Normal Game Thread Big Trouble in Little Salem

Eh, pedantic is probably a good word for me.

I mean, I suppose technically, as OMGUS is defined on MafiaScum, that is the case. But I think we both know what I meant. I made an accusation against you, that your reasoning was inconsistent without sufficient explanation, and your response was to deflect by accusing me of being Scum and defending someone else you accused of being Scum. Moving forward, I will refer to it as a shallow deflection, if that makes you happy.

I mean, if we're really counting stances, how many issues have there even been to take a stance on? There's been whether or not Nick's early post was a joke or role fishing, and I've taken a hard stance on that. There's been Prada's overdefensiveness of Reaper, and I took a hard stance on that. There's been Reaper's initial behavior, and I took a hard stance on that. There's been Ningen's weird retroactively changing what he said, and I took a hard stance on that. There's been your vapid reads, and I took a hard stance on them.

What issues am I skipping over in pursuing this discourse with you, exactly?

I voted Maple when I felt that he was lurking, and proceeded to miss EoD helping a roommate setup (and use) crunchyroll on our entertainment system. It was a throwaway vote that I'd likely have changed if I'd gotten back before Day ended. It's frankly a bit out of character for me to have placed that vote, because I tend to play very carefully with my vote. I believe throwing one's vote hither and yon robs it of any meaning, when it comes to applying pressure.

Have I voted? I'm pretty sure I haven't voted. As for votes, I am playing it safe. I don't have any strong Scum reads this early, so I don't really want to just throw my vote anywhere.

I like how each of these is an unsubstantiated statement meant to substantiate a larger statement. Let's break this down.

Appeal to Ridicule. "It's obvious, and you're stupid for not seeing it."

Appeal to Ridicule. "It's obvious, and you're stupid for not seeing it."

WIFOM. "Scum wouldn't do this thing, because we'd be suspicious of them, so don't be suspicious of him for doing this thing."

Non-sequitor. Because your supporting arguments are all shallow fallacies, your conclusion is invalid.

It may depress you to learn that Occam's Razor is not a proof, and using it as one is a fallacy.

Yes. Reaper proved prone to claiming in the previous iteration, and prone to melodrama and overreaction in this game. He's clearly demonstrated himself to be a new player who is not well adapted to the pressures involved in this sort of game. He just as easily could have claimed in frustration as stopped defending himself.

Can you explain why?

Wait, what? No, but what? How the absolute **** did you come to this conclusion?

No, but could you explain how these two are related?

I feel like you just strung a bunch of completely unrelated sentences together. I'm just going to mark this off as another Non Sequitor.

I'm not sure what this sentence is trying to say.

"This is a myth, because I have anecdotal evidence to suggest it may not be true, which you'll just have to trust me on." Yup, that's a classic Quick post.

At least we can (probably) rely on the mechanics of your role. Though, why declare this without naming names? What's the point?

Now, to clarify, is this a Quick read, or a Cop guilty, on Maple?

Oh, ok. So Maple has claimed a Vig and is shooting Prada. Gotcha.

So, in the meantime, can we have the name of your guilty so we can begin looking at that player's past interactions? I don't think I have to say this, but I don't trust you to analyze their behavior accurately.

 

@Rotaretilbo, before I get to your wall, you have engaged with me more than anyone else in this game IIRC. What is your read on me?

 

Wise choice

Musings that's fair but of course there could be a method to his madness whereas your proposition is an insurance policy

 

I think you're probably incompetent; grossly so, even. Your behavior strikes me as scummy, but you were right when you said that the logic game assumes people will be rational, and your unhinged "reasoning" is clearly anything but. With an apparent Cop claim and no counterclaim as of yet, I have little reason to doubt your Townness. I just doubt your ability to form rational thoughts. So anything you give me which is based purely on mechanics, like a guilty result, or messages passed directly from other players, like this Maple thing, I will accept (mostly) at face value. Anything else, I will pick apart, because that is what I do.

