Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cheeetar]

Cheeetar:

I wouldn't be able to link you to a specific play, no- I'd probably have trouble linking you to an aggressive play that helped town win as well, without going back and reading through games I've played. I'd say, yes, reactive play does help avoid lynching the wrong people. The good guys tend to be reactive- police wait for people to commit crimes before arresting them, and so on. Aggressively questioning people can make them implicate themselves, but so can analysing the posts they make, and even townies can say stupid things that seems suspicious if they feel under pressure.

Have you had much trouble in games, with a more 'reactive' style of play being taken as a more 'passive' one, and thus being seen as Scummy?  If this was to happen in the future, how would you prefer to resolve the concern?

I don't think I've had major problems with it in the past, no. I'd resolve the concern like I'm resolving it with you now- explaining what I'm doing. If that isn't sufficient, and you feel you'd ought to lynch me for what I see as a valid way of playing town, then I personally think you'd be being scummy by trying to find an excuse (any excuse) to lynch somebody.

[notquitethere]

Imp

How do you intend to distinguish when a player who cannot (or will not) follow up on their questions is currently aligned as Town or Scum?  Do you see such players becoming something of a policy lynch for you?

How do you envision a player legitimately not being able to follow up on their questions? If someone is short on time it's fine for them to post less. But just going through the motions and asking questions just for the sake of it and not with any hunting-agenda is scummy. I wouldn't go so far as to say policy-lynch-worthy. Not everyone is an effective player and a lot of regular town will just go through the motions at the start of the game as they don't know what else to do. More, that negligence at following is a black mark and enough such marks are building blocks towards a case.

[Imp]

Imp

How do you intend to distinguish when a player who cannot (or will not) follow up on their questions is currently aligned as Town or Scum?  Do you see such players becoming something of a policy lynch for you?

How do you envision a player legitimately not being able to follow up on their questions? If someone is short on time it's fine for them to post less. But just going through the motions and asking questions just for the sake of it and not with any hunting-agenda is scummy. I wouldn't go so far as to say policy-lynch-worthy. Not everyone is an effective player and a lot of regular town will just go through the motions at the start of the game as they don't know what else to do. More, that negligence at following is a black mark and enough such marks are building blocks towards a case.

This quote expresses really clearly what I'm trying to ask about.

I WON'T change my playstyle so drop it.

Then wouldn't the proper response be to LYNCH YOU EVERY TIME UNTIL YOU LEARN BETTER OR STOP JOINING GAMES?

... That's right. I went there.

I'm in the middle of deciding what I think about this, what I think about someone who plays scummily and may do so regardless of their role each game.

I don't see someone being unable to follow up on their questions as legitimate play, but for some it could be legitimate error, akin to a newbie mistake regardless of if they're newbie or not.  If a player consistently fails to create a plan of follow up (unless they get an answer they can recognize as suspicious) and has other weaknesses in their play, then that player's likely to be an early lynch over and over again each time they are tested for those criteria.  That's great for when that player's Scum but if someone make the same choices for the same reasons when playing as Town - some people do that and seem likely to do that every game they play.  Some are also intentionally resistant about trying to change their playstyle.

What are your thoughts on this, are such playstyles a strong lynch pick now for the same reasons they were a strong lynch pick in previous games, given that the playstyle has not changed and the player shows it regardless of their role?

[TolyK]

Bah, post is on another computer.

Will hopefully post in a bit.

[TolyK]

TolyK:

First thoughts: Why Do People Think I'm Good At This Game?!

Twitter Mafia.

Oh, that. Well, AFAIR that was just a clusterfuck at the end. XD
And you played better than me, esp. since you more or less coordinated the whole deal.

TolyK:

TolyK - I have not seen you around much, but as I understand it you are a bit of a veteran. How do you define your own gameplay?

Well, it's unusual, since I don't like asking many questions, I don't like voting for people unless I'm pretty sure they're scum, and I try to pull shenanigans in role-heavy games that sometimes work. And I like to joke around sometimes. TLDR: pretty bad XD

Are you using this answer to cover yourself if people start accusing you?

Well, that was my plan. >.> [/joke]
I'm basically saying my tendencies so that people don't get the wrong impression.

Birdy, Imp and Iqovian: If you were all one scum team and the one to the left of you (for Birdy this is Iqo) had a claim that was about to get proven wrong, what would you do?

Assuming we're not absolutely reliant on Imp for our wincon, and it's Imp's fault (the claim isn't based on something Birdy or I provably did), join the masses trying to lynch him, and furiously work in scum chat to get them out of it.

So, basically, bus the guy while trying to rebuff the accusation. Gotcha.

[TolyK]

For those curious on why I asked this, it was to get insight on how the three people (that I haven't seen before) say would act.

TolyK:

Birdy, Imp and Iqovian: If you were all one scum team and the one to the left of you (for Birdy this is Iqo) had a claim that was about to get proven wrong, what would you do?

