# Scum mafia: On Cecil pond \[Game Over\] **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [January 24, 2010, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202 "2010-01-24T05:10:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 49
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2010, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/961 "2010-02-10T23:40:55Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > But while reviewing that post, I noticed that sache has changed his mind a bit on Rysto, since in post #813 he dismisses the case against Rysto at that time, yet today Rysto is on sache’s short list for getting a vote. A lot was said between then and now, but I’d like to hear you explain your change in tune, sache. No problem, my view did shift and I can see your missing it. I was originally not suspicious of Rysto for his view on Special Ed. My view was mainly because my perception was that bringing up PIS is a common occurrence in these games so I didn’t see the big deal in Rysto doing so. I questioned Drain Bead on it and her response was that in her experience scum are more likely to hang the PIS ‘scum tell’ on Townies. I had not considered this possibility. In a previous game, I (Town) made a ‘slip’ and got heat for it. I went back to look and see who was piling on the heat. Everyone who was pinning PIS on me as scummy were scum. Not a single Townie thought much about the statement, but scum made a big deal about it. As far as I know, “bringing up PIS as a scum tell being a scum tell” has not been brought up to any significant degree in our game population. Therefore, I feel that Drain Bead’s case against Rysto has merit. Somewhere in this thread is a summary of my findings in the Mini-Munchin Mafia game where I implied that storyteller and Squid were Town. You might want to look it up. Though, now that I think about it, I’m kind of surprised you didn’t notice the post on your own as you are mentioned by name in it. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2010, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/962 "2010-02-10T23:41:52Z")
This is going to take a while. Sach first. > [@sachertorte](#): > > This is more in line with what I would have expected from you Yesterday. You have a position, one that is being attacked, and all you did was whine about not wanting to discuss it anymore. I pointed out the, um, ‘lack of reasoning’ of your statement and you took offense. You flat out refused to defend the attacks on your position. _That is why I was suspicious of you_. You are stating your case now, and that is good, but the suspicion is not totally gone yet. I think the major thing that you are failing to take into this calculus is that while I believed and believe the double-lyse to be worth doing, I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal. I don’t think it’s a deal-breaker. I definitely _do_ think that the amount of time I spent discussing it impeded me (given that I have a finite amount of time to devote to this game) from doing things with more value. So I tried to drop it, because it was clear to me that no agreement was possible > [@](#): > > The fact that you don’t acknowledge the counter-arguments and make an attempt at proving those arguments wrong is problematic for me. _Why?_ > [@](#): > > And this attitude drives me nuts. I’m trying to understand you. Simply stating that we won’t resolve it so we shouldn’t talk about it sounds like avoidance. Don’t you see how that makes me want to cut you open and see if you have scummy insides? No, I don’t. Because we have a finite amount of time. Even now, here I am, still talking about this instead of talking about other things. How do you expect me to change your opinion of the value of finding Scum on Day One? I can’t, and I know this. It’s not like it’s a close thing, where half the Pond agrees with me and half the Pond agrees with you and we’re fighting over something that matters from a practical standpoint. We’re not going to double-lyse any time soon, because there’s zero support for it. Why does it matter so much to you if I, quietly in my corner, think we’re making a minor mistake? > [@](#): > > Well then, point that out! Have you been scum in all the games with fluiddruid? If so, tell us! That would be a fantastic thing to point out. I have no idea. Do you know how many games there have been? Is it really worth a research project on that scale to defend against a subjective charge of “your playstyle has changed,” which doesn’t prove anything _anyway_? > [@](#): > > My main concern was that you weren’t taking on the argument head on. If you truly believe that double-lysing was Pro-Town, my expectation was that you would argue as such with greater vigor and logic. Since you have not, I question your motives. I do not think you think double-lysing is strongly anti-Town, but I don’t think you think it is nearly as pro-town as you purport. I think it’s 100% Pro-Town. But I also think it’s a relatively minor point. I don’t know how else to explain it. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2010, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/963 "2010-02-10T23:55:52Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > No problem, my view did shift and I can see your missing it. > > I was originally not suspicious of Rysto for his view on Special Ed. My view was mainly because my perception was that bringing up PIS is a common occurrence in these games so I didn’t see the big deal in Rysto doing so. I questioned Drain Bead on it and her response was that in her experience scum are more likely to hang the PIS ‘scum tell’ on Townies. I had not considered this possibility. In a previous game, I (Town) made a ‘slip’ and got heat for it. I went back to look and see who was piling on the heat. Everyone who was pinning PIS on me as scummy were scum. Not a single Townie thought much about the statement, but scum made a big deal about it. > > As far as I know, “bringing up PIS as a scum tell being a scum tell” has not been brought up to any significant degree in our game population. Therefore, I feel that Drain Bead’s case against Rysto has merit. > > Somewhere in this thread is a summary of my findings in the Mini-Munchin Mafia game where I implied that storyteller and Squid were Town. You might want to look it up. Though, now that I think about it, I’m kind of surprised you didn’t notice the post on your own as you are mentioned by name in it. :dubious: I didn’t play in Mini-Munchkin and I’m not going to go read another game to try and make heads or tails of posts made in this one, so I could very well have skimmed past any reference to my name. Is it fair to say your tune has changed on Rysto because of what you consider reasonable meta-game precedents being presented then? ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/964 "2010-02-11T00:01:51Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > No, I don’t. Because we have a finite amount of time. Even now, here I am, still talking about this instead of talking about other things. Dude, multitask. It’s not that hard. > [@](#): > > How do you expect me to change your opinion of the value of finding Scum on Day One? I don’t expect you to convince me. I expect you to provide sufficient reasoning so that I can conclude, “eh, I disagree, but I see your point of view.” At the very least you could acknowledge the difference between number of lynches and number of Days and prove to me that you have some reason for equating the two. Even now you are avoiding the situation by lamenting your inability to convince me. That’s not the point. I want to hear the argument. I want to know that you have reason to believe what you say you believe. So far your arguments have been… lacking. > [@](#): > > I have no idea. Do you know how many games there have been? Is it really worth a research project on that scale to defend against a subjective charge of “your playstyle has changed,” which doesn’t prove anything _anyway_? Uh. YES! You yourself have made statements that minimize your encounters with fluiddruid saying you have only played a few games with her. Is it really that hard to figure out which games you played together and what alignments you both were? Seriously, that’s ONEROUS?!!! And WTF? You already implied that you were scum in a previous game with fluiddruid. Why are you simultaneously pulling facts out of your ass regarding previous games while lamenting that you won’t go back and fact check. Hell, if fluiddruid was pulling that card on me and I vaguely remember that I was scum in the game with fluiddruid, you bet your ass I’d go back and check. This entire exchange has me bewildered. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/965 "2010-02-11T00:06:18Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > I’m not entirely sure what you mean here, so I’ll respond to both interpretations. If you’re saying that you find it bizarre that I did not consider on Day One that ed could have non-scum PIS, while I was certainly aware of the possibility I felt that it was much, much less likely than scum PIS and voted accordingly. > > If you are saying that it’s bizarre that I did not consider non-scum PIS when I made post #807 on Day Two, then > a) I was explaining my reasoning from Day One, when of course I had no idea that ed was Town > b) I was trying very hard not to publicly speculate on what we could learn about the remaining masons from ed’s posts. story’s already taken me to task on this subject and he’s probably right that the scum could have easily worked it out on their own, but I’m a cautious player by nature and I don’t like to expose power roles if I can avoid it. My feelings are that while it probably won’t stop the scum from working things out, there’s always the chance that they’ll miss it so why make it easy on them? Heck, I was dropping cop tells left, right and centre in Batman and no scum seemed to catch them. I’m saying (as I said immediately after you made the statement) that making assumptions that any given Player is Town on Day 1 is a reasonable play on the odds, and that is how I parsed Story’s statements with respect to Scuba. Maybe it was that statement that caught the eye of Scum indicating that he could have been a Mason and bringing about his death, but that is not a foregone conclusion. There seems to be an understated consensus that Scuba is absent-T Pond, and probably a Communal Organism. While I am willing to acknowledge that possibility, I see no reason not to also consider otherwise. And that isn’t a call for Drain Bead to confirm or deny, I’m just explaining my thought process. Ed could have just been playing the odds in his “Assuming Scuba is town…” statement. I make statements like that all the time as a townie with no PIS, just working through hypotheticals. Short of him showing up and actually playing and convincing me of his Pondiness, flipping as Pond upon death, or being claimed by Drain, Scuba’s alignment will remain a big fat question mark in my book. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/966 "2010-02-11T00:06:25Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > I didn’t play in Mini-Munchkin and I’m not going to go read another game to try and make heads or tails of posts made in this one, so I could very well have skimmed past any reference to my name. Is it fair to say your tune has changed on Rysto because of what you consider reasonable meta-game precedents being presented then? Yes you were. The name is misleading, but its the one by Pleonast that had a D&D feel to it. You were a Druid of some sort that could blow items into the Hoard. I would not consider the case against Rysto “meta.” Drain Bead has asserted that scum are more likely to hang the PIS bogeyman on Townies. I fact checked this assertion. I found it to be true. Therefore I feel Drain Bead’s case against Rysto has merit. i.e., Rysto attacked Ed with a PIS attack. Scum like using PIS attacks. Therefore, Rysto is more likely to be scum. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/967 "2010-02-11T00:07:19Z")
That should say “That is how I parsed Ed’s statements with respect to Scuba.” ---
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/968 "2010-02-11T00:10:47Z")
So. I need to talk a bit about someone other than me. Three players have sort of spearheaded the pursuit of me: **sachertorte** , **fluiddruid** , and **Alka Seltzer**. First: I consider it wildly unlikely that all three are Scum, and extremely unlikely that more than one of them is. For two (more more!) Scum to engage in parallel pursuit like this would be a big risk. I also think it’s no better than even money that even _one_ of the three of them is Scum. That said, because I’ve spent the better part of my time in this game interacting with those three players, I’m going to start with them. **Alka Seltzer** is a huge problem for me. I don’t think it’s going to shock anyone if I say aloud that his playstyle and my own do not mesh. This is the case regardless of our respective alignments, and my frustration with that colors my ability to intelligently judge him. For this reason - and in spite of knowing that this is going to sound like a cop out - I defer to the rest of the Pond to consider him more closely. I have a bias that I cannot overcome, at least, not right now. **sach** , well, who knows? Nothing about his approach to me has struck me as particularly Scummy except for one thing - he has still not articulated what, exactly, he thinks is the (potential) Scum motivation underlying my actions. He has explained why he disagrees with me, and why I have frustrated him, but he hasn’t really made the connection that would explain active _suspicion._ But this is even more true of **fluiddruid**. Here’s the thing. The Scum player needs one thing during the Day: an argument that seems reasonable, that can support a vote, that won’t draw too much fire for being a bad argument. It doesn’t even have to be an argument that actually gets its target _lynched_; it just has to give the Scum player a chance to vote without looking bad. Now, there’s obviously a problem in most cases. In the majority of cases, Scum have to manufacture an argument. They have to argue something they don’t believe (that Player X, who they know to be Town, is actually Scum). It is far easier to argue something you actually _do_ believe (which is why voting for your fellows is an easier way to blend in than voting for Townies). But this double-lyse issue has given a great opportunity to the Scum. Most of them probably feel (as most of the players in this game appear to) that double-lysing would be anti-Town. So if they argue against me about this, they can argue their _actual_ beliefs, rather than having to make something up to argue that they don’t really believe. So here we have **fluiddruid**. I feel like she still doesn’t really know what she’s accusing me of. She’s floundering, trying to turn a strategy disagreement into a legitimate case. And it has the appearance of a good case, because she can nitpick every point I make and post two encyclopedic posts doing so. And it won’t be a controversial case, because most players disagree with me and it’s not hard to wave your hands around a little and create a connection in their minds between “I disagree” and “he’s scummy.” But still missing is any kind of Scum motivation. If you believe that I argued against my own true belief, then why? Why would I do this as Scum? What do you think I was trying to accomplish? **fluiddruid** has tried to handwave a couple of psuedo-explanations, but the motivations she’s trying to impute just make no sense. I’m arguing against my own beliefs on Day One so I can say I argued for this on Day One? What? Why? What is the master plan under which this makes any sense at all? And of course, if you think I believe what I’m saying - that double-lysing can be pro-Town under certain circumstances (a point fluid has