Because I've seen that pattern like a dozen times. It just is a thing. Lame jokes and making boring posts about mechanics is a thing scum do.
Hate everything about this post. No conclusions based on the Tare wagon, just commenting that a thing happened.
Then he transitions to this extremely poorly reasoned Osie bandwagon vote. By which point, I already wanted to kill him.
I chopped off a bunch of the other things he said, but it was also an extremely long post, that simultaneously displayed very little in the way of a townie mindset or thoughts. He just comments on stuff, but he doesn't arrive at conclusions regarding town/scum. Even on Osie, the guy he eventually votes, he has a hard time articulating a firm sense of how he sees him.
Massive post also came on the heels of being identified by meas one of my top two scum. Probably a semi-subconscious overreaction on his part to try and defuse pressure.
Shortly afterwards, he disappears for a while, hopping to fly under the radar a bit while the Tar/Osie wagons play out.
This is his Osie unvote. Fails to explain what about that quote convinced him. Again, impossible to see a townie mindset in these posts, nothing is explained or charted out.
This I've already dealt with. He calls me scum because I was voting for Taredas while also attacking him. But I'd already explained, multiple times, that Tar was my top scum read, and Hunt was secondary. So why's he attacking me for that?
When called on that, he tries to retcon it here:
This here is some pretty classic scum obfuscation. When Hunt flips scum, take a hard look at this, because it pretty much 100% proves me town IMO. Scum Hunt isn't sneaky enough to try to post this kind of a takedown on a partner.
This is the kind of thing you post as scum to try to make someone look bad when the facts aren't on your side. You make them out to be doing something sneaky and underhanded, even when the actual facts don't support that interpretation at all if you stop to think about it for half a second. But hey, maybe the town won't stop to think about it and you'll get away with it.
If I need to explain again what's wrong here, the man is trying to say that I was being sneaky or subtle or underhanded in my attacks on him, to quietly, subliminally push his lynch as scum.
And again, my reply to that is that there's absolutely nothing subliminal about my attacks on him. I want him dead, and I've made that perfectly plain to anyone reading my posts.
The flash of his lance projects the pure radiance of his honor.
'cause a neighborizer is "proof" of your alignment, amirite
Okay, fine. Unvote, Vote Huntz. Huntz is at L-1.
I'm still interested in a flavor claim, knowing that most of the game has claimed and yet we are missing all of [iso, Az, and Sir Chris] and at this point I want to know if scum definitely got fake claims, or the people most against revealing their flavor are also the ones with those names. I'm not advocating using it as a lynch reason, I'm more interested to know what we're dealing with.
Azrael - Proph
Iso -
tomsloger - hunt? Bur?
osieorb18 - Cantrip
D_V -
Anaklusmos - Tom?
Huntzilla - silver
kpaca - cyan
Killjoy -
shadowlancerx - Seppel
Taredas - Vaimes
Cyan - Newcomb
T/S
Town
Shadowlancerx
Killjoy
Town lean
Kpaca
Osie
Azrael
Anak
Null/mixed
Taredas
Tom
Iso
Cyan
Scum lean
DV
Huntzilla
Add Iso to the "willing to lynch D1" list.
See, Iso's on the shortlist of players for whom *not posting* is a pretty good indicator of them being scum. (See also: me; Gatecrash is the most recent example.) That's been the case at least since WitchHunt, and even a cursory examination of Disinheritance indicates that this hasn't changed while I've been gone. I've had Iso on the backburner waiting to see if and when he showed up and started playing; my instinct starting the game was that Iso was likely scum if he still wasn't participating by the middle of D2, but after two "this is why I'm not posting" posts and promising to be more active after the deadline would have already passed I'm comfortable calling it now.
---
Firing on the vig is a bad idea *unless* a kill clanks first (in which case it's a very, very good idea). It's the other 3-4 good town burnouts I'm looking to rearm.
Yes.
