Green Poet

Last post before I head off. This is fair, as I can see how SB has been unmemorable to anyone not specifically looking out for his (infrequent) posts. Normally I'd question whether or not citations of Elie's RVS posts and brief Boron sheeping are still relevant when there are more recently active people with content to comment on and case, but given that Via has said that his focus is on unmemorable/blending people, Elie does arguably fit that criteria... It may appear to be a votepark because my vote on you is fairly distant from the actual text where I talk about your posts. That's because what prompted the vote was me deciding that Cam was no longer scummy for the reasons I'd initially voted him for, so I settled on voting my last-established scumread while in the middle of discussing Cam's posts, rather than yours. Not the best formatting, I know, sorry for that. My case on you is the text around the first two quote boxes of that post, for reference. Lemme know what you think when you do get into the mood for it.

Uh, I can pretty much only be on SF around this hour, so... with 13 hours left in the phase, I'm not confident I can be around for phase end. Just a heads up. If I am around, it'll be on a crappy phone with slow page loads .-.

I didn't think this would require explanation, but policy vigging is a thing and is not my original idea. Less game-related: If you think that your state is inhibiting your ability to play or to receive criticism, I'd suggest just taking a break and coming back when you're feeling more up to it. We're here playing a game, for fun, so you don't need to feel stressed to always avoid making mistakes or to never play poorly. We're not trying to insult you for your play. As Boron said, we have all experienced being new to this game, and that is not something to give yourself a hard time over. Take it easy.

The second part of the argument that you had an issue with was focused on Boron saying "harping on word choice," and the first part of the argument that you were in agreement with was focused on "mountain out of a molehill." So I'm aiming to discuss different things that merit different explanations. There's probably misunderstanding here because I wasn't telling Boron how to scumhunt, or how to examine my posts for scuminess. What I tried to do with that post was to explain to Boron why I personally see the benefit in "harping on word choice" and "making mountains from molehills." Those are things that she disagrees with, so my post only justifies why I do them, and doesn't try to advise her to do them.

I didn't see your most recent post as I was writing mine, so my recommendation to vig you was based on the two posts of yours that I had seen from about a (real 24 hour) day ago: That's entirely vig-worthy because the only serious comment from the first vote is "I don't think that the first four pages' worth of Junko cases is worth commenting on," and the second post is "Thanks for giving me a summary, Shin" yet don't give your thoughts on said summary. I think that you see the similarities between these two posts and what you were posting D1 during Batmafia. We can't call it scummy and we can't draw a lot of meaning from it, hence vig-worthy. I don't mean to offend in saying it. I will be looking that most recent post when I get the chance.

I'm seeing a fair bit of self-meta from Via and justification/explanation of his own reactions to others' posts. For example, my takeaway from this relatively lengthy post is just "I might have convinced myself that Junko was scum, but I'm not really sure anymore." It's quite wordy and possibly more filler than just self-conscious phrasing. I'm inclined to believe the frustration expressed here is genuine, but I still have an issue with this post because it still says little about the game, and a lack of content is not necessarily excused from being scummy by genuine frustration. I read this as just "I spent a lot of effort on my last post and dislike how Shin seemed to ignore it even when it involved him." The post doesn't comment on what this means about Shin's alignment, or anyone else. I'd really like to see more posts from Via discussing other players when he's feeling up to it, because so far his posts do read like coasting, especially so because he's not voting anyone at present. This is a good observation. "What do you think of X?" can be a fine conversation starter, but after going back to each of the individual posts that Cam quoted, I don't feel like that's Junko's genuine intention. Most of the time, it reads like scum trying to divert attention away from himself. Coupled with the fact that there are like five or six quoted instances in which Junko asks these kinds of questions, I'm doubtful that they are all motivated by some actual curiosity. The back-and-forth between Cam and Junko does not completely sink my townread on the latter, but it is making me reconsider it. It's not so much the specifics of what Junko's saying, but rather how his posts become increasingly defensive (i.e. "here's my response to every single point from #1, 2, 3 ... 9 of what your criticisms were") and abandon expressing reads on others. I think Cam's posts, particularly those involving Junko, have become more understandable to me and thorough than those of his from ED1 discussing SB. I also think that it is unlikely that Cam is bussing Junko, as the page 9 high-effort Junko tunneling appears genuine. Because of this, I'm going to ##Unvote: Cam ##Vote: Via Then you've succeeded. I'll say that I'm not examining the "wrong" words intentionally. I wouldn't have tried if I knew that they were not meant to be focused on. Regardless, I don't think that continuing talking about this is going to do much towards finding scum. This looks the same as Izuhark's play from Batmafia ED1. Not going to vote someone based on blatantly/deliberately bad posting. He should be vigged on policy if it continues. I've been thinking about what this could say about about Paper's alignment for quite some time, and have not come up with any certainty. I don't think it's the best reason to vote someone, as "I know you're better than this as town, therefore right now you're not town" doesn't sound like the most reliable scumtell, and it is fundamentally a case based entirely on meta. But I am not Paper and do not know the extent of his expectations from, or familiarity with, town!SB's play, and don't feel entirely capable of commenting on whether or not such a case is alignment-indicative. SB's response also agrees with this... so I suppose it's OK? I honestly feel like I'm trying to read players outside of my capacity to here.

