I concur that a neutral 1xVig is not a town asset at this point. I am also reminded of (I think it was) Battlestar mafia where a Mafia claimed vig D1? I can't remember the specifics but it led to a lot of confusion and a mafia win. If this claim is genuine, then I feel we do not lose anything by lynching him. Also, I do smell a rat in that it's a complex role with a claimed 'leave' condition which I am generally suspicious of; this claim does nothing to allay my previous suspicions of TK.
- Registered User
Member for 12 years, 4 months, and 9 days
Last active Thu, Sep, 11 2014 16:46:17
- 1 Follower
- 1,241 Total Posts
- 1 Thank
Nov 11, 2013 Posted in: Mafia
Nov 8, 2013Okay, long post incoming, so I'm gonna use links to posts rather than quoting, for my own sanity.Posted in: Mafia
My highest scum read right now is TK-421, although I do not agree with some of the cases made against him, particularly around when Rhand replaced in. I don't believe #180 was a gambit attempt, but I do think it (and #178) are a scum tell; these posts (and the subsequent one, #184), come off as nervous-posting to me, and his response to Rhand's vote in that post comes across as scummy to me too, trying to placate Rhand with compliments on his towny behaviour.
Anyway, my main case on TK refers to earlier posts than that; #158 and #161. Specifically, in #158, "Thanks. That's the answer I was looking for." rang some alarm bells for me.
Asenion's original post which started that thread of conversation (#136) was one I noted down as "scummy?" in my notes at the time due to being very much from a reactive mindset not a proactive one, so in my reread I followed that thread intently. TK421's acceptance of Asenions explanation feels to me very much like subtle tutoring. I'm not sure of Asenion's experience level nor TK421's, but in the thread here Asenion claimed to be not great, and was annoyed by the possibility he might be lynched D1 due to previous experience of that happening. TK's 'that's the right answer' post just seems to be trying to reassure Asenion that he's doing alright and that he need not speak more on the subject (which I believe was originally a little light bussing by TK; as I mentioned, I found Asenion's #136 suspicious, but not outright damning, and in my mind it makes sense that TK, as a scumbuddy, would jump on it to gain some towncred, particularly as there was no danger of a wagon on Asenion at that point). When Asenion steps up some activity and posts a semi-believable rebuttal, TK is happy to then let that drop, some inter-scum contact hedged against later accusations.
Then we get onto #161. When reading through, I noted this down as being a scummy post because being cagey with your vote (as TK admits to being here) comes across as scummy to me; unwillingness to commit to your reads, unwilling to use your vote to put pressure on people, and avoiding building up too much evidence for when it comes down to vote analysis.:shrug: I'm now not confident this is a strong scum read, but those are the notes I made at the time.
Next is #207. This post makes basically no sense to me, particularly the bottom paragraph (the upper just being irrelevant talk about his own behaviour). A LOT of WIFOM is introduced here, as others have pointed out, and frankly I disagree with a lot of what TK is saying. Yes, discussion is good, and is what drives this game; aimless discussion about null-tells isn't! TK is claiming his posts earlier were discussion bait, but I don't see how you get from there to PROVING anyone to be town, as he claims is possible? There's very little logic in this argument, and it isn't scumhunting, it's moving discussion onto mafia theory which isn't really pro-town behaviour in this instance.
Since then, his posts have been infrequent and often not serious (#265??) which to me does not jive with a town player in the position he is in (I believe him to be at L-2, although I have not checked this for sure).
I mentioned Asenion above, re: TK advising him, and there's not really much more I want to say about Asenion specifically; lurky as all hell D1 is not a strong scum tell, though, I think to that extent it is; I don't buy complaining about not being able to do setup/vote analysis, some people (Rhand I think?) have said this is obv.town but I think it could just as easily be scum not wanting to let slip that they have extra info by commenting too much on nebulous behavioural tells. I've already said I found #136 to be from a worryingly reactive mindset, and #151 only reinforces that. "I need to see a flip, learn something about someone's role, have a reason to defend myself, or have an objective before I start getting into it I think."; A player who only posts in order to defend themself is almost obv.scum, and we HAVE an objective... to identify who isn't acting in our best interest. And I don't think Asenion was, before being replaced.