explicitly conceded, by the way), and that Day One constituted one of those circumstances - then the case against me really falls apart. I think **fluid** had a slam dunk - argue against an unpopular idea, sprinkle a little pixie dust, and POOF, you have a vote that keeps you out of trouble (and maybe a vote that can bandwagon a Townie, but that’s incidental). But she didn’t really think it through, didn’t really figure out what she wanted to accuse me of doing, exactly, and now she’s floundering trying to invent a motivation where no rational one exists. And so: **vote fluiddruid** and, for now [color=blue **vote Spawn** [/color] * * * Regarding everyone else: I’ve been far too caught up in my own stupid stuff here, and I need to re-read for comprehension everything _else_ that’s happened. More in the morning, if I’m not buried in the snow. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/969 "2010-02-11T00:12:44Z")
Ah, the blow-hoard game. My mistake. Still not likely to go reviewing it to put those posts in full context, but thanks for the memory jiggle. And maybe I use meta-gaming too broadly, but I don’t think it is always a bad word. You are basing your conclusion on what has happened in other games. I consider citing precedents as meta-gaming, but reasonable meta-gaming. ---
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/970 "2010-02-11T00:13:03Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > I would not consider the case against Rysto “meta.” > Drain Bead has asserted that scum are more likely to hang the PIS bogeyman on Townies. > I fact checked this assertion. I found it to be true. > Therefore I feel Drain Bead’s case against Rysto has merit. i.e., Rysto attacked Ed with a PIS attack. Scum like using PIS attacks. Therefore, Rysto is more likely to be scum. Wait. How many other games did you check to reach this conclusion? Was it just Munchkin? Because that’s only one random cherry-picked data point. Or did you actually look at multiple games and find that Scum are more likely than Town to use PIS attacks? ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/971 "2010-02-11T00:58:37Z")
**vote fluiddruid** I backed off of my **Chronos** vote from Day One of whatever that game was we were in…Screamers? He turned out to be Scum. I’m glad to see the case I started way back when is picking up some momentum. I just hope my intuition is as good as it was back then. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/972 "2010-02-11T01:06:04Z")
Vote total: Spawn 14 fluiddruid 4 KellyCriterion 3 Mahaloth 3 storyteller0910 2 Rysto 1 [del]1: special ed[/del] 2: ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies – Spawn (727) 3: Drain Bead – Spawn (737), [del]Rysto[/del] (785-909), fluiddruid (971) 4: Oredigger77 – Spawn (717), fluiddruid (949) 5: storyteller0910 – fluiddruid (968), Spawn (968) 6: Meeko – Spawn (715), [del]KellyCriterion[/del] (824-874) 7: Mahaloth – Spawn (721), KellyCriterion (778) 8: Freudian Slit – Spawn (718), Rysto (802) 9: USCDiver – Spawn (749) 10: Alka Seltzer – Spawn (821), Storyteller (900) [del]11: peekercpa[/del] 12: Natlaw – KellyCriterion (886) 13: Zeriel – [del]Drain Bead[/del] (796-901), KellyCriterion (796), Spawn (901) 14: DiggitCamara – [del]Drain Bead[/del] (795-894) 15: amrussell – [del]Drain Bead[/del] (867-880), Mahaloth (959) 16: KellyCriterion – Spawn (740), Mahaloth (838) 17: Scuba\_Ben 18: sachertorte – Mahaloth (860), Spawn (864) 19: fluiddruid – Spawn (804), storyteller (851) 20: TexCat – Spawn (722) 21: Rysto – Spawn (917), fluid (917) ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/973 "2010-02-11T01:17:48Z")
> [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > **@Mahaloth** - Where do you stand on the Drain and Story claims? Uh, exactly as I stated _earlier_? I’ll quote myself(this is weird): > [@Mahaloth](#): > > 1. I believe Drain Bead is a mason. Obviously, I’m not 100%, but I think lysing him today is not the best move. If I’m reading it correctly, he is saying the game had a total of 2 masons, with one dead. Is that about right for a game of 21 players? > > 2. I kind of believe the vigilante claim. Not sure, and I’m wondering what the drawback is, but I lean toward believing it for now. Now, give me a bit and I’ll review and come back with some thoughts. ---
**Author:** ![TexCat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/texcat/32/9041_2.png) [@TexCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TexCat)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/974 "2010-02-11T01:29:36Z")
I’ve caught up again. No one is really standing out for me. I guess I’m going to have another read and hopefully find a vote with some kind of justification before morning. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/975 "2010-02-11T01:36:37Z")