It splits the playerbase into two groups - players who think I'm scum/would support the Tar wagon and players who don't. It's specifically phrased the way it is to sidestep "I think X is scum but Y is even more likely to be scum". There's a reason for that, but I'm not going to explain at this time.
I thought I'd made that clear already? Anak's a weak scumread, mostly based on how he's handled his PR - his posts early felt like he was using his PR to justify not contributing rather than trying to communicate through a PR. (I'm less confident about that at *this* point, but that's based entirely on his posts since you asked this question - 275 in particular reads.)
... Why is this important? What does this tell you?
---
Definitely played with: Az, Cyan, kpaca, Iso
Definitely modded, think I've played with* but can't remember: tomsloger, Huntzilla, Killjoy
Definitely modded, don't think I've played with*: D_V, Anak
No prior experience: You, Osie
* - Unless you're counting "was in Mind Screw Salvation where I was a postless, voteless Survivor in addition to being the mod", in which case I've played with all five.
---
Hunt: Hard to explain, mostly his position in the gamestate. Best way I can put it is that most of his posting feels like it's mirroring the thread consensus except for his stances on my wagon and calling kpaca/shadow town-on-town; that's consistent with deep wolf (if he *is* deep wolf then his defense of me is for towncred and/or pocketing and kpaca/shadow is either for the same or to justify a townread on a partner) and doesn't fit as well if he's scum who thinks he has a safety blanket. Problem is, it's *also* consistent with Hunt being town going with the flow, hence the null read overall.
Shadow: I'll put it this way:
Unvote, Vote: shadow
Strong scumread, preferred lynch for the day (with the possible exception of Iso, given his continued not posting (see above) and how good of a rolehunter Iso is?) - not sure he's my *strongest* scumread, but he's close and if he's scum then there's a very good chance he is specifically the Mafia disruptive role (Roleblocker or the like):
- Shadow has claimed Seppel.
- Given Seppel flavor and how this game seems to be handling flavor I'll be surprised if shadow's role is anything other than disruptive or maybe something to do with votes (barring scum!shadow who swapped a safeclaim with a buddy). (This is contributing to my scumread on Shadow - my sense of the setup says that the kind of roles that make sense for Seppel flavor don't overlap much with the kind of roles town is likely to have in the setup..)
- I'll be surprised if the Mafia doesn't have at least one role whose main function is to interfere with town abilities, because how often do the Mafia *not* have such a role outside of very low-power games?
- Given the game's flavor, the flavor of the Mafia members is known: Azrael, Iso, and Zionite (barring the corner case where there are only two scum in which case Zionite is absent) - I'm guessing Iso is a disruptive role and Zionite is a goonish role. Furthermore, since the Mafia have flavor that identifies them as Mafia, they need safeclaims.
- *IF* Bur wanted to give the Mafia safeclaims that would match with them trueclaiming their abilities, then Seppel makes a lot of sense for the disruptive role's safeclaim given the above. Operative word "if" - scum safeclaims matching abilities is an assumption I'm making, but it's not a safe assumption and I know it. That said, it's a common enough mechanism of making safeclaims that I'm willing to make the assumption (should *probably* check whether Bur has ruin previous games and whether he used full safeclaim PMs in them - safeclaims matching true abilities is much more likely if the mod provides full safeclaim PMs).
(Why yes I *will* play outguess the mod, thank you very much!)
---
Lynch pool: shadow, Iso, tom (not sure if Tom belongs here or in the next pool given the last few pages; not clearing tom for it, got burned really badly by doing that with Proph back in the 2015 Invitational, but also not sure I actively want to lynch him toDay)
Would not oppose a lynch but not going to fight for it either: D_V, Hunt, Anak? (scumread but I'm a bit wary of lynching him toDay despite that)
It is too late for the pebbles to vote."
Did you just give up your buddy's flavor? Hmm?
D_V: Serious this time (Says that he flavor claimed on Pg. 1?)
Iso: 12.
Killjoy: None.
Tom: Huntz/Bur?
Anak: Tomsloger?
