I hoped Galzria's case would provide a clearer look at his head than this, but I see mixed signals. Some of his accusations are plausibly legitimately misguided. Some of it is so much of a reach that it sounds manufactured, like the accusation that I deliberately avoided quoting in order to make my iso hard to read.
Then some of it is so illogical that it concerns me how he can glide over his own fallacy. He traced a path where I should want him lynched, because he made a gambit post. I can follow that and all, but when you finish the calculating area of a pentagon and get 133 degrees farenheit, you should check your answer and make sure it's reasonable. At a fundamental level, townies don't want to lynch townies and scum want to lynch townies. So a refusal to lynch a town aligned player is .. evidence of a town wincon. The only way to twist it otherwise is for Galzria to declare that he knows my skill value is less than needed to get an accurate gut read on him in spite of the gambit. He has no way of knowing that.
The fallacy of the argument lends itself to suspicion because you can trace along it more easily if Galzria is scum. For instance, my desire to lynch Galzria should be GAMBIT - TOWNTELLS. If Galzria knows towntells
should be zero, it's easier for him to ignore the term and have an otherwise valid argument that I should want to lynch him.
That was a whole lot of explication but isn't necessarily proportional to that concern. I was just trying to be clear. Overall Galzria really isn't someone I want to lynch today anymore, I think I can benefit too much by continuing to sift through D3 posting, and he's not scummy enough for me to feel a D2 Galzria lynch is sufficiently accurate.
#1: Stop right there! That's a foul!:
Referee is a brand of IIoA which is already a little black book tell. So.
Wait! Before I continue, I would like to point out that Pops rarely EVER quotes. His posts are VERY hard to read out of the context of the conversation happening around them. This is a blunting tactic used to make it harder to go back and make a strong case against him, because you can't always tell to whom he was referring, or why. So I'll do my best here to provide some context (as best I'm able), so that you don't get lost.
The above quote speaks for itself however. It's something he loves to claim others are doing (he used it as the backbone to his case on Axxle), but indeed is something Pops himself has subtly (at times) tried to do himself. Here's a sampling of Pops telling everybody else how to play. Again, most without context (as he was sure not to provide any):
First off, hypocrisy is not a scumtell. Lots of people think it is, and I don't think I've ever talked any of them out of it, but it's not. If two of the first four people to post in the thread are confirmed to be scum, and I was one of those 4 people, it is totally and utterly legitimate for me to point at another individual in the group and say "there's an unusually high probability you are scum". In the same way if that group is the group of people who have said "mafia" instead of "town" accidentally or the group of people who says "I'm going to nightkill you", a town vig or stuttering townie in those groups can totally and justifiably use that as a tell.
Second off, the apparent hypocrisy arose out of poor wording and miscommunication. About half the time I call the stuff I call refereeing "narrating", and I think maybe that conveys what I mean more. I meant referee in the sense that they are moving things along in a neutral way, "hey take your two free throws", "ok time to flip a coin for overtime", not that there is some set of rules the person is enforcing. I've never referred to Axxle's only instance of "rule enforcing", posting the scumhunting article, as being a reason I wanted to lynch him.
I finish with those two last because it's something that's been said in almost every Mafia thread to date. It's good play, right? I mean, who cares about how scummy somebody plays, as long as we lynch Mafia, not Scum. The problem is, the way Pops uses this is as a defense. He's basically saying "Yes, I'm playing like scum. Scummy scum. Scummiest scum. But it's ok, because as long as you don't lynch me, we'll be good!"
"Lynch Mafia, Not Scum" is not a defense. It's an excuse. It's an excuse to play any way you wish, and not have to justify it. There is VERY little Scummier than that.
This is more miscommunication, I thought the timing of my chanting of the saying would have conveyed the meaning, "lynch mafia, not the players in the game you wouldn't want to be stuck in an elevator with", but apparently it didn't, and the saying is not ubiquitous here at all. I agree that if your interpretation of the word scum were correct it'd be absolutely fallacious and silly.
Furthermore, when called out on his Referee behavior, and the use of his "little black book" to call foul or get tells on everybody, he came up with this beauty of a hedge:
The tells don't always work. A fullhouse doesn't always win. Just makes good odds.
When it's pointed out that the above quote is absolutely NOTHING but hedge, Pops goes for broke:
Idk what hedging is you folk will have to explain it to me. I've never heard of it before so I can't own or disown the behavior.
I know what hedging a bet is. The term is not used on mafiascum, though "fencesitting" is used a lot. I can understand the analogy without being totally sure what it means. Much like the failure referee analogy.
Hedging as it's used here is not fencesitting, though I thought it might be and thus the answer I sought was useful to me. Hedging here means divesting yourself of responsibility for a lynch more so than staying in a state where you can pick either of two wagons based on which is popular(fence sitting). (now that I've defined it, try to forget it, I don't think it's a scumtell)
#2: Why won't this vote STICK!?!?:
Unfortunately, voting analysis is more complicated than counting on your fingers. Quantity and quality both matter, and my suspicions have been genuine, not really seeking the most viable wagon I could possibly start.
This is arguably the least important of the 3 points, but if you willfully play to add little value to the game, you deserve to get lynched. This is a behavior thing, and unlike above, is a "I don't like the way they've played" argument more than anything else. He has admitted to being capable of playing better. Saying more. Adding more discussion to the conversation. Every time he's questioned about it though, he just turns the other way. "I didn't want the lurkers to get bogged down, so I've only been posting 1 liners"
Playing sub-optimally never helps the town. Ever. Holding back, or being obscure for no reason, causing suspicion and stirring the pot just to "see what happens" without giving a reason or following up with your radical claims do nothing useful. All it does is make it harder for the town to actually get decent reads. If this is town play, it's not town play I want in my town. If it's Mafia play, well then it's excusable - but still not wanted in my town.
Lynching players because they aren't valuable townies doesn't hold a candle to lynching players more likely to be scum. You probably know that though, just, the confirmation bias is strong with this one.
I never deliberately played sub-optimally in the thread. Keeping players happy, motivated, and kept up with the thread improves lynch accuracy. Furthermore, superposting blends players with actual real lives and scum lurkers together, usually with the net result that both get full day 1 pass, which is not good. I played in a way I thought best for the town. And yes, much of my jerkness has been trying to get reads. But not the "you'll get nothing and like it" post. I just really like saying that.
In all, the evidence I believe adds up to Pops being Mafia (no sir, not scum, but Mafia). I'm willing to risk my neck to prove it, but I have no reservations in casting my Vote: Popsofctown at this time.
You DO find me to be scum, but hopefully after some thought you'll know I'm not mafia
@Robz: I regret the magnitude of my day 1 play, but not the direction. I went a little too far and hogged too much D1 spotlight with my extended wagon, which didn't generate much information because it was full of towns (as far as I could tell)
I probably should have gone "good guy" a little bit earlier in the thread. And Throne Room my Fortune Teller so I'd know that theorel was going to get NKed and Opal was getting replaced so posting wouldn't have done much actual harm.
Author
Topic: Mafia IV: Within These Estate Walls (GAME OVER - MAFIA WINS!) (Read 334981 times)