M1007 — "Mafia, She Wrote" Game Thread

[e.m.c^42]

Speaking of Flavius, that wasn't how I meant it lol
in your teacon thing when you mentioned I has similar thoughts on damo, the interpretation was meant to be a little different xD

Damo does make early, one-two sentence reads day 1, so that wasn't necessarily surprising - he pinned me as alien that game after all. Pretty sure it was the quality that pinged.

[e.m.c^42]

Wonder where ND went, he's kinda died now that his top scumread Durga died and turned out as VT lol, no-one to flame at anymore maybe.

Kinda want to hear what he has to say about Vashta :D

[teacon7]

Going on to Vashta, - - snip - -

He's been low-content/low posting. Granted, Moscow/Percy/me also fit that this game so far, but him stating "I'll be active endgame dw y'all", hmmm. Don't like that excuse so much, but not sure why yet. The casualness to almost being lynched could be forced, since how uninvested can someone actually be...unless he's like bo lol, selfvoting and lynching himself as town.

On the other hand, I don't feel like any of this is super scummy enough for him to turn into a viable wagon this early? like, maybe I'm too lenient/hopeful towards lessened activity...

This is one of the main reasons I think a huge TvX firefight is bad for town. In the event that we're TvT, it lets low commitment scum lurk in the shadows, and discourages low-time town from engaging. Vash fits one of those descriptions, but he's far from alone.

@emc - why did you move to vote for him right at the end? The vote that didn't count?

@ND - why'd you vote vash?

Flavius is so cocky lol
his absolutes kinda rub me the wrong way, but not sure if this isn't a personality thing.

What I don't like about flav's play is the tendency to assign a label first and then only sometimes follow it with a case. Most of what he's doing is name calling of one sort or another. I guess it rankles more cos he's calling me names, but either way that's not a good way to find scum.

[teacon7]

Speaking of Flavius, that wasn't how I meant it lol
in your teacon thing when you mentioned I has similar thoughts on damo, the interpretation was meant to be a little different xD

Damo does make early, one-two sentence reads day 1, so that wasn't necessarily surprising - he pinned me as alien that game after all. Pretty sure it was the quality that pinged.

Yeah see i'd have no way of knowing that. I didn't read the first part of the last game, and didn't remember much about damo other than that he had the team nailed by the end. I recall him mentioning that he wanted to be more verbose.

[teacon7]

So the plan was to make your behavior this time diametrically opposite?

This is a great example of what I'm talking about. He's turning everything around with shade to make me look bad.

The initial point here was about my meta: I lurk as scum. I'm chatty as town. Don't take my word for it, ask the people who have played with me before.
Xorx takes this opportunity to say: "well given this data point, it must be the exact opposite of what he's saying because that doesn't fit the narrative I'm pushing. "

That's an example of him pushing for a lynch, rather than trying to solve the game. It's often done with repeated statements, so the only way to make sense of his words is to agree with his unstated assumptions:

Data point / evidence: teacon's metagame is chatty as town, lurky as maf
Data point / evidence: this game, teacon is chatty
The most straightforward conclusion from this is: teacon is town

Unstated assumption xorx wants you to think: teacon randed scum
xorx' unstated logic: "the only way teacon can both be scum and have this meta is if he changed his meta"
xorx stated conclusion: "well teacon must have changed his meta"

It's deliberately favoring unstated assumptions. It's deliberately leaving out alternate and more probable causes for the evidence at hand: I'm town.

Xorx, if you're town, you've tunneled yourself dangerously far into this assumption, and are arguing for my lynch in the way scum argues for a lynch.

town xorxes argues fairly and with an open mind
xorxes is not arguing fairly, but with a closed mind
xorxes is not town.

One or two shade-ing statements like the quote above is not a big deal by itself. I'm not sure how much weight I personally would put on meta as a data point (some people are far more consistent than others, so it depends on who they are.) But what I'm seeing him do here is conduct a war of attrition. Over time the repeated false-premises get stuck in your head and start to seem more normalized.

[e.m.c^42]

@emc - why did you move to vote for him right at the end? The vote that didn't count?

Quickly skimming/catching up at EOD, I didn't really find the cases on Durga that appealing, for reasons I think I've said before.

However, her wagon was pretty much continuously leading by one and tying by voting someone else was a terrible idea, so voted her to bring it up/prevent someone else doing so - right after voting, I see Flavius vote Vashta (missing bozo's vote if I recollect accurately), think "oh wait, this is tied again?", "imma vote vashta", since I preferred him over Durga at the time

then the idiot realizes it would've tied accidentally had the submit button been pressed seconds earlier :d

[teacon7]

It sounds an awful lot like you're basing the majority of your case on scumreading me for moving.