I'd need to know more details to give you any real answer.  How do I know his counterclaim is about to be proven wrong?  what's the state of the game; how is each player interacting with the others, especially in terms of scumpicks or outward cooperation with each other?  In general though, I'd be working to achieve my wincon, and I'd do so in the most effective way I could find based on everything I knew and could understand about the circumstances of the game.

TolyK:

Birdy, Imp and Iqovian: If you were all one scum team and the one to the left of you (for Birdy this is Iqo) had a claim that was about to get proven wrong, what would you do?

I suppose you are a bit similar to me in some respects then! In the recent past I have had issues with voting willy-nilly. Now I'm just trying to use it to highlight who I trust the least. Shenanigans are always fun though!

Now, as per your question. I tend to see myself as a person who busses aggressively when pressed. If Iqovian makes digs himself a pit, it's his job to get out of it. In a situation where I know that my partner just dug his own grave with a potentially disastrous claim, I have no issue with calling him out on it. If he's going to die, I may as well make myself look pretty.

However, I may also try to leave an out or a counter against me.  While I wear a combative face against them , I'm also just as likely to be plotting for some kind of method that they might save themselves with in the scum chat.

Birdy, Imp and Iqovian: If you were all one scum team and the one to the left of you (for Birdy this is Iqo) had a claim that was about to get proven wrong, what would you do?

Assuming we're not absolutely reliant on Imp for our wincon, and it's Imp's fault (the claim isn't based on something Birdy or I provably did), join the masses trying to lynch him, and furiously work in scum chat to get them out of it.

Basically, Iqovian and Birdy would bus, while Imp seems unsure. Will report some more later.

[notquitethere]

Imp

This quote expresses really clearly what I'm trying to ask about.

I WON'T change my playstyle so drop it.

Then wouldn't the proper response be to LYNCH YOU EVERY TIME UNTIL YOU LEARN BETTER OR STOP JOINING GAMES?

... That's right. I went there.

I'm in the middle of deciding what I think about this, what I think about someone who plays scummily and may do so regardless of their role each game.

I don't see someone being unable to follow up on their questions as legitimate play, but for some it could be legitimate error, akin to a newbie mistake regardless of if they're newbie or not.  If a player consistently fails to create a plan of follow up (unless they get an answer they can recognize as suspicious) and has other weaknesses in their play, then that player's likely to be an early lynch over and over again each time they are tested for those criteria.  That's great for when that player's Scum but if someone make the same choices for the same reasons when playing as Town - some people do that and seem likely to do that every game they play.  Some are also intentionally resistant about trying to change their playstyle.

What are your thoughts on this, are such playstyles a strong lynch pick now for the same reasons they were a strong lynch pick in previous games, given that the playstyle has not changed and the player shows it regardless of their role?

Yeah, that's why I'm not in favour of policy lynches: some players struggle to present themselves and unfortunately a lot of them (like Diakron you quoted) just stop playing. The trouble is, it's pretty lousy for everyone else if they can't get a decent read on person because that person consistently plays bad. It's bad for them, and it's bad for their team mates. One of the reasons town loses the BMs so much is because the players are even more clueless than normal and scum, even fairly incompetent scum, can use this to their advantage. I'm pretty clean on encouraging players to play better rather than just sitting back and catching them out on easy mistakes. If they still play scummily, then even if that's their whole meta, then they've got to recognise that they're letting themselves get lynched. What do you think should be done about players that consistently play scummily regardless of their role?

Also, it strikes me that if someone consistently shows scum-tells when they're playing town, then maybe we should be rethinking what we consider scum-tells.

TolyK

Basically, Iqovian and Birdy would bus, while Imp seems unsure. Will report some more later.

Curious. I'd be interested in hearing what you'd conclude from that.

[Nerjin]

Well, sorry for having to do it this way but I’m going to have a HUGE wall of text it looks like. Here’s some spoilers to help break it up.

Spoiler: @Birdy51[/spoiler (click to show/hide)

Birdy

Honestly I don't know. I really have a good feeling about Toaster being town.

Even before he's posted in this game?

Preemptive intuition. Something tells me that Toaster is going to do something interesting in this game. What that might be, I have absolutely no clue.
[/quote]

Preemptive intuition? I guess you could be playing the odds BUT I find that a bit hard to believe. Please, what is the REAL reason you’re certain that Toaster is town? Also, doing something interesting does NOT mean they’re town.

TheWetSheep

Birdy:

TheWetSheep - Do you believe in policy lynching? Ex, kill all Third Parties, lynch the AFKers, lynch all self-voters, ect.

No. I don't think there is any event that always merits the same action; every circumstance must be taken into account.

I don't quite understand why you're voting him. Care to share?

Cheeetar - Are you satisfied with your role?

I love the smell of rolefishing in the morning. Why did you ask this?

To the second, why are you so concerned about that question in particular? Are you really worried that I might be role fishing, or are you simply looking for a prospective target?

To the second, why didn't you answer the question?

