molestargazer

C8T - I haven't got time to read all that now, but a few points I can address that I saw whilst flicking through. 1) It doesn't take you 6 pages to learn how to play the game. That's just an excuse for not contributing. I have exams right now. It doesn't stop me from contributing - there's evenings to post in as well as days. 2) How in the blue f*ck can this case be OMGUS? Trust me, I really don't care about the Ad-Hom debate. It's all part of playing mafia. I understand your voting for me, I understand the reasons - but you're wrong. I'll address the rest of them when I get back. Now, gotta go. Law exam won't write itself.

Quite frankly, at this moment in time, I don't know. I am reasonably confident, right now, that C8T is the most likely to be a druggie. If we lynch him, and I'm correct, we can look at other players' relationships with him in the game and how people react to votes against him.

I certainly what to see what he says before we go for a lynch.

I've done a thorough reread. I have made my conclusions on C8T impartially. There's not much I can add to it other than that. Read what I've said. Trust me. I'm fairly confident in my result.

Oh, bugger. EBWOP: This puts Captain8Track at a ScumPoint™ score of +2. The end of Day 1 post I've read as fairly pro-town. His other arguments are often flawed, and he lurked during D1. My gut doesn't have an opinion either way about him. But my re-read shows more scummy than the other 2 on the Falzis wagon. Feel free to respond to any points I've made. There may be problems or typos. Please just point them out and I'll explain them, don't just jump on me for them.

CAPTAIN8TRACK The one that will be most interesting of the three. With both KH and Narsis at -2 ScumPoints, this read will certainly determine who gets my vote. This was C8T's first post after Curufinwe's random vote on him: Now, this would usually be classed as huge OMGUS. There's only so many points I can excuse with the NewbieCard, but I think this is one of them. It does make me want to keep an eye on C8T though - the fact he didn't notice other 'random' votes and note this might be one of them... Could be Newbie or Nervous Scum. And that was his only post in 3 pages. +1. There's not really much to pick up on here. What I will say in his favour is that he's voting using what he has. This was his THIRD post in 6 pages. I've already added a point for the lurking, so, I'll leave it as it is. I have coloured in orange points that I will be replying to. 1) Interesting how he thinks BOTH of mine and Falzis' points could have been an intentional thing to mislead. C8T - At this point, did you think we both might be anti-town because of our constant posting? 2) Interesting also how he points out the other players for 'lurking' when he is doing just as much. Being new doesn't excuse you from posting. He might be trying to divert attention from himself. 3) This, however, is a good point. Quite frankly, there's good and bad points in this post. The WIFOM thing is good, but he appears to be making no solid case and simply fence-sitting between myself and Falzis, and calling out all the others for not posting. For this, I'm going to give him a +1. But it's a close call. Now, the post which may be really quite interesting. Now, I'm not really sure what to make of this. Since this was SO close to the end of the day, and that may(?) have been the hammer vote, I can certainly agree with calls that he's druggie switching to quicklynch scum. However, the reasoning is THERE. I don't particularly like how he plays the newbie card again, but I can let him off for that, as the rest of it really is quite good. -1 for this post. And now we reach DAY 2. Of course, the reasoning is fair. And indeed, it'd be normal for someone to think that. I don't like how he called my lynch blatant when just the day before he said that Falzis cast the first serious vote, and my first vote on Falzis was 'flippant'. Tempted to give a point, but I won't. Once again, further belief that he doesn't believe my pressure vote - when yesterday, he thought it was very convincing. I'm going to give a +1 this time for that continued push. And now we enter the final phase in the game - the whole debate between myself and C8T, with the whole 'ad hom' business. So let's gogogo. Using purely the same evidence against me again, without giving care to any of the logic I used in my scumhunt. He sites KevinH as 'very insightful' - if I remember correctly, KevinH wasn't amazingly insightful during my reread - but he does pick up on the 'under the radar' thing. If he flips Druggie, I think Canucks would be worth a read. He suggests we should focus on 'KevinH or Narsis as some type of scum', which suggests he thinks they might be MAFIA - could be due to knowledge of who really is druggie, or it could be a mistake. Either way, by this point it had been mentioned several times that we needed to lynch druggie today. He then explains his switch - however, I think that had he pushed he may have been able to get me lynched, so I'm not entirely sure I buy this. +1 for the above. The 'Ad Hom' he quoted was me asking why he went with Falzis rather than me, and ended with 'Or were you just aligned with him?'. Yes, it's aggressive. But yes, it's a valid point. I can understand his points against me, though. He refutes the SAME logical reason. C8T - At the time of posting, was that purely the reason you wanted to kill me for? Because I haven't noticed any others during D2 you posted. 1) The attack did appeal to reason. I asked you why you agreed with Falzis, and stated a possible reason. Yes, it's a bit of an attack you on. But there's logic in there too. 2) I disagree that all mafia games are WIFOM. WIFOM is trying to second-guess the mafia. Mafia is all about looking at what people post and deducting from that. It's not all trying to second-guess them, because that would never work. 3) Once again, you are absolutely right in that you can't prove anything, and I agree you're playing the odds. But I'm a townie. -1 for your reasoning here, despite it coming to an incorrect conclusion. This puts Captain8Track at a ScumPoint™ score of ___. The end of Day 1 post I've read as fairly pro-town. His other arguments are often flawed, and he lurked during D1. My gut doesn't have an opinion either way about him. But my re-read shows more scummy than the other 2 on the Falzis wagon. Feel free to respond to any points I've made. There may be problems or typos. Please just point them out and I'll explain them, don't just jump on me for them. SO, TO CONCLUDE, IN SCUMPOINTS: KevinH: -2 Narsis: -2 captain8track: +2 This is WITHOUT my 2 'bias' points that I mentioned before I started with the KevinH. And if I could, I wouldn't use them both. I would, however, give another -1 to Narsis. But for now, that's pointless. I'm going to cast my vote now - however, feel free to respond to any points. If it's done well enough I can still change my mind. Vote: captain8track

