Genre Fiction Mafia

[Normal_Phase]

@pedescribe

That is a ridiculous insinuation and you know it. Everyone other than you assumes the “one person, one vote” rule is in effect unless stated otherwise. It’s a null tell, something you are rather fond of utilizing Day 1. FOS

And this is correct. This IS a smudge – a baseless sideswipe at someone.

[Mahaloth]

@Normal_Phase

Conceded on the first point, which I had forgotten. But this didn’t look like “just checking” to me, and to some extent still doesn’t. He came within about half an inch of demanding a mass “noose” claim.

Uh, I definitely don’t think it is out there, but heck, if it makes you feel better, I’ll go further. Other than the slight waste of time it would probably be, I actually see no harm in a mass “noose claim”. I wasn’t demanding one, but I’m not against it particularly.

[Pleonast]

@Hirka_T_Bawa

Ok then..
Vote pleonast for always voting multiple times.
vote pleonast for always claiming
vote pleonast for doing things contrary to the way things are done on purpose.
vote pleonast because I can.

These are poor votes. None of them give any indication of why you think I am scum.

@pedescribe

Secondly, why on earth would the scum need to breadcrumb each other? Wouldn’t they just wait until Night 1?

If you read more carefully, you’ll notice that I did not suggest scum breadcrumbing each other as a possibility.

Thirdly, why would you bring it up? Going off of the above, if it’s not coincidence (which I suspect it is, else I would not be posting this), they’re probably townies. Which means you just blew their cover, if you think it merits explanation.

I think them being townies is unlikely, although it is barely possible. I think scum trying to charge a power is definitely possible. Zeriel gave their explanation, I’d like to see Tom’s.

That is a ridiculous insinuation and you know it. Everyone other than you assumes the “one person, one vote” rule is in effect unless stated otherwise. It’s a null tell, something you are rather fond of utilizing Day 1.

Why don’t you wait and see what fubbleskag’s explanation is before putting words in their mouth?

@Zeriel

In theme games, where I know the character name I’ve been assigned, I adjust my vocabulary/style to fit the character name when funny.

Thanks for the clarification.

@fubbleskag

You mean, kinda like the link you provided to mafia wiki earlier?

Making a claim about the current game outside this forum is fundamentally different than pointing to a record of past games. So, no, not kind of like it.

That’s exactly two tacks, from believing his story to no longer believing it, based on new evidence. Do you realize how ridiculously poor of a supposed scum tell that is?

It seems reasonable to me.

Wow. Just, wow.

So you have no defense at all for your attack on me? You simply like to call “bullshit” at someone and then avoid explaining why or what you meant. That’s not very helpful.

@Normal_Phase

Astral doesn’t need an excuse for making his claim. The argument that he claimed too early is a poor one.

Further I don’t think I have ever, in my mafia-playing history, actually seen anyone called out on claiming too early (when actually under pressure) before now. You bringing this up as a reason why my request was anti-town is just bizarre. This is the second time you’ve used post-hoc reasoning (the could-never-be-anticipated result of my action, instead of what my action would have meant at the time I did it) against me. That’s not honest debate, Pleo. And as long as I’m at it, the word “forced” is also loaded. I wanted a claim, I pushed for one, and if Astral hadn’t complied I would have held it against him (to whatever extent I could with my vote already there); to characterize that as “forcing” his claim is subtly but definitely too much.

I agree it’s a poor argument about when Astral claimed, but I have seen it multiple previous games.

I don’t see a substantial difference between “force” and “push”, but you do apparently. Assume I was using “push” then. I don’t think it’s good to push players to claim. I suppose we’ll be unable to persuade each other.

You’re being inconsistent in your own approach to Astral, IMO.

I’m pointing out my suspicions as I see them. I’m not going to cut off one avenue of thought simply because it’s not consistent with another.

I’m uneasy about this because of your previous-stated position that self-preservation votes are inherently anti-town (and that you would vote for them on principle). That gives this vote a whiff of the automatic for me. I’m not sure it’s entirely fair given these specific circumstances, but it’s there.

I stated my reasons for the vote, make your judgement based on those. If it makes a difference to you, I’ve never advocated using automatic votes, anyone who thought otherwise was misunderstanding me.

Well we agree on one thing, then. I think it’s a decent case, too, particularly by day one standards. Fubbles gives a bit of a “sitting back and letting it all play out” vibe. However, I will note that part of the case against him is the same thing I just pointed out as regards you, in reverse. He believes Astral, but then asked a hypothetical that requires that Astral is scum. You don’t believe Astral, but then pursue a line of questioning that IMO only makes sense if Astral is town.

