Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Galzria]

And let me tell this Galz. All your accusation has confirmation bias. That is, indeed to some extent what eevee did can be viewed logically as what mafia would have done.

The problem is, what he did can also be easily explained as town. (If you want to say his insistence on frisk, do you want to lynch PPS for his insistence on you?)

My accusation on you is different. My 3 red alerts are things that I can explain logically when you are scum, but I cannot explain them logically when you are town.

Your three red flags are made up cases, or extensions of the twisted facts you believe. I've already pointed out how your summaries and logic was wrong, and so are your three red flags. They simply don't exist.

[Eevee]

I dont insist manda being town anymore. Her recent behavior reads scummy to me, very scummy indeed. I might even be down for lynching her unless she starts defending herself.

Galzria, thanks for clarifying your reasons for suspecting me. My comments:

I did tell you why I thought Frisk had to be town. I'm not going to apologize for realizing he is town and trying to convince others of it as well. Quite frankly, I know you are smart and experienced in this game, I think you should have realized I was right about Frisk. Maybe you didnt want to because you are mafia?

I argued Frisk being town way way harder than I did you being mafia. I was just trying to find alternative lynch targets, I think I had my vote on Robz for some time too. Well, his evasive behavior turned out a power role wanting to lay low. But saying I was equally sure of Frisk's towniness and your scumminess is 100% not correct. I didnt have a town read on you, and you seemed like a good lynch candidate. It was today when I got the scum read on you. I agree 100% with timchens case. I read his "softclaim" as a careless stupid wording, nothing more than that. His explanations make very much sense to me, yours dont.

I absolutely thought we were heading for nolynch. I know I cant prove this and apparently you and some others felt different, but I thought I got you lot convinced and no one was going to vote for Frisk. So your B is entirely incorrect. Town Eevee was happy he got people to see Frisk is town, and was settling on a nolynch until the hammer dropped.

Gloating was stupid and caused unnecessary confusion, also gave scum some weapons to attack me with. However, it was nothing but me being genuinely happy I was right about Frisk. Man it would have sucked if he had somehow fooled me.. I was very relieved to see him flip town, and I felt like a superhuman for my read and got cocky. Sorry about that again!

Today, timchen has written all the cases for me. I 100% agree with his case on you and his explanations for his own actions make perfect sense to (right until the "I give Galzria my vote"-tantrum, but to be fair you voted for yourself too so its not like you are much better in that regard). I dont think saying I've offered very little contribution is fair still. I shared my reads on manda, and why I thought she was town. No one really commented on them so I assume they werent very convincing for other, and her recent behavior has been scummy to me which I've also noted. That and I'm like the only one here who has a clear stance on your situation with timchen.

My reads at this point:

Galzria: Still suspect #1, although I think mafia is yet to "give up" and selfvote.
timchen: Frisk-level town read. Like his case against Galzria a lot.
manda: I had a town read on her, but its fading by the minute. Her lack of participation and refusal to defend herself is not earning her any points.
Young Nick: Hasnt said much, but has seemed townier than yesterday. I understand this game can be hard to keep up with, and he hasnt faced any danger of getting lynched so I sort of understand his quietness better than mandas. I dont think we should lynch Nick today, but I think he could play a little more active and try to help town more.
PPS: Has also seemed townier than yesterday I think. Most active of the inactive bunch, and has made sense when he has posted. I would appreciate some initiative though, weighing in on the timchen-Galz debate is good but actually settling on a lynch target who is mafia is pretty important here and I think PPS could help us more with that.
shark_bait: Awfully quiet today, we need to hear more from him. Could very well be mafia, is getting surprisingly little attention for how scummy he has actually played.


Oh boy I wrote a freaking book, I've got other games to attend to so wont proofread any of this, sorry!

[Young Nick]

Man, I am so far behind. This is more of a timesink than I anticipated. I will get caught up as soon as I can, which may not be until later tonight, or later. And, as I have said, I will be V/LA this weekend. I am not lurking; I just am not even reading. I'll start now and post my thoughts when I am fully caught up.

[pingpongsam]

@PPS: can you explain why mafia then not push galzria lynch first then lynch me next day? At some point 2 days ago probably there are plenty of time doing this.

I think Mafia  are licking their chops waiting for Town to lynch themselves. I think the Mafia players got an easy D1 kill in this manner and they're hoping for another D2 kill in this manner. The people I suspect of being Mafia haven't had to build cases and they don't know how to build one without revealing there alignment. Town may at each others' throats but so far they've been deadlocked.

