Mini Mafia 1018 - Race with the Devil [hidden]

[celaph]

especially as a late jumper to lfischl

You shouldn't be scum reading me for my late vote. Anyone who can read can see I didn't believe in it. If you want to scum read me for something, scum

i don't care

voting is voting

if you were the tiebreaker, think of that towncred you'd get

ergo, that was a scummy vote (or at least not-town)

For you to argue that it is a scummy vote you should really make a case why I (town celaph) wouldn't have voted there. If it's a case in which you think that both town celaph and scum celaph would have behaved identically then that's the definition of NAI.

[celaph]

You shouldn't be scum reading me for my late vote. Anyone who can read can see I didn't believe in it. If you want to scum read me for something, scum

*Scum read me for defending him all day.

they were tepid and uninteresting defenses

You are right that it was more hedging that lfischl playing similarly to past games was TI than anything else. I'm still surprised you put more emphasis on the vote than my history of messages that make my lack of interest in the vote obvious.

[celaph]

Side note: I do find it rather notable that Bona was absent for the 80 minutes before EoD and then appeared rather quickly after the results were shared.

[celaph]

i don't care

voting is voting

if you were the tiebreaker, think of that towncred you'd get

ergo, that was a scummy vote (or at least not-town)

This keeps eating at me. What are you trying to say here? Saying it's a scummy vote because breaking the tie in lfischl's favor would appear townie is tautological, because a town celaph wouldn't know that to be the case. Celaph's point is that his vote wasn't ever going to get him any towncred, and thus should be NAI, not that his vote is townie.

On assumption celaph is town, he doesn't deserve anything for his vote. This is unverifiable immediately, so we must keep it in mind but not use it too much.

However, breaking the tie in this situation often will get the breaker towncred. Scum!celaph most likely knows this and therefore, we must consider scum!celaph voting scum!lfischl as for towncredit. If this were to be the case, then celaph would have fooled us. This is bad, and deserves caution. Therefore, this vote must be considered not-town.

Taking these two together (nothing, and not-town), on balance that was a not-town vote, which, given usual patterns of celaph's behavior, is scummy.

This post has a number of glaring flaws.
1. Looking at it for whether I deserve credit is a dumb way to look at it, I obviously don't.
2. The fact that you can't verify that I'm town doesn't give you blanket cover to avoid analyzing the situation.
Why don't you think that town celaph would vote like I did? As I mentioned earlier, I don't care how strongly incentivized scum would have been to vote there if town would have also voted there.
3. The alignment of a player has no relevance on whether or not their action was scummy or towny. Just because a town does something doesn't make that action towny and not all actions by scum are scummy.
You've discussed why scum are incentivized to vote there, but that doesn't mean that voting anti-town.
4. You can't just take "averages" of deserved credit, even if you derived it correctly, and use that to dictate how you act.

[celaph]

Is that because there's basically nothing to read?

I'd say a combination of this and because his comments and questions are often surface level, direct, and not insightful giving him the appearance of not trying to solve.

weird post
why point this out?
why do an actual analysis on this chain of posts?

Because I'm not sold on Bona's argument that lfischl is impossible to read. And it's not just because he posts so little. He has had a couple town games with many more posts where he still ends up getting killed quite quickly. I had a theory about his behavior being indicative of a normal, town, lfischl. Obviously I was wrong.

[celaph]

##vote Kak for the fluff he was filler he was putting out.

@kak, you said that you were fishing for reactions yet a number of your posts so obviously contained no information that it makes me wonder what reaction you were expecting for besides being dismissed/ignored. What conclusions have you drawn from them?

I'm also partial to Maniac and Worcej wagons given their lack of content. lfischl also falls into this category, but his posts felt very normal and so I'm less inclined to vote for him.

maniac for lack of content?
really?
and not lfischl?

i disagree with kak reasoning but its at least fine and i could see someone thinking that

Yes, Maniac provided incredibly little content especially the latter half of that day.

As I noted above, I had commented on my reasons for not wanting to vote lfischl hence his exclusion here despite the obvious lack of content. Rdr is the other name that I didn't bring up mostly because I D1 bias rdr enough that I'm not inclined to kill him.

[celaph]

@Kak, go look at lfischl's M67 where he was town. It strikes me as similarly unimpressive to his play today.

it strikes me as odd how many times celaph pointed out lfischls inactivity as normal
and wanted to kill specifically in the non-lfischl lurkers

I wasn't pointing how normal his inactivity was. You might note that M67, the game I highlighted, he was way more active with 61 posts.

What I wanted to highlight is that his approach of asking incredibly simple questions this game reminded me of town lfischl in past games.

[celaph]

Kak is so scummy here and I don't know why others aren't seeing it.

that wouldve looked a lot worse if worcej was scum
as it stands it doesnt look too bad now
i think

Why would it have looked worse if Worcej is scum? I feel like Jamie looks decent for calling out Kak's move to lfischl.
As is, I feel like it looks alright, but mostly because I don't expect that scum Jamie there is in the mindset there of accusing Kak knowing Kak is right.

[Maniac]

@kak - could you explain your final vote. I’m assuming you x-posted with Celaph. It looks like you were happy to make it 3-2-2-2 and allow IfishL to then tie it. Why vote bib but suggest/encourage IfishL to vote WorceJ?