There’s two differences between myself and fub.

1. I’m not voting for Astral and never did.
2. fub changed their mind. I have not changed my mind about Astral. I still think they are likely not town (more third-party than scum, but I’ll lynch the same either way). I have considered the unlikely case that Astral is town, and the implications of that.

Can explicitly state why you’re voting for me?

[Normal_Phase]

In no particular order:

The gratuitous smudge on Pedescribe (which it occurs to me is ALSO a case of inconsistency of approach: you question Pedescribe’s by-all-logic innocuous comment on the basis that he might know something the rest of us don’t, yet characterize me doing the same thing to Mahaloth for far better reason as “odd”).

The (in my belief) inconsistency regarding your vote on fubbleskag, seconding nesta’s argument that included fubbleskag asking a hypothetical about Astral = scum while appearing simultaneously to hold the position that Astral is town. This you do while characterizing my request for Astral’s claim as anti-town on the primary basis that Astral might actually be town*, while simultaneously holding the position that he probably is not. Both these things (you and fubbles) suggest the kind of detachment that I find more likely to show up in scum (who have no real suspicions) than in town (who do).

*To clarify an earlier point I ran out of time to say properly: your logic in the whole “forcing the claim was anti-town” post doesn’t feel convincing. “It’s anti-town because if Astral is town the consequences might be bad” – that makes sense. “It’s anti-town because if Astral is scum you should just have been voting him without the claim anyway” – that’s weak and feels tacked on for completeness’ sake. Hence the conclusion above.

Use of dishonest post-hoc logic twice in your comments to me. First you put Astral perhaps being a town detective to my ledger. Second you put Astral being able to deflect charges of a too-early claim to my side as well. Neither thing (even if true) is something I should have had any reason to anticipate when deciding how to relate to Astral. They’re data points that look meaningful (in a way negative to me), but aren’t.

Possibly (weakest point) falling back on a “but I always vote this way” rationale for voting SisC. Point becomes slightly stronger if she is town than if she isn’t, since your history could serve as an excuse.

(Not a point at all, but I’ll add it.) A feeling that there’s something wrong with how you’re arguing in general.

[Trepa_Mayfield]

@Pleonast

I think them being townies is unlikely, although it is barely possible. I think scum trying to charge a power is definitely possible. Zeriel gave their explanation, I’d like to see Tom’s.

You are gesticulating wildly. Do you really think it’s “barely possible” that two people used the word “tiger” on Day 1, especially since one instance was a commonly used parable? I find that well within the realm of probability.

Incidentally, if you are right, you’ve essentially made that power worthless already, since no-one will dare use the word “tiger” idly this game.

@Pleonast

So you have no defense at all for your attack on me? You simply like to call “bullshit” at someone and then avoid explaining why or what you meant. That’s not very helpful.

It is bullshit, and for the reason I gave. I like how you completely ignored my argument about it but quoted fubbleskag’s non-argument. Strawman much?

@Pleonast

Can explicitly state why you’re voting for me?

Unvote Sister Coyote
[color=blue]Vote Pleonast
[/quote]

I know why I am: your self-assurance on the “tiger” is eerily reminiscent of the debacle debacle, which would be a good strategy for scum Day 1, and because you made an illogical smudge and then refused to defend it against reasonable argument.

@Normal_Phase

In no particular order:

The gratuitous smudge on Pedescribe (which it occurs to me is ALSO a case of inconsistency of approach: you question Pedescribe’s by-all-logic innocuous comment on the basis that he might know something the rest of us don’t, yet characterize me doing the same thing to Mahaloth for far better reason as “odd”).

Hold up a sec. He didn’t smudge me, he smudged fubbleskag. And for the record, I’m not defending fubbleskag. I think nesta’s case is also pretty strong.

[Trepa_Mayfield]

:sigh:

** Vote Pleonast **

[special_ed]

Hey, Pleo

About 15 years ago, my wife and I separated.

The first woman I dated lived over 800 miles away in Canada.
The second woman I dated lived over 1500 miles away in Texas.
The next was a lesbian who at that point felt it went against her religion.
Then I dated a married woman.

None of these relationships worked out.