Post-replacement, Shockwave hasn't done much, which is fair enough, rereading and all, so there's just two posts I want to analyse, his reads, #255, and then #282. First the former; some of these reads closely match mine, however I see very little actual analysis in there; a lot of this is just stating what has occurred, and I feel this is playing very safe; /barning a lot of other peoples suspicions and town reads. I see Guardman is placed in the Null section despite Shockwave being critical of the BlueElectric outing. If it's 'odd' for that to play into our favour, Shockwave, doesn't that make Guardman scum?? Please explain your stance on Guardman more fully, particularly in light of your further reading. Note in this T/S list, Shockwave lists TK as scum; I believe this to be mindless /barning.
Now, #282: "... the Void/TK-421 issue. Something is off there. It makes little sense for a town player to call someone whose come under scrutiny as scum a scum hunting pro in my mind. I'm inclined to think a town-scum interaction is going on here leaning towards Void as both a more likely scum suspect and a better source of info into the matter post flip."
I don't know Shockwave's experience level but I am not massively experienced and I can see Void's apparent train of thought here. Added to the fact that in Shockwave's T/S list they listed TK421 as the ONLY scumread, I can't see why, given you claim there's a TvS interaction occuring, that you claim it will be Void who is Scum and not TK?? Have your reads changed that much since your T/S list? I strongly believe this is slip; trying to gently deflect off your scum-mate while forgetting you bussed him by barning the general thread's opinions earlier? I can't see any reason to suspect Void (the 'scum-hunting pro' post is a null-tell in my book) over TK who I feel has posted the most scummy content.
I'd be happy to vote Shockwave or TK-421 in light of that post.
Guardman next; Frankly, I just don't know. I called his attack on me OMGUSsy because I felt he was forcing a poor case rather than doing honest analysis, but since then he's posted a lot that I've agreed with (like the debate with Void; this comes off very TvT to me, as I said above). I'm still not convinced that the BlueElectric Out was town-motivated, but I want to stop tunnelling Guardman, I'll come back to this D2.
Man, this post is taking ages.
My notes from the reread start with 'super suspicious', but the list of posts I want to refer to is pretty empty after #92, which was a LOONG time ago. In short, #39 I dislike because it's very quick to jump on BlueElectric (and vote) for a post he claims is 'no way' from a town mindset, where I can totally see town motivation, and I think it's fairly clear. Confusing, and others have pointed this out too. In #87 I think iRebel is trying to claim he was reaction baiting Blue, but I can't quickly find the post by DC he's answering. If that's what iRebel's claiming (and 'reaction baiting' seems to be a common excuse this game), then I don't believe him, and will /barn DCIII's response in #88. In #92 iRebel's arguements are just full of holes:
"This struck me as natural town. It seems unnecessarily ballsy for scum to stick their neck out in this fashion. Those who start and push wagons early are, imo, more likely town." = WIFOM.
"I was looking for either an OMGUS post or a calm, cool, and collected post. This is the latter. If Miss Blue were scum, then I would've expected a reply attacking my (bad) logic instead of something calm, cool, and collected." = WIFOM
"2. I know it was a bad argument. I put it out there because I was attempting to bait reactions." = WIFOM
"Tell me DC, have you not stopped and asked yourself why no one but you, Void, and Miss Blue (obviously) have said anything about how I went so aggressively after her? Or the bad logic?" = Terrible logic! It's entirely possible that the reason so few people went after iRebel was because the other scum didn't want to bus iRebel so soon.
Then there's a pretty huge gap in relevant iRebel content. Some null-tell defending, some v/la, nothing much I can comment on until the T/S list in #268, which comes of a very suspicious to me, solely because of the focus on TK and Void (who I believe to be Scum and Town respectively):
"TK BAHA-421: Something about his interactions with FIGHTING on page 3 just strike me as not natural. I can't put my finger on it exactly. #169 is a prime example - that doesn't sound natural. #170 sounds almost as if he's taunting or mocking FIGHTING, maybe to try and fluster FIGHTING and spin it? Strikes me as scummy. #178, scummy."
