Normal Game Thread Big Trouble in Little Salem

I would click the like button on your post if it was there for making the situation a lot more easier for me to understand, In the way you put it, c is what Nick was trying to do, which would be role fishing and make him almost automatically town. But you have to consider the fact that he could have just put up the post with no apparent reason there making that post a useless spam. Why he would do so, maybe to start conversion or to attract attention for some reason. Thank you for the simplification @Rotaretilbo

 

M8, you Chainsawing Prada?

 

What's that? You use so many phrases and abbreviations :ugh

 

Its where one group Scum defends a second group Scum member by attacking the person attacking the second Scum member.

 

Musings i always find it funny when lurking and inactivity is taken as a suspicion, it always seems like a bit of an excuse. That's not evidence and nor should it be counted as evidence.
For example if you were going to be lynched and just needed one more vote on someone else for them to have the majority and you tried to use that as evidence when they quoted multiple posts thatd be a silly move right?

Anyway you're banking your suspicion on two posts that tie in together? At this point you'd be better to say thats in instinctive

However, what she said is a bit off in the wording, but thats about it really

I agree with the retaining info and being limited in what he shares, I don't like it when a player does it but at least in my experience whenever they're voted off based on that they read as town

I agree with what you said abkut crimson repear, new or not what occured last dp was really weird when it came to their reactions and if they were scum given that it would have been a good move to get rid of ningen

 

hmm what reactions exactly? you're accusing me because i voted for ningen? anyone can mislynch you know. Plus i wasn't the only one to lynch him lol.

 

What you're saying is really vague and isn't really something you could back up your claim with. You're just rolling the dice at this point.

 

Because I stated that I linked them (they were literally all linked in the original post you quoted), and you said you looked them up "for me" which implies a failing on my part.

I mean, I don't really see you asking questions either. I see you making inane "reads" of people that even the people in question are like "what, that doesn't make sense?" in response. If that is scumhunting, then surely the logic game is as well. After all, just because people aren't wholly rational does not mean that they are wholly irrational either. Not to mention that you tried your hand at the logic game last time.

Actually, not really.

Aside from these beauties where you very explicitly state that, unless you say you think they are Town or Scum, you aren't giving a read, and even then it's not really a read unless it's part of a read list, there's very little to actually go on with Glob last game.

All we get is a couple posts about the "tone being off" and that you can't be assed to explain yourself. The rest of your posts are arguing about how Scum would automatically make an assumption for no reason, arguing that we shouldn't bother with something which is pointless only because you don't think everyone will participate, a handful of asinine observations, and complaining that Reaper isn't taking the game seriously enough.

Or were you referring to this game? Because neither of these posts is really an explanation. Mostly more vague, unsubstantiated platitudes.

"Some of their points seem Townish to me." Which points? Why do they seem Townish? Saying this means nothing.

"Their tone is more game solvey here." What the **** does that even ******* mean?

"Last game, they seemed more unsure of themselves."

Are you saying Glob seems more unsure of herself because she happened to ask people for their thoughts? Because she follows that up with her own thoughts!

"They talked more this game." How is this relevant to the tone of their opening posts?

So no, I don't think you've ever really substantiated what about Glob's "tone" was off last game but not this game in her opening post. It's just a series of worthlessly vague buzzwords that carry no actual meaning to disguise the fact that it's just a gut feeling.

Alright, let's back up.

I never said that Ningen had to be Scum. I consistently stated that Ningen's behavior was not alignment indicative. And I backed this up by exploring his possible motivations, and found that Town and Scum would have the same ******* motivation for asking about OGC.

You, on the other hand, looked at one possible motivation, made a bunch of arbitrary assumptions for no particular reason that you have still failed to ever explain, and then said "whelp, he's Town!" It was so stupid that even Ningen thought it was stupid.

So this is what an aneurysm feels like?

I listed a series of statements you made regarding the behavior of players last game, wherein you regarded the behavior as either suspicious of above suspicion. In each of the examples, the behavior you found suspicious was performed by someone who was Town, and the behavior you found above suspicion was performed by someone who was Scum. Considering that these statements were as vapid as all of your other "reads" have been, it can be said that you were wrong in each of these cases.