You don't need to elaborate, no, but it is constructive to do so. Not elaborating what you mean when you state "These are the usual Shin antics" can lead me to guess many things about what you mean. I'm not Cam or Elie, and I do not know what they think or what their experience with Shin is. For you to think that "Cam and Elie already know this, therefore I don't need to elaborate on it for their benefit" may possibly be true, but it doesn't hurt to confirm this through a more explicit statement. Beyond the two of them, there are other players in the game who will read your post who will be as ignorant of the situation as myself, and because of that, it behooves you to help all of us understand what you are trying to say about Shin. I see, makes sense. I'm definitely trying to find a large, sweeping conclusion from a small beginning indicator. It's D1 and we have little more than joke votes with which to hunt for scum - we all start with the molehills that are brief and non-serious RVS posts and must arrive at the mountains that are serious cases and accusations. If you feel like I'm rushing towards my conclusions of who is scum, or being overly presumptuous about it, I'm more than willing to explain my thought process in more detail. Harping on word choice is one of the things that can get me from RVS to a solid case. If I'm scum, I'm going to type differently than I would as town. There are going to be written mannerisms I forget to replicate and typos that can give away an antitown thought process. We're playing this game entirely through text, so the only thing to examine, and jump on, are words. I can see that it may be uncomfortable and feel excessive, especially if you are town, but I hope you can see why I'm doing it. Junko actively went for the most visible option available to him. He was prompted to voice a scumread on one of two players, and chose instead to vote the person who asked him to do this. It's not a vote motivated by appeasement or the scummy intent to blend into an acceptable answer. It goes against the norm in order to spark an impassioned conversation, and this visibility is not antitown. If I could quantify the towniness of his reaction, I would say that it outweighs his first, scummy post.

Sorry, I should have included ##Unvote: Oceanbourne before that vote. Also, before I forget to mention it again, I'm a mayor so my vote counts as two.

This is scummy because it's a justification for a joke vote that isn't the first vote on the Shin wagon. An initial joke vote is to be expected in RVS, but someone trying to cash in a vote on the same person's wagon, via the same joke, is scummy. This is a more succinct explanation of what I mean re: above. I do see what Junko is getting at with this post. I had a similar gut reaction to reading this that's a little difficult to put into words. It feels dismissive. It's commenting on what Shin's doing without taking a stance. Yes, it may be his usual behavior, so does that mean it's not alignment indicative? If it's not alignment indicative, why not elaborate and state explicitly "You guys should stop voting Shin, because he always jokes like this"? Instead of making that comment clear, suggesting that we should be, or that you are, "moving on," without introducing anything new to actually move everyone's attention towards feels empty. This exchange makes Junko look like over-defensive town. It's a really bad vote on Quote though. ? Cam, you had something to say on Shin, Junko, and Boron. Even if you're not sure what to make of the Junko/Boron topic, this SB vote is non-contributory and doesn't line up with what you're saying. I would have expected a "Paper, why do you say that my posts shit and what would you like to see elaborated?" instead. This kind of dismisses the issue, and avoids calling Paper out on his insubstantial accusation, because Paper has yet to explain what he finds faulty about Cam's posts at all. If I were Cam, I'd pressure Paper for that comment. Why? So... there's no stated reason in all of Cam's points up till now as to why he's voting SB, or thinks that SB is scum. ##Vote: Cam Junko reads town. Boron reads null.