Shadow: Seppel
Azrael: Prophylaxis
kpaca: Cyan
Cyan: Newcomb/NotVoxxicus
Osi: Cantripmancer
Tare: Vaimes
Huntz: Silvercrys3467
And... a readlist, I guess.
Kpaca is almost certainly town. Cyan is probably town. Shadow and Anak I'm leaning town. Iso needs to be more active. I could go either way right now on Tom. Tare
iswas kinda okay but sinking down the list. Huntzilla, Killjoy, and Azrael are currently light scumreads. D_V (as usual) is a heavier scumread.Claiming Silver seems very convenient for Huntz... not sure if I believe that claim.
Tare: What's with the bad modgaming? Harrumph...
Make that Tare is a heavier scumread. Unvote, Vote Tare
Because I did my homework?
There are four active Council members, one is the pregame kill, that leaves three. Town win condition is to eliminate the Mafia Council, ergo Council is scum. Three possible Mafia flavor names, presumably three Mafiosos, you figure it out. (Outside chance of only two Mafia (in which case scum flavor is Az and Zionite) but I'd be really surprised by only two Mafia in a modern MTGS mini so...)
It is too late for the pebbles to vote."
Right.
Zionite's not in the game, Sir Chris is.
It is too late for the pebbles to vote."
Shadow has promptly shot to the top of the scum list for his post. I know Tom knows who I am, pretty certain anyone reading would know too.
Actually, you know what? You're right. I really *haven't* paid proper attention to your posts.
Up until now, at least.
Which is unfortunate for you, because if I had been paying proper attention to you I would have noticed the full implications of a couple of posts (notably 125) a while ago.
You're scum. Get lynched.
Let's look at 202 again:
Your comment on my gamestate analysis is that it's illogical because it makes a lot of assumptions... and I can't follow a town thought process for that. At all. What you're saying is both factually wrong and not relevant *at the same time*. It's wrong, because deductive logic is straight up "given X then Y" and 164 (and 201) are straight-up working through "if my assumptions are correct than they have the following implications about the gamestate" and helping me figure out whether those assumptions are correct (both by checking whether those assumptions generate consistent implications - see my D_V comments in 204, where I concluded that my assumption that D_V was likely scum was less likely conflicted with the implications of some of my other assumptions and that "D_V is likely scum" is less likely to be correct given that - and by indicating results that would falsify those assumptions). (To put it another way, it's *scientific* - I'm testing hypotheses.) It's also not relevant, because I don't see how whether or not 164 is illogical has a single whit to do with my alignment. My scumhunting process and especially gamestate solving process *is not rational* - or even *conscious*, for that matter. Reasoning is for error-checking (see: 164 and 204), drawing conclusions into the conscious (see 164 and 204 again) and for convincing other players that I'm right.
What I see no evidence of whatsoever is you actually trying to figure out *why* I'm making my assumptions, and whether or not they're genuine. Let's say for the sake of argument that 164 *was* illogical... again, so what? What does that say about my alignment?
What it *is* consistent with is scum whose primary motive is to *discredit* me. The entire comment is a *classic* ad hominem - "he's not being logical, you shouldn't listen to him".
Let's look at the rest of your questions/comments towards me in 202:
Classic, classic scum behavior - sniping at a townie with a wagon on them without actually committing a vote and while leaving himself an escape hatch to back off if needed.
The first two questions are... I guess the best way to put it is that they *could* come from town but I don't think they *do*? They're not *inconsistent* with a town mindset, but they're fakeable and I gutfeel that they *are* faked.
The third question is rich for somebody who's now accusing me of not reading his posts thoroughly - I made my Anak read fairly clear back in 62, and had put him in the leanscum pile back in 164. More importantly, it's a much clearer example of a question that doesn't actually help get to my mindset - how does my read on Anak help Killjoy figure out why I didn't ask Az to elaborate on his Anak read, especially when the players I asked Az about were two scumreads that Az was townreading and a townie that I considered a far stronger townread than Az did (provided that his townreads were in order of strength).
