still no time to play
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXIII
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
still no time to play | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
/replacement Don't be in a hurry to throw out whoever hasn't replied yet, though. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
<tips hat to Kick and Chromatic> | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Hi All. From other games, it seems the best 3 questions to ask are: 1) Stance on Lurkers: i.e. Do you policy lynch? 2) How do you think scum would try to infiltrate us? 3) [Being from Australia] Do you like prawns/shrimp on the "barbie" 1) We should lynch the most likely to be scum player day 1. Scum is there to be found day 1. That being said, building a wagon on a lurker/unsatisfactory poster and watching their reactions (and everyone else's) is an entirely acceptable way to find the scummiest player. 2) Scum try to post like they think they would if they were town. A pretty useless answer to a pretty useless question. 3) Not really. Speaking of policies what is your take on lynch all liars? Consider on a case by case basis. Most cases will probably be a lynch because townies shouldn't lie. @Everyone How many games have you played? Just the one, Newbie Mini Mafia XXXI as regular old vanilla town. Town win, but the quality of my contribution is a little hard to measure. It is my belief that any millers should claim now. A claimed miller is NOT automatically town in any way, but it may save us some grief later. For starters, with this policy anyone who claims miller after day 1 should eat rope (making checks a little more useful). | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
A big thing which has jumped out at me so far is cakepie's first post. Everyone else replied to those questions pretty briefly, cakepie dumped a wall of text. Seems to me like a pretty good excuse for "content" while not committing to anything related to this game. Your thoughts? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:34 Mocsta wrote: @All Activity has dropped off a bit. Perhaps this time of day is bad for all timezones. Either way, FatChunk made me think a bit more about Day 1 proceedings. I am stuck in the middle. There have been a few contributions, but ultimately, there is still too much inactivity. Does anyone in their experience with this game have suggestions on how to stimulate discussions Day 1? I'm not stuck in the middle. This has been largely useless so far. As for the way discussion starts... someone throws down a vote. ##Vote: cDgCorazon His posts have been particularly useless so far. Hasn't really responded to anything unless directly asked. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
We'll be making progress when we have two competing wagons, I think. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 19 2012 18:55 shz wrote: But we can change votes, right? So this should not be that big of deal. Quite right. We're not even a quarter of the way through day one, we're not locking in a lynch just yet. For that reason no-one should be afraid to vote their scumreads at this point (or even just players they think need to post better). Don't like to vote for Mocsta or Corazon? Vote for someone else. We need something to discuss, and votes are it. If you think either of the current targets are plausible scum, vote them (with some justification). If not, just vote for whoever you like. Get some activity going! At this point you're not going to be really hurting town by putting a vote on another townie... it only hurts if we lynch one. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 19 2012 20:01 Mocsta wrote: ... For all of the lurker discussions going to and fro. I think its disconcerting to throw accusations without either evidence, or bringing any new thought process to the table. Which accusations are you referring to here? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 19 2012 21:08 cakepie wrote: @Spaghetticus: this is my first game. If my count is right, this is the first time for 7 of us, and 4 others have just one game under their belt (not counting threesr who has played elsewhere before). Quite the newbie game! I think your count's a little off: afaik Kickstart has three games, Sylencia, Chromatic, Spaghetticus and myself have one each. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
@Corazon: You can't deny that our discussion has become a lot more worthwhile in terms of looking for scum (as opposed to discussing policy) since I voted you, which was my intention. As for why I voted you as opposed to a "lurker", I don't believe there are any lurkers until 24 hours have passed (to give everyone in every time zone an opportunity). You had had a significant amount of time to post (and had made a fair few posts, too), and none of them were constructive at all. In my eyes, that's just as bad as a lurker, if not worse. My vote will stick for the moment, but if you continue to post constructively I imagine I'll take it off after work. Town benefits from day one discussion, and the only way to generate that really is with a day one lynch. Besides, scum is catchable day one. especially @ Aquanim, Chromatically, Kickstart, Spaghetticus, shz Q: what do you think of mocsta’s flurry of posts and vote switch? Is he merely overly excited, or could there be merit in the accusation that his incessant questions were noise without substance? I am distinctly unimpressed with mocsta's posting so far, but not certain it makes him scum. I'll reread him again when I get home. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
As for the scumreads going around, I have some comments. Personally, I believe there are two very different kinds of tells: a player can do something which is not hard for scum to do or they can do something which is just scummy. Some examples: Things which are not hard for scum to do: - Talking about policy - Defending other players - Rambling about Mafia theory - Jumping on scumslips - Posting rationally (about things that aren't scumhunting) - Jumping on a wagon etc. Things which are scummy: - Not voting for their best scumread when lynch is imminent. - Derailing fruitful discussion. And, for comparison: Things which are generally hard for scum to do: - Scumhunt. This is NOT the same thing as "put down a vote with some justification". - Convincingly converse with their scumbuddies. As you can see, the first list has a lot more stuff in it. Everyone does some things that are in the first list, but when they're ONLY doing those that's a problem. The point is, I'd encourage everyone to look at their scumreads and think "are they scummy, or just doing things which are easy for scum to fake"? Similarly, look at your townreads and think "are they scumhunting"? Putting down votes isn't necessarily scumhunting BTW. If they're not scumhunting, they're not particularly town, I don't care how much they've written or how smart/cautious/nice they are. Oh, and talk to your coaches about scumreads instead of listening to the opinions of some newb. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 20 2012 09:32 Chromatically wrote: I'd like everyone's thoughts on these people that I'm suspicious of. (Second try, computer shut off during the first one) You make good points. I hadn't picked up that they both are fine with lynching a town threesr (saying that about someone who endorses lurking is awfully tempting, though). I'm very uncomfortable with Kickstart's lack of activity in particular, he's not a habitual lurker in my experience (as town or scum). As he's the most experienced player here by a fair margin I'd really like to see some opinions from him. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
- Apathy about who gets lynched. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 20 2012 18:14 Mocsta wrote: Im on bus..spag post is amazing. Great point about lack of effort to change vote. Enough time to not bus mafia. What is your take on threesr then. He has been defended by the lurker kickstart...this aligns heavily with the reasoning used in your case to hunt mafia. You only answered half of the question. You've switched to Corazon, fair enough, but what do you think of Shz now? Not sure whether you're asking me about my read on Threesr or Kick... the sentence seems to start talking about threesr and end with kick. I really wouldn't try to associate anyone day one. Threesr isn't a scum read for me at the moment, but he's done nothing to make me think he's town. I'd like to see him do some pressure and analysis. Pressure, analysis and contribution does not have to be long, not wanting to post long things is not an excuse. I'm very much expecting more from Kick, he didn't lurk at all in the game I played with him (and he was scum to boot). That being said, I called him as scum day one then (not that he got even nearly lynched, but still) - maybe he's not posting to not give anything away. If he hasn't contributed by the end of the day I'll be looking at him seriously. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Mocsta, what is your current read on Shz? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Spaghetticus is posting reasonably and being nice. In fact, he's being too nice. He hasn't accused anyone at all of anything. He hasn't expressed any suspicions of any other player, or posted any analysis. In fact, he hasn't done anything useful for the town at all, while still looking active, and that is textbook scum.
