# 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:** 53
**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, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1041 "2010-02-11T17:47:15Z")
By the way, you guys really know how to keep a moderator busy with the vote-counting. There were a heck of a lot of votes, unvotes, and vote changes this past page or so. Which of course increases the likelihood that I’ve made a mistake somewhere, so please, everyone, double-check both the votes you’re casting, and those against you. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1042 "2010-02-11T17:50:54Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > Holy Christ, yes, ON WEDNESDAY. I SAID I WOULD BE AWAY ON WEDNESDAY. Well, you were around yesterday…though it seems most of your posting was in the evening. I don’t know, it just seems like you claimed because you wouldn’t be around to post and yet being away hasn’t hampered you. Sorry–I don’t mean to push the point too hard. I’m just wondering why claiming so early was important to you…it seems like if anything, the claim has gotten you more votes. ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1043 "2010-02-11T18:13:05Z")
I’m struggling to keep up with the posts today, and don’t know what the hell to make of the vote swings. Late lynches really hurt town. Story’s defence seems to centre around the argument that he wouldn’t have argued for a double player lyse so forcefully if he was scum, and that he wouldn’t have argued it so forcefully if he didn’t believe it was pro-town. There are a couple problems with this. If ‘scum motivation’ is the benchmark for finding scum, you will only find scum who are playing to plan which you successfully identify among the sea of false positives and imperfect information. It’s a very useful useful question to ask “why would scum do this”, but it’s not a reliable indicator. I got burned by this in the last game. As to the other half of his argument, every time a scum player makes a case against a townie, they are arguing something they know isn’t true. It’s not a big stretch to think scum might argue strategy they don’t objectively believe in. It is odd that a scum or 3rd party Storyteller would play as he has, but I can see possible reasons. There might be some hidden aspect to the spawn mechanism that makes it worth the risk. it could be an attempt to cause a distraction, or an elaborate act of distancing, or he might be trying to protect a scum power role. Looking at it the other way, I don’t see any pro-town motivation for Story’s actions (that is also a useful metric to apply to players). Therefore, there is a good chance that he is not town. In this post: > [@storyteller0910](#): > > 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 > > **vote Spawn** Story is arguing that it’s unlikely that more than one of me, Fluid and Sachertorte are scum, and that he thinks that it’s no better than even money that one of us is scum. That looks like an analysis post to me, he gives us his reasoning and places his vote accordingly, although I do note he placed it on Fluid, who had some votes against her at this point (I’d need to check to see how many). A bit later, and Story is now voting for Fluid and Sach, which contradicts his own analysis. What exactly changed between these two points? ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1044 "2010-02-11T18:16:02Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Well, you were around yesterday…though it seems most of your posting was in the evening. I don’t know, it just seems like you claimed because you wouldn’t be around to post and yet being away hasn’t hampered you. Sorry–I don’t mean to push the point too hard. I’m just wondering why claiming so early was important to you…it seems like if anything, the claim has gotten you more votes. On this, I don’t think it’s a good idea to question absences for out of game reasons. Plans change, etc. If we went down this route we’d never stop. ---
**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, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1045 "2010-02-11T18:20:05Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > If I kill, neither the role nor the alignment of the player I kill will be publicly revealed. Really? \*\*This seems like an advantage for Vig. Not a drawback. \*\* I mean, you get a 100% free shot here. No one can harbor any grudge against you. If you are intent on Vigging someone anyway, that is all that matters. Not having information shouldn’t concern you in the least. It’s information after the fact. It doesn’t change how you felt for them before. I never, ever got the joke, where people eat something “Oh, I’ve never had rocky mountain oysters. This is pretty good, what are they again?” And then they puke. \*\*As if knowing the ingredients changed the taste. \*\* \*\* Unvote Story\*\* Thanks for wasting my time. \*\*Vote Scuba Ben \*\* Even if he will get subbed, I never got an answer, and I feel my vote on him at this point is better than not voting at all. ---
**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, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1046 "2010-02-11T18:21:50Z")
\*\*NETA: That was, a question asked to Chronos over what we were doing with him, and if votes on him [Scuba] would be worthwhile at all. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1047 "2010-02-11T18:25:30Z")
But won’t **not** having the information after the fact be annoying for us, town, as we don’t know who anyone is? A death is only worth what info we can glean from it. ---
**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, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1048 "2010-02-11T18:31:14Z")
I forgot about third parties. Power confirmation won’t do much to prove alignment. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1049 "2010-02-11T18:32:53Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > Holy Christ, yes, ON WEDNESDAY. I SAID I WOULD BE AWAY ON WEDNESDAY. > > I’ve changed my mind again; I’m done with this Day. Lynch me or don’t, but the fact that people are just flat out doing shit like **Freudian** just did makes it clear that I’m getting lynched. > > If I kill, neither the role nor the alignment of the player I kill will be publicly revealed. > > Now kill me, please. > > Storyteller, out. We’re currently tied, so it could go either way, but you know, I still don’t understand why you’ve avoided my questions (among others’) and this doesn’t clarify it for me at all. Assuming I die, and you live… I’d really like to know why this negative was so insurmountable that you couldn’t answer unrelated questions. You’ve certainly posted enough in volume, so it can’t be a time issue; maybe you think I’m scum, and therefore you’re hoping not to discuss it. Either way, it looks like it’s you or me, and if you survive, I think you need to do some serious ‘splainin’. Again: - Why do you insist on voting late? - Why did you say that you feel like you should have claimed on Day One? - How are we supposed to verify your claims? - Why do you keep avoiding these questions? ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1050 "2010-02-11T18:34:11Z")