Now, let's take a look at Killjoy's original batch of questions back in 65:
That first question is a scum question through and through. There's no actual curiosity, just an attempt to discredit - both through painting my Osie read as being extreme ("pushing for Osie being town really hard" - I don't know, does it count as "really hard" when it's intended to derail a wagon that a) has developed to L-2 within the first 24 hours of the game and relatedly b) is on a player that you think will flip town?) and by the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?" rhetorical trick.
And that's doubly damning in light of me being the *other* major wagon at the time, because it's absolutely consistent with the classic scum tactic of staying on the sideline and sniping at a seemingly vulnerable townie to discredit them without getting their hands dirty by committing to a vote. And that's true of absolutely everything Killjoy has posted towards me this game.
I'm quoting this post in its entirety. Take a good look.
Killjoy thinks Osie is scum, with one scum on the wagon and one scum off. He *also* agrees with shadow that one of myself and Azrael is scum getting credit for a spicy read (I think, given the context, that shadow is referring to what is usually called "white knighting").
Wait, what?
If either myself or Az is scum defending Osie and Osie is scum, then by syllogism whichever of me and Az is defending Osie is defending a scumbuddy. That's not a towncred move, that's just scumteam preservation - the towncred move when your scumbuddy is being run up is *bussing*.
And yet... as far as I can tell, Killjoy is saying that he thinks that Osie is scum *and* that one of Az and myself is defending Osie for towncred. That dog don't hunt.
How does this thought process make sense as town? I can't see it.
It makes absolutely perfect sense if Killjoy is scum, though - especially scum who *knows* that Osie is town. In that case, it's a straight-up slip - Killjoy knows Osie will flip town, ergo one of Az/myself defending Osie for towncred makes perfect sense!
Except Killjoy *should* think that Osie will flip *scum*, in which case one of Az/myself would be defending a scumbuddy.
Oops.
But wait, there's more! While I'm here, let's take a look at a couple of Killjoy posts *not* involving me:
This is reminding me of how I jumped off AI in Gatecrash, so let me quote Az's response:
It's not an exact match by any means. But it feels similar, morphologically (and if you don't understand morphological thought process, you don't understand me). And I think the key point Az raised against me in Gatecrash also applies to you here: your unvote is slick. It's not really supported by your thought process - it's just "this isn't going to work out, I need to leave the wagon now".
It's also not the first time this game you've bailed off a wagon like this:
---
TL:DR:
- Killjoy's questions towards me are not consistent with town trying to sort me and *are* consistent with scum trying to discredit me.
- Killjoy's overall position in the gamestate is consistent with being scum: he's pushed on popular wagons on easy mislynches (Osie, tomsloger) while sniping from the sidelines at the strong player who drew a wagon (me) without committing to the attack.
- The way Killjoy has bailed off of *both* major wagons he's been on has been artificial.
- Post 65 is a mindset breach and scumslip: Killjoy thinks that one of Az and myself is white knighting Osie despite having a scumread on Osie.
- Okay, so apparently I will be trying to use mindset analysis this game after all.
Unvote, Vote: Killjoy
It is too late for the pebbles to vote."
dont know who DV is. sorry bro.
@huntz who would you neighborize if we decide to not lynch you today?
what would you tell them?
@tare do you think setupgaming is a useful tool?
also:
I'm still thinking Az/Hunt is not a thing though, and if Hunt is scum, Az is clear.
I feel like that goes without saying. The flavor of this game involves the scum being specific people. Not giving them fake claims means that a simple flavor claim just wins.
No, I'm saying that giving a vig a second shot in a 12 player game is particularly good, as it adds several more lynches to the town's repetior.
Well, thank you for answering my question so throuoghly.
I'd assumed you would infer what I was actually asking here, but I will explicitly state it for your benefit.
Why is Cyan a strong townread now?
Or it's specifically worded to figure out who wants you lynched, but have other purposes too.