A post-by-post analysis: + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 11:00 Spaghetticus wrote: K first post :D LAL: I think LAL the policy is stupid, but think LAL the conversation about whether to implement the LAL policy is great. My lynch decision making is flexible, but lurking constitutes a substantial markup on the probability of me lynching you. If you lurk, I will be on your case, and if your answers are not adequate I will put you on my to-lynch list. For lying I am the same. In the one game I've played I lied to hide that I was a cop. If you lie this draws massive attention, but it's important to look for motive, intention, and possible outcomes as well. - Cakepie - Kickstart - Fatchunk - Aquanim Have not posted yet (correct me if I'm wrong). Please disregard this list when considering my contribution, I post lists because they are useful and I have them anyway, not to appear useful. Keep your list hate to yourself @Threesr You are about to come under massive amounts of pressure if you don't conform/comply with LAL attitudes (not a threat, just a prediction). Your position at the moment is too empathetic for a game where the most important tool is the noose. There will be times when people will lurk because they don't know what to do, and at these times, it's more likely that they don't know what to do because they are a more complex role (scum). If you are looking for certainty then you are almost certainly playing the wrong game XD To nubs in general: Please make an effort to keep your posts clear and informative, as a lot of us will be playing catchup. Do not be under the impression that (wordcount) = (town behaviour), others and myself will go through your filter and swathes of cruddy posts actually draw attention. Please keep the bickering impersonal, and have a great game :D My previous game (cop) (win) I'll consider lists scummy all I please, you can't get out of posting useless fluff just by saying that's how you roll. + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 11:27 Spaghetticus wrote: Mocsta I honestly think it's too early to be getting town reads. This is in response to your acknowledgement of Chroma not your null on me. The positives of such a move (that I can think of) are that if you are good at reading people your reads yours will hold more weight than those of a bad reader. The negatives are that if you are a below average reader then you are throwing town off, if you are scum you could be solidifying a position as head town, and read confidence improves with time. I don't see it as a solid move this early. I like the drive you are giving town though. In my last game the scum only had two players and there were no ways to interfere with the reliability of the cop power. I was 100% certain that any inspection I made was correct, which made for a bit of a lopsided game. The game ended quickly as one of the scum was trying to opt out of the game and was playing fast and loose. I can't really give great insights into cop play as I was actually correct in my initial read on both scum, which is something due more to luck than any skill on my part. Lecturing other players isn't all that useful. Nobody has said anything useful at this point though. + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 12:30 Spaghetticus wrote: Strong post Cakepie, keep it up. @Everyone How many games have you played? I want to compile another list, for personal use and otherwise. Even if you have already made this information available could you please do so once more so I don't need to trawl through starter fluff again? I am concerned about people pulling the nub card, and want to be able to assess the legitimacy of these claims easily. A massive mistake people were making last game was to assume that people were scum if they were inexperienced, which IMO is pretty silly in a nub game. More fluff, and inviting other players to clog the thread. An unsubtle buddy to Cakepie for good measure. Some serious hypocrisy here: On December 19 2012 12:51 Spaghetticus wrote: Cheers Omni and Chroma. Things seem to have died down, I might head to the gym. We still have three people with no posts, if you are one of them I suggest you make a big and informative post after reading through everything that has been posted this game. Try and have questions for the players that have been posting, and develop a theory of who is town and scum. You are late to the part y but you can still be valuable and productive town. So he wants people to "develop a theory of town and scum" without doing anything of the sort himself? This is what first set off my alarm bells. + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 20:34 Spaghetticus wrote: I just looked though everyone's filters and took some notes. I have a terrible memory and find it gives some context to the names I try so hard to remember. If you find it difficult to associate a person's name with their actions so far, I suggest you look through their filter in order to put a face to the name, and prevent them lurking past you. I will now try and compile a synopsis before bed. On December 19 2012 21:02 Spaghetticus wrote: Lurkers: Threesr: He seems to want to defend lurking, which is really weird. Only contribution to date is disputing LAL. Cakepie: One very solid post. Would like to see more, though I think you have contributed more than a few other people here. Orange: Very little substance so far. Fatchunk: One post. Kickstart: Two posts. Sylencia: Seems to want to contribute, but is struggling. Corazon: One post. Shz: low contribution, attempts to stimulate discussion have been weak. So we have a bit of a lurker problem. Some of you I think will have no problem increasing production, but some others seem reluctant. If all you have done is discuss LAL policy up to this point, you need to contribute more. Give us your scummy reads if you have any. I would put money on the day1 lynch being one of the names I just mentioned, please try and make sure it’s not you. At this moment in time my prediction is that either Corazon, Shz, or Threesr will get bandwagoned. Anyone can compose a list of lurkers. Still no town motivation here. On December 19 2012 21:19 Spaghetticus wrote: For the record, I find Cakepies text dump(s) actually fairly good. For the most part he has stayed on track and made his positions clear. I also agree with most of what he has said. I'd still like more, but he is far from lurking or suspicious in my eyes (relative to many of the other lurkers). Yet more noise. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 00:09 Spaghetticus wrote: I am someone with a natural inclination to lurk. So far I'm on my 6th page of notes, and once I have more than a 30% read on anyone as scum I'll make a case. Until then I just trawl through the data and try to keep others on track. I'm reluctant to play aggressively until I have a foot to stand on. Personally I would like people to focus their efforts away from Mocsta and Cakepie, and focus almost exclusively on the lurkers. If they do happen to be scum then at this rate they will leave a trail and we will nail them day two. Anyone looking for brownie points should try and focus on contributing OC, that is, post a case on one of the many lurkers. I'll give you a hint: if you are one of the lurkers, you need to score brownie points by proving yourself more useful than your lurker brethren. Bandwagonning on lurkers that have already been called out does not count! He's still asking for other people to make cases, and still contributing absolutly no analysis of his own. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 10:47 Spaghetticus wrote: @Threesr Please leave the attitude at the door. By making things personal you are bringing out people’s emotions, when what we need is reason. When OMGUS votes are cast something is going wrong for town, the fact that you are causal to the OMGUS means your activity is hindering town. Please keep things civil and impersonal, and rather than address only comments made at you, please do your best to develop cases that are not immediate to your survival. If you contribute to town, you will be valued and your chances of getting lynched go down, more so than the knee-jerk slinging of mud has got you by far. Also, with your votes, you are flipping around so much that any case you do make seems like only a distraction until some new and shiny muckup catches your eye. If your vote is just a means of applying pressure (which my town hypothesis of you would indicate), then it’s better for you to stick to a person and pressure the shit out of them, than to switch willy-nilly, as people start to disregard your vote, knowing it will soon change. More lecturing of other players, more complete absense of analysis. On December 20 2012 10:55 Spaghetticus wrote: My internet is about to get shut off for an unspecified amount of time. I'm gonna go through filters and try to have a case for when it comes back on. Promises a case, never makes one. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 12:02 Spaghetticus wrote: Internet back up, quicker than expected :D Chromatically I strongly disagree, I think the approach of Shz is great. I disagree with his conclusions, but the approach is immensely valuable, and I will likely be voting in line with this approach. I've said it twice and I'll say it again, this is not a game of certainty, and our first lynch is more likely to come up town. If anyone is having confidence in their reads of over 40% they are either prodigal or misguided. We should not only expect a town lynch, we should prepare for one. All this posturing is setting up for day two when the real game begins. More noise. He's trying to pass day one off as useless. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 12:05 Spaghetticus wrote: @Corazon Any and all of your assertions that head/scum hunting is bad are wrong. It is cool that you have struck out to find your own understanding of the game, but at this point we really need some information, and the only way to get that is scumhunting. There are plenty of resources on this site that will tell you why scumhunting is protown, I shouldn’t need to convince you by way of this thread. You have made several slips that could be construed as scum behaviour. I do discount this evidence entirely as I do not believe Freudian slips to be of much substance. While it is unfortunate for you (and town if you are town) that this has happened, as some people are easily swayed by this type of evidence, I implore you to not let it affect your utility to the town by causing you to go defence mode. Rather, pick your best read, and stick to them like a limpet. Also proof read your posts just to make sure it doesn’t happen again. What I told Threest in regard to OMGUS is equally relevant to you if not more, as (don’t quote me on this) your OMGUS was more explicit. Your vote is not a bargaining chip, it is a tool for pressuring and lynching. Your idea that lynching useless town is better than lynching useful town does hold some merit, but honestly it shouldn’t influence the equation that much. I just finished reading your filter and your posts are all stuck in the past addressing Threesr, please bring some more up to date content to the table. More lecturing of other players, more complete absense of analysis. On December 20 2012 12:06 Spaghetticus wrote: @OmniEulogy Your contribution has been almost entirely limited to the Threesr/Corazon debacle. This is not an untapped vein to begin with, regardless of where your vote lies, please contribute elsewhere. You mentioned being suspicious of FC? More lecturing of other players, more complete absense of analysis. I'm getting tired of copy and pasting this by now. On December 20 2012 12:17 Spaghetticus wrote: @Orangeremi Do you still believe it is not beneficial for mafia to lurk? You shouldn’t, as you’d be wrong. As I have done before, I would point you to the resources available on this topic on this very forum. Lurking bad. Speaking of which, you still only have a one page filter. Admittedly my filter is only two pages, but your one page only has 1-2 posts of any substance. Step up if you’re town, continue to stagnate if you’re scum. Do I even need to repeat myself again? On December 20 2012 12:20 Spaghetticus wrote: @Sylencia I have not yet read your filter yet but you need to step up now as you have very little time left before you need to vote. You are actually a mildly scummy read for me in that the only real information I have on you is that you have claimed a legitimate reason to lurk. You will need to put a lot of effort in if you want your words to stay strong in your absence. Okay, this is still more lecturing and this is getting ridiculous. And then a huge block of lecuring of other players for good measure, while contributing nothing himself. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 12:31 Spaghetticus wrote: @Kickstart I'm afraid I didn't make myself clear, though you were you for an update anyway XD I asked you because you've played the most games, how are the players in the current game acting in comparison to when you've played with them before? I assume you've run into at least one in your travels? This is at least a question. It's still not particularly constructive though. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 13:26 Spaghetticus wrote: @Chrom I have absolutely zero problem currently with the way you conduct yourself. Your approach is direct, and simple. I begin to suspect they are a little forced, as I can't imagine anyone that is this selective in the data they choose to interpret wanting to play a ridiculously complex game like mafia, but for now you serve a purpose (that sounds more cold than I mean it ). I would normally brush your commentary aside, but I feel that while I have been very active, I have given next to nothing on my actual perspective. So that you have a standard to later judge my actions by, I will respond. "I dislike your post saying that we should "expect a town lynch". Good towns can find scum d1. Good players can be correct in their reads with over "40%" certainty. Your post reads like you're not going to even try to find scum." Assuming you are town, you should start the game with a neutral 25% suspicion of everyone (you are the 13th player). Through day one, people will pave the way with false bravado and bluster, but ultimately, day one only serves to identify the people you are playing with. I now have a feel for your styles, an have limited information about what you can and cannot do without bringing the scumhunt to your door. There is incredibly little actually being done, and evidence is inconclusive. I admit, I don't know the actual statistics, but I assume the chances of lynching scum on day one is 25% or less. I believe the inputs for this equation are actually very complex, but I'll try and simplify and communicate the little I do understand. You posit that 'good' town can find scum d1. This is true, and that should be a focus, but this is unlikely to happen because: 1) - Good scum are approximately equally as abundant good town. For every master inspector there is an escape artist. Your argument from town competency is counteracted. 