-->
@WyIted
At this point, you should give some justification for why you suspect Austin. It's going to impact where the rest of the town falls on this wagon.
Pie Recycled Roles Mafia DP1
Posts
Read-only
Total:
843
-->
@Savant
Can you link me to one of his town games?
-->
@Savant
Austin's behavior is much more OMGUS than mine was, he's just avoided voting against Moozer so he won't be accused of attacking people for voting against him
That… doesn’t make a lot of sense. He saw indications from your play that made you seem scummy to him, not what I would call an OMGUS. And yes, people generally avoid looking sus whether they’re town or scum, and an OMGUS would not help him.
No matter how Austin flips, it's going to reveal something. If he's town, Moozer is probably scum. If he's scum, whiteflame is probably his partner.
I disagree that it’s that straightforward in either direction.
-->
@whiteflame
Yeah deali.g with some stuff for a minute but working on it. I find it odd though that you don't find his response to pressure as suspicious.
-->
@whiteflame
He saw indications from your play that made you seem scummy to him, not what I would call an OMGUS.
I'm referring to him attacking Moozer and the people voting against him rather than explaining why he himself is likely town. And of course he gives a reasonable-sounding reason for that, that's how scum Austin would OMGUS.
-->
@Savant
This is part of why I scum read you. You immediately went to attacking people who voted against you instead of explaining why you are likely town. At this point, I want at least a role claim.
You win games by attacking scum, not defending yourself. Any arguments I make regarding my own alignment are inherently biased by the fact that I know I'm town. The only thing I can do to prove my towniness is to hunt for scum, but you're not making that easy at all. You're probably town, I'm town, and this is getting annoying and allowing scum to hide in the shadows.
-->
@Savant
I'm referring to him attacking Moozer and the people voting against him rather than explaining why he himself is likely town. And of course he gives a reasonable-sounding reason for that, that's how scum Austin would OMGUS.
See above. What do you expect me to do, pull out an Innocent Child role pm?
Just for clarification: what is OMGUS?
-->
@AustinL0926
You win games by attacking scum, not defending yourself.
If you're being suspected and you know your town, attacking people is not going to help because we don't know to trust your reads. Something like a soft claim might at least stop the wagon for the time being and allow us to give some credence to your reads. We're not going to move on just because you say you're town and accuse someone else.
-->
@Savant
So read through Dp1 that game. Austin doesn't exhibit the multitude of scum tells I see here. Give me a minute. Still organizing my thoughts but he should be the lynch
-->
@WyIted
Yeah deali.g with some stuff for a minute but working on it. I find it odd though that you don't find his response to pressure as suspicious.
Ok it's just annoying af when I'm getting pushed for no reason at all other than someone is mad at me for voting them. Like what am I supposed to do, avoid voting anyone in the game? Savant has literal zero basis for scumreading me and his recent posts prove it, where apparently he's upset that I haven't confirmed myself on D1.
-->
@Casey_Risk
Stands for OMG, you suck! Refers to accusing someone because they accused you despite little actual reasoning for suspecting them.
OMGUS is not a scum tell despite people thinking otherwise. It is a noob characteristic though
-->
@AustinL0926
someone is mad at me for voting them
I'm not mad you voted me, I just think your reasoning for doing so was not very sound. You accused me of coasting on being the first claim, but it was early in the day phase with limited information. I was just saying that I was not a good person to lynch on dp1, given the information that we knew so far. I also voted you because WyIted also suspects you for other reasons, which in my view makes the case against you stronger.
-->
@Savant
Stands for OMG, you suck! Refers to accusing someone because they accused you despite little actual reasoning for suspecting them.
🤯
-->
@Savant
I'm not mad you voted me, I just think your reasoning for doing so was not very sound. You accused me of coasting on being the first claim, but it was early in the day phase with limited information.
Except you were coasting on your claim. At best, early claiming makes you less likely to have fakeclaimed. It has nothing to do with alignment. Yet you apparently decided that this gave you carte blanche to not be considered as a lynch on DP1. That's the definition of coasting.
