Genre Fiction Mafia

[Normal_Phase]

@Mahaloth

Then we disagree. I think poking people then stepping back to watch their reaction is a scummy way to stir up the pot. I think gnarly knew this, so he changed it to “poke holes in arguments” which sounds a lot better.

I’ll buy that he might have changed his wording according to your perception, but I continue to think your own argument is essentially semantic.

[Stanislaus]

@Pleonast

vote gnarlycharlie
for voting for a player they’re not suspicious of. Townies need to vote for players they think are scum.

I still need to go back and catch up on the rest of Day One. I’ll likely be changing my vote then.

Do you think that gnarlycharlie is scum?

[Pleonast]

@Stanislaus

@Pleonast

vote gnarlycharlie
for voting for a player they’re not suspicious of. Townies need to vote for players they think are scum.

I still need to go back and catch up on the rest of Day One. I’ll likely be changing my vote then.

Do you think that gnarlycharlie is scum?

Sorry, I should have been more explicit. “Townies need to vote for players they think are scum” is the contrapositive of “players not voting for who they think are scum are not town”. So yes, I think charlie is likely scum because of their vote.

[Stanislaus]

Wait what?

If gnarly is town, then he’s not voting for someone he thinks is scum, so therefore he’s scum.

Joseph Heller called - he wants his Catch-22 back.

[Mahaloth]

@Normal_Phase

I’ll buy that he might have changed his wording according to your perception, but I continue to think your own argument is essentially semantic.

Might? According to my perception? My argument is not semantic.

And I see no reason for you think it is.

[Astral_Rejection]

I mentioned this before, but I’m on Normal’s side here. I find gnarly pretty suspicious over all, but I’m just not seeing this particular issue.

You said that you poke people and step back to watch reactions. When challenged on this, you tried to say that you poke holes in arguments which is quite different than poking people for reactions.

Would you say that poking people can include attacking their arguments? I feel that poking someone’s argument can be the same thing as poking someone. How else could they do it?

There’s plenty to find scummy about gnarly, but this just isn’t it (in my opinion).

[Stanislaus]

@Pleonast

Sorry, I should have been more explicit. “Townies need to vote for players they think are scum” is the contrapositive of “players not voting for who they think are scum are not town”. So yes, I think charlie is likely scum because of their vote.

No, it’s not. “Townies need to vote for players they think are scum” is a statement about good gameplay - about how things should be. “Players not voting for whom they think are scum are not town” is in the form of a hard and fast rule - a statement about the way things are. You can’t get from an ought to an is.

More importantly, you’ve played more than enough games to know that this just isn’t true. Town have a long and inglorious history of voting for players because they’re being disruptive, or they’ve done something silly. You may not like it. You may think they need not to do it. But you should know better than to declare that they don’t do it, and that therefore this behaviour is clear evidence of scumosity. I think this is a policy vote in disguise. And I would urge you not to make those, because town should vote for players they think are scum.

[Mahaloth]

@Astral_Rejection

There’s plenty to find scummy about gnarly, but this just isn’t it (in my opinion).

:snipped and underlined by me:

Then I guess I disagree with you and Normal.

[Normal_Phase]

Takes a village to make the world go 'round, and all that.

[Normal_Phase]

Question for Silver Jan:

@Silver_Jan

It just worries me that Astral could forget his alignment and is it possible that there is a third faction? Ok, to my answer my own question, it is possible but is it likely?

Why ask about a third faction here? I think this was prior to Stanislaus’ argument – what were you thinking that you said this?

[Zeriel]

@Pleonast

Sorry, I should have been more explicit. “Townies need to vote for players they think are scum” is the contrapositive of “players not voting for who they think are scum are not town”. So yes, I think charlie is likely scum because of their vote.

@Stanislaus

More importantly, you’ve played more than enough games to know that this just isn’t true. Town have a long and inglorious history of voting for players because they’re being disruptive, or they’ve done something silly. You may not like it. You may think they need not to do it. But you should know better than to declare that they don’t do it, and that therefore this behaviour is clear evidence of scumosity. I think this is a policy vote in disguise. And I would urge you not to make those, because town should vote for players they think are scum.