After some therapy, it became evident that I wasn’t acting rationally. By entering relationships that were doomed to fail, I could try 110%, and when the relationship failed, I had no accountability. It was because of the distance/orientation/situation not because of what I was doing.

[special_ed]

I was thinking of ways to work either Eye of the Tiger or Tiger Blood into the conversation.

And I just did.

[Silver_Jan]

@special_ed

I was thinking of ways to work either Eye of the Tiger or Tiger Blood into the conversation.

And I just did.

Are you saying that you are a Mason or just a bad husband?

[Silver_Jan]

I have no idea where to place my vote at the moment. I like the way** Astral** has come back at every question aimed at him.

Sister C seems to be a bit iffy about everyone.

I want to wait a bit before I place another vote, I want to see what** gnarly** has to say

[Normal_Phase]

@pedescribe

Hold up a sec. He didn’t smudge me, he smudged fubbleskag. And for the record, I’m not defending fubbleskag. I think nesta’s case is also pretty strong.

.

Yeah, I went off the rails somewhere when you replied. Thanks for the correction.

[gnarlycharlie]

@special_ed

Astral’s claim

Sister’s claim

@Silver_Jan

I have no idea where to place my vote at the moment. I like the way** Astral** has come back at every question aimed at him.

Sister C seems to be a bit iffy about everyone.

I want to wait a bit before I place another vote, I want to see what** gnarly** has to say

about what specifically?

[Astral_Rejection]

So, gnarly.

15 posts total. 4 of which are from before the game started, so we’ll skip those.

I’ve mentioned that I’ve been finding him slightly suspicious, and that feeling really crystallized while reading through his posts. Primarily, much like Sister Coyote, he doesn’t weigh in on anything. He doesn’t really take a stance unless prodded into it by other players.

@gnarlycharlie

my take so far:

i agree that Astral is probably scum or 3rd party. between his ‘slip’ and claimed role there is inconsistency. we can opt to look for scum elsewhere but who? i doubt scum would rock the boat now and bring attention to themselves. the only one else who got my attention was Hirka for questioning Ed’s reasoning which IMO is logical.

He agrees that I’m probably scum or 3rd party, but doesn’t vote for me. Why? What pro-town reason could there be for not voting for someone you believe is probably scum? And why does he, after only two sentences discussing me, move his attention elsewhere? I don’t necessarily believe his conclusion is wrong - scum, in fact, NEVER try to bring attention to themselves - but why not more discussion of me? Especially given that he hasn’t voted for me, it seems odd that he’s dismissing my case almost immediately after agreeing with it. Why does his voting record not follow his stated beliefs?

I ask why he hasn’t voted for me, given that he believes I’m scum. He still doesn’t:

@gnarlycharlie

it’s still early in the Day. something may yet happen but if you want me to, i’ll oblige.

Normal votes for him and asks him why he still hasn’t voted for me. His response:

@gnarlycharlie

that was a supposed to be a snarky reply for what i felt was ‘i dare you’ post from Astral.

funny how people complained when players joined on a bandwagon in my other game.

Vote: Astral

i will still see if anything else comes up and see if anything changes my mind.

Normal, feel free to keep your vote on me and keep voting for me while i’m in the game. i don’t care for your tone.

He finally votes, but only because he’s drawing heat for his lack of a vote. He promises to look for further scum.

@gnarlycharlie

yes, i do tend to start slow. usually the more experienced players have enough fireworks going so i observe, poke here and there and try to get reactions. then i vote.

I know Mahaloth has an issue with this part of Gnarly, but I honestly don’t. Poking is a weak if valid strategy on Day 1.

@gnarlycharlie

smudge, smudge, smudge and still no vote for me. you just want to save yourself? maybe you and Mahaloth are friends? :rolleyes:

He twice accuses me of “smudging him” by mentioning I find him suspicious. Too defensive over too little of a thing. I find this to be a useful scum indicator.

And that’s his whole posting history, minus some mechanics posts and responses to Mahaloth. His promises to keep hunting for scum never materializes, and honestly, he never started, either. He pretends to weigh in on me without actually saying anything of value, and immediately backs away, all in the same post. Scum, knowing I’m not on their team, don’t want to be seen as part of the mob that lynches a cop, no matter how good the lynch is looking at the time. Scum want to be seen as reasonable so nobody can point back to their vote as evidence of their scumminess.