2) - The scum are manipulating our vote. Three informed votes have a lot of sway in the uninformed majority. As I hope to have adequately expressed above, it is actually incredibly optimistic to expect a day one scum lynch. On top of this, any scum lynches could be the result of an early bus, which leaves the scum with all the cards. I expect the number of successful scum lynches that do not involve some more advanced mafia play are even less than the 20-25% mentioned earlier. Mafia, much like starcraft, is a game with phases. I play macrozerg, I win with broodlord infestor. Trying to 6pool out a win on day one is not my style. Some more rambling about his views on day one prospects. Still bloody useless in terms of contributing to finding scum. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 13:34 Spaghetticus wrote: @Corazon The information is there for the reading. Please don't surrender if you are town, the voting is inconclusive. People have been pressuring with their votes all day, the only difference here is that they all decided to do it to the same person. Sheeping this hard this early is crazy and almost certainly scum manipulation. Despite your play being scummy, I would prefer someone else get the lynch just so that the sheeple will stop being so lazy and keep making cases. That a supposed majority have settled on one person this early is IMO retarded, people need to throw down the hivemind mentality. More lecturing, containing this gem: Despite your play being scummy, I would prefer someone else get the lynch just so that the sheeple will stop being so lazy and keep making cases? You must be joking. Spag has still not made anything even resembling a case. On December 20 2012 16:49 Spaghetticus wrote: I am writing up a defense of Corazon ATM. It's long, and complex. I expect people to put in the effort to read it, as I am spending a good amount of time writing it. We still have 15 hours or so (I think) before lynching, let's make them count! I would have preferred to write a case on someone but I think it's more important at this moment to get town back to actively scum hunting. So Spag thinks that the best way to get town back to scumhunting is to defend someone under pressure, not make a case himself? Words fail me. Then the defence of Corazon, I can't be bothered quoting it. Suffice it to say that it's still not scumhunting. While I agree that we shouldn't lock in votes on Corazon just yet, there's stuff to be learned from watching reactions to it. It's as good a topic for discussion as any. Spag's whole "I'm defending Corazon but still happy to vote for him" BS is a classic scum move too - keeping his options open for new developments so he doesn't have to contradict himself later. I'm not saying that town would never do this, but it's pretty damn scummy. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 19:27 Spaghetticus wrote: how long until lynching? I need to plan logistics. @Mocsta My read on Threesr mirror's Kickstart's, though I by no means condone Kickstart's lurking (still one page filter!?). The battle between Threesr and Conazon reminds me of my only other game. Both Kush and WeeTee were conspicuously weak players and everyone was gunning them down. I launched a defense similar to the one I just threw out, and while WeeTee got lynched (innocent), Kush (also innocent) managed to stay alive and we had scum gg after the second night. People that are new read too far into other noob's actions, it's a complex element that people in higher level games don't need to worry about as much. While I am not saying that there is absolutely zero chance of these players being scum, I think that the information available points to them just being bad town. With Threesr, it's the fact he's been modkilled for lurking that gives me the feeling his obnoxious internet persona is not a skilfully crafted scumshield. On top of me actually thinking neither of them scum, I also think it's best for the town if we talk about other people regardless of their level of guilt, as if either of them is scum they are almost certainly a weak one, and not likely to stay off our radar for long. We waste time talking about points that have already been said, both players have been drilled to death. My inclination is to believe that the lurkers hold at least 1-2 mafia, as they have had no reason to step up because Threesr and Corazon have been taking all the heat. By being complacent and lazily voting for the conspicuous, we have let too many people fade into the background. And he's STILL telling everyone else to discuss and give reads while offering none of his own. This has gone far enough. Now, Spag has said that he prefers to build up to a case with his notes, and then drop it all at once. Fair enough, so do I. However, let's quickly check out his previous game, Newbie XXV, where he was town: + Show Spoiler + On August 24 2012 12:34 Spaghetticus wrote: This is a repost of my case against Shady Sands. I hope I'm using the tags correctly now... As I will probably be unable to respond to any criticism immediately for the next 10.5 hours, it would be lovely if any comments directed at me could be made quite salient. I'll be tired when I get home and deciphering pages and pages of text can be difficult without cues. @Kush So in the few hours this game has been running I have somehow managed to both bandwagon and lurk? This seems brash considering how tentative you have seemed to want to be so far. I have not bandwagoned. The extent of my contribution is having agreed with Scrawn's lurker policy, but also criticised it for being too conservative. I haven't had time to lurk, as afore mentioned I am a busy person who does not have time to sit on this thread all day and respond in real time to every comment. There is also very little to go on at the moment, just because I am not pretending to contribute does not mean that I am not going to actually contribute as soon as I have something to say. Now looky here... I do have something to say! I think Scrawn is doing a good job as town, this certainly does not mean he is beyond suspicion, but he has been fairly reasonable up until now. I do however, disagree with Lvdr's assessment of Shady Sands. He has been very critical so far, but nothing he has said comes to mind as particularly proactive (I'll eat my word if he can give me a counter-example). In particular, his critique of Lvdr's comment: filter On August 24 2012 08:54 Lvdr wrote: He said: This seems like empty criticism, as he almost seems to deliberately misinterpret the statement in order to give himself something to say. If Lvdr thinks we should lynch lurkers, but not give up actively scumhunting in order to do this, then