**Stanislaus **is right here. Can we not let this turn into a discussion of what’s a policy vote vs. what’s a good scum-hunting rule?

[Tom_Scud]

Ed review (and he had 76 posts in one day? Yeesh.):

129 - handshake attempt
142 - confirms wincon is as per 2nd edition sample PM
146 - fluff
181-2 - queries Astral on how he could miss Raftdwelling Slumlords in his alignment field
185: hypothesizes Astral was Scum & surprised to see a second scummy-sounding faction mentioned
190: continues querying Astral
216-7 - responding to Stanislaus who says Astral is most likely 3rd party

@special_ed

No, it makes just as much sense if not more were he Scum.

He knows he’s a member of ALE. He sees this CARS faction mentioned and wants to make sure Town pays attention to them as well. Or he actually genuinely thought there might be a 3rd faction besides his own

231 - accuses Astral of fabricating fake PM
241-2 - asks Astral how he came to think there was a 3rd party based on that PM
245 quote

@special_ed

Here you were ‘guessing’ there were 3rd party who would not communicate.

Also, here you seem to think the 3rd party members are a part of the ALE. Which your PM indicates you can detect. Yet you’re a weak detective who cannot detect them.
Vote: Astral

282 fluff
290 further explains vote reasoning
296 - counterqueries Hirka
297,299 fluff
301 - notes plausible scummy explanation for Astral to claim a different wincon
368 - response to Normal vote on Gnarly - reasons to not vote suspicions esp. in hammer game
369 - re Hirka not knowing who to vote for: scum tell?
380-1 - disagrees w/ SisCo re: above
379 - quote to Pleo

@special_ed

Since you’ve gone metagame how about providing a breaktown

Out of those 9 times, how many times were you lying and how many time were you honest? How does that correlate with your alignment?

384 semifluff
388 - queries gnarl’s vote history - early or late?
401 - queries Astral re: night 0 PM exchange
402 - defends handshake/claim to SisCo - speculates on Pleo
405 - explains handshake to Weedy
408 - notes always thinks SisCo is scummy

(side issue - I disagree with Maha on his interpretation of gnarly’s 410)

419 - queries Maha re: gnarly
429-433 - restates case on Astral
438 - agrees with Normal

@special_ed

That’s a good point.

He knew his PM didn’t match the published one, but he didn’t notice it enough to see that he needed to eliminate the threats to the team that was his own alignment.

442 - further with SisCo re: his “claim” or not
444 - semifluff
448 - partial review of Pleo history - not completed afaik
472 - semifluff re review
488 - places Astral’s & Sister’s claims sidebyside
507 - unvotes Astral after Normal vouches for similar formatting
519 - semifluff
529 - to SisCo: “why do you continue to avoid Scum hunting?”
535, 547,548 - semifluff to Pleo
572 - to Tom: weak cop might not provoke counterclaim, also role claim has to indicate alignment only team
573 - thinks weak cop could also indicate third-party power
579, 592, 593 - cont. 572,3

Worth noting that the above were direct interaction with me; someone else may want to review and see if I’m eliding some element of suspicion that would have led scum-me to want ed gone soonest

591, 597 - thinks Jan’s vote on gnarly at 581 is possibly a Scum hemming and hawing
603 - votes Fubble with little comment
609-610 - further on fubble vote
616 queries Jan re her 615 (and unvote of gnarly)

623 - semifluff
643, 646 back n forth with fubble
677,679 (night) - speculates on forensic scientist role.

Notes: he put pressure on Astral, obviously, but also Jan, Pleo, and to a lesser extent Hirka. Possibly was killed to remove said pressure; possibly was killed because scum thought he might be a forensic scientist (per night speculation); possibly just killed because hey it’s ed, he’s a good player.

His examination of Pleo’s past claims was unfinished.