"VOID: Scum. Had me fooled, too. His interactions with DCIII on page 4 are terrible, and reek of a desperate attempt to try and save a buddy in trouble (kind of like I did in WWII Mafia with Void). TK already looked bad, and Void's only making him look worse. Guardman's #218 and #221 are also solid reasons why Void is scum."
Seems to me like you have a much stronger scum-read on Void than on TK, here; why push for the lynch on TK first? I haven't done the actual counting, but I believe TK was at L-3 when you made this post. It would certainly make sense for a scum, at this point, to earn solid townpoints by getting on a popular wagon before it gets too close to lynching, bus a team-mate and deflect some of the suspicion on you. That you voted TK rather than Void after the T/S list seems suspicious to me; you try to misdirect by setting Void as a lynch tomorrow (presumably to try to turn the game back around in the face of a mafia lynch on D1). I think if Void dies and flips Town then we should look very seriously at iRebel based on this.
And that's all I have. It's nearly 5am local time now, so I'm just gonna wrap up with a little bit of a a T/S list for the remaining players I haven't touched on; I have no reads on Rezombied (too few posts), slight town leans on Cythare, mid-town read on Paperblade|Rhand (I read Paperblade as just noob floundering), strong town reads on DCIII, BlueElectric, and Void, and a slight scum read on FIGHTING (some subtle barning hidden behind an aggressive demeanour, some attacks I don't agree with), although I strongly feel the three mafia (assuming there are three) lie among the four I have discussed above.
I am in a position where I want to vote TK-421 now but am leery to do so because I believe he may be at L-2. So,
@EtR: Modcount please
Nov 8, 2013Still reading, but for now:Posted in: Mafia
I feel like I was tunnelling Guardman a bit back there and while I (so far as I have read) haven't made up my mind, I do feel like I have some other strong reads to post about and focus on as well. In particular, Guardman vs. Void (posts #219 and surrounds) comes across as Town v. Town to me.
More to come.
Nov 8, 2013Posted in: MafiaQuote from Cythare@iRebel/@Idle Muse: Both of you too. You both stated your content would be coming some time today. I know it's early in the day, but I just want to bring it back up to hold you to it.
I'm working on it.
Nov 7, 2013Okay, I'm far enough behind now that I need to do a serious reread. Expect some actual content from me by tomorrow.Posted in: Mafia
Nov 4, 2013The weekend wasn't kind to me, guys, and today and tomorrow aren't good either. I'm effectively gonna be V/LA until wednesday.Posted in: Mafia
@mod, please note this.
Oct 31, 2013EBWP: I want to clarify my position of Paperblade to avoid misunderstanding; "I was more simply confused about Paper's actions than outright suspicious that they came from a scum motivation." refers to my thoughts regarding Paperblade in the early game only.Posted in: Mafia
My suspicion is now mounting; pending a reread of them with an eye on actual scumhunting activity. My vote will stay on Guardman for now because I still believe my logic re: his outing Blue is sound; it may not have had the effect he desired, but I don't believe him when he claims that it wasn't an extremely calculated move.
Oct 31, 2013I'm really not sure what to think of iRebel and the case on him, I still want to reread in more detail to understand the case, but have been unexpectedly busy this week.Posted in: Mafia
I still think Guardman is scum, his recent post which was attacking my early posts re: Paperblade comes off OMGUSsy to me. The main criticism he seems to have of me is that I was undecided and vague about attacking Paper super early in the game and not putting my vote on him; to explain, I was just getting into the game, having not played for a long time, and hesitant to vote when my own opinions weren't yet well-formed. I hate playing the inexperienced card since I feel I've read enough to have a strong understanding of the game, but in this instance, what held me back from actually voting WAS the inexperience in using my vote and associated hesitance to do so given that I was more simply confused about Paper's actions than outright suspicious that they came from a scum motivation.
Moving back to the present, I've said I want to reread iRebel and I will do, likely early this weekend. I'm also want to have a look at Paperblade again; ignoring the early game stuff I refer to above (which I've said before I don't think is telling either way), have they done much actual scumhunting this week? My suspicion is no, I can't find much at all just skimming back quickly.
Lastly, FIGHTING's logic against TK421 makes a lot of sense to me as well. I don't really have anything to add, so this is effectively a /barn; I think a Guardman/Paperblade/TK421 scumteam is a real possibility.