 

You don't understand me because I look at things you don't consider valid. That has nothing to do with whether I am incompetent or not, it just means I have a different perspective than you. You look at facts and concrete things way more than I do. I dwell in the subjective much more and that doesn't mean I am wrong. You would like to think it makes me wrong because I don't fit into your little logical box, but I have made reads that you prolly could never grasp because the things I look at are based on thought process and not on logic. I have gotten a correct VT read on someone simply by them posting "????????????", I have also gotten a Town read on someone (who reminds me of you a bit) based on them posting "Sup" (this is a link) after I entered the thread posting "Sup?" myself. I don't think you even know how to make those reads honestly. There are countless other examples I can give. Do I have a perfect record reading people this way? No, but no one has a perfect record reading people. I do pride myself and my methods to be more accurate than average tho. So just because you don't understand how I got from point A to point B doesn't mean that I am incorrect, it just means that I take a different path than you.

 

Nick must've been role fishing to get the mafia out and only a anti mafia would do so to get the mafia out of hiding, thats why

 

I don't understand you because you look at this which I consider valid, and then make wild, baseless claims that do not remotely follow those things you claimed to look at. And that's when you're basing your claims on something I can even see, instead of something vague like "tone" which you still have never actually explained with words that mean anything.

See, if you were just being subjective, that'd be one thing, but you're basically just throwing darts blindfolded as far as I can tell.

I don't. Because the posts and your reads are not in any way meaningfully related. You get gut feelings, and any time a gut feeling pans out, you make a little mental note, and any time it doesn't, you just forget about it. Case in point, you looked at half a dozen people in the previous iteration, and were basically only right about two, but those two are the only ones you acknowledge as actual reads.

Only if you can demonstrate what path you took. Every single one of your posts is "trust me, I got this" and "trust me, I know what I'm doing" and "trust me, this makes sense somehow." Well I don't trust you. I won't trust you. This is ******* mafia. You can't just keep saying "trust me" as the only explanation for what you're doing. And any time you go "ok, I'll explain" you start going on about things that are objectively false. Do you know how many ******* times I've used bold while Scum to make statements? Every time. I ******* always use bold, no matter what, regardless of my alignment. I like bold. It helps the sentence read better, and give a little more voice to my text. It has nothing to do with my ******* alignment. It had nothing to do with wowee's ******* alignment. It has nothing to do with anyone's ******* alignment.

You've basically walked into a philosophy discussion and said "by the way guys, I can read minds" and expect everyone to be like "ok, cool." If you really have some ******* method that isn't pants shittingly retarded like the bold thing was, then explain it. It's like that TV show Psyche about a guy faking that he's psychic, except your gimmick is stupider and you don't have an actual avenue and are just making shit up as you go.

Right...but Reaper just flipped Town...and Nick wouldn't know Reaper's alignment if he was Town anyway...so...uh...come again?

 

Oh man that was a terrible day phase.

Quick was pretty high up on my sus list last phase but after catching up it's rather decreased. Reaper's flip was disappointing but can't be too harsh on him for newbie mistakes so it is what it is.

pou and Bimbo dying is interesting though I didn't notice them stepping on anyone's toes particularly, pou had some insightful posts but never particularly harsh on any one person I think hmm gonna have to look more into it.

Top 3 scum candidates for me atm are probably... Globear, Prada and SHINTO

Though when it comes to lesser active people it's hard to give that insightful of a read on, vanilla town apathy is OP especially in newer communities. Crispickle could be likely scum paired with the no kill on d1... though dunno how it works in this setup if there's a GF or something to send actions in for teammate in which case inactivity wouldn't be the cause for it.


Will have to see more of how phase develops and the posts people make to zero down on one candidate. Though atm leaning Prada

 

Well, I can imagine a possibility where this can bite me in the ass. I weighed my choices though, and I think this is the best way to go at it.