it does not at all seem that he is suggesting these two things are mutually exclusive. Yet this is what Shady seems to suggest. Furthermore, Lvdr has played with Shady before, and claims that Shady should by now have an idea of Lvdr's policy preference. Soon afterwards, he had the following criticism of Fubu's post: On August 24 2012 06:30 mkfuba07 wrote: He wrote: This is an accurate criticism, but not particularly useful. IMO (and fubu feel free to step in and correct me) Fubu's post was poorly written and he mistakenly made his both a descriptive and prescriptive assertion: that we will all look for scum during the day and the night and that we should all look for scum in the day and the night. If my interpretation is correct, then this is a completely understandable mistake and speaks extremely little of some scummy motivation he may or may not have. So far I have shown you two examples of what I believe are needlessly critical posts, that is: posts that are needlessly skeptical of things that will not help us catch scum. Now, as WeeTe has already mentioned, posting lots is generally attributed to town behaviour. However, posting lots of unproductive criticism seems like the sort of thing a scum would do to look like town but not contribute to the lynching of scum. FoS Shady Sands I would like to note that I am the first person to my knowledge that is acting against Shady, and IMO I am the first person to put up a decent reason to actually suspect anyone. I'm gonna get back to study, and I'll likely be unable to post for the next 11 hours, at which point I'll go through a read and post before heading to bed. This is his fourth post in XXV, just four hours in - and he's already contributing and getting some accusations and analysis out there. I'd encourage everyone to read through some of his XXV filter and think about whether his play here is anything like his play there, or indeed anywhere near as worthwhile from a town perspective. tl;dr: Spag isn't taking a firm stance on anything and isn't scumhunting at all. Other people are doing the same, but there are two major differences: - Spag has posted a lot. While the lurkers worry me, the point of threatening to lynch lurkers is that they are then obliged to post, and scum will have to post useless things... like Spag is. The sheer quantity of his posts while saying nothing of worth is the clincher here. - Spag was constructive very early in his last game as town. ##Vote: Spaghetticus I'm not messing around with pressure votes anymore, this is a vote with intent to lynch. All aboard! @Everyone: If you're not on this wagon you'd better have a really good reason why. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
1) I have a better scum read. 2) I think he's looking for scum. Inexpertly, perhaps; but in between defending himself there are hints of genuine searching for scum. He'd be sheeping the Threesr case/general suspicion if he'd posted a rehashed case or voted him. In fact, Corazon tried to pressure Threesr. Not the same thing at all. Like I said earlier, I want to see more hunting from Corazon. I'm certainly not convinced that he isn't scum. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 20 2012 21:20 Spaghetticus wrote: My first issue is that you say I have done nothing useful. This is false. My contribution is substantial, you have just turned a blind eye to the benefits the town has wrought. I have not accused a single soul, and for good reason. People that are pressured say stupid things, that are misinterpreted by an overeager inquisition. I am more interested in observing the flow of the game until I feel I can make a solid case that will actually change minds, than in beating a horse beyond death. I quite agree with the last sentence here. However, there is nothing to be gained from discussing policy forever. That just allows helpful scum to "contribute" without committing themselves to anything, which is what you have been doing. When I tell people to ignore the list, I am telling you that my contribution will be substantial with or without the lists. And if your contribution had been, I wouldn't have brought it up. I try to keep people active without making them defensive (see how that worked out for Threesr and Corazon?). Indeed I do. Pressuring Threesr and Corazon, while it made them panic a little, did give us a better town atmosphere in which to hunt scum. It made your lack of constructive contribution more obvious. a scum Spag also does not make sense with your predefined expectations. A scum Spag would do everything in his power to appear useful while hindering town. I have gone out of my way to help town in ways that are not directly measurable. Have I even tried to sway the vote of anyone other than away from Threesr and Corazon? You HAVE done anything in your power to appear useful while hindering town by clogging up the thread with your supportive but worthless posts. Hypothesizing that Threesr and Corazon are town, as scum you would have a very good reason to defend them: one of them will probably be lynched, and you'll get town points for supporting them. And having got repeated town reads from other people for being nice and helpful, why wouldn't you continue? Now look, I'm not saying we should all be aggressive, pressuring machines making everyone's life here painful. I'm playing this way because someone has to, so that we have material to read. That said, if you are town you should have had some kind of analysis built up, even if you didn't post it, right? You proved you were capable of it in XXV... Apparently not. From the time of my case it took three hours for you to build anything resembling a case, and it's not even like you voted for Omni with it. If you were town, I'd have expected you to have some analysis you'd been doing for the last day and a half (you said you had notes, right?), and post it to prove you'd been doing something useful. Instead, you had to go and make an unconvincing case from scratch. A player who's not even been looking for scum privately IS NOT TOWN. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On No-Lynching If we no-lynch, we lose a productive town player overnight. We may obtain a useful cop check, but the odds aren't high, and that's the only thing we could possibly gain. We could lose a PR, too. If we lynch, we may lose a second town player in addition. However, they will be a town player who is playing in an unproductive way. However, we stand to gain a lot more than we lose if we lynch scum. And finally: A lynch is the only time scum are absolutely forced to commit to something. Votes at lynch are the biggest undisputable facts in the game. If we no-lynch we lose this information. Setup Speculation On December 20 2012 23:49 Mocsta wrote: Actually.. I think this is a very clever play. The dust needs to settle and votes need to be given the consideration they deserve. @Threesr: I also think that this is an extremely ironic statement given your pedigree this game. Now that I have read the thread. + Show Spoiler + I want to congratulate Mafia today. They have really stepped it up a notch in the second 24hr period. I have read the thread sporadically today, but topics and votes have changed significantly between p24 and p27 etc. This is exactly the type of confusion mafia need from