##Vote: Oceanbourne

confirming

/in

oh I ded

fuck it ##Unvote ##Vote: Mancer Quick list of thoughts: A synopsis of Mancer's ISO is more or less "tunnel Gaius" Between a scumread on a new player and a scumread on someone who's played several SF games before, the latter should be more solid Mancer also has more interactions that will be valuable to read into postflip Would rather mislynch announcer than joat I feel like town!Mancer would have tried to contribute something in particular with his announcer role Dreamer posting her vote simultaneously with TG just now makes me convinced that they cannot both be scum

I may not be here at deadline. Need 7 to lynch. TG's at 4 and Mancer's at 3. Going to reread Mancer's ISO. Still prefer TG > Mancer right now personally.

Nah, I don't feel that a discussion of my role is relevant to today's lynch

That grammar theory was the graspiest case I've ever written good lord I still think it's got a solid chance of being true though

I don't buy the claim. We already have an essentially non-functional JoaT in the game; it strikes me as odd in terms of setup balance that there would exist, within the same setup, a JoaT with actually useful/powerful abilities, and what is essentially a vanilla/joke PR-giver JoaT. Like, at that point, I would just look at the setup and think, "Izhuark's role isn't actually powerful, so is there a point of making it a JoaT in name, when I see it juxtaposed with an actual JoaT on the same faction? I may as well move parts of the 'real JoaT' onto the 'joke JoaT' and help make the setup a little less swingy." Overall, TG's claim is not entirely unrealistic, but it seems unnatural to me. Compounded with the fact that we already have an unlimited-shot doc flipped, I feel like it's a stretch to give us another doc shot? Furthermore, her N1 investigative action conveniently does not tell us anything original, and she didn't corroborate Clarinets' action before when such a contribution would have been relevant. Now, there isn't a precedent in her posts that would give us reason to think that this claim wasn't faked shortly before it was posted. My last issue with the claim is entirely semantics-related, but I think it is potentially very telling. I don't like how TG stated how she has "one-shot of both a watcher, decoy and doctor." While it's possibly just a typo, TG has made zero grammatical errors in her posts up till now that have stuck out to me. That there is one here just reads like she invented her third role on the spot and forgot to change the conjunction to "each" or something, because her claim is fake, and was initially written with two roles in mind. This becomes more likely when we consider the way TG likes to use Oxford commas. A brief examination of her public SF profile led me to this introduction: "You can call me Tiny, Manakete, or Sammy." (I hope I'm not imposing by citing something out-of-game-thread. I took an example of something that was relatively public and quick to access from her profile, so I hope that doesn't offend.) Note the use of the Oxford comma there, whereas no such comma is found in between "decoy and doctor" in her claim. Thus, I'm led to believe that her initially-written fakeclaim was "one-shot of both a decoy and doctor," before she found that she needed to fake her N1 investigation result and added "watcher, " to her claim without changing either her comma usage nor conjunction from "both" to "each."