It's probably best if you answer the question proposed to you before you ask questions of Wet Sheep. You're deflecting a bit there.

I am fully aware of what I am doing.

But there are times when answering a question can wait, especially when I question the validity of why he is concerned with my "role fishing" as he calls it. If he can justify his question well enough, then I will have no issue in giving him a proper reply.

Are you aware of what you’re doing? I am, you’re avoiding the question. ANSWER IT!

Finally, no. I am in no way shape or form in cahoots with Toaster, unless we both happen to be Townies. To be perfectly honest, the biggest reason I picked him because it was late at night and I couldn't think of another person. It's a bit entertaining how it's become a bit of a talking point though.

It's a talking point because you stated, with no room for interpretation, that you think Toaster is town.

How valid of a tell do you think rolefishing is?

Not too valid, particularly this case, which is mild. Like I said, that vote on Birdy wasn't so much suspicion about his rolefishing as wanting an alternative to randomvoting.

Ergh… I am running out typing time for tonight, so I will first go ahead and answer your question since you have answered mine. Tit for tat.

I asked Cheeetar what he thought of his role out of curiosity and the fact that I was running out of RVS questions.

Now, as for you and why I dislike your vote. I can understand wanting to get out RVS, but I can hardly see how my post was role fishing.  Given that I had innocent intentions when I wrote the question, it causes me to ponder what in particular made that one post stand out to you.
[/quote]

Oh look, you finally answered it. Why didn't you do that at first? Simply saying "I was curious." would've saved you some suspicion from me

Spoiler: @Cheetar (click to show/hide)

Cheeetar:

[. . .] The good guys tend to be reactive- police wait for people to commit crimes before arresting them, and so on. Aggressively questioning people can make them implicate themselves, but so can analysing the posts they make, and even townies can say stupid things that seems suspicious if they feel under pressure.

Have you had much trouble in games, with a more 'reactive' style of play being taken as a more 'passive' one, and thus being seen as Scummy?  If this was to happen in the future, how would you prefer to resolve the concern?

I don't think I've had major problems with it in the past, no. I'd resolve the concern like I'm resolving it with you now- explaining what I'm doing. If that isn't sufficient, and you feel you'd ought to lynch me for what I see as a valid way of playing town, then I personally think you'd be being scummy by trying to find an excuse (any excuse) to lynch somebody.

I’m glad your analyzing everything. Who do you suspect right now? Do you plan to be more active on Day 2?

Spoiler: @Deathsword (click to show/hide)

You only have two posts and the first was just you asking questions that you don’t follow up on and the second was just you agreeing with other players and slightly [almost a miniscule amount] pressuring Birdy51. Why are you lurking? Do you feel confident that Birdy51 is scum? Do you plan to actually participate?

Spoiler: @Hapah (click to show/hide)

So far everything checks out. Though I’m curious if you still find Toaster as the biggest scum possibility. Granted you never seemed to but yet your vote is there and I want to know what you think right now.

Spoiler: @Imp (click to show/hide)

So Nerjin, what precisely have you learned from everyone's responses. You planning on following any of them up?

I've learned that you didn't read my whole post.

What? I did read the whole post, you answered my prior question in your reply to Imp, that's fine.

notquitethere assumes that you meant 'You didn't see my answer to your question' when you say "I've learned that you didn't read my whole post.".  Is that what you meant?

What is more important to you:  'To play in a way that satisfies you, regardless of if it satisfies your wincon', or 'To play in a way that satisfies your wincon, regardless of if it satisfies you'?

If you recieved a wincon you found disinteresting or distasteful, do you think you'd ignore it and just play the game towards some other goal that did motivate you?

When I said that I had assumed that he didn't read my whole post and thus, did not notice that I'd already answered the question.

I really love your bottom questions. I'd have to say I'd rather play towards playing a way that satisfies me. Because it's a game. Thus I try to play as close to the wincon as possible but also prioritize having fun. I would NEVER play against or ignoring my wincon though. At least not intentionally. Thanks for asking that question, it was a really fun one to think about.

May I be honest? You’re doing really well. I’m pretty sure you’re town right now.

But I have a question for you: Who do you think is the scum-team right now?

Spoiler: @Nerjin (click to show/hide)

Sometimes people come up to me and say “Wow, you’re ridiculously good looking.” And I say “Thank you.” And they say “When did you first find that out?” And I tell them:

“It all started back in the fourth grade. I was eating my cereal when I caught my reflection in the spoon and I remember thinking, ‘Wow, you’re ridiculously good looking.’ And I thought ‘I should do this for a living!’”

To which they often reply “Do what?” and the answer is, obviously, “Be ridiculously good looking.”

Also, this guy needs to post more.

Spoiler: @NQT (click to show/hide)

I’m pretty happy with your play so far. Nothing sticks out. Though on an off-note, I’m beginning to think that I have you confused with someone else because you don’t play like I remember.  Hm…

I do have a question: Who are your top two scum-picks right now?