I also voted you because WyIted also suspects you for other reasons, which in my view makes the case against you stronger.
We should triple the US government's spending. Not really gonna specify my reasons, but in my view it makes the legislator's cases stronger.
-->
@AustinL0926
Yet you apparently decided that this gave you carte blanche to not be considered as a lynch on DP1. That's the definition of coasting.
This is a strawman of what I said. I said "The odds are very strong that I did not lie about my game, which allows you to narrow down my role. Shouldn't be difficult to determine if I am scum later." Which part of that is not true? I was referring to Wylted voting me early based on very limited information.
We should triple the US government's spending. Not really gonna specify my reasons, but in my view it makes the legislator's cases stronger.
If Wylted accuses you without a good reason, that makes him look pretty suspicious tomorrow. You're making a very obvious false analogy, and you should know better. The fact that you aren't accusing Wylted despite soundly disagreeing with his logic is also kind of suspicious. It makes me think you may believe he has a good reason to suspect you, and that him being revealed as town would implicate you. Town Austin would have scum read Wylted by now, especially in combination with his early vote. Instead, you jumped on his wagon and then criticized him later for not making sense while also avoiding accusing him.
I have mixed feelings on the buddying so did not list it but I think it indicates that if austin is scum than lunatic is town.
So Austin is definitely scum. Let's review the evidence.
scum tell 1
Tow behaves differently when on their head is on the chopping block than scum. One scum tactic when their head is on the line is not to defend their evidence but gaslight their accuser by questioning their logic. A more natural response to stupid logic is not really that aggressive or defensive. Here are gaslighting posts below;
post 227 " > I also voted you because WyIted also suspects you for other reasons, which in my view makes the case against you stronger.
We should triple the US government's spending. Not really gonna specify my reasons, but in my view it makes the legislator's cases stronger"
Now this is poor logic by Savant, but the logic is strawmanned, not necessarily an issue, but the issue is gas lighting them and attacking their logic, instead of proclaiming your innocence or scum hunting
post 222 "Savant has literal zero basis for scumreading me and his recent posts prove it"
Who gives a shit. we all know that this is a bad way to defend yourself, but the issue is questioning the logic behind it. Most of us would say it is bad logic and move on or just say something like "fuck off I am innocent", and not elaborate. He isn't defending himself he is attacking.
post 206 questioning logic again not sum hunting or defending himself.
"Right, so the wagon on me is:
-Savant (who's mad that I pointed out objectively scummy behavior)
-Wylted (for reasons unknown)
-Moozer (sheeping the above two)"
post 199 follows the same logic of attacking the logic of somebody who is on your wagon and gaslighting them.
Scum read reason 2
Austin is lying and we should lynch all liars
post 132 about Savant
"I scumread him because it looked like he was pretty much coasting on his "first to claim" thing which means close to nothing in terms of towncred imo yet apparently he thought it makes him unlynchable this DP? yea not rly sure where that comes from. "
He scum reads savant, this is after placing his vote, so no reason to lie here.
post 137, he also doubles down that he had a scum read on savant
"lready said I scumread you because I felt you were coasting on your early claim in a way that didn't feel genuine. I asked you why because I wanted to see whether your reaction was coming from an informed ("oh no I've been caught but he doesn't know that") or uninformed ("I'm being pushed for no reason") perspective."
post 133, he claims to never scum read him and just be reaction testing. So he either lied about the mere reaction test or lied about scum reading him.
"Savant, why would you claim though? You only had two votes and mine was literally just a reaction test."
Scum read 3
Austin is trying to look like he is scum hunting by merely just making random comments about theory. We all go off on theory here and there but this feels like austin is trying to mimick being active.
post 158 "I actually disagree a bit with this imo - I think posting reads as you catch up is one of the best ways to let other players read you. Scum have the burden of too much information, which can sometimes show in an unnatural read progression."
This isn't scum hunting and it is fluff he does it more.
post 111, another excuse to talk theory instead of scum hunt to simulate activity
"Somehow missed this earlier. Although I can understand why you did this, I advise you not to do it in the future. Claiming a SOP role will always lead to measurable harm for town because it narrows the POE for scum to fire in.