What would be troublesome is if scum is opportunistic and capable of turning this to their favor, hence why I said, attention should be projected on Quick, rather than straight up saying that Quick is scum in that scenario. I'm just covering my bases in case Quick is scum and plans to roleblock me, not to frame me due to his statement, but to protect Prada, and eliminate me in one go. However, that's unlikely (lel Quick and Prada being on the same side x'dddd), and there are easy ways to go around this if he's scum, like not killing me and leaving it up to the town. In that case (scum choosing to not kill me nor Quick + me being roleblocked), I'll just have to stand my own ground on the matter regardless of his alignment. I would be suspicious of Quick if this happens and decides to push my lynch before Prada, although I would probably need a person to counterclaim to back that up. Otherwise, it's just me defending for my laifu.

Also, there is that cop claim with no counterclaim to consider, thus allowing me to lean town on him as a result. It would be strange if scum chose to kill me over Quick if Quick is indeed town anyways since it's obvious who he is claiming as. Then again, scum might think that Quick will be protected and kill me instead. This will fall under the possibility I mentioned (me being blocked and killed) and the reason why I wouldn't assume Quick to be scum if this happens. Basically, I ask of you not to assume Quick is scum, but rather get him on the center stage of discussion if he isn't already. After all, if I'm dead, I'll have no choice but to have faith in the town. Although me being roleblocked and killed is the worst possibility for me personally, but if no one a good enough counterclaim against Quick, I suggest trusting him anyways.

This leaves one possibility though, if Quick is killed and Prada doesn't. If Quick flips as town and is cop, obviously Prada needs to get taken down. If he's not cop and he's town, then that's just dumb. If he's scum, then... why would scum kill him unless some weird busdriver shit happens. He said that if Prada doesn't die, I'm scum, but please remember the possibility of us being both town and how the mafia can use it. Scum can easily use that statement to lynch me, but understand that Prada should be a higher priority than me given that Quick would have probably investigated him. I allowed him to say what he will, but that doesn't mean I intend to sit there if my ass is in trouble, which should be a given.

What would definitely help to avoid this whole mess of possibilities is if there is a tracker somewhere than can target me. I don't want to rely on that possibility though, nor do I want them to claim here right now if so, but again, it would be nice.

Of course, if Prada is killed and Prada is town, we know who to look at. Likewise, if Prada is killed and Prada is scum, we know who to protect. This possibility is enough for me claim, even if I end up dying. It's not foolproof, but it does narrow some stuff down as opposed to not saying anything at all. That's how it looks to me and honestly, even though this is technically WIFOM (if I'm using this term correctly), I gain almost nothing from this deal if I'm scum unless you assume I'm pulling some elaborate shit. That's all I have to say in the matter.

 

That would be fine, except it isn't ONLY MS that uses that dichotomy. My reason for Scum reading you is because you haven't made a stance on the majority of things itt. I see no read from you on most of the players in this game.

Its not "issues" you are skipping, its everything else that has happened itt. Even a reads list with a couple Nulls is better than what you have given. I have a read on Wowee, you don't, I have a read on Globear, you do not, I have given a read on Crimson Falcon and Ratchet and you have not.

By your own implied playstyle by admission, you have played Scummy than.

Its not that early M8, its D3.

K.

FTFY

Not at all when considering proper context that:
1.) The player claimed last time with little to no pressure on them
2.) The player who asked if they were going to claim by their own admission said it was a joke

Right which is why you have to ask yourself if its more likely a Newb is bold enough to pull that off or not. So its not as WIFOMY as you might think when given a deeper context. Its logical that a Newb would not be as confident in making a risky play like that right off the bat.

I think I made my point clear that given context, its much easier to believe it was a joke than that some Newb goes balls to the walls with a risky play straight up asking if they are going to claim.

I didn't say it was a proof. I didn't even imply it was a proof. I simply stated that it was most likely given that is what the definition of Occam's Razor is. you don't have an argument on this one. The question isn't and shouldn't be whether Occam's Razor is a proof or not because I said no such thing. The question should be is it Valid? Is it more valid than other methods? If the answer to these questions is yes, then you have no argument. You are simply fighting me on this read at this point, which is Scummy.

This is what Prada originally said that I replied to:

Frankly, its sloppy that you don't put the same kind of scrutiny for every one that you do for me. Whether CR thought it was a legit push on him from Nick or not doesn't matter a single ******* bit! Also Prada's response here is OTT.