I actually agree here, mostly. My thought is that he could be doing more. Like, we get one line per post to analyze from him. Like, if he's so sure shadow is scum, a case would be nice? Like with quotes from shadow, and more from Anak for us to try and interpret.
IDK it feels like he's riding the line between skating by because PR and actually doing stuff.
...it tells me that your argument is based in a lot of assumptions (instead of facts) and is therefore illogical.
Yes, there's a logical train of thought in that 'if->then->else' train IS a logical process. But it is theorycrafting. It's a hypothesis. It's not 'because->then->else'.
You're thinking, which is good, but I feel like it's a lot of work on no actual, provable reads.
See, THIS is why I was saying you weren't reading my posts. I literally said I was scum in Gatecrash not earlier today. It was like, last page or something. So how could you not remember? You remembered that you lurked in Gatrecrash, but not who your buddies are?
See, I have a problem with this. Like, you think he's scum because he claimed Seppel and you assume that if Iso ->mafia disruptive && that Seppel is a good fakeclaim for that. Yes, the game is flavorful but the reviewers weren't born yesterday. Such an obvious connection is very unlikely to have made it by them.
I agree re:Hunt.
Aaaaaaaand seperate post will be for Tare's case on me. But first, I'm gonna eat dinner. I am hungry.
@D_V: If you are in fact town, then if you're gonna claim, just go ahead and claim. Otherwise, we might as well assume that your page 1 mystery claim was a scumclaim, especially given this post:
I guess you must have flavor claimed scum if Az is on your scumlist and pushing your flavor.
im... lets just say not convinced.
lemme iso DV and see if i can figure out his breadcrumbs
I'm beginning to feel like Tare is one of those people who you figure out is scum based on how his buddies act towards him, because it's, like, really hard to tell if he actually believes what he's saying.
and another, less likely, option if he was referring to another thing
i have an educated guess
@DV #35, right?
responding to my flavor crumb in #32?
Huntzilla (4) - tomsloger, Azrael, Killjoy, D_V
Azrael (2) - Cyan, Huntzilla
tomsloger (1) - kpaca
D_V (1) - Iso
shadowlancerx (1) - Anaklusmos
Taredas (2) - shadowlancerx, osieorb18
Killjoy (1) - Taredas
Not Voting (0): -
With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch. Deadline is at Sunday 26th of March, 9:59PM GMT.
What I actually said was that your argument was illogical. You're basing your worldview within the perview of this game on theory, and following it like it's fact. That is what I'm saying here. You are basing this on the assumption that I said or implied that this was alignment indicative. I don't believe it is. I find it null and confusing.
Again, no. Here is the post in question: This is an insane jump in logic.
1) Shadow: "Lets flavorclaim because it's fun!"
2) Shadow notices game is flavorful.
3)if game is flavorful->roles are flavorful->role names provide strong clues to abilities
4) Full nameclaiming ~= massclaim, giving scum strong clues to town PRs
5)"And the only reason you give (for wanting to out all the PRs) is "because it's fun!"
You are drawing lines from these thoughts shadow himself may not have drawn. It's entirely plausible that shadow didn't think through the potential implications.
Lets use a non-mafia example, in story mode (because I'm listening to Storytime by Nightwish, and am in a Storytime kinda mood):
Rosebud
Killjoy and Tare are hanging out in the snow, skipping along, having a grand old time. MAybe we made some snow angels, built a snowman, whatevers. Along the way, Killhoy slips on some ice.
"Gee willikers, Tare, it sure is icy out here today. Hopefully someone doesn't hurt themselves on such a common hazard." Killjoy whimisically muses to Tare.
So a while passes. More skipping happens, mostly from Tare, because he likes skipping. The jolly pair come to a hill. "Hey, Tare, lets go sledding! That sounds like fun!"
Tare gasps! "You're trying to kill me!" Tare exclaims. "See, you noted earlier that the snow was icy, and dangerous. Now you're suggesting we go sledding, possibly hitting an ice patch and dying!"