Obviously, this isn’t a bulletproof case. It’s built on some guesswork based on how I’m interpreting events. But, it’s a starting point, and I’d be happy to see Gnarly get lynched today. I’m gonna have to think about whether or not I want to switch from Sister - currently, their cases are pretty damn similar, and I can’t quite decide which I find more suspicious. Both have played it safe, both have failed to seriously discuss anything.

[Red_Skeezix]

Astral Rejection(7): [del]Tom Scud[136-236][/del], [del]Stanislaus[139-211][/del], TexCat[141], Mahaloth[154], Zeriel[160], [del]Normal Phase[207-237][/del], [del]Special Ed[245-507][/del], gnarlycharlie[324], [del]Silver Jan[327-428][/del], SisterCoyote[466], fubbleskag[490], Inner Stickler[492]
Pleonast(5): Winston Smith[328], fluiddruid[356], Hirka T’Bawa[del][536-536][536-536][536-536][/del][536], Normal Phase[540], pedescribe[546]
SisterCoyote(2): [del]Normal Phase[317-318][/del], [del]pedescribe[399-545][/del], Weedy[407], [del]Hirka T’Bawa[414-536][/del], Astral Rejection[451], [del]Pleonast[487-530][/del]
fubbleskag(2): nesta[523], Pleonast[530]
Special Ed(0): [del]Astral Rejection[248-451][/del]
gnarlycharlie(0): [del]Normal Phase[318-540][/del]
Mahaloth(0): [del]Hirka T’Bawa[398-414][/del]
Did Not Vote:Tom Scud, Special Ed, Stanislaus, Silver Jan, MHaye
With these votes Astral Rejection would be lynched.

[gnarlycharlie]

@Astral_Rejection

So, gnarly.

15 posts total. 4 of which are from before the game started, so we’ll skip those.

I’ve mentioned that I’ve been finding him slightly suspicious, and that feeling really crystallized while reading through his posts. Primarily, much like Sister Coyote, he doesn’t weigh in on anything. He doesn’t really take a stance unless prodded into it by other players.

He agrees that I’m probably scum or 3rd party, but doesn’t vote for me. Why? What pro-town reason could there be for not voting for someone you believe is probably scum? And why does he, after only two sentences discussing me, move his attention elsewhere? I don’t necessarily believe his conclusion is wrong - scum, in fact, NEVER try to bring attention to themselves - but why not more discussion of me? Especially given that he hasn’t voted for me, it seems odd that he’s dismissing my case almost immediately after agreeing with it. Why does his voting record not follow his stated beliefs?

I ask why he hasn’t voted for me, given that he believes I’m scum. He still doesn’t:
Normal votes for him and asks him why he still hasn’t voted for me. His response:
He finally votes, but only because he’s drawing heat for his lack of a vote. He promises to look for further scum.

I know Mahaloth has an issue with this part of Gnarly, but I honestly don’t. Poking is a weak if valid strategy on Day 1.
He twice accuses me of “smudging him” by mentioning I find him suspicious. Too defensive over too little of a thing. I find this to be a useful scum indicator.

And that’s his whole posting history, minus some mechanics posts and responses to Mahaloth. His promises to keep hunting for scum never materializes, and honestly, he never started, either. He pretends to weigh in on me without actually saying anything of value, and immediately backs away, all in the same post. Scum, knowing I’m not on their team, don’t want to be seen as part of the mob that lynches a cop, no matter how good the lynch is looking at the time. Scum want to be seen as reasonable so nobody can point back to their vote as evidence of their scumminess.

Obviously, this isn’t a bulletproof case. It’s built on some guesswork based on how I’m interpreting events. But, it’s a starting point, and I’d be happy to see Gnarly get lynched today. I’m gonna have to think about whether or not I want to switch from Sister - currently, their cases are pretty damn similar, and I can’t quite decide which I find more suspicious. Both have played it safe, both have failed to seriously discuss anything.

1. crystallized huh? then it isn’t bulletproof? i guess those words aren’t mutually exclusive but don’t seem to match. leaving wiggle room in case i flip Town?

2. i already explained why i didn’t vote right away. i won’t rehash it.

3. i apologize for not meeting your post quota. while more posts are beneficial to Town, volume isn’t a measure whether a player is scum or not. there have been many talkative scum. furthermore, despite calling attention to my meager number of posts, it appears that you didn’t even read them. i never PROMISED to look for scum. of course i will look for scum but you’re attributing things to me that i never explicitly said. that’s terribly suspicious.