Oct 28, 2013I don't have a lot of timne tonight and I want to reread in more depth regards iRebel, but I do want just post quickly and answer this again.Posted in: Mafia
Quote from Void
How many completed games of Mafia do you have?
I'll repeat what I said in #90; I have one completed game of forum mafia, which was here on Salvation, and a fairly long time ago.
Also, I just want to quickly say that I'm really not happy by Guardman's lack of response to my accusation. Everyone else; what are your opinions of him?
Oct 26, 2013Posted in: Mafia
Upon rereading, I see may argument is along the same lines as DCIII's, here.
Having reexamined the debate leading up to Blue's outing as Iso, my theory is that Paperblade is Guardman's scumbuddy. Not because of the Lynch Void / No Lynch mess, I don't think that's really a tell into Paperblade's alignment. Rather, it's that the main debate at that time is about the intent of Paperblade. The wagon that is the strongest is BlueElectric's, but the debate is all about Void and Paperblade as well, they're also people under the microscope. I do not believe Void or BlueElectric to be scum (Void, because I believe him about the NL being an attempt to draw comment, and BlueElectric, because of the logic above), so that leaves Paperblade as the potential person Guardman was trying to pull focus off by dropping that bombshell.
Additionally, I had not previously realised quite how strong the wagon on BlueElectric was (in terms of votes); I have even more faith in my reading of Guardman's post now; he was jumping on an opportunity to keep the focus on her and make sure the wagon didn't lose momentum.
I'm less confident of my opinion of Paperblade, as the logic that they're scum isn't based on their behaviour, rather the possible intent of Guardman, but it's worth bearing in mind, and I will be watching them closely.
Oct 26, 2013Posted in: MafiaQuote from BlueElectric
I also dislike this post by you. The conclusion I drew from Mister Dog's post was that he had not thoroughly read my posts, not that he was intending to oust me as another player for the sake of the mafia. As it is, there are plenty of prime lynch candidates on the playing field - Mister Dog was in no danger of diverting any attention onto himself, so he had no pro-mafia motivation to oust me publicly as Mister Iso - so I do not see why he would not either:
A. State such in pre-game mafia chat (as the mafia typically has this)
B. Wait until Night 1 to post it in the mafia chat since there was no pressure on him up to that point.
How on earth do you arrive at that conclusion, given the above?
I did not know that pre-game chat was allowed for the mafia.
I DO think there is a pro-scum mindset behind outing you toDay, rather than just in mafia chat, as I mentioned in my post; it puts the attention of the town onto you. I do not think that it follows logically that because we now know you're more experienced, that we should trust you more (as Paperblade suggests in #89); only that we should pay more attention to what you say, in a sense of critically analysing your behaviour.
The logic that I have previously stated is that, if you are town, Blue, outing you is totally beneficial for the mafia whether or not we trust or distrust you; if we distrust you, we're gonna be analysing your posts more, which is good for the scum; if we trust you and you are pressuring town, we're gonna be analysing your targets more, which is good for scum. Guardman wasn't necessarily trying to set you up as a lynch target, but rather, deflect attention TOWARDS town members, both you and potentially your targets too.
Which, in itself, suggests that other scum members were under scrutiny at the time Guardman posted that post, and he was deflecting on their behalf, so to speak. Continuing with further discussion of Blue's identity is only what Guardman wanted with his post, and I think we should proceed with more actual scumhunting. Since Guardman has yet to post again since my accusation, I'm gonna read back to see what the exact situation was when Guardman outed Blue and proceed from there.
Quote from FIGHTING@muse: how many games of mafia have you played before? Have you ever been scum?
I have played one serious game of mafia here before on Salvation, many moons ago. Never played elsewhere, and never been scum.
Oct 25, 2013This post makes me super super suspicious of Guardman.Posted in: Mafia
Quote from GuardmanIf I remember right Blue Electric is Iso in drag.
Second I like Blue as town. I understand her reasoning behind her actions with the paper and void thing. They are not great but I understand after paper's post why Blue would vote for him. And I get why Blue would vote for Void for the no lynch. But it's sort of a 1 plus a glob of green paint equal 2 sort of thing. Not great, but questionable logic doesn't equal scum and I am not really feeling a scum mindset from her.