You have to weigh whether the benefit town gets from knowing the SOP is greater than this. I don't really think that's the case with this particular role, since if town is really so divided that we can't agree to a lynch after an entire day of discussion, then it's better to have a negative utility role eliminated for POE."
scum read 4
Scum have this tendency to make double statements that follow the pattern of this guy is scum but also he is town.
Post 149 "For the record, I think Savant is lean town for his role, but I feel he's vastly overreacting to a single vote on him and it makes me uncomfortable."
he leans town and scum. lets see how often this comes up. post 108, savant is also both town and suspicious allowing austin an out for a mislynch
"was sussing Savant earlier for this but idk rly. It seems a bit contrived but I also think town is more likely to just put their thoughts out there whether good or bad."
-->
@Savant
However posts like this make me concerned about you;
ou're making a very obvious false analogy, and you should know better. The fact that you aren't accusing Wylted despite soundly disagreeing with his logic is also kind of suspicious.
A lot of people use bad logic in general, it doesn't make them scummy and we are all guilty of poor reasoning from time to time
-->
@Lunatic
I don't have time to go through these people's games. What is up with Savant? His logic seems poor and though I don't remember much about him from before I thought he was a semi active member and somehow got the impression he had really good logic and reasoning. I don't think I have crossed his path much, so not sure where I got that opinion from
There's a lot going on here. I have had an exhausting week at work and my mind is not at full capacity. I'll reread the DP either when I get home or tomorrow morning. For now, I'm not convinced about voting for Austin. I actually think Moozer is a better target, for largely the same reasons as Whiteflame: his progression from saying that Austin is townsided to voting to lynch him feels very unnatural to me and seems a lot more like scum bandwagoning. I'm not going to vote yet, though. Like I said, I want to reread everything first.
My DP1 hero solve is [Wylted, Moozer] as scum team, with Moozer having the PR and a good fakeclaim and Wylted taking the lead in buddying Savant and trying to mislynch me.
(it's probably not 100% right but it'd be hilarious if it was)
I'll respond to Wylted's post later, but suffice to say I think most of the things he points out are colored either by accidental or deliberate confirmation bias, more likely the latter.
Yeah I talked to him in PM before and went through his threads. He seems very intelligent. Like 130 IQ or over range. I know it doesn't mean you have a good grasp of logic and can even make you more prone to some cognitive distortions but a lot of this reasoning seems beneath him.
Savant, how old are you?
Maybe I only think he's smart because he is well read and agrees with me on a lot of stuff. Maybe he is smart but very young, maybe he is smart academically but socially dumb. Something is missing though
-->
@AustinL0926
most of the things he points out are colored either by accidental or deliberate confirmation bias
Potentially. I haven't voted yet though because I want to give people a chance to point out where I went wrong if I did go wrong. It's also possible my logic is spot on and it is 90% likely you are scum and we just get unlucky and you are on the wrong side of that 90%
I find it funny that Austin accuses Savant of OMGUS and then immediately goes from a town read of me, to a scum read on me after I make a case against him.
-->
@Moozer325
if you are still online I suggest full claiming since your name is coming up a lot and you will be MIA for 24 hours
-->
@WyIted
Yeah deali.g with some stuff for a minute but working on it. I find it odd though that you don't find his response to pressure as suspicious.
I'm going to leave it to Austin to address the larger response set, as I'd like to get his take before I give mine.
As for not finding his response to pressure suspicious... let me put it this way. Up to the point that you posted this, your reasoning amounted to "I have my reasons." Savant's reasoning was mostly based in frustration and seeing Austin's responses as efforts to distract, tactics that could either be town or scum from where I'm sitting. And Moozer's reasoning was that he wanted to bandwagon before he had to leave off the site.
So, yeah, I understand Austin's being frustrated when that's what he's dealing with. I understand why he might want to avoid claiming his role or giving into this pressure in any way. It's not how I'd handle it, but that doesn't make him scummy from where I'm sitting, at least not based on the games I've seen him play.