Never scumread you for moving.

We spent way too much time talking about the move then. Your rationalization for a scum!teacon forced-bus move to damo seems very very improbable to me. scum!teacon probably would have just yelled "consolidate!", and voted for ND. Or I'd have just stayed put. It's inconceivable to me that as scum I'd feel responsible for taking action at all.

If you're not, then please explain - where does your case really come from. Do you have any hard data? Any other vibe that isn't confirmation bias of a "hunch" about EoD? Am I missing some other point you've made?

The initial suspicion came from your treatment of my case on damo. This was reinforced by your reluctance in voting for damo, when as town you would have been happy to do it early and help me push his lynch. It was reinforced even more by the huge thing you wrote N1 instead of interacting in the thread normally. And then even more by the way you have been responding to me in our exchanges.

1) tbf I had a gigantic board game party for most of what was N1, so I wasn't really around to reply in the thread anyway.
2) I'll concede that lurking teacon looks scummy.
3) I had a mild townread on you for D1 play. I thought you were trying to draw an NK somewhere else. I skimmed the thread and replied to you once N1. You indicated you were 5% more certain on me because I wasn't posting. I replied to reassure you, and I asked for real reads. I asked for real reads because at that point I still figured you were trying some kind of town theatre to let you play another day.

I've said this elsewhere, but to reiterate:
4) I disagreed with the reasons for which you scumread damo. I was not the only one who did that. (moscow didn't agree with the reasoning behind your case against damo, and maybe bozo was with him on that? someone check on that. who else wasn't sold on xorx' reasoning against damo, but scumread damo for other reasons?)). I wasn't defending damo, just pointing out what I saw as a weaker case. Who can infer that much information from a simple phrase?

She always makes comments like that, it's nothing unusual in her.

Her comments looked pretty strange to me on re-read. But you probably know know her meta better than I do.

[teacon7]

sorry. FYI I'm catching up on comments from before EoD2. AMA while I'm around

[teacon7]

Of course I get huge towncredit for lynching damo. I was under no pressure to vote for him or push him. He would not have been lynched if it wasn't for my push. I was the main responsible for his lynch, and you denying or minimizing that is another point that shows you are not being honest in your assessments.

I'm not denying that you were responsible for his lynch. In fact, I'm suggesting that you bussed him.

I am challenging whether you should get as much towncred as you're asking for.

The other people on the damo wagon were not there for the same reason you were. Who on the damo wagon moved there because you told him to move?

Are you trying to solve the game, or keep towncred?

Does this prove I'm town? Of course not. Is it possible I bussed damo like I have never done before? Of course it's possible. Is it likely? Not remotely.

So: are we going to admit meta to our little discussion? If so, you've got to deal with the difference between these statements:

I don't know teacon's usual style, + he hasn't played for awhile (so he's essentially a blank slate for meta),

I play pretty lurky when I'm scum.

I'm rather disappointed in this game, that durga, ND, Moscow, and Xorxes have failed to mention this.

So the plan was to make your behavior this time diametrically opposite?

Does this prove I'm town? Of course not. Is it possible I bussed damo like I have never done before? Of course it's possible. Is it likely? Not remotely.

So that's the case? Teacon is scum and he's playing against his meta, but xorx can't be scum because this is against his meta? That's ridiculous.

[FlaviusAetius]

@teacon that might be why I was so adamant, and still am on you being a scum, not only have people who I believe are town(xorxes and espresso) but also two people so far who I know are town have also targetted you(durga and vapor(who is now me))

I'm at a spot no one else is at, one where I know whatever the person before me said with honesty.
It might seem like I'm tunneling you, but its because I have the personal evidence too.

Thanks for trying to discredit everything I say teacon, as for me tunneling or working backward from my conclusion
You ignored this specific point several times, interesting.
Also @emc if you see me at the beginning of this game, I was not confident, but I have personal evidence that I wouldn't have in any other game.

rdrivera suspected you

xorxes and espresso are people who think you are a scum

durga and vapor both thought you were scum
Not a single other person in this game has had this many proven townspeople turn against them.

Also all this talk about tunneling. What did you do yesterday? That's right you tunneled Durga. You never even thought about moving your vote. I'm thinking this is projection coming from you.

Refused to move from Durga.
Hesitant to jump onto damo, despite knowing how he plays(radical shifts, needs to be explained, you put blinders on, or you know he's your teammate)
Discovered the crumbs that no one else noticed for rdrivera being a cop(you even posted them here!)
Now you are on xorxes, who has been trying to solve this game from Day 1.
Interesting.