Wait and Bleed - Slipknot

Wherein Lies Continue - Slipknot

NARSIS This read may be a little more insightful - especially since Narsis has gathered a vote or two for the whole 'druggie' thing. Narsis' first 2 posts show nothing. Clearing up the mod thing and agreeing with KevinH's basic theory ideas. Random vote on me. Fine. This I disagree with, as I mentioned on my post at the bottom of the page. This was never answered. +1. Not much of a comment here. At this point in the game, theory discussion is still largely ongoing. Narsis steps into the Myself-Falzis debate shortly afterwards. Let's look at the post. Basically outlining the possibilites, but it's good logic, and does prove a flaw in Falzis' argument. Another good post pointing out flaws in Falzis' argument. -1 for these two. Still more. I'm not going to bother quoting them, but there's good arguments being presented. Another -1. An interesting post here. He has stated most of the way through D1 Falzis' faulty logic and the fact I make the better argument.. but here he's willing to kill me. Quick change of thoughts? +1. I like this scumhunting though. -1. More general good posts give Narsis another -1. Seriously. Read through his posts if you don't believe me. There's good arguments and scumhunting going on here. Narsis is also at a Scumpoint score of -2. Quite frankly, I'm getting even more of a pro-town feeling from Narsis than I am from KevinH. Any blips are less serious, and there's more logic and good scumhunting going on. I'm feeling this more than I did KevinH's -2. As with last time, feel free to respond to any points I've made. There may be problems or typos. Please just point them out and I'll explain them, don't just jump on me for them.