Also, while I understand you have a town read on Galzria based on his style of post (I had that town read too!) please also compare what two of us are saying. I have summarized what I said in the last page.

As of right now I am playing a perceptive game. There is a time and a place for logic. Logic is great when it can conclusively disprove possibilities thereby whittling possibilities down. When I'm reading the timchen vs. Galzria debate I'm trying to avoid exactly what is being said and trying to look at what position is being taken. The words are a vehicle for a position.

Galzria's initial position on timchen was an easy one for anyone to take, really. Argue it wasn't a softclaim till you are blue in the face but everyone had good reason to believe it was. Galzria ran with it and put his vote where it belonged to pressure that angle. Your response, while reasonable in light of your less than level headed play, came off as scummy. Anyone can bend anyone's arguments against them with logic in this game. He did that but the position is timchen made an ugly move and keeps getting uglier especially by sheeping Eevee's vote on Galzria simply for it being a Frisk deathwish. That reeks of OMGUS combined with an eagerness to drive a lynch on Galzria, this was the point I believe Mafia stepped back to watch the fireworks.

timchen's position has remained pro-town after the point of the softclaim that he denies happening. The soft-claim itself was terrible town-play, The resignation to sheep a Galzria vote is terrible town play. The over the top erratic behavior, however paints a position. This isn't calulated Mafia maneuver. If timchen comes out of this Mafia then he may be the greatest Mafia player ever in the game. Also, It would almost have to be an Eevee/timchen pairing. Galzria sees this and changes his stride by maintaining a reactionary but still arguably pro-town position.


The timchen/Galzria entanglement is hopeless without scum forcing the issue which makes it too easy for us to find them tomorrow. The Galzria self-vote is effectively a pro-town maneuver regardless of his flip. It's a shitty one if he flips Town but it ends this debate and puts the focus elsewhere. If he's Mafia it's superbly pro-town. Mafia isn't likely to kamikaze like this and they aren't going to play pro-town.

What I said from the start of our argument till now are identical and consistent. The only consistent explanation I can get from Galzria's behavior is that he is mafia. (If you don't agree, can you do me a favor to explain the 3 red alerts I outlined in the previous page? If you can persuade me those are consistent town play, I may as well throw away my case on Galzria.)

All this is time wasted on what was said and not looking at the positions being taken.

How about Galz's arguments? He started with a story that eevee and I are scum pairs. Once he gave up fighting my arguments, he pushes a manda wagon. Then today he said eevee has always been the #1 suspect for him. And now he said his play is to enable us to move on expecting that you, manda, sharky, and YN will semi-lurk.

Looks like an active town position which always attracts negative attention from unwitting fellow townies. If eevee/timchen are paired then why is timchen taking a town position? manda has no town position. Go with the flow, remain non-committed, wait for an opportunity to interject an early non-controversial vote or maybe follow her scum buddy? What is she doing to take a pro-town position? I've already put logic into my vote on her but her continued lack of position keeps my vote on her.

None of the actions he has taken make good sense. I've spoken a lot for his argument of me. (Even though now he said that it is because he had to take my secrecy as fakeclaim, that story does not fit how he had behaved during we are arguing.) I didn't see any reasoning why pushing a manda wagon if his #1 suspect is in fact eevee. And I don't see reasoning either why he wants us to move on without the rest of town.

Makes perfect sense to test an eevee/manda pairing. Eevee's reaction is logically easy to paint scummy but his position is arguably pro-town. What about manda's position, here?

[timchen]

And let me tell this Galz. All your accusation has confirmation bias. That is, indeed to some extent what eevee did can be viewed logically as what mafia would have done.

The problem is, what he did can also be easily explained as town. (If you want to say his insistence on frisk, do you want to lynch PPS for his insistence on you?)

My accusation on you is different. My 3 red alerts are things that I can explain logically when you are scum, but I cannot explain them logically when you are town.

Your three red flags are made up cases, or extensions of the twisted facts you believe. I've already pointed out how your summaries and logic was wrong, and so are your three red flags. They simply don't exist.

Point me to the post. Flat out lying.

[Galzria]

In response to #1079

Tim, try again. I made my case in #815 (against PPS,, wrongly), corrected to you less than 3 hours later (not more than 24 as you claim) in #824, and then vote you before it's OMGUS as you claim I did, just 6 posts later in #830.

Oh, here's the votecount from #838, showing I voted for you first:

Vote Count 2-5

shark_bait (2): Eevee, Young Nick
manda2014 (2): pingpongsam, timchen
timchen (1): Galzria

Not Voting {2}: manda2014, shark_bait

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch

Lynch deadline: Monday, August 13, at 8:00 p.m. forum time (EDT)

If you're going to "summarize" your case, it helps if you don't flat out lie.