[teacon7]

I spent a lot of time asking the question:
"Why would scum bus their godfather d1?"

It's a good one, because it lets us figure how to weigh the people on the damo wagon.

I later amended the question to this:
"In what circumstances would scum bus (vote+lynch) their godfather on d1?"

This post intends to explain why I asked that, and what I'm thinking the response is.

hm. I'm sad xorx isn't on when I'm here to ask questions.

Did he ever answer my question to him:

"why would scum bus their godfather on D1?"

I sure did:

Maybe you told us the answer yourself:

I bet scum tries to draw a scan onto their godfather.

You wanted him to be scumread so he would be a good candidate for a scan, you just didn't expect that your weak scumread would practically force you to lynch him in the end.

Xorx at first avoids the question.

He says scum would throw slight shade to draw a copscan.

(In brief, the godfather could play "lightning rod" style on d1 to draw+neutralize the copscan. That's a decent idea for any given scumteam with a godfather. ).

But look what his answer does:

1) Notice Xorx' change in voice there. I ask why scum (any given scum) would do action X. He answers with a "well YOU did this here because Y" ... It's another example of answering a question in a way that accuses someone back. I get that some of that can be accident

2) Notice also Xorx' soft-implication in the response - he's implying that my comment was really a scumslip, an unconscious insight into scum strategy. That's again, quite a bit of a stretch, and not at all what I said.

3) He doesn't answer my original question. Why avoid that question?

@xorx That's not the question I asked. Please don't avoid it.
I didn't ask:
"Why would scum shade their godfather d1?"
I asked:
"Why would scum bus (i.e., vote for and lynch) their godfather D1?"
If you want clarification... "under what conditions is it advantageous for a scumteam to bus/kill their godfather on d1?"

Xorxes' new answer:

Of course you would try to avoid it if you could. I don't think it was your plan to lynch him, it just happened that way because of things you could not have foreseen.

I asked "under what conditions it is advantageous..." and he answers "you would try to avoid it." This fits with his larger push about me being forced to vote damo because blah blah blah. What it doesn't do is answer my question. I wanted to know when it would be advantageous to bus.

Here's why:

The only reason scum would ever bus. Towncred.

Bussing, theoretically gives scum towncred.

"Under what conditions is it advantageous to bus?" He looks to be saying "it's never advantageous." If he was interested in honestly answering that question, why not address the notion of bussing for credit? Instead, he used both questions as opportunities to shade me. Why was it so difficult for him to answer my question... that he never really got around to it?

--> Because he was bussing for towncred. <--

He was currently getting credit for the damo lynch, and minimalizing the other contributions to the lynch. / He couldn't bring the idea (scum bus for towncred) into the discussion, as it would lend validity to a case against him. / When I pressed him on this, he's aggressively trying to claim responsibility - and thus credit.

His was a thin line to walk there. He couldn't say "scum would never bus" because his case on me relied me to have just bussed. He couldn't say "scum would bus for towncred" because that would indict him rather than me. So he dodged the question until he could explain the improbable: why my vote for damo was "forced."

I did this on purpose in a couple different stages. I remember watching the tv show Dr. House... he's the brilliant but damaged doctor who figures out miracle cures for people. His method (or the formula for the show) was to diagnose the disease by applying different cures to try to figure out what was going on. See how the disease reacts and answer accordingly.

What I did here was: rather than assume something about his alignment, I asked him questions to see if he'd react the way I'd hypothesized. It's not just what people say, but what they DO.

Avoiding the question about scum bussing? check.
Doubling down on grabbing towncred for the damo lynch: check.

Now, I'm willing to admit there are other explanations for avoiding questions and doubling down. Durga's flip shook me, because even after all of D2, I thought durga more probable scum than xorx. I am still willing to admit that all this is moronic T v T. But he'd have to admit to misunderstanding/avoiding my question twice in a row, and he'd have to publicly give up claim to special towncred status for the damo lynch. Is that going to happen?

That depends largely on whether he's willing to imagine the possibility of TvT, or if he's going to stay in a tunneled attack position.

[teacon7]

flav before I respond to your last post, I want to make sure I can read your post rightly.

Are you copy/pasting from a different post?

I see that you're quoting from my last post to respond.

Did you know that you can do inline quotes of what someone else is saying?

I'm saying this because it'll make it easier to understand what you're saying.

You put brackets and the quote code around the text you're trying to reference.

Like this.

Code: Select all

[quote] 
the quoted text
[/quote] 

I'm asking because in your last post I can't quite differentiate between what you're saying NOW and what you're copy/pasting from before. I'd like to understand you the right way.

[teacon7]

@ND - Where are you?