[celaph]

You shouldn't be scum reading me for my late vote. Anyone who can read can see I didn't believe in it. If you want to scum read me for something, scum

*Scum read me for defending him all day.

okay i can do that

Sweet. That's a far better reason than for my vote.

[celaph]

do you think it was BobMcBob?

Maybe. Celaph's vote means nothing, but I think Bona agrees with that. I think you, Fox (partially for independent townread reasons), and Maniac have earned a little while at least.

so in that case nobody would be the busser?
or you dont really think anyone was bussing?

@bob, do you think anyone was bussing?

[Jamiet99uk]

Ghug and Jamie super scum.

Inaccurate.

[Jamiet99uk]

Kak is so scummy here and I don't know why others aren't seeing it.

that wouldve looked a lot worse if worcej was scum
as it stands it doesnt look too bad now
i think

How do you know that Worcej is not scum?

[Jamiet99uk]

You seem convinced that Bona is town.

Interesting.

i think bona just says that stuff for fun

This is another example of Jamie making out comments to be strongly-held reads in an attempt to discredit the commenters.

I am not making any "attempts to discredit". That's your style, Ghug. I'm town and I'm responding to things as I see them.

You are really starting to test my patience with your zealous tunnelling.

[Jamiet99uk]

<inane rambling>

This post has a number of glaring flaws.
1. Looking at it for whether I deserve credit is a dumb way to look at it, I obviously don't.
2. The fact that you can't verify that I'm town doesn't give you blanket cover to avoid analyzing the situation.
Why don't you think that town celaph would vote like I did? As I mentioned earlier, I don't care how strongly incentivized scum would have been to vote there if town would have also voted there.
3. The alignment of a player has no relevance on whether or not their action was scummy or towny. Just because a town does something doesn't make that action towny and not all actions by scum are scummy.
You've discussed why scum are incentivized to vote there, but that doesn't mean that voting anti-town.
4. You can't just take "averages" of deserved credit, even if you derived it correctly, and use that to dictate how you act.

A solid rebuttal.

[Jamiet99uk]

i think bona just says that stuff for fun

This is another example of Jamie making out comments to be strongly-held reads in an attempt to discredit the commenters.

I am not making any "attempts to discredit". That's your style, Ghug. I'm town and I'm responding to things as I see them.

You are really starting to test my patience with your zealous tunnelling.

To expand on this since Ghug and I don't communicate well, let me be really clear:

1. I accused Bona of trying to earn town brownie points in a suspicious way.

2. Bob said he "really doubted" that this had been Bona's intention.

3. I interpreted this to mean that Bob had a solid townread on Bona (otherwise why would he be so sure that Bona's intentions were pure?). I was interested in this so I responded to Bob, outlining my reaction.

4. This wasn't exactly what Bob had meant, so he clarified his view further, which is absolutely fine.

5. Ghug called me scum.

[Jamiet99uk]

But no, Ghug seems to think that:

Jamie reacts to someone's post = Jamie is trying to discredit that person.

Nonsense of course because Ghug is totally blinkered due to his general attitude towards me, but there we go.

[Jamiet99uk]

I declare to you all that my reactions are honest and that I have no hidden agenda.

If I am wrong, please tell me that I'm wrong. But any accusation that I am lying or twisting or attempting to discredit people is sadly misplaced.

[Jamiet99uk]

So I've taken a final look back at Lfischl.

Lfischl made 11 posts.

4 of his 11 posts were opposing Ghug's early push on Vecna.
2 of his 11 posts were asking about Vecna "squawking".

His 10th post contained the very weird claim that:

"If one of ghug and jaime are scum then the other definitly is. If we were to vote one of them out and they were town then i think the other one would be town as well."

In other words, claiming that Ghug and I must be of the same alignment. I can't quite fathom why Goon Lfischl would make that post. I know that I am town and we all know that Lfischl was scum. The scenario of scum Lfischl soft-bussing scum!Ghug in order to shade me if Ghug flips before I do seems highly unlikely. The scenario of scum Lfischl claiming that Ghug is town if I am town, in order to give towncred to Ghug if I flip before he does, is marginally more appealing but still seems fairly unlikely.

So, I don't know what he was doing there.

Interesting that he had a mild Vecna fetish, though.

The lack of a vote just looks like nervous scum. Has Lfischl been scum before? I've looked back over a few games.

In M67 Lfischl was VT. He voted mid-way through D1 and moved his vote once.
In M65 Lfischl was VT. He voted early in D1 and moved his vote several times.
In M1016 Lfischl was VT. He voted mid-way through D1.
In M64 Lfischl was a Town PR. He voted early in D1 and moved his vote several times.

I think M64 was Lfischl's first game. So this current game was his first time as scum.

Conclusion: Town Lfischl seems to have no fear of voting. Today Lfischl seemed very reluctant to vote. Kak has observed that Lfischl was online a few minutes before EoD. Meanwhile in this game Lfischl lurked and was afraid to vote. This might suggest that either Worcej or Celaph is scum and Lfischl was worried about voting for his team-mate. It doesn't explain why he wouldn't just plonk a vote on me, though.

[Maniac]

@Jamie - the more you say ‘I’m not scum’ the more I want to vote for you.