> [@storyteller](#): > > Here’s the thing. The Scum player needs one thing during the Day: an argument that seems reasonable, that can support a vote, that won’t draw too much fire for being a bad argument. It doesn’t even have to be an argument that actually gets its target lynched; it just has to give the Scum player a chance to vote without looking bad. Explain to me though, how this differs (aside from intent and PI) from what most players are also trying to do? Humor me if you have to, as it is just that little niggle of doubt in the back of my neck that we’re about to lynch fluiddruid and be wrong. However, Fluid ping’d me back on what I considered her unnecessary, illogical, emotional and potentially baiting post about voting for peeker because she doesn’t like playing with him. I’ve stated as much previously but have been trying to let that exchange lie and see what else turns up. For the most part I agree with storyteller’s unsettling-and-eloquent-a-usual assessment. I also don’t recall fluid ever being so long-winded and Rooshian, but that is a minor point. What doesn’t make sense to me, and what dovetails into story’s thesis that it is manufactured smoke and mirrors, is a player feeling so confident in a case against another player as to devote so much time and energy to putting together such a wall of words on Day 2. Mid-game or end-game, sure, but now? Not only is it so much of her time but potentially so much of the Pond’s time as well, where diligent Pondies trying to make informed decisions will try and read through each wordy and academic paragraph, only to find yet another rehash of a marginally compelling case against an unpopular strategy. **Vote fluiddruid** ---
**Author:** ![Meeko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Meeko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meeko)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/976 "2010-02-11T01:42:33Z")
> [@TexCat](#): > > I’ve caught up again. No one is really standing out for me. I guess I’m going to have another read and hopefully find a vote with some kind of justification before morning. That makes two of us. But, I mentioned that this game would go the way of Execution and Ostracizion. But, I was told I was wrong. While I am re-reading : Story, if you aren’t going to Vig, the very least you can do is tell us your drawback. I wonder if your drawback would have an interesting interaction if you offed yourself\*. \*\*\* I mean this in the Old School waaaay out side of the box, Meeko sense, not in the “I wish you would go ahead and off yourself!” sense. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/977 "2010-02-11T01:43:32Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > **sach** , well, who knows? Nothing about his approach to me has struck me as particularly Scummy except for one thing - he has still not articulated what, exactly, he thinks is the (potential) Scum motivation underlying my actions. He has explained why he disagrees with me, and why I have frustrated him, but he hasn’t really made the connection that would explain active _suspicion._ Huh? I find you suspicious. When did we create a high bar for that state? I find your play perplexing, _which makes me suspicious of you_. That I can’t fully figure out a master scum plan isn’t really needed to be suspicious of you. I fully reject the implication that one is necessary. When we move towards killing you then you have more reason to complain. I’m not going to put aside my suspicion of you simply because I can’t read your mind. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/978 "2010-02-11T01:54:34Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > Wait. How many other games did you check to reach this conclusion? Was it just Munchkin? Because that’s only one random cherry-picked data point. > > Or did you actually look at multiple games and find that Scum are more likely than Town to use PIS attacks? Wait. Let me get this right. You, who refuse to look up information are accusing me of cherry-picking data because I only looked at one game instance? The reasoning is clear: I _remember_ Mini-Munchkin because it happened to me. If anyone wants to offer additional data he or she is welcome to do so. Let’s go over the order of events again… slowly. (1) I questioned Drain Bead’s take on Rysto. i.e., I thought she was full of shit. (2) She explained her reasoning. (3) I checked to see if her reasoning had support. (4) I found support. (5) I conclude that my assessment that Drain Bead is full of shit is full of shit. Mini-Munchkin is _supporting_ evidence. It doesn’t _prove_ anything. Well, that’s not entirely true, to me it proved that Drain Bead had a leg to stand on. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/979 "2010-02-11T02:06:27Z")
Oh, and I find it interesting that storyteller demands a scum motivation simply for suspecting him, but offers none for fluiddruid in his case against her. Why would fluiddruid zig when everyone else was zagging regarding peeker? What is the scum motivation for making her vote personal rather than perfunctory? Why would fluiddruid create an elaborate case against storyteller? Why not a weak terse vote and duck behind Alka Seltzer and me? What is the scum motivation? If storyteller is Town, then the elaborate case is going to garner suspicion for fluiddruid. Is fluiddruid trying to protect someone? Why is fluiddruid sticking her neck out at all? I’m actually fine lynching fluiddruid without answering these questions. I just put them here to make a point. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/980 "2010-02-11T02:13:43Z")
An elaborate case demands time to read and digest and distracts from analysis elsewhere. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202.md?page=48) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202.md?page=50)