End.
This is your argument, Tare. Yes, it's possible that shadow does want all those things you said. It's possible you're right there. But you didn't question him nearly enough to prove it. You asked him once. There are several ways that could go, btw.
For instance, that the game is flavorful and he doesn't want to wait until the end to hear what flavor is around. That comes to mind.
And that is why your argument is a stretch. It is a stretch in the literal sense of the word, as well as the coloquial sense. You literally stretched his argument past what he (may) have intended. That doesn't mean you're delving into his mind... you're just exploring one possible path from the starting point of "because it's fun". It's like you saw what he said as scummy in a vaccuum and jumped all over it.
I just felt it was weird that Anak, a player who hasn't done much this game, would be missing from a request to expand on players. But actually, why didn't you ask Az for a read on Anak? That actually hadn't occured to me until now.
I... don't understand why you say "there's no curiosity". Like, really. What do you mean?
I was tunneling a bit on Osie, so I was a bit intense in my language there. Reread the whole of my time on the Osie wagon. You'll see it if you do that.
Also, in what world are you 'vulnerable'? You seem to believe, as I do, that you're extremely rational and could probably argue his way out of a lynch if he wanted to. So, saying I was picking on basically 'low hanging fruit' in you is... well IDK what it is. It's... WTF?
Tare broke the next quote of mineso I'll just leave a link to it here. (125)
Again, tunneling.
I wasn't in the headspace of "defending a scumbuddy is stupid". I was tunneling like crazy, and therefore obviously people who thought the confirmed scum!Osie was town was scum as well. You couldn't both be scum, since both of you defending your buddy would just be silly.
So first of all, "it reminds me of a thing I did as scum" is not an argument, as not all scumtells are universal. Second, look closer: This was the progression. I vote tom, he doesn't claim (which is risky for scum to do), then he's all defiant and posts that "do this when I die" post which read to me as sincere. So I unvoted, as it was a townie reaction to being wagoned.
And re:Osie, again... tunneling. There's a bit more to it as well, actually. I'm usually really good at spotting newb town. Like REALLY good. It's one of the few reads I'm always confident on. So then Osie is new and not acting like town. I thought I had her. That's part of why I was so attached to that wagon; I was sure that newb town didn't act like that. Turns out though, that she was just a late bloomer. Her noobtown started showing later than most does, instead of RVS/early game like I'd expected.
Okay, so unless we have some weird moment where scum flips with Zionite flavor, I don't actually think that was a scum slip from Tare. I do think that either scum or town could have not read the OP, so it doesn't town clear him either, but I don't feel strongly that he's scum.
I've skimmed the Taredas/KJ stuff, I'm going to try and delve into that later on today as I don't really have time right now.
People who have already flavor claimed, weigh in on whether or not you think everyone should.
People who haven't, I really would appreciate if you did. DV, confirm that you flavor claimed Iso? (Your post 35 you suggest lynching actual Iso, meaning you're flavor Iso? If not, I really don't know who you claimed)
Could also be GJ based on Tom's post.
Yeah and 101. I assumed you knew from your response in 101.
It's still part of their sig too.
Uhhhh
GJ's not on the council.
What?
How did I claim GJ?
I'm wrestling with it being terrible, but at the same time, I feel like to jump down that rabbit hole, you have to believe it.
DV is claiming Huntzilla. Cool.
Oops. Confused GJ and Sir Chris. You're right. GJ has that line about no lynch in his signature... Hmm. Weird. Sorry, D_V. Back to Unvote, Vote Taredas...
Huntzilla (3) - Azrael, Killjoy, D_V
Taredas (3) - tomsloger, Cyan, osieorb18
Azrael (1) - Huntzilla
tomsloger (1) - kpaca
D_V (1) - Iso
shadowlancerx (1) - Anaklusmos
Killjoy (1) - Taredas
Not Voting (1): shadowlancerx
With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch. Deadline is at Sunday 26th of March, 9:59PM GMT.
Iso has been prodded.