[timchen]

@PPS: this is the most ridiculous long post I have ever read in mafia.

Let me summarize for you. Basically you are saying:

1. My statement can be understand as softclaim. Softclaim is suspicious (especially after my denial) so Galzria has right to suspect me.  (This I agree.)

2. I am suspected so I have right to suspect back. (well LOL. I have said numerous times my case on Galzria is not just because that he suspected me. It is because... well why don't you go back and read the previous pages.. I have it all written here and you just wrote here tell me you refused to read.)

3. Therefore the two must be town at each other's throat.

What you are saying is just what you are willing to believe and not what is actually happening. There is even no evidence that scum is sitting back d1.

Yet you just refuse to read what I say about Galzria. It's like I am saying:

"Look! there is light!"

And then you said

"No I smell nothing and refused to open your eyes."

[pingpongsam]

You are correct that you and I are approaching this game from 2 entirely different angles.

You seem angry that I am following my nose and refuse to use the sight method.

I, however, am not angry at you. This is your playstyle and it appears that your style has successfully painted you as obvtown so it has some merit.

My playstyle is still in the testbed but it has a decent track record so far. Mafia games are full of long-winded posts espousing logical constructs built on faulty or contrived basis that are later proved to be worthless. That I abandon that approach should give me some immunity to not only building faulty cases (see my miserable failure on Frisk) but also to being swayed by faulty logic.

It is good for us to have different methods of approaching the game. In this way we are not so easily swayed by scum identifying the key mechanism for getting us all on their wavelength. To be angry at me for injecting diversity into the method is distracting from the scum hunt especially considering your approach is logical and logically we should want as many means of detection as we have members.

[pingpongsam]

Effectively I'm saying I smell nothing although you claim to see it.

But conversely I'm saying I smell scum over here and you are refusing to look because you don't use your nose.

[timchen]

You mean Manda, right?

I heard it. I agree with it. But I am not as sure as Galzria.

The problem is, I have already made that promise. So if Manda is not scum, then we lost. But even if we lynch Galzria now and I am just horribly wrong, we still have chance.

[pingpongsam]

I can assure you that your unrelenting resolve to abdicate your vote to Galzria's whim is as obnoxious to me as my unrelenting resolve to keep my vote on where I "smell" scum is obnoxious to you.

I ask you, which method of play strikes you as more effective?

[timchen]

In response to #1079

Tim, try again. I made my case in #815 (against PPS,, wrongly), corrected to you less than 3 hours later (not more than 24 as you claim) in #824, and then vote you before it's OMGUS as you claim I did, just 6 posts later in #830.

Oh, here's the votecount from #838, showing I voted for you first:

Vote Count 2-5

shark_bait (2): Eevee, Young Nick
manda2014 (2): pingpongsam, timchen
timchen (1): Galzria

Not Voting {2}: manda2014, shark_bait

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch

Lynch deadline: Monday, August 13, at 8:00 p.m. forum time (EDT)

If you're going to "summarize" your case, it helps if you don't flat out lie.

Haven't I replied to that already in #1082?

@PPS: one additional things on your read: on frisk's dying wish is nothing serious. If you read that way, please accept what I am saying now (as I was the one to mention it first.) and change your point of view accordingly. I was not voting for Galzria just because frisk said so. Neither was eevee I believe. I have stated numerous times that we voted for him at that stage because he has lurked at that point for more than a day.

Position is one good thing to look at I agree. But for now it does not produce definite results. What I am saying is to beg you to look closer. If you really read into what Galz has said under what time frame, it painted himself unambiguously as mafia.

[pingpongsam]

Do you really think a Mafia Galzria would double-vote himself to L-1?

[timchen]

I can assure you that your unrelenting resolve to abdicate your vote to Galzria's whim is as obnoxious to me as my unrelenting resolve to keep my vote on where I "smell" scum is obnoxious to you.

I ask you, which method of play strikes you as more effective?

I understand how my play is obnoxious to you. I believe you can also tell that is indeed my ploy to force people to vote on Galzria. But I decided to put forth that play precisely because you refuse even to look into what I have said about Galzria.

Think about this. What you say you are doing is to some extent identical to refusing to vote for Galzria if I were a cop and claimed that I investigated him. If you only look at positions that will be of the same position as what it is there now. And just put yourself in my own seat for a bit. How does it feel if you have spent so many time putting up a clean and clear case (and ready for dispute too) and others just refuse to look at it?