So, I think a good starting point from here would be who else was on the Falzis lynch besides me. Please bear in mind my Vote Counting skills have been known to be pretty dire. If you wish to redo this yourself if you spot any problems, feel free. Discount me, and EM (Dead), we have three people for investigation in suspicion of being DRUGGIES. So, if both druggies were on the wagon (Which seems fairly likely), then I have a 66% chance, which can with a bit of luck be increased by some scumhunting. Which is pretty heartening. - KevinH - Narsis - C8T Now, I'm thinking of doing this on a kind of points system - where each scummy post or thing that happens to a person gives them +1 scumminess points, anything I deem to be pro-town gives -1 scumminess points. I will be able to add or take 2 points from whoever at the end of ALL OF my rereads to account for gut instinct, general scumhunting, and anything I feel noteworthy (But only 2 as to not bias the results too much). Of course, if I point something out you are free to respond to it - I probably won't be casting a vote quite yet. Rather than going over a general reread and pointing out what I see, it might be better to do a post-by-post analysis of each person within the game, and pick out any off points that I see. KEVINH A read I'm not really forward to. I have a feeling it's not going to be easy to get a read on him. (Alright, this forum really sucks how you can't get a link to an individual post.) Not really much to see here. Just stating fact and starting off with your generic "Go Town!" kinda thing. So, +/-0. Shortly after this, Falzis agrees with KevinH's post, says to let RVS continue, but doesn't vote. I don't really know what to make of this, but if we see any more of it, it could be worth a mention. KevinH's second post is used to spell out theories of how druggies would react (Jesus christ, my chair just nearly collapsed. I'm only 50kg or so.) to voting patterns on Day 1, and comments on how a druggie might die overnight - this was based on the idea that the scum would try and kill someone on the wagon, which they did. Also a nulltell. The third post is reply to me, also in this vain. Interestingly in Post 4, KevinH places his trust in NKs... In this scenario, a scum is labelled as being killed D2. Here we have no possibility of mentioning a druggie lynch. Post 5 finally concludes this (Mentioning said druggie lynch), then states 'Let's find out who they are', but states that the dealers couldn't force the lynch of a townie - which EM disagrees with. There's an explanation as well, so KH is looking good. -1 for general pro-town posts so far. Just putting this here. It could be useful in future. Despite saying he's giving up on the theory, at this post, KevinH isn't contributing to the ongoing myself-Falzis debate and airing his opinions on the subject, but is indeed contributing to theory again. +1. Which actively puts control in those who DO read, which could be druggies. I don't think it makes you scum or druggie, but it's not a good, pro-town action. No, a druggie would want the mafia dead so he could get the power to night kill. Is this a deliberate attempt to mislead? -1 for pointing this out. This seemed a fairly pro-town post to me. He gave the reasonings Re. Falzis, kept it short and to the point. -1. More theory posting, with little else being added to the discussion. I would've liked to see more. Does this make him more likely to be a drug dealer? I don't know. So now we move onto D2. Nothing to say here. I don't like this. Bussing can happen, as I mentioned. It was, however, explained. So fair enough. This is very much worth mentioning. It could also be C8T being a druggie and switching to finalise the lynch will good reasoning. Here, KevinH is voting for people who he thinks might be mafia - despite the fact that HE pointed out in D1 we have a fair need to lynch a druggie today. +1. This could be an honest mistake. It could also have been a failed attempt to mislead. I've already put a scumpoint for this saga, so I'll leave it for now. The post on May 14 gives me a strong town-tell. -1. Agreeing with C8T without adding anything to it, and simply sliding me to the top because of it. I've spotted one or two problems with said post, which I'll point out in my analysis of C8T to come later. This puts KevinH at a ScumPoint score of -2. With the odd blip, I've read him as fairly pro-town. Feel free to respond to any points I've made. There may be problems or typos. Please just point them out and I'll explain them, don't just jump on me for them. The other 2 analyses will come when I've written them. You'll have to bear with me though, I have an exam on friday.

1. If I'm right, the odds are on my side. With some scumhunting, I should be able to pluck a druggie. 2. When I go for a lynch, I will go for the person who has the strongest case against them. Hopefully this can help prove my alignment. Time to read through again with my new Slipknot CD and see what I can pick out.