Not sure where to go from there.

[nesta]

@Tom_Scud

Ed review (and he had 76 posts in one day? Yeesh.):

[snip review]

Notes: he put pressure on Astral, obviously, but also Jan, Pleo, and to a lesser extent Hirka. Possibly was killed to remove said pressure; possibly was killed because scum thought he might be a forensic scientist (per night speculation); possibly just killed because hey it’s ed, he’s a good player.

His examination of Pleo’s past claims was unfinished.

Not sure where to go from there.

I agree that it’s important to look back through ed’s posts, but we have to be careful about assigning any motivation to why he was killed – it’s wifom all the way down. His suspicions, on the other hand, we now know were legitimate.

[Zeriel]

Thank god my damn new motherboard works now. Will be around more often once the RAID array rebuilds.

[Trepa_Mayfield]

Sorry I haven’t posted in a bit–thought Nights were Fluff-Only, and then I got caught up in an archive binge.

I don’t find the cases on either gnarlycharlie or Astral Rejection convincing, but (and correct me if I’m wrong) it’s not an either-or thing.

I’m voting for
Vote: Pleonast
again. His actions look more scummy now than they did before what with fubbleskag flipping town.

[nesta]

gnarlycharlie, voting for yourself is a distraction. You say you are doing it because you are disappointed in people’s reasoning in voting for you. Either it’s a manipulative “pity me” scum play, or you are really town and that frustrated. Either way it’s anti-town.

@gnarlycharlie

[snip]

i will NOT unvote for the rest of the Day even to save myself. i will continue with the limited time i have to contribute and share my thoughts. i may even ‘vote’ even if they will note count ala Pleo or just FOS.

with that i continue to pack. good day!

@gnarlycharlie

okay, let’s be clear. i’m NOT giving up on the game. it is my most strenuous way of expressing my disappointment in people’s reasoning.

[snip]

i think i’ve already addressed #s 1 to 4. as for #5, i’m still packing and unable to reread D1. i have a few more days this Day so i will definitely contribute after our move. but i still will not unvote.

[bolding mine]

Why are you so adamant that you won’t unvote yourself Today? What if you find someone you are convinced is scum?

[Red_Skeezix]

Correction: The Hammer for today is 12 not 10.

[Silver_Jan]

@Normal_Phase

Question for Silver Jan:

Why ask about a third faction here? I think this was prior to Stanislaus’ argument – what were you thinking that you said this?

I was just asking a question, do you think it’s likely that there is a Third Faction? Inner Stickler actually mentioned a Third Party when talking about** Astral** in post 147. I have never played a game with a Third Party wincon. (I might be confusing Factions and Parties here because this is new to me) I have played a game with 4 Factions but we were told about that up front. So what I really wanted to ask is: do you think it is likely that there could be a single player with their own wincon?

[Stanislaus]

@Silver_Jan

I was just asking a question, do you think it’s likely that there is a Third Faction? Inner Stickler actually mentioned a Third Party when talking about** Astral** in post 147. I have never played a game with a Third Party wincon. (I might be confusing Factions and Parties here because this is new to me) I have played a game with 4 Factions but we were told about that up front. So what I really wanted to ask is: do you think it is likely that there could be a single player with their own wincon?

There have been many games that did have single players with their own wincon. As this is a closed game, it’s impossible to say how likely it is that we have one - but it would not be unprecedented. Usually (in the vast majority of cases) third parties don’t steal the win - they can achieve their wincon in parallel to one or other of the two main factions.

However, it’s also not worth worrying about. As we don’t know anything about any putative third party, we don’t know what they’ll be trying to achieve. This makes it difficult to go looking for them. We do know what scum are trying to achieve, so it makes sense to focus on them.

[Silver_Jan]

Thanks Stanislaus, it was a question that I had asked quite early on day 1, mainly for something to talk about but Normal wanted an answer as to why I had asked it. I think he was wondering why I brought it up first when in fact, I hadn’t.