At the time, I felt as though I was making no headway in negotiating or agreeing with any of my scumreads (Dreamer, Clarinets, Mancer) on... anything. Knowing that many of the players in this game, like TG, Izuhark, and Dreamer, are relatively/completely new to SF mafia, I felt that it would help get the urgency of my message through if I specified that voting Clarinets was genuinely crucial to keep the game going for everyone, including them, should they be scum. The wording is weird, I understand, as it involves trying to come to terms with scum on a rhetorical level. But considering that scum!GP would have just posted the message in the scumchat instead, I was confident enough that my motivations would not be misunderstood and that my saying "regardless of your alignment" would not distract from the focus of the situation. That's interesting. I actually hadn't gone through TG's overall SF post history, just her game ISO as provided by the hosts. It's something worth considering. Mm, I'll think about it!

ebwop

This does not necessitate that Mancer is town. Mancer could have performed an untrackable action, a concept that we know exists in this game due to Proto/Blitz's flip. I don't know whether or not being blocked usually makes you return a negative tracker scan, but if that is the case, it could also be a viable explanation if scum!Mancer attempted the N1 factional kill. All that said, the possibility of scum!announcer is fringe enough that I'm not going to push it... In examining what may have prompted scum to kill Izuhark (assuming Proto/Blitz was not the faction that killed him, and that the kill was deliberate), I can see two reasons: (1) they killed him for being a JoaT, either due to belief of his D1 softclaim or due to investigation, or (2) he was pushing cases on scum. I'm not really sure if (2) warrants a kill since Izuhark's only non-consolidatory vote of D2 was on Mancer, and the case was very brief and never expanded upon or revisited. Furthermore, there were some of us who would probably be larger threats to Mancer that posted about possibly lynching Mancer after Izuhark did, myself included. It's entirely possible that Mancer isn't even scum, and thus Izuhark's reads posed no threat to scum. Thus, I'm inclined to believe that there exists an investigative among the mafia. There's little to go on, but we can't take this anywhere without votes. ##Vote: Tiny Goddess "[izuhark's] claim seems to be pretty genuine, however odd and random as it may be. Eh, but that information could be used against him." See my analysis of Izuhark's death above as to why this D1 quote from TG is indicative of scum. I also don't like how noncommittal TG's general verbiage is while trying to present scumreads - in the post linked above, she says that she is "most mildly concerned" about Diego. Here, she says that her read on Dreamer is "extremely null." The terms try to impart weight and indifference at the same time, and end up looking contradictory. It's like TG is afraid of using stronger words to affirm investment for any of her scumreads. Here at the start of D2, she holds her vote because she wishes to wait for others who've not yet posted to give their thoughts first, but doesn't explain why those particular people or their opinions are important to her. It reads like she's waiting to feel out the climate of the everyone's reads and sheep them. This is a scum post. TG says that she now doesn't feel that Dreamer is scum because of the latter's recent post... why? TG expresses another null read on Sniper, without giving thoughts as to what she thinks of Sniper's claims, only that the claim felt genuine (yet not genuine enough to concretely make Sniper a townread? What else is needed beyond a perceived genuine tracker claim?). Most telling, that post is concluded with a sheeped case on Clarinets that isn't accompanied by a vote. TG went through the entirety of D2 without voting. If Clarinets is TG's only scumread as of late D2, there's no reason not to vote that I can imagine, short of not wanting to appear on the list of people who were on a town-flipped wagon. Bal talked about looking through the people on Diego's wagon at length yesterday, and I can see scum!Dreamer reading through that, and wanting to support a Clarinets lynch while still avoiding being examined.

Sniper should out his scan. It's odd that he is not dead, given a dead doc. Still considering flips and night actions, and what happened with mine. Will post in detail sometime soonish.

40 mins. ##Unvote ##Vote: Mancer Heavy speculation - If doc!Clarinets is true, then Proto was almost certainly the intended N1 NK. The only reason I can think of for his selection as the NK would have been because Proto switched from Diego to Mancer partway through D1, and scum would have been inclined to believe that he would continue to push Mancer after Diego's D1 mislynch. Hence, the possibility of scum!Mancer. A Mancer lynch also lets us confirm Sniper.

Okay, Clarinet's ISO didn't tell me anything new I'm on board with Dreamer/TG/No Lynch right now. Which do you all want to push?

No NK =/= "we can afford to carelessly lynch today because we're one death out of debt" This statement implies that we have a death quota to meet, and is antitown; the value of a lynch to us does not change based on the frequency or success of NKs until *YLO