I don't need to "substantiate" this further, because the alignments are functionally public knowledge. We know who the Assassins were, and by proxy likely know who the Town were.

You felt that Prada's behavior was so unsuspicious that you felt the need to express that you felt "good" about his posts. He was Scum. You felt that Crisp's reaction to Reaper claiming was so over the top that you needed to call specific attention to it. She was Town. You explicitly stated that Reaper voting Glob was opportunistic, which is generally a thing that only Scum would do to Town, which would imply Reaper was Scum and Glob Town. Reaper was Town, and Glob was Scum. You accused Nick of hedging his reads, a thing Scum does to make it seem like they are contributing when they are not. He was Town.

This is not that difficult.

Right now, the only two people not participating are both chronic lurkers. Crisp hasn't had a real post in either of this game's iterations, and Shinto has barely met the requirement for a single day phase across three now.

A third party is a person or group who is not primarily involved in a situation. The "primary situation" in this game is the conflict between the Town and threats to the Town, aka the Anti-Town. Mafia, Cult, and SK are all threats to the Town. They are, therefore, not third party, as they are primarily involved in the situation.

When I refer to our enemies as Scum rather than Mafioso, I do so because the term "Scum" encompasses Mafioso, Cultists, and SKs. When I outline how a plan will impact Scum, I am referring not to how it will impact simply a Mafia, but how it will impact all Anti-Town forces. When I, then, refer to third parties in the context of this conflict between Town and Scum, I am referring to factions/wincons which are not part of that conflict. That is, the Survivors, Lynchers, Jesters (usually), etc.

Huh. So, has the community you're from ever considered playing to the Town wincon, though? Or do you just not have real third parties there?

Luckily, I don't really need them to. Because ignoring the inno/guilty meta just means that you're treated as Innocent, and if you really are a Miller, you're intentionally game throwing. Object, or participate. There is no middle ground.

Ah, I love how quickly you try and change the direction of the conversation. Where to even begin?

Just because something does not, in its own right, reveal Town or Scum, does not mean that something is pointless. Most of this game is going to be reading into things people say that do not, in themselves reveal alignment.

Revealing Town or Scum was not the point. You may a statement that it should be obvious that Nick was joking, and use this to go after Prada. My purpose is to demonstrate that more than just Prada took that stance, and that there was enough division that it isn't fair to fall back on the "it should be obvious" argument.

As it happens, I think that Nick was flagrantly trying to provoke a new player that he knew was prone to overreaction to claim while maintaining the excuse that it was "just a joke" later. That is to say, textbook role fishing. The difference is that, while this is what I think he was doing, I will never make a worthless appeal to ridicule "if you don't get it you're stupid" argument to try and dismiss those who disagree with me. Instead, I will outline why I think that this is what Nick has done, as I have done repeatedly now.

It's a second lynch made without having gained any additional information. The point of lynching, especially early in the game, is to gain information, so that the next lynch might be better informed. It's the same reason you generally don't want the Vigilante just popping off shots every night. You're more likely to hit Town than Scum on Day 1, so doubling down on the Day 1 lynch is misguided at best.

You really want to talk statistics? Statistically, assuming a similar setup to the first iteration, there's a 54% chance you get 0 Scum, a 39% chance you get 1 Scum, and a 7% chance you get 2 Scum with a double Day 1 lynch. By comparison, there's a 73% chance of getting 0 Scum and a 27% chance of getting 1 Scum with a single lynch. You bump up the odds of catching 1 Scum by a measley 10% at the cost of a ******* Towny. I mean, a one-for-one trade is great and all, but not when it's statistically more likely that you're just double mislynching.

The Day 1 lynch is an information lynch. If Town could consistently catch Scum on Day 1, the game wouldn't be any fun. To double down on this lynch, in particular, is madness. I could see doubling on a late game lynch, but the Day 1 lynch? Absolutely not.