4. for argument’s sake, let’s say i agree that all you said is true and i’ve played it safe and haven’t seriously discussed anything, how does that compare with your failure to realize that the Slumlords are Town? i’d vote you over me even if i weren’t me.

5. i too would be happy to see you lynched today.

[MHaye]

I can see I’ve got a lot to catch up on.

Yes know it’s my fault; I condemned myself to this when I signed up. So, if you’ll excuse me I’ll get to a reread.

Oh, I have to take a break in two hours; Monaco GP qualifying will be shown live.

Goes off to reread, humming the last part of The Chain.

[Mahaloth]

@Astral_Rejection

I know Mahaloth has an issue with this part of Gnarly, but I honestly don’t. Poking is a weak if valid strategy on Day 1.

I definitely don’t like it, but I dislike his change of story even more. He clearly tried to pull a fast one by changing “poking people for reactions” to “poking holes in peoples’ arguments”.

After Astral, gnarly clearly leads my suspect pool.

[Stanislaus]

A look at Zeriel, prompted by a feeling that he was playing in the zone that works so well for scum on these boards - low but not non-existent posting, most of which is not focused on hunting scum:

117: the “tiger balls” post. Either a subtle and cunning power-play, or by his account, fluff.
160: Places the 5th vote on Astral, agreeing with the other votes.
162: Responds to questions from Weedy, on vanilla PMs, mass claims and scum communications. Most of this is general Mafia lore, rather than specifically related to the game.
174: Responds to gnarlycharlie’s question about the meaning of Universe/Story. Asks, “Why would that be relevant?” which strongly suggests that this post isn’t either.
197: Joke about another game.
218: Third-party theory, in response to a Q about whether third-parties are as good a lynch priority as scum.
242: A challenge to Astral, accusing him of being an inattentive third-party and casting doubt on Astral’s own explanation.
244: A response to Astral, pointing out that in a closed game the absence of a counter-claim means nothing.
258: Joking with Pleo.
261: Response to Astral: Re-iterates that in a closed set-up we can’t make any deductions from the absence of a counter-claim; reiterates his belief that Astral is a third-party.
262: Asks why Astral couldn’t have the usual survivor Wincon.
270: Follows up on the above with speculation about Astral’s wincon.Álso replies to SisterCoyote with a clearly expressed opinion about Jester roles.
278: Further conversation about Jesters.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13838044&postcount=279: Further conversation about Jesters
322: Checks the timing of Astral’s claim with respect to votes. “Jumping the gun” is his conclusion.
tbc…

[Stanislaus]

…

357: Brings gnarlycharlie up to speed about Pleo’s claim history.

372: Gets sucked into the recurring discussion about Pleo’s claim history.

396: Challenges Astral for not sharing earlier what he’d learned from Red in PMs.

423: Accuses Mahaloth of trying to be involved without actually saying anything.

458: Responds to Astral: explicitly says that he thinks Astral is a** third-party survivor**.

459: NETA

460: Comments on frequncy of Night Zero games, with link to Mafiascum.

482: Coding help.

511: Responds to Pleo re Night 0 games and tiger balls.

538: Further chat with Pleo about the fluff nature of the tiger balls comment.

[Stanislaus]

Right, so what?

Going through that, it at first seemed that my initial impression was wrong. Although there has been a fair amount of discussion about generic game theory, and responding to new players’ questions, Zeriel has been pretty focused on challenging Astral.

However, this is not scum hunting. Zeriel explicitly says that he thinks Astral is a third-party survivor. So not ALE, and not an immediate threat to Town. Zeriel himself says as much:

@Zeriel

Nabbing a PFK is somewhat good but not nearly as good as nabbing a scum.

Take the traditional PFK, the serial killer: since they have to kill everyone, killing scum is just as beneficial as killing town for them.

Nabbing a non-exclusive-win third party is beneficial, or not, depending on how that third party has been acting and what their powers are. On the other hand, killing them if they’re playing in support of town is not as bad as killing a real townie because they typically don’t count towards town’s majority in games I’ve played in.

Take the traditional 3rd-Party, the survivor: since they have no powers except voting, and are going to be trying to blend in with town (and thus voting like town), killing them is somewhat bad but not as bad as killing a real townie.

It’s very difficult to reconcile this post with Zeriel’s pursuit of what he believes is a third-party survivor and failure to look anywhere else for scum. I’m inclined to think that Zeriel is Scum who thinks he has found a safe “pro-Town” vote that won’t draw much attention.
**
vote Zeriel**