Yep, accepted your invite bcnd.

I don't know how I can persuade you otherwise. Everything I can say to defend myself has been said. It's very likely that even if I survive today, suspicion on me will still be high. HOWEVER. I'd like to offer the town a deal which will be one last chance to save my skin. Today, I'll read through and make a case on the person who I most believe to be one of the two druggies. If the town follow through with this, and we lynch a druggie, I'm in the clear. If not.. you can lynch me tomorrow. Thoughts?

All Hope Is Gone - Slipknot

Saying "you're scum" doesn't mean it's an attack on your character. Mafia sometimes gets heated. It's how it happens. Yes, I was trying to drive it. I thought Falzis was scummy, so I pushed the lynch. It worked. He was scum. Oh, please. I was MOST suspicious of him on the posts made. Doesn't mean it was a lot. I've stated that so many times I'm starting to go blue in the mouth. I perfectly understand why you think I'm a druggie. Sorry, but you're wrong.

That's ad hominem. It's about the game, yes, but it's still ad hominem. It in no way refutes my logic. It simply casts baseless aspersions on me. That isn't ad hom. Granted, it's aggressive. I am asking you why you went with him though. Just want an answer. It was luck. There's not much I can say to prove otherwise, but that's what it was. And I know you're wrong. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions. It wasn't random. It was a pressure vote using all the information I had at the time. You don't have it on your side any more than I do. I'm not a druggie. It was luck. You can't prove that any more than I can.

No. No it isn't. Saying "That's what a druggie would do" is WIFOM again. We don't know what the druggies would do. They could do anything to throw us off guard. My pressure vote was just that, a pressure vote. I had NO, ABSOLUTELY NO intentions of going for Falzis until his responses with bag logic made me pick up on him. I have stated this over, and over, and over, and over again. I thought he was scummy from his responses. I used scumhunting, and I was right. I am NOT a druggie. You went with him? Why? You think his logic was better? Or are you just aligned with him? So, your logic is, because I scumhunted well, and killed a mafia member, I'm against the town?

For mafia, those are pretty good odds. I don't know who the scum are. I picked up on Falzis for his aggressive and incorrect responses to my pressure vote, no more. Doesn't mean I'm a druggie. I don't like this bit. You don't want to vote, but you believe my attack on Falzis was a BLATANT showing of my alignment? No. FoS: captain8track I'm fine with this - however, could you please quote some of these 'responses' you find scummy and say why?

Good song. Dead Memories - Slipknot

Just a townie here. So do I. I won't get into WIFOM about it though. This bit raises an eyebrow. It's very possible for scum to jump onto a wagon to lynch their scumbuddy and ride out the rest of the game. I'm not comfortable with instantly clearing everyone on the wagon. Nothing wrong with a pressure vote. The vast majority of that time in that whole scenario, I was repeatedly defending my actions to Falzis. Only when he continued with the same broken logic did I attack, as would any decent townie. I did not know Falzis' alignment until he was dead. I only had my confidence in my scumhunting.

I only have Live Silver, I'm more of a PC gamer, but feel free to add me anyway. mole70 I have: (Ranked in order of popularity right now) - Mirror's Edge (<3) - Guitar Hero: World Tour - Halo 3 - MoH: Airborne - PGR 4

Psychosocial - Slipknot Bit of a contrast to REM.

Absolutely nothing. Might listen to some REM or something.

They were the basis for my vote. It doesn't mean that that vote was intended to kill. I have to give SOME reasonings for my vote, now, don't I?

1) Exactly. 2) No, no, no, no. A vote does NOT always mean to lynch someone. 3) I don't look at meta (A person's previous playstyle). If it's obvious enough to mean something, I'll pick it up (See - EM, KevinH). So, I don't know, and I'm not using that as a basis for my vote.