Me and Galzria have put up our cases. I have disputed his to the extent that he admitted that he is wrong. I can understand he then choose a different tactics to make others not to look at the points I have made. But if you are to side with Galzria, I really think it worth your effort (especially I have already shortened it to just two posts!) to read through my reasoning. And if the reasoning does not satisfy you you can feel free to point things out.

[timchen]

Yes. Or let me ask you the reverse: how can a townie Galzria vote himself to L-1?

I am convinceable by logic. He can argue with me using logic.
Even if he can't, he can appeal to others. Let others read and judge. No need to accelerate by voting himself.

What he's doing here in my read is that he cannot wait for others to read through and judge. Because if he does, it will be clear that he is scum.

[pingpongsam]

I want to see a weigh-in from YN, manda and SB.

I shall return in 2 hours or so I've got a meeting to attend.

I agree timchen has some valid points...

[shark_bait]

I still need to dig through this shit storm regarding Galz/TC.  I'll get to it... eventually (tonight sometime).  IMO, the process of me doing this is like a chemical reaction with a very high activation energy.  This afternoon, the energy required to overcome this barrier was not sufficient so the reaction did not proceed in a forward direction.  Tonight, I will easily overcome this barrier.  Sorry for slowing things up.

[timchen]

Nice to hear that from you sharky!

[Galzria]

Yes. Or let me ask you the reverse: how can a townie Galzria vote himself to L-1?

I am convinceable by logic. He can argue with me using logic.
Even if he can't, he can appeal to others. Let others read and judge. No need to accelerate by voting himself.

What he's doing here in my read is that he cannot wait for others to read through and judge. Because if he does, it will be clear that he is scum.

And once more, I have already explained my self-vote, from a town perspective, and so has PPS. You simply refuse to acknowledge anything that contradicts what you believe, and then keep spouting that the stuff doesn't exist.

Ask yourself this: If your case is so crystal clear and perfect, why isn't anybody but you and Eevee buying into it? Do you think they're all idiots? Do you think they're all my scumbuddies? Or maybe - JUST MAYBE - there's that chance that your case isn't actually all that. It's built on faulty logic and it's been disproves on numerous occasions by me as to where your logic failed.

Your logic started failing, btw, when you accused me of responding with an OMGUS vote (and no reason given) to your case against me... When in fact I had already laid out my case on YOU, including my vote, in full, more than 60 posts prior to you accusing me.

From there, you're damn right I defended my case and vote. It wasn't until you convinced me that you could play such a terrible town that I realized the mistake in my initial case was believing that you could not.

[manda2014]

I'm here. Gonna spend a while reading everything, eat dinner, and then post.

[timchen]

And once more, I have already explained my self-vote, from a town perspective, and so has PPS. You simply refuse to acknowledge anything that contradicts what you believe, and then keep spouting that the stuff doesn't exist.

Ask yourself this: If your case is so crystal clear and perfect, why isn't anybody but you and Eevee buying into it? Do you think they're all idiots? Do you think they're all my scumbuddies? Or maybe - JUST MAYBE - there's that chance that your case isn't actually all that. It's built on faulty logic and it's been disproves on numerous occasions by me as to where your logic failed.

Your logic started failing, btw, when you accused me of responding with an OMGUS vote (and no reason given) to your case against me... When in fact I had already laid out my case on YOU, including my vote, in full, more than 60 posts prior to you accusing me.

From there, you're damn right I defended my case and vote. It wasn't until you convinced me that you could play such a terrible town that I realized the mistake in my initial case was believing that you could not.

1. Yes. You have explained. I acknowledge that. But I also have an explanation how you can did that as scum. Do you want to refute that? I also suggested a few other things you would be more likely to do if you were town. So yes, your self vote read more scummy than town to me.

You can say all you want that my cases do not exist. But I have pointed them all out in two posts and I will let others judge that.

2. Others have answered this for me. They are still reading it. Your argument here is a straw man argument. Sometimes things are not that easy to see (especially if part of the players are destined to confuse people.) I am open to logical reasonings. The only way that can make me take back my arguments is to just point out where they are wrong. And I believe you have already had experiences with me knowing that how quick I can retract and change when I was logically pointed out wrong. And no, as far as I can see you didn't successfully point at any place where my logic is wrong. The only thing I see is that I forgot your early vote on me (and I acknowledged that.) Maybe we can try again. You have no reason not to answer this question:

This is my red alert 1: Why did you insist that I fake-soft-claimed?