I was kindof hoping you'd post some EoD2 analysis again. What do you think of what happened?

[teacon7]

How does this at all look like Im buddying xorxes?

How indeed?

is Flav always like this? how many games has he played?

Last game he was more "I'm so innocent I don't know what I'm doing" than this one, but he already knows he can't get away with that twice in a row.

(to xorx) Do you think he's trying to buddy or sheep you?

Siding with xorxes is probably a good idea regardless in this situation, so the evidence in my mind is just piling up on you teacon.

Xorxes also thinking you are scum just confirms you more solidly as a scum.

@flav - Are you still standing by that?

[xorxes]

Discovered the crumbs that no one else noticed for rdrivera being a cop(you even posted them here!)

Wait, this may be significant.

What crumbs for rdrivera being a cop did teacon find? Are you sure he posted them here and not in your QT?

[FlaviusAetius]

Let me show you

[FlaviusAetius]

hesitant to lynch damo early
as both I and emc stated, damo, a town in the last game, was playing extremely passive, not coming out swinging.
teacon made mention he was also reading last game, he would know this.
He would have seen damo right off the bat, but didn't.

This argument assumes quite a lot. I didn't read the entirety of last game. I don't know damo's meta from the beginning of the game, and even if I had, one game isn't enough to know someone's meta.

thought vapor(previous me) was a cop
so any and all evidence against me that is from vapor is a null and void in teacon's eyes as it pointed to a cop.

what? I thought vapor was the cop. I didn't push him because I thought that. I was wrong. Now, I kinda scumread vapor for blabbing about cop stuff so openly. It's possible vapor's talking about it made rdriv open up about cop theory, so that's how the scumteam found the cop.

he also went after xorxes hard.

This is NAI. are you OMGUSing one behalf of xorxes?
why do you townread him so hard?

Both are really good at mafia, so why didn't xorxes the supposed scum, go after vapor for their NightKill, since in teacon's eyes was obviously a cop.

That's incoherent. I thought vapor was cop. I have no idea who xorx thought was cop. vapor knew he wasn't the cop, and yet he was pretty chatty about it.
you're assuming that I'm good at this game because I posted a lot. you're also assuming that xorx and I would think alike.

That seems to be reserved only for xorx and damo

all known town people suspected him
I've explained in my above post about the others, but let's talk about rdivera, shall we?

Yeah, let's. here's what rdriv said:

It seems like these quotes address the common theme of policy lynches. whether you're policy lynching a lurker, or policy-lynching a useless player, it's still a policy lynch.
-rdriv points out that we should be finding scum rather than info lynches. I agree. I asked about info lynches b/c I wanted to know who we think is/isn't providing info.
-ND points out that calling for {policy lynch based on useless playstyle} is scummy. Agree.
-I think lurking is NAI, but low investment posting *is* alignment indicative, because it's an attempt to "stay off the radar" by participation but no commitment. hedging is another way to try to stay off the radar. In my read so far, the former describes percy pretty well, the latter describes emc and damo.

+1 (in fact +100)

There are moments a policy lynch could be necessary, but not usually D1.

And I agree with Percy, Damo and Emc being low effort/hedgy. I just tend to not push EMC so hard because it's his style.

A question, why Vashta isn't on the same list of Percy?

He told teacon in Day 1 that the policy lynch that teacon suggested was a silly approach! An easy mislynch, a redirection of anyone but damo, was clearly happening.

yesss... he did. And we talked about it. On page 27. Check it out, unless you're just interested in cherrypicking quotes?

Those are the main points I have brought up.

hunh. news to me.

How does this at all look like Im buddying xorxes?

I'm not sure I asked you that...
xorx wants to lynch you. He's said as much on multiple occations. and you are arguing the same way he is about me. maybe if you agree with him and vote with him, he won't bus you? is that it?

[FlaviusAetius]

thought vapor(previous me) was a cop
so any and all evidence against me that is from vapor is a null and void in teacon's eyes as it pointed to a cop.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
what? I thought vapor was the cop. I didn't push him because I thought that. I was wrong. Now, I kinda scumread vapor for blabbing about cop stuff so openly. It's possible vapor's talking about it made rdriv open up about cop theory, so that's how the scumteam found the cop.
that specifically^^^^^^^^^^^

[FlaviusAetius]

@teacon Was just quoting myself, to show to emc why I was so cocky about you specifically, and also answering the tunneling discrediting you are trying to say

[FlaviusAetius]

Also, about the sheeping xorxes, I came up with my own evidence against you way before xorxes said anything about me. Him going against you I would say is just another piece of evidence against you. Especially since I think he is a town!