Spoiler: @Shakerag (click to show/hide)

You’ve not posted much. Your only post so far has been adequate though. When you get back I expect some reads on all players though.

Spoiler: @Iqovian (click to show/hide)

Iqovian: Do you trust common methods, or do you prefer to be innovative and unconventional in your scumhunting?

If the method is tried and true, the scum have tried it and likely know counters. I try and be innovative, but people usually misinterpret that as acting scummy and I get lynched. Of course they interpret most things I do as scummy, so there's not much change there.

You know what might help you "innovation" a bit? Posting more and trying to figure out who's scum. Stop lurking, get off your lazy bum, and get to work peon.

Of your three posts, you've said:

1. I want to be confirmed town
2. Playing with a ventrilloquist is annoying
3. You've played email mafia and not forum mafia
4. I'll address this one personally here in a second.
5. You explain what a ventrilloquist role would entail
6. You have no trouble bussing a scum-buddy.
7. You don't have reads. So you won't do anything to get them.
8. See the above quote.

Now, onto #4, this struck me as HUGELY scummy:

The Iqovian— your opening post in this game was wholly passive. Is this kind of play normal for you?

Well there's no one to shift any of the large amounts of blame I'm sure to accrue onto yet, and I can't read any of you. So there isn't that much to say, yet.

So you have no one to shift blame onto? You know who shifts blame Iqovian? Scum.

Spoiler: @TheWetSheep (click to show/hide)

I prefer pressuring people on valid points to randomly voting and asking hypotheticals. Why am I suspicious for voting you on a scumtell instead of random-voting?

That's nice. Do you plan to actually scum-hunt someone then? So far your three posts are alright BUT you lack hunting on anyone other than Birdy51. You kind of ALLUDE to it in your most recent post but there needs to be more than that. Get back into that scum-hunting ring champ! You gotta get all of them, not just one.

Spoiler: @Tiruin (click to show/hide)

Ah yes the eternal monster of Real Life. Hope that gets sorted out soon. We miss you!

Anyways… Once you get the chance I’d like to hear you view on the events that have transpired in your absence and who you think is most scummy.

Spoiler: @Toaster (click to show/hide)

You seem alright kid. But I do have this question for you when you finally get time enough to do some more posting:

Who is the scummiest player to you and why?

Spoiler: @TolyK (click to show/hide)

Well you’ve not posted much but are apparently quite busy. Fair enough, however when you HAVE posted what you’ve said has amounted to questioning the people you don’t know. Next time you post I hope you have more than active-lurking to show for it.

Who do you see as scummiest and why?

For those of you who didn’t read the whole thing I voted The Iqovian see his spoiler for reasons.

Birdy51 is my secondary scum pick. Again, go check that spoiler.

[notquitethere]

Nerjin

I’m pretty happy with your play so far. Nothing sticks out. Though on an off-note, I’m beginning to think that I have you confused with someone else because you don’t play like I remember.  Hm…

Oh?! I think my play is always constantly evolving. I think I play better now than I did before but I still make plenty of mistakes. When I first started playing chess against people that could play, I must have lost my first twenty games but my play improved and though I'm not amazing at chess, I'm way better at it than I would have been if I didn't lose so many games and try to figure out each time where I went wrong. Well, mafia is the same. I still make mistakes and, just like in chess, sometimes they're atavistic mistakes that I really should have gone beyond, but each game I play I get closer to the ideal meta-game goal of mistake-free play.

In chess I play aggressively and am fond of unexpected gambits and sacrifices. In mafia, I am fond of logical analysis. In my very first BM here that you ran you can see I tried to reason logically (and, as it happened, correctly) about what the scum team would be up to, with the same open admittance that I might be mistaken:

Unless this is a very cunning double bluff, I think we have good reason to suppose that +!!scientist!!+ isn't in fact scum, because if they were, their partner in crime would be telling them to vote for Captain Ford to cause a nolynch. Unless their partner is just as clueless...

My play has improved but I'm still questing from the same basic perspective.

I do have a question: Who are your top two scum-picks right now?

So, The Iqovian is the player I'm voting for. They're being shifty and passive. It could just be weird new-player stuff, but the pressure from the vote hasn't prompted them to make any clarification or increased their scumhunting, so they've got my vote.

Second most scummy? Deathsword has only made one real post and there he just answers a few questions and fires off a few questions. Easy day 1 stuff. I'd like to hear more from him.

It's hard to say though— there's a whole bunch of players that have only made one or two substantial posts. I'm swiftly coming to the firm conclusion that it's a lot easier to spot town players than scum: good town play in a way that it is hard for scum to emulate because their play flows from genuine suspicion; whereas time-stretched, inexperienced or disengaged town players will look like scum.

I think Cheetar, Imp, TolyK and you are the most engaged in the game and this is usually a good proxy for town. I found Cheetar a bit too passive at the beginning but he's done a fairly good job of explaining where he's coming from.

[TolyK]

TolyK

Basically, Iqovian and Birdy would bus, while Imp seems unsure. Will report some more later.