Meeko, this is the second time you’ve changed your vote to force a tie. What the hell do you think that you’re doing? ---
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1051 "2010-02-11T18:34:52Z")
> [@Meeko](#): > > That was, a question asked to Chronos over what we were doing with him, and if votes on him [Scuba] would be worthwhile at all. And it has been answered twice! > [@Chronos](#): > > Quoth **Alka Seltzer** :Just to clarify: This is still Summer 2. If Scuba remains inactive until the end of the Summer, I will attempt to replace him, not to kill him. Inactivity on any future Summer, or if I can’t find a replacement, will result in a mod-kill. > [@Chronos](#): > > There is no “letting” anyone be mod-killed or replaced. If a player meets the objective criterion to be removed from the game, I will remove them. If they don’t, I won’t. I don’t like having discretion over something like that, as a moderator. ---
**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, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1052 "2010-02-11T18:35:24Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > But won’t **not** having the information after the fact be annoying for us, town, as we don’t know who anyone is? A death is only worth what info we can glean from it. Compared to all of what I thought it was, the “Drawback” is very, very minor. Even if Story get’s NKd tonight, then at least it means we wont be further gone than if he misviggs and was NKd as well. If we keep voting spawn, I don’t see anything wrong with the drawback. It would just shorten our game by a year. There have been games where Vigs have done worse. [[Sorry Peeker]] That being said, it’s not like Story has vigged yet. We can glean information before he shoots. If we reamain unlucky, it will get down to a certain point where Story’s odds will be good enough to use it. We have all played games where people subbed out, were modkilled, or just stopped playing. I don’t see a Vig kill with out identification as any worse than those. Again, I think it’s better than. Story, do not tell us if you are a One Shot vig or not. Keep Scum guessing on that. ---
**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, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1053 "2010-02-11T18:40:28Z")
> [@Natlaw](#): > > And it has been answered twice! So, at the time we will know if votes on Scuba count or not, will be the exact moment we can’t vote or unvote him. Even if he is replaced, the Role is what we are voting, not the Player. Given the time of the day, I’m keeping the vote on Scuba. Join me if you want, but I can find no better “Safe” move than this. ---
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1054 "2010-02-11T18:43:32Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > OK, this is getting frustrating. Is anyone actually reading my posts, in their zeal to try to identify magical inconsistencies? > > The difference between a double-lynch and a Night One Vig kill, I think should be pretty easy to identify. The one is a lynch and the other is a Vig kill. Yes, no direct vote record from a vigilante kill was brought up by (I believe) **Oredigger** Summer One. That is why I specifically mention someone who had defended and claimed - I perhaps should have said ‘claimed because in danger of a lynch’ to be clearer. Take this Summer for example - would there really be a difference between a double lynch of **fluiddruid** and you or lynching one and a vigilante taking out the other (ignoring that you claimed vigilante, just the situation of a close lynch early game). I don’t see much of a difference except that if the lynched one flips scum, the vigilante can decide not to kill. ---
**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, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1055 "2010-02-11T18:43:33Z")
It was nice playing with you and feeling like I generally understood what you were talking about, Meeko. While it lasted, at least. ---
**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, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1056 "2010-02-11T18:44:03Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > Meeko, this is the second time you’ve changed your vote to force a tie. What the hell do you think that you’re doing? Trying to tread water. or Would you rather me to keep my vote on a Town Story? I’m not so sure any one player can “force” a tie with the Spawn voting in play. Going for a smudge here Rysto? Perhaps you know something about ties that I don’t? ---
**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, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1057 "2010-02-11T18:46:11Z")
Why are you so certain that story is town? There is a lack of paranoia there that troubles me, especially since you were just voting for storyteller. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1058 "2010-02-11T18:47:47Z")
> [@Meeko](#): > > I’m not so sure any one player can “force” a tie with the Spawn voting in play. Going for a smudge here Rysto? > > Perhaps you know something about ties that I don’t? Ties are resolved randomly. Chronos has said this multiple times. ---
**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, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1059 "2010-02-11T18:49:25Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > It was nice playing with you and feeling like I generally understood what you were talking about, Meeko. While it lasted, at least. 😕😕 Story told us what his drawback was, and I simply stated that I don’t consider it to be a drawback at all. I consider him further to be Town, and I don’t want to lyse Town. I only have one [ok two] vote in all of this. How do I become the guilty party all of a sudden. If you can’t understand me, ask for specific clarification. This not only helps me, it helps you avoid smudges. If you think I am being Scummy, vote for me then. As it stands right now, I am trying to make heads or tails out of all of the bull\_\_\_t that is going on in the game about hypotheticals and what not. I am trying to play the best game I know how. I unvoted someone that now believe is Town. How does that make me a bad person? \*\* Someone help me out here. I Don’t understand you guys. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202/1060 "2010-02-11T18:49:30Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > Ties are resolved randomly. Chronos has said this multiple times. Yep. Adding a random Spawn vote affects forcing a tie not at all; it’s randomly decided either way. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202.md?page=52) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scum-mafia-on-cecil-pond-game-over/526202.md?page=54)