If you are town, this is what I view as a logical response to my secrecy on eevee, given that you recognize it as a softclaim:

Ok you saw a softclaim. An obvious softclaim. Is it from scum or town? Prob scum as town should not make such an obvious claim. So you pointed it out and have a conspiracy theory for that. This is fine.

Now once you pointed it out I explicitly denied. Now you should rethink. Would mafia immediately deny such claim? Then you would realize that your conspiracy theory does not actually require that softclaim to work. The goal is always to mislynch today and claim next day. Softclaim today can work, but it can only work if it stays soft. Once you reached this thought, it would then be clear that even as scum I would have no motive to fake-soft-claim in such an obvious way.

So the only conclusion can be reached is either what I did is inconsistent scum play, inconsistent town play, or after all what I said is true. Once the reasoning that such claim is obviously softclaim contradicts itself, the remaining highest possibility would be that I was telling the truth.


But no, that was not what you reached. You had plenty time to think about it after I explicitly denied that as a softclaim. So I cannot allow myself to think of you as a thoughtful townie who senses a complicated theory. Then the most probable reason for you to come up and insist on this soft-fake-claim theory is to frame me.

3. My logic does not fail there. Actually that has nothing to do with my logic. Adding the fact that you already decided to vote for me at #830, the only change is that you have a case on me earlier than I first summarized. But it still does not explain the alert above, and it does not explain why you chose to refute what I said after I explained my eevee theory rather than elaborate on your own. Actually my logic in your case is not streamlined so it's not like if I make a single mistake then the whole accusation fails. The 3 red alerts I highlighted are to some extent independent of each other. And that is why I am so sure you are scum because each of them points toward that possibility.

And still I don't see how I played a terrible town.

[timchen]

It's actually kind of sad Galz. Your recent play in a sense does give me a town vibe.

But your early play spoke too loud and too much for me. If you have backed off like you did right now two days earlier I wouldn't have a case against you.

[Galzria]

It's actually kind of sad Galz. Your recent play in a sense does give me a town vibe.

But your early play spoke too loud and too much for me. If you have backed off like you did right now two days earlier I wouldn't have a case against you.

Red Alert #1 explanation: I insisted it was a softclaim because it obviously was meant to be unless you were oblivious to what you said. I didn't believe you would be that oblivious. I was wrong. Next?

[timchen]

Red Alert #1 explanation: I insisted it was a softclaim because it obviously was meant to be unless you were oblivious to what you said. I didn't believe you would be that oblivious. I was wrong. Next?

Next: why did you not realize that the theory you therefore put forth is self-contradictory as I have repeatedly point out (which should then lead you to consider your presumption is wrong)? Or alternatively, why did you not just argue 2 days ago that I must have softclaimed. I denied. So I lied? (as this is essentially what you are saying right now.)

[Galzria]

Red Alert #1 explanation: I insisted it was a softclaim because it obviously was meant to be unless you were oblivious to what you said. I didn't believe you would be that oblivious. I was wrong. Next?

Next: why did you not realize that the theory you therefore put forth is self-contradictory as I have repeatedly point out (which should then lead you to consider your presumption is wrong)? Or alternatively, why did you not just argue 2 days ago that I must have softclaimed. I denied. So I lied? (as this is essentially what you are saying right now.)

It is not contradictory. Once called out on the softclaim, scum can do 2 things:

Admit that's what it was

Or

Claim it wasn't.

If they admit to having softclaimed, they get called out as a liar by a PR in 66% of the games straight out of the gates. This is not good for them because it will lead to their lynch either today or tomorrow at the latest. Would a scum be willing to risk that? No, that's ridiculous, so instead you do the safe scum thing of backing up, trying to deny it existed.

As town, you've got two options:

Admit that it was a softclaim

Or

Claim it wasn't.

Now, I understand a town player saying "no, I didn't mean to softclaim - boy I worded that poorly. I can understand why you might think I did" - but this is not what you said. You said "Galzria is making up fake theories about me and claiming I softclaimef which I never did!"

The fact is, whether you meant to or not (and yes, I have a hard time believing it was unintentional), you softclaimed something. Period. I wasn't the only person to see it, and rather than acknowledging the mistake, you decided to pretend it simply didn't exist, and proceeded to OMGUS attack and vote me over my calling you out - repeatedly - on it.

You never once admitted that it was there, even if it was a mistake. A mistake I can look past. Denial of the existence of the intentions of a past that most people read to mean "I'm softclaiming" is scummy.

So of the two "back away from the claim" possibilities above, you took the much more scummy path, and I pursued it as such.