If this is true (which I see it is from BlueElectric's post), and you think Blue is town (I'm gonna go read Kitty Trek mafia or whatever it was called now), then you've just given us a huge disadvantage! Outing that BlueElectric is a powerful experienced player to the mafia is decidedly anti-town, if you indeed believe her to be town as you state. Revealing such information about player who you believe to be town does nothing to help the town, and gives the mafia useful information! I just don't see a town member revealing this information.
On the other hand, if you're scum, then revealing that a town player has something to hide is definitely in your interest! I can totally see a scum outing a town player's alt like this, to put focus on them, to force us to re-scrutinise their playstyle, and ultimately, to prevent them from being seen as trustworthy due to a greater perception of that players strength.
In this case, you're informing us that BlueElectric is an experienced player and by that, that we need to pay closer attention to her posts, which, if she is town and is attacking other town, is great deflection from the scum whether we choose to trust or distrust her.
Based on this, I feel that BlueElectric is likely town, and Guardman is scum.
Oct 24, 2013Posted in: Mafia
Mine wasn't a vote, did you mean nonRVS post?
Yes, sorry, that was a typo. I meant "was the first nonRVS post".
Oct 24, 2013Posted in: Mafia
Cythare, surely if you have suspicion that BlueElectric is someone other than she appears, then you can read up on her other posts in order to get a stronger understanding of her meta, not a weaker one?
Oct 24, 2013Posted in: MafiaQuote from Void@iRebel, Idle Muse, Cythare, TK-421:
Please explain why you didn’t make a comment about the on-goings of the game Re: paperblade?
I read your previously completed games and noticed that in none of them no one had voted for a No Lynch and now that someone has you ignored it. Would you mind giving me a reason why?
I did, once I had read it... And I've read enough games to understand the concept... and I figured it was just part of RVS. I was much more interested in the fallout of it re: Paperchase and BlueElectric, since there's actual content there to analyse.
Quote from Idle MuseUnvote
Quote from PaperbladeI'm used to using lynch user or ##vote user for the syntax. That theory is pretty wild. And yes, I acknowledged when first questioned that technically that lets us leave RVS, but it's not in a way I'm fond of.
I'm not convinced by this, too... how to vote is clearly laid out in the rules, and there was a whole bunch of RVS voting that demonstrates it, you'd really have to be not reading the thread OR the rules to miss that.
Where is it common to use that syntax, Paperblade?
That said, I can't see any scum reason to psuedo-vote Void like that...
Quote from BlueElectric »My thought process was, "Vote for Mister Void and see what Mister Paper does, as well as how Mister Void reacts."
Why the focus on Paperblade at that point? What so grabbed your attention about them previous to your vote on Void, compared to other players?
This post seems very off to me.
@Idle - I see where you say you don't see any scum reasoning for the pseudo-vote, so then why say that you aren't convinced that he is used to the lynch syntax and press the issue by asking him where it's common? If there isn't a scum reason to do it, why does it matter? It looks like you're trying to throw suspicion on Paper without committing to thinking his behavior is scummy.
Also - you ask what "so grabbed" Blue's attention about PaperBlade compared to other players when it was very clearly the fact that he cast the first real vote of the game. This after basically barning her suspicion that he got tripped up with the syntax.
This post doesn't appear to come from any real place of curiosity but, rather, more be an attempt to cast suspicion on other players.
Vote: Idle Muse
It comes from a place of confusion; I've never seen anything like a weird pseudo-not-actually-a-vote-but-trying-to-look-like-one before, and my questions were just trying to understand if that was intentional or not, or what was intentional. To put it simply, I wasn't suspicious of Paper, and to clarify here, I don't think tripping up on syntax is scummy, just confused as to how that came about.
Re: BlueElectric, I disagree with the bit I've bolded and underlined above; Paperblade's post may have obviously been been the first nonRVS post to you guys with more experience, but to me it just seemed like more RVS, ie, 'lol I'll vote against boring people'. I couldn't "very clearly" see BlueElectric's motivation until she explained it a bit more...
To me it seemed like:
Paperblade - why does Void's NL vote warrant yours?
Void - why are you trying to break my (and quite possibly iRebel's) brain?
was the first nonRVS vote, back then.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.