us to survive. (i.e. have 2 or 3 ppl on the block, so they can spread their votes to hide identity). I am also surprised strong contributors from the 1st 24hrs have subsided in the second period. The last thing is: I re-read the OP for roles. + Show Spoiler + Out of the 13 roles, the default types of roles is 8 good guys, and (4+1) bad guys (1 = SK). I have not played this game before, but I am guessing the ratio may be balanced... i.e. 8 townies to 5 mafia. if we allow variance, it may be 9 townies and 4 mafia. (10/3 sounds way too skewed for town) My point is: I think there is 4 mafia this game. (Chance of 4 + 1 SK, still equates to 4 mafia) I am off to building a case. Rembember, scum have the two huge advantages of getting a kill on town every night, and knowing who one another are. 9-4 would be ridiculously mafia favoured. If you do the math, if town lynch randomly I believe 10-3 has a very large chance of scum win. (I know it's something like 70% in a 7-2 setup). If town has really weak PRs, 11-2 or 10-2-1 is even conceivable (check out C9++ for a sample of a 13-player setup). There's no guarantee, at all, that all of the roles in the OP are present. On Spaghetticus: @Corazon: I feel like this is the best course of action right now. Why don't you guys search for someone who is good at hiding their true and pick out their post instead of trying to lynch the noobs Day 1. Spaghetticus is not a newb. In fact, he's one of the more experienced players in this game. And he has indeed successfully hidden his true colours by appearing useful. So using your brain automatically makes you mafia? You have been posting rationally with your last couple of posts, does that make you Mafia. If you think he hasn't suspected anyone, read his long post in my defense. He said that I was still probably Mafia, but that you guys should not pursue me Day 1, as there were better Mafia players hidden in the shadows that you should have tried to confront to prevent them from having a bigger influence on the game. Using your brain does not make you mafia and it does not make you town. Using your brain in pursuit of mafia makes you town. And I did read his post. If he thought there are better Mafia players hiding, he should confront them himself. This is in fact exactly what I meant: he's telling everyone else to attack, pressure, make cases, etc. but not committing to any of them himself. So no one has said anything useful at all? Then why am I on the chopping block? Are you guys admitting that there is no good reason that I'm up here? (Disregard this if that post was in the quoted one, I wasn't sure). Well, you did scumslip pretty hard. And you've misinterpreted me a bit: at the time Spag made this post no-one had said anything useful. He has developed a theory of town and scum. It is day 1, you're not going to catch all of the scum in Day 1. He doesn't want to be the only one making reads, which since then most of us have made reads. You're just wrong. He made NO scum reads prior to my case. Why are you analyzing his first posts. This was before you started head hunting and turned this into the French Revolution, so I believe noting who has not posted is not a useless thing to do, and could definitely be a town action in my eyes. I agree, it's not useless. But it's an easy thing for scum to do convincingly. I don't argue that everything he's said is scummy, I argue that nothing he's said is particularly town. @Shz: 1. We should not assume someone is playing bad or good because of information from sources outside this game. I don't think this is very worthy of discussion. For all we know everybody could be a smurf, played with a smurf before, or just played somewhere else. Don't assume anything, look at their actions in this game. I agree partially with this. I don't assume that people without games on this site on this profile are inexperienced. I do assume that people with previous games on this profile on this site ACTUALLY PLAYED THOSE GAMES. And Spag demonstrated in the previous game which he played that he is capable of analysis and hunting, and has done neither this game. While I agree that Spaghetti is possible scum, the argument that rational posts = scum is dumb. I never argued this. I argue that rational posts does NOT equal town, and that there is good reason to think that Spag is scum. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I don't argue that everything he's said is scummy, I argue that nothing he's said is particularly town. ... and given his volume of play and his experience, he SHOULD have said towny things by now. Also, one more thing: Defending people who are town, even if it's you, is a thing you can EXPECT mafia to do. It's called white-knighting and it's a common ploy to gain trust both from the person you protect and the rest of the town if and when they flip. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 21 2012 04:03 FatChunk wrote: ... Spag - I felt I should elaborate on this one since he's getting lynched tonight. While I agree that he has not shared a lot of his own analysis, neither have a lot of people. Also, he mentions that his analysis is in the background and will present findings as they arise. If he is not lying, this could be very useful to town. He has at least been active in trying to promote discussion, and defending people under pressure comes as a sideaffect of good judgement and rational thinking, something I respect. While I don't clear him completely of being mafia, I think it is more than likely he is town and we gain nothing from voting out Spag. Spag has in fact promoted very little useful discussion. He keeps telling other people to post constructively, while not doing so himself. The best way to promote a good atmosphere is to lead by example. Again, I think that if he in fact had been doing analysis he'd have been able to post a better case than he did in far less time. I respect his judgement and rational thinking, too - I just wish he hadn't rolled scum so we wouldn't have to lynch him. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 21 2012 05:57 Chromatically wrote: @Kick/Aqua FatChunk. Go. This is gonna have to be brief. He certainly hasn't posted a whole lot. While that's a problem, and if he's town I want to see it rectified day two, it makes me less confident of a read on him. Spag's sheer quantity of posts without any pressure or committment is the elephant in the room. In what posts he has made, FC did justify his vote on Threesr a little bit: ... Threesr did a good job of contradicting views regarding lurking, diverting town chat paths, and the town seems to be talking a little bit but we are dancing around constructive discussion (not to mention the fact that Threesr has been quite inactive recently). Perhaps this is scum behaviour. ... And he did proceed to pressure Threesr some more (insofar as that's possible with <10 posts). Threesr is a very easy target and FC hasn't done anything huge so far, but I can believe this from a newbie town. Which is not to say I have any confidence in his towniness, he just hasn't contributed enough. tl;dr: FC is more inexperienced, has posted less in general, but attemped to look for scum a little. Spag has more experience, has posted more and demonstrated a fair bit of knowledge, but has not looked for scum. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Being a nice guy doesn't make Spag town. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 21 2012 08:30 Spaghetticus wrote: - Aquanim I expect Aquanim to come under considerable pressure when I flip town, as he should. I did not have any read on him before, though I am scared of the possibility he is scum and masterstroked me from full health to zero in one hit. He's quite right here, starting a case on a (now) confirmed town should bring pressure in my direction. All I can really say is that I was as genuinely convinced by my case as the other townies on the wagon. I'd welcome any questions if you have them. I'll have to think for a while about how the lynch and the start of the night went down. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 21 2012 13:26 cDgCorazon wrote: While this is a good way to start discussion, I feel like less dramatic measures could have been taken, so overall, I really think he should have done that better instead of automatically coming to the conclusion that I should be lynched. I'ma gonna clarify this right now. My first vote, for you, was NOT a decision that I wanted to lynch you. That would be ridiculous based on three pages of play. That vote was an indication to you that your posting to date was not satisfactory. If you had continued to post like that, or reacted in a way that was clearly scummy, that would have become a vote with intent to lynch. Instead, you reacted well enough that I didn't want to lynch you day one. I don't have an updated read on you yet, haven't read the thread real thoroughly. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Do you think overall your approach was a success? I didn't do anything I regret (except for the end result, obviously), but if both Spaghetticus and I had been available for three hours before lynch we might have made a lot more of the day. If we'd had a more serious second case going that would have been preferable, but obviously I can't drive two wagons at once. Did Spaghetticus stick out like a sore thumb to you; or do you think you were lured towards his path? Well, most people had town reads on him, so I don't think anyone lured me there. Like I said, the combination of his large volume of posts and his small amount of hunting was what grabbed me. Speaking of which, I think everyone should take a look at their town reads and think "is this person's contribution helping us to find scum?". For me that's easy: I don't have any meaningful town reads. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 22 2012 00:35 cDgCorazon wrote: @Aqua On the issue of voting me without really meaning it: What did a vote do that a FOS would not have done? Did you need to react that hasty? There were other measure you could have come back to. I think that a FoS is pretty much worthless. A vote commits you a lot more, and if everybody commits to things scum have to make mistakes. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 22 2012 07:49 cDgCorazon wrote: I would also like to see your thoughts on Aqua's accusations on Omni. Right now it seems like you are not looking at the big picture, and are only seeing possible cases about people who are accusing you. Uh... that case was made by Chromatic. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
The Spaghetticus wagon I obviously have a different perspective on this to anyone else, since I know without question the alignment of the person who started the wagon. The final votecount: Spaghetticus (7): Aquanim, OmniEulogy, Mocsta, cakepie, Kickstart, Chromatically, shz cDgCorazon (2): threesr, Sylencia threesr (2): FatChunk, cDgCorazon FatChunk (1): Orangeremi OmniEulogy (1): Spaghetticus Basically, I think I'd expect two scum on the Spaghetticus wagon, and one off it. Why there weren't three scum on the wagon: + Show Spoiler + Three scum on the wagon would only really make sense if they were trying to drive attention away from a scumbuddy who was going to be lynched, there's no real reason to commit that hard otherwise. This was the state of voting just before I made the Spag case: threesr (3): FatChunk, Mocsta, cDgCorazon cDgCorazon (6): Aquanim, Chromatically, OmniEulogy, Sylencia, shz, threesr Orangeremi (1): cakepie Not voting (3): Kickstart, Orangeremi, Spaghetticus Corazon is by far looking the most likely to be lynched - I think that wagon was losing traction, but there weren't any other serious accusations floating around. Threesr is also an outside possibility. Neither of these were voting for Spag at any point. Why one scum is plausible, but less likely: + Show Spoiler + Simply looking at the proportions of players on and off the wagon. With Spag obviously not voting for himself and Threesr and Sylencia inactive, there are only three remaining players (FC, Corazon and Orangeremi). Two of these three being scum is, I think, unlikely though not inconceivable. Disclaimer: If Threesr or Sylencia is scum one of the others could easily be as well. Why zero scum is very unlikely: + Show Spoiler + Same as above, but more so. As for my opinions on who actually behaved scummy around the lynch, OmniEulogy and Shz hopped on the wagon unconvincingly (Omni said he had better reads, Shz' vote didn't really matter), and the behaviour of FC and Orangeremi was decidedly sketchy (FC tried to make town cred from the mislynch, Orange contributed very little). Of course, there's also threesr and Sylencia who weren't there at all. Miscellanea: On December 22 2012 08:27 cakepie wrote: Contrast with my vote on OrangeRemi which is a stated pressure vote to force activity, and which I stuck to for a good while, to patiently gauge a longer-term reaction from him. (More on that later, hopefully) It's my view that stating that a vote is a pressure vote removes a great deal of its ability to actually cause pressure. Orangeremi didn't look like he was under much pressure day one. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 22 2012 06:49 Aquanim wrote: @Orangeremi: What did you think of Spaghetticus' defence to my case? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Just to make this clear: if you have been roleblocked you should say so. We gain more from you revealing this than hiding it. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 22 2012 13:18 cakepie wrote: ... Also a quick note for those thinking about possible SK: not compulsive kill in this setup In my opinion, there is very little at the moment to suggest if there Descartes is in the game or not, and I do not feel that we should devote too much energy into figuring that out just yet. ... This is definitely true. It's almost not in the town's best interest to search for SK earlygame, I think, for two reasons:
If town gets into a comfortable position, having lynched all or all but one of the mafia, then we start thinking about looking for an SK. Before that it's not a constructive use of our time. I was really concerned about the lack of scrutiny on myself throughout D1, and it does not help that when something as finally brought up, it had to come from a dead man's mouth. Corazon, OrangeRemi, Aquanim and maybe sylencia seem to be around atm. What is your take on Mocsta's read on me? Anyhow, I'm going to stick around in the thread for a bit now while I toss around all the possibilities in my mind. Feel free to ask for my thoughts on anything. IMO you didn't draw much scrutiny day 1 because of the sheer size of your posts. They were pretty imposing and contained enough worthwhile content that you didn't draw anyone's attention. I didn't and don't have much of a town read on you, but I think that the idea that you and Chromatic are both scum is a little hard to swallow. The two of you, Mocsta and myself accounted for a fair proportion of day 1's constructive and probing posts. Either or both of you could have contributed a lot less without standing out, and a lot less would have got done day 1 as a result. I know from my own experience it's very easy to suspect those leading the thread as scum with a mastermind plot, and very occasionally perhaps some of them are - but far more often scum are just blending in with the crowd. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
The OP wrote: All roleblocks will result in the target being notified. He was notified that he was roleblocked. This does not mean he has a PR. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 22 2012 16:48 Aquanim wrote: @Orangeremi: What do you think of Kick's contributions in the last few hours? EBWOP: Specifically, how have they altered your read on him? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
After that, the case seems to become "Chromatic is scum, therefore this is a bus, therefore Chromatic is scum". I'd like to hear some other opinions on that case. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
- The entire Chromatic case is based on Omni being scum. - I don't think Omni would necessarily be consistent in his use of the words "tell" and "read". | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Spag - I felt I should elaborate on this one since he's getting lynched tonight. While I agree that he has not shared a lot of his own analysis, neither have a lot of people. Also, he mentions that his analysis is in the background and will present findings as they arise. If he is not lying, this could be very useful to town. He has at least been active in trying to promote discussion, and defending people under pressure comes as a sideaffect of good judgement and rational thinking, something I respect. While I don't clear him completely of being mafia, I think it is more than likely he is town and we gain nothing from voting out Spag. Everyone keeps mentioning that spag is appearing useful while not contributing. Spag has argued that he has been lighting fires under lurkers to gain information. Is this not considered scumhunting, whether direct or indirect? He seems to be contributing in ways that are very obviously pro-town. I do not really see conclusive evidence. But who knows, maybe thats what town's supposed to do on day1. Anyway, we would have stood much more benefit and less to lose by lynching theesr - we would have confirmed theesr as town/scum and in turn shed some light on spag's innocence. Now hes gone. This defence of Spaghetticus keeps referencing Spag's own defensive post, but not the actual content of Spag's filter. Defending what we now know to be a townie isn't necessarily scummy, though there can be definite upside for scum. However, I'd expect a townie to read the actual posts of a scum suspect and make their own decisions rather than relying on the suspected player's defence (which is obviously going to distort reality in their favour). I also have no idea how lynching threesr would have given us any idea as to Spaghetticus' alignment. And since the lynch, he's made one post partially dropping his suspicions on Threesr (because he got put under a little pressure for having them) and on myself. This smells like a scum trying to cover over his past indiscretions and hope no-one notices. ##Vote: FatChunk If you're town FC, don't be scared by people telling you not to make cases on people because they're "easy targets" - just make a good and thorough case. If you have confidence that will shine through and our read on you will dramatically improve. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 23 2012 06:15 FatChunk wrote: ... Mocsta has some great points, I find it very hard to provide new insight when cases are well-fabricated and I agree with them. While I do not think the evidence is inconclusive against Chromatically (while I always shared a suspicion of him) Omni is a real issue. ... I don't quite understand what you've said here. Are you suspicious of Chromatically or not? This being said, I would like to hear from sHz and Sylencia, two players who have been posting infrequently and pretty much agreeeing or disagreeing with others without providing reasons. I honestly don't know why these players have been given a free pass, with nobody prodding them during their time afk. Does anyone agree with any of these points? What are your opinions of shz and sylencia? I'm really not a fan of shz at this point, for largely the reasons you and Chromatic have raised. I don't think Syl is the most active poster at the best of times (on a quick read of XXXII, where he was VT). I'm prepared to give Syl a little more time to get his head in the game and start contributing and committing to reads... my patience is running out, though. Aqua, I thought there was a relationship between theesr and spag, as spag was advocating theesr as town. If we lynched threesr and he turned town, you can probably expect spag to be town too. However if we lynched spag, and he turned town, we would be stuck with the non-useful townie. Like I've said, scum defending some of the weak townies is by no means unheard of, so I don't entirely agree with you here. I'm glad to see some rationale for this though. I haven't seen quite enough yet to justify moving my vote, but do keep posting sensibly and looking for scum. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 23 2012 08:35 Chromatically wrote: Aqua, do you think that FC is scummier than shz/Omni or are you just pressuring? At this point? Pressure. Obviously, I reserve the right to change my mind if he stops contributing or starts posting rubbish. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I'd really like to put some direction into this day. Who is here? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
His first post after the Spag case is: The case for Spag is huge, I'm leaning towards that. It's really the only case so far that has actually made me consider voting something other than no lynch (my previous top choice). I'd currently rate my voting choices at 1. Spag 2. Kickstar 3. FatChunk with a possibility of no lynch if they have sufficient evidence to the contrary. He then proceeds to vote no-lynch after saying some other random stuff. When he comes back in the morning, he votes FatChunk. With absolutely no reason. So, did he switch from Spag because he found Spag's defence convincing? On December 22 2012 12:30 Orangeremi wrote: I wasn't swayed either way by it. Your case was a tough one to argue and he tried. I don't feel like he succeeded. When he answered my question about his defense it seemed to me even fluffier as well. ##Vote: OmniEulogy Nope. As for his read on Kick: On December 22 2012 19:04 Orangeremi wrote: Wasn't convince he's town before, still not convinced he is. No reads on being something else, either. This was in reference