I mean, this was his very next post. The read that he wasn't joking is completely unsubstantiated, tinfoily, and not based on anything that actually happened itt.

Again, given context, this is an inaccurate read. It assumes that Nick is going to assume that there is a chance that CR is going to make the same exact mistake that they made last game when they didn't have knowledge that it was a mistake as now when they do have knowledge that it was a mistake. I expect Nick to be able to piece together that CR is prolly not going to make the same mistake after people told him last time that it was a mistake, hence why its a joke and not a RF :facepalm: for all your logic and you saying I am incompetent I would expect you to piece together that Nick could piece that together if you were actually Town here.

Yes, because given that CR was corrected on his behavior its likely to assume that Nick would know that regardless of what he does that CR is not going to claim under not much provocation.

Because:
1.) Last time he claimed VT.
2.) If he was a PR he is not dumb enough to out himself this time knowing last time he made a mistake claiming a relatively unimportant role. Its logical to assume that because he would have a more important role that he would want to be extra careful not to mess up a second time.

This is not brain surgery, it is common sense.

Nick, knowing there is a likely chance if he is Scum that CR is going to be truthful in their response on whether they investigate Innocent or Guilty assumes that CR is already giving information about his role. Since last time it was a mistake for him to voluntarily give out that information without a plan and since this game he is expected to give information with a plan, its logical to assume that he is not dumb enough to give extra information about his role without a plan.

Still think that?

Its saying "Nick was most likely joking and the only way you can say that he wasn't joking is because he didn't actually say he was joking in the post he made the joke in by way of emoticon."

Experience speaks louder than words.

To see how people react so I can get read based off that.

Not going to answer that.

Didn't say that, didn't imply that.

Why not?

 

Why those three in particular?

Given by his wording, we can somewhat assume he's claiming town, or at least can see something we can't. Well I mean if you're both (Prada you) town it'd be a good move to lynch Quick, although why he would take such a risk is beyond me.

But other then that I agree with what you've said, it's all a double edged sword though.

 

Sorry @Lord Maple for ******* that up for you. I am bad at games with roles in general. I do much better without having to mess with claims and just playing mountainous games suits me way better.

 

Globear: You had a very distanced approach to supporting Reaper as scum, just enough to throw more doubt on him but not enough to be blamed for his flip. Some of your posts have a very odd tone to them like you know more than you're letting out.
Also partially gut feeling lol.

Prada: Incredibly high survivability is rarely for town, both lynches somehow went past him and onto other town which if he's town also is some damn amazing luck. His confrontations with Ningen were more than noticeable and the fact that he's still alive after everything is frankly worrisome.

SHINTO: I mean not much to say about him, low activity not as much as pickle but still down there, his posts come off as beating around the bush just to post without saying anything concrete town or scum. Might just be another case of beginner doubt but his only real relevance atm is the extra vote if he's town

also dunno who else it'd even be.
Got a fairly high town read on Rot and wowee
Mid town read on Rat and Quick
Low town read on Nick

rest are all hit or miss with no read due to no activity or just not much to work with in general.

 

So I'm going to ask you this.

Should I rescind my kill on Prada? We can lynch him this day phase, guarantee his death, and place certainty on Quick's alignment. The only person who is going to lose from this is scum and me. Scum because 1) if Prada scum, he dies and 2) if Quick is scum, he's exposed. For me, I will lose any possibility of gaining solid town cred aside from whatever shit I can come up with on the spot. This would be simpler to keep track of than the mess I just posted, unless I'm missing something.

My decision has already been placed, but I will rescind it depending what I hear from others.

Well, I played less than 10 mafia games so it's alright. This is just me trying to make the most of what I can interpret.

 

Musings there's not really I can say on my part - all you said is truth, I mean it doesn't mark me as scum but your facts are truth

What you bring up on Prada is interesting, he could easily flip either way, and you're right he has had some near misses

Shinto isn't a beginner so much as far as I know, this kind of activity in mafia is normal for him, and every time I've thought of him as scum he's turned out to be town, so Im personally going to tread carefully there.