Curious. I'd be interested in hearing what you'd conclude from that.

See below.

I think Cheetar, Imp, TolyK and you are the most engaged in the game and this is usually a good proxy for town. I found Cheetar a bit too passive at the beginning but he's done a fairly good job of explaining where he's coming from.

...
I'm usually even more wanting to play the game as scum, though, since that's rarer. So I don't quite agree with your logic.

@TolyK
Well you’ve not posted much but are apparently quite busy. Fair enough, however when you HAVE posted what you’ve said has amounted to questioning the people you don’t know. Next time you post I hope you have more than active-lurking to show for it.

Who do you see as scummiest and why?

See below.

Nerjin:

@Everyone: Which three players would you most like to be confirmed town and which player would you think is most devestating as scum?

birdy51, The_Iqovian, and Imp for the first and Toaster for the second.

What's funny is that these are exactly the guys I'm looking at right now.

Now, as for you and why I dislike your vote. I can understand wanting to get out RVS, but I can hardly see how my post was role fishing.  Given that I had innocent intentions when I wrote the question, it causes me to ponder what in particular made that one post stand out to you.

You can still do scummy stuff if you have innocent intentions.

I don't hear much about passivity finding Scum.  Could you offer some links to help me find where passive play has been used effectively to assist and ensure Town wins?

This is really painting yourself as town. As in, this is like saying "I'm town", except "Help me work for the town's cause".
It makes you look as if you're trying to make yourself look like a fluffy bunny that's asking for help.
Don't you agree?

*post*

*other post*

Neat. There's something here, but I don't have the time to look at it right now. Ping me later in case I forget.

The Iqovian

Well there's no one to shift any of the large amounts of blame I'm sure to accrue onto yet, and I can't read any of you. So there isn't that much to say, yet.

So your way of forming reads in the face of low-content is to... sit back and answer the handful of questions people pose?

At this stage of knowing absolutely nothing about the other players, any questions I pose will be horribly generic @everyones which will do nothing but display my own ineptitude.
Or land myself in hot water, like with Cheeetar's rolefishing fiasco.

You seem pretty concerned with not being in hot water. I understand you, however Cheeetar didn't really have anything on you, so it's not really hot water, is it?


Scummy? A bit. But they all have something in common, don't they?

[Shakerag]

Imp:

Shakerag:

Nerjin:

@Everyone: Which three players would you most like to be confirmed town and which player would you think is most devestating as scum?

birdy51, The_Iqovian, and Imp for the first and Toaster for the second.

What reasons for those selections?

Three people who I don't know very well and might have difficulty getting reads on (although, in hindsight after responding to Nerjin, I feel like it should be something like Hapah, NQT, and TWS/Tiruin).  Therefore it would be best if I could have them confirmed town.  Toaster is the most likely and experienced here to play a strong scum game.

Deathsword:

Deathsword: Pretend your only night-useable ability allowed you to choose to either block someone (both from receiving or taking actions) or to redirect someone (again, that redirection applies both to actions targeting that player, and to actions that player tries to make).  Which would you probably use more often, and why?

Redirect. I really like redirects and it can, if used right or with enough luck, destroy the plans of scum or third party.

What do you look for when deciding where to place a redirect?

Trying to figure out how to avoid catching a redirect, Imp?


Nerjin:

Spoiler: @Shakerag (click to show/hide)

You’ve not posted much. Your only post so far has been adequate though. When you get back I expect some reads on all players though.

I hate this question/request.  It always feels so lazy. 

birdy51 - upbeat? - seems sharp - possibly town
Cheeetar - poking on lurkers (TolyK) - passive - possibly scum
Deathsword - no strong read
Hapah - no strong read
Imp - inquisitive - maybe a bit cautious - neutral
Nerjin - feels like he's fishing for someone to jump on with asking everyone who they think is scummy - neutral to light scummy
notquitethere - no strong read
The_Iqovian - making appeals to excuse poor/scummy plays - newbie to slightly scummy
TheWetSheep - no strong read
Tiruin - no strong read
Toaster - no strong read
TolyK - setting up self-meta to get away with lurking - commenting on another SK or cult - possibly scum


TolyK:

TolyK— you've played a lot of role heavy games right? Are there any really common things we should be looking out for?

Well, considering it's a WUBA game, there's likely "another" SK, since he modkilled one instantly, or a cult.
Common things? Don't say everything you know instantly, and always always always check facts with your facts.
And there's always gonna be this crazy jig that ruins a lot of stuff in BYOR's. See: BYO Cards, where my Auto ability gave me a day to myself.

Worried about another SK?  Worried about a cult?  Worried about something ruining your plans?  Hi scum. 


Toaster:

No, nothing of note came from either of you.

Why say this?  It feels like you're closing off the potential for one of them to be nervous about your conclusion.