I want to start by noting that you don't seem to know what "ad hom" means, if you think that would qualify as ad hom. Ad hom, short for argumentum ad hominem or argument to the person, generally refers a logical fallacy wherein a person insults their opponent in some irrelevant manner in place of offering an actual rebuttal. It refers to a shallow attempt to discredit the opposition without having a real argument. My pointing out that you apparently can't count past 2 is not an ad hominem attack for two reasons. First, I do not offer it in place of an argument, but alongside an argument. Second, because your ability or inability to count past 2 is relevant to my greater argument that you are seemingly grossly incompetent. I'll concede it as being a cheap shot, but not fallaciously so.

Anyway, if you were Scum, the assumption would be that you did not mix up the VCs, but intentionally pushed the Ningen lynch over the edge. That'd only really work if Prada was your partner, but the alternative is believing you so incapable that you couldn't count past 2. Of course, delving into this mystery wasn't really the point of that bit of post. That is, after all, what "nevermind" means, is it not? I just wanted to hear your explanation for why we would ever want to double lynch on Day 1. The answer was, like many of your rebuttals, "because reasons."

That all said, I don't think if I've ever accused you of being Scum at all, thus far. To be quite honest, as the above may have indicated, I think it more likely that you're just grossly incompetent. I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt and try to not assume gross incompetence on the part of another, but the impression you left on me in the last iteration was one of a person who was an unideal mix of highly self-confident and grossly ignorant, and your behavior thus far has nicely lined up with that impression.

I call attention to what I see as your failings throughout the thread, not because I think I'll catch Scum, but in the vain hope that maybe, by having your flaws laid bare, you might seek to improve yourself, which will in turn allow me to more easily catch Scum because I'll have to worry less about false positives due to incompetence. Failing that, I hope to prevent others from giving too much credence to your intrinsically flawed arguments by identifying and explaining those flaws.

It may surprise you to learn that "almost always" and "always" happen to mean different things. The particular post I happen to be mocking, for reference, is this:

Wherein you call attention to your "correct" assessment of Ningen and claim that you are more often right than wrong, in reference to people having the audacity to doubt your "reads" on others. I'll concede that "almost always" and "more often than not" are not quite the same thing either, but, at the risk of sounding like you, that's the tone I got from that post.

Alright, so back up. Why would rolefishing (that is, provoking an undesired claim without appearing to be responsible for said claim after the fact) be a pro-Town action in your eyes?

Not really. I just thought it was interesting that you explicitly Town read both Prada and Ningen earlier in the game, well after the Nick thing had been discussed, and then, with seemingly no new information, shifted to pushing a lynch on both of them. For someone who is "more often right than wrong" and, more importantly, seems supremely confident in himself, it seemed very strange for you to suddenly and completely shift on a read without any real reason.

It's cute that your responses to my accusation thus far have been to try nitpicking the wording and then OMGUS me, though.

 

One thing, Rot, I do want to say is that I do feel like it was fairly easy to mix up the vote count. having it done in a seperate thread with no vote counts meant even I was missing votes when trying to work out where everything was, so I can see someone thinking they've tied the vote only to have missed some votes from earlier in the thread without them being unable to count to two. Especially during the end of the day, when everything was getting pretty hectic.

 

No, since i am specifically bringing up your reactions to Ningen and Falcon asking you questions and you stopping to defend yourself, and then at least for me i dont think you responded to anything I said or asked you about it afterwards. Then when he was lynched, going town. People stopped talking about that with less focus on you and started focusing on others.

 

By the way @Quick @Rotaretilbo

I wouldnt factor in how much i posted this game compared to a last game as a hint to determine if im scum or not - there was only 1 and a bit dp in which i was lynched in the first, i was asleep when i was lynched and i was busy. In fact i wasnt online for most of that day &.& so i wouldn't use that as a hint either way

 

Lol might as well throw the game lol. What's so suspicious about me defending myself? Well, because there was nothing to respond to.They were all just the same as your recent post. That my logic was fallacious or that i seemed to be nervous. Yet up-till now you haven't explained why..

 

I always said about the interactions, you not defending yourself lalala
No, it's not defending yourself thsts the problem. That 3 pages in you were done with it.

 

Deciding to lynch nick since he really just seems to me that he's role fishing. Not sure yet.

 

Yeah because it was late. Do I not have the right to sleep now? I have responsibilities too you know.