[TheWetSheep]

Cheeetar:

For now, I'm going to unvote TolyK and FoS birdy51- Upon reflection, I find it slightly hard to believe that the only reason you had for asking me about my role was idle curiosity, or a need to ask something. You could have posed any number of questions of me, but decided upon my role.

If you're unvoting TolyK, why are you only FoSing Birdy? Shouldn't you be using your vote to pressure? Are you worried about being seen as bandwagoning? And if the purpose of your FoS is pressure, why aren't you asking him any questions?

NQT:

Sheep

Not necessarily, since it could just be that I'm a mediocre player. And I don't know how I play survivor or scum, since I've only ever been town.

Covering all bases, huh? Let's entertain a little thought experiment here: how do you think you'd play if you were playing scum?

Maybe more cautiously? Maybe? I really don't know; I'd try to play as close as possible to how I play town.

Imp:

TheWetSheep:

When you find Scummy play, how concerned are you usually with trying to distinguish Scummy from Scum?

Very. I think a lot of people make the mistake of thinking that if people make such and such a blunder then they must be scum, as opposed to trying to see what scum or town would do in a certain circumstance. The latter is more useful, since it actually helps find scum, because anybody can make a scumslip regardless of alignment.


Just a note, I'll be unable to post over the weekend.

[birdy51]

All of this attention makes me feel loved inside. ^.^ Back to business!


TheWetSheep:

Birdy:

Now, as for you and why I dislike your vote. I can understand wanting to get out RVS, but I can hardly see how my post was role fishing.

How was it rolefishing?
-If he answered "No" it would make him less of a NK target because he's likely to have a more boring role
-If he gave more information than a "yes or "no" it could reveal something else about his role.

Basically asking anything about anybody's role could be considered rolefishing. But that's not all that important to me, since it wasn't all that suspicious. I voted you for a reaction, and you jumped pretty high and dodged the question.

Given that I had innocent intentions when I wrote the question, it causes me to ponder what in particular made that one post stand out to you.

So any attack on you when you're town merits an OMGUS-y vote because you know that you had innocent intentions?

Now you are become a tad unreasonable.

   - If he had answered "no", it would have been a rather off-color gesture against Wuba. Regardless of the performance, the audience claps, does it not? The same is with these roles. I would have been surprised by any answer, except for yes. To say "no" is to not clap, and instead hiss at the performers like a cat.
   - Here's another sticking point. The word "could" is rather open. However the fact of the matter is, I wasn't asking to him to reveal any vital elements about his role, or even whether his role was a person, place, or thing.
   
Secondly, no. I dodged the question because I actively mistrust both your question and your intentions. I believe I have right to question arguments made against me. Now, I realize that I did not ask this directly, but shall now ask it with bolded emphasis. What made my post stand out to you?

Imp:

Birdy:

To the first, I tried to look for something on the Mafia Scum wiki, but I have ultimately failed. I've read it some where on that sight where it actually recommended considering lynching the Towniest player at LYLO. But instead of flashing that particular page heroically I shall have to make due with not being able to find it.

I got curious and tried to search that up, I couldn't find it either through Mafia Scum wiki's search or Google.  Thought I found a reference to it with a Google of "lynching towniest player lylo", but that was actually a game thread for a "Weird Voting Mafia", and yeah, it had weird voting.

Checked it because Google quoted "So even if they weren't the towniest player during the day, the fact that the .... you want to see lynched), the towniest at the top (the person you want to have...", that quote seemed pretty garbled but I thought it might relate to what you found; nope, they had a crazy vote system and were trying to teach each other (even at lylo!) how to avoid accidentally lynching people that were seen as Town picks (the voting system required every player to vote for every player, order mattered).  Glad that's not our game.

I did want to find the page you were talking about if I could, it sounds interesting, but even more I'd like to know how you'd use it.  What advantage do you see in "flashing that particular page heroically" if you could?

What do you think of that voting strategy as you described it?  Have you used it in play or do you plan to try it, at lylo or at any other point in play?

TheWetSheep:

Birdy:

Cheeetar - Are you satisfied with your role?

I love the smell of rolefishing in the morning. Why did you ask this?

To the second, why are you so concerned about that question in particular? Are you really worried that I might be role fishing, or are you simply looking for a prospective target?

Mostly the latter, actually. I prefer pressuring people on valid points to randomly voting and asking hypotheticals. Why am I suspicious for voting you on a scumtell instead of random-voting?

Now, as for you and why I dislike your vote.

How serious do you perceive TheWetSheep's 'case' against you?  How serious do you perceive his vote to be?

The devil's advocates needs to win the debate sometimes! There are occasions where a somewhat seedy person might simply be a lazy townie, and occasions where a righteous townie are complete under scum buckets underneath the skin. Perceived authority can be rather tricky and deceptive.

Now, I have yet to use this strategy once. I've only been at LYLO once, and that was a scumbucket. If I am still alive at LYLO in this game however, I will try to look at both sides of the arguments with an even eye. This, barring any unusual shenanigans. Given that this is a BYOR, I think that this game will already be abounding in Shenanigans, and we can rest assured the LYLO will be rather interesting.

Now, as to my phrase of "waving it heroically", I like winning debates and arguments. It's certainly not something I would have held over anyone's head, but rather a sort of cherished "AHA!" moment.

Finally, I am taking TheWetSheep's argument seriously, because I find it lacking under pressure. While my numerous gaffes are both amusing and potentially deadly to myself, I don't think his base argument holds much water. He's assuming that I have overreacted. On the flipside of the coin, I think his question and vote was overreacting to the RVS question I asked Cheeetar.

His reaction is what caused me to believe he could be scum. To use his own words,

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Birdy:

Cheeetar - Are you satisfied with your role?

I love the smell of rolefishing in the morning. Why did you ask this?

To the second, why are you so concerned about that question in particular? Are you really worried that I might be role fishing, or are you simply looking for a prospective target?

Mostly the latter, actually. I prefer pressuring people on valid points to randomly voting and asking hypotheticals. Why am I suspicious for voting you on a scumtell instead of random-voting?

I didn't think his point was valid in the first place, especially now that he himself has gone against it. TheWetSheep is establishing himself as valid, but he skips the part where he admits that his both his question and his vote were weak. 

Hrmm... Regardless my point is getting convoluted. When I get some time, I'll try to arrange both off our arguments in some kind of meaningful context as opposed this gobbeldy gook mess of disconnected thoughts and words.

Cheeetar:

@Cheeetar

I realise the worth of the wild mass questioning of day 1 in that it gives people something to actually talk about and helps clue the town in on who's scummy, but I feel that there're more than enough questions already being asked, and I'd feel more confident asking questions when I have something of substance to act upon. I've probably (?) not been asked before because people are trying to draw everybody into the conversation.

How'sabout you humor us then? What are you looking for on Day 1 that'll convince that it's time to start getting heavily involved?

There are a wide number of things I might twig at. I suppose I'll know it when I see it!

For now, I'm going to unvote TolyK and FoS birdy51- Upon reflection, I find it slightly hard to believe that the only reason you had for asking me about my role was idle curiosity, or a need to ask something. You could have posed any number of questions of me, but decided upon my role.

A counter-question. How well do you know me, or what kind of roles I enjoy to play?

TolyK:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

TolyK

Basically, Iqovian and Birdy would bus, while Imp seems unsure. Will report some more later.

Curious. I'd be interested in hearing what you'd conclude from that.

See below.

I think Cheetar, Imp, TolyK and you are the most engaged in the game and this is usually a good proxy for town. I found Cheetar a bit too passive at the beginning but he's done a fairly good job of explaining where he's coming from.

...
I'm usually even more wanting to play the game as scum, though, since that's rarer. So I don't quite agree with your logic.

@TolyK
Well you’ve not posted much but are apparently quite busy. Fair enough, however when you HAVE posted what you’ve said has amounted to questioning the people you don’t know. Next time you post I hope you have more than active-lurking to show for it.

Who do you see as scummiest and why?

See below.

Nerjin:

@Everyone: Which three players would you most like to be confirmed town and which player would you think is most devestating as scum?

birdy51, The_Iqovian, and Imp for the first and Toaster for the second.

What's funny is that these are exactly the guys I'm looking at right now.

Now, as for you and why I dislike your vote. I can understand wanting to get out RVS, but I can hardly see how my post was role fishing.  Given that I had innocent intentions when I wrote the question, it causes me to ponder what in particular made that one post stand out to you.

You can still do scummy stuff if you have innocent intentions.

I don't hear much about passivity finding Scum.  Could you offer some links to help me find where passive play has been used effectively to assist and ensure Town wins?

This is really painting yourself as town. As in, this is like saying "I'm town", except "Help me work for the town's cause".
It makes you look as if you're trying to make yourself look like a fluffy bunny that's asking for help.
Don't you agree?

*post*

*other post*

Neat. There's something here, but I don't have the time to look at it right now. Ping me later in case I forget.

The Iqovian

Well there's no one to shift any of the large amounts of blame I'm sure to accrue onto yet, and I can't read any of you. So there isn't that much to say, yet.

So your way of forming reads in the face of low-content is to... sit back and answer the handful of questions people pose?

At this stage of knowing absolutely nothing about the other players, any questions I pose will be horribly generic @everyones which will do nothing but display my own ineptitude.
Or land myself in hot water, like with Cheeetar's rolefishing fiasco.

You seem pretty concerned with not being in hot water. I understand you, however Cheeetar didn't really have anything on you, so it's not really hot water, is it?


Scummy? A bit. But they all have something in common, don't they?

I'm not quite following you with this one… Would you care to expound why you clump us all together?

[TheWetSheep]

- If he had answered "no", it would have been a rather off-color gesture against Wuba. Regardless of the performance, the audience claps, does it not? The same is with these roles. I would have been surprised by any answer, except for yes. To say "no" is to not clap, and instead hiss at the performers like a cat.

This does not make my point invalid.

- Here's another sticking point. The word "could" is rather open. However the fact of the matter is, I wasn't asking to him to reveal any vital elements about his role, or even whether his role was a person, place, or thing.

No, but he might have. I'm assuming that if you were rolefishing you would be a little less blatant then "Cheeetar, tell me exactly what your role does".
   

Secondly, no. I dodged the question because I actively mistrust both your question and your intentions. I believe I have right to question arguments made against me. Now, I realize that I did not ask this directly, but shall now ask it with bolded emphasis. What made my post stand out to you?

I was scumhunting. What made you mistrust my intentions?

To your question, it was the most valid thing I could pressure somebody on at that time. I voted you not because I thought that your rolefishing made you scum, but because I wanted your reaction to an accusation and not a RVS question. That's how you leave RVS. (This also addresses this:

I didn't think his point was valid in the first place, especially now that he himself has gone against it. TheWetSheep is establishing himself as valid, but he skips the part where he admits that his both his question and his vote were weak.

[Cheeetar]

Spoiler: @Cheetar (click to show/hide)

Cheeetar:

[. . .] The good guys tend to be reactive- police wait for people to commit crimes before arresting them, and so on. Aggressively questioning people can make them implicate themselves, but so can analysing the posts they make, and even townies can say stupid things that seems suspicious if they feel under pressure.

Have you had much trouble in games, with a more 'reactive' style of play being taken as a more 'passive' one, and thus being seen as Scummy?  If this was to happen in the future, how would you prefer to resolve the concern?

I don't think I've had major problems with it in the past, no. I'd resolve the concern like I'm resolving it with you now- explaining what I'm doing. If that isn't sufficient, and you feel you'd ought to lynch me for what I see as a valid way of playing town, then I personally think you'd be being scummy by trying to find an excuse (any excuse) to lynch somebody.

I’m glad your analyzing everything. Who do you suspect right now? Do you plan to be more active on Day 2?

It's much easier to be active on Day 2 because there's more to talk about - the results of the lynching Day 1 (if it was scum, who they seemed to be teaming up with or avoiding pressuring at all), the results of the nights actions, any information you yourself may have gotten that's usable. Right now? I suspect you, Nerjin.

Spoiler: @Iqovian (click to show/hide)

Iqovian: Do you trust common methods, or do you prefer to be innovative and unconventional in your scumhunting?

If the method is tried and true, the scum have tried it and likely know counters. I try and be innovative, but people usually misinterpret that as acting scummy and I get lynched. Of course they interpret most things I do as scummy, so there's not much change there.

You know what might help you "innovation" a bit? Posting more and trying to figure out who's scum. Stop lurking, get off your lazy bum, and get to work peon.

Of your three posts, you've said:

1. I want to be confirmed town
2. Playing with a ventrilloquist is annoying
3. You've played email mafia and not forum mafia
4. I'll address this one personally here in a second.
5. You explain what a ventrilloquist role would entail
6. You have no trouble bussing a scum-buddy.
7. You don't have reads. So you won't do anything to get them.
8. See the above quote.

Now, onto #4, this struck me as HUGELY scummy:

The Iqovian— your opening post in this game was wholly passive. Is this kind of play normal for you?

Well there's no one to shift any of the large amounts of blame I'm sure to accrue onto yet, and I can't read any of you. So there isn't that much to say, yet.

So you have no one to shift blame onto? You know who shifts blame Iqovian? Scum.

This is an incredibly suspicious post. Iqovian hasn't posted as much as other people and that is your only reason to vote for him, disregarding his joke completely flying over your head. There are also other people who you've called out in your post for not posting as much, some of whom have posted even lesss but you seem much less concerned about it- is Iqovian just an easier target, given that he's newer to this style of Mafia than everybody else?

Spoiler: @Imp (click to show/hide)

But I have a question for you: Who do you think is the scum-team right now?

Spoiler: @TheWetSheep (click to show/hide)

Anyways… Once you get the chance I’d like to hear you view on the events that have transpired in your absence and who you think is most scummy.

Spoiler: @Toaster (click to show/hide)

Who is the scummiest player to you and why?

Spoiler: @TolyK (click to show/hide)

Who do you see as scummiest and why?

Spoiler: @Hapah (click to show/hide)

I’m curious if you still find Toaster as the biggest scum possibility.

Spoiler: @NQT (click to show/hide)

I do have a question: Who are your top two scum-picks right now?

Why are you so concerned with who everybody else thinks is scum? Shouldn't you be focusing on your own investigation instead of finding out who the easiest person to bandwagon on is?

I think Cheetar, Imp, TolyK and you are the most engaged in the game and this is usually a good proxy for town.

I heavily disagree- I wouldn't say scum are usually hyper active, but it's definitely not uncommon.

Cheeetar:
How well do you know me, or what kind of roles I enjoy to play?

I wouldn't put any degree of confidence in how well I know you. What kind of roles do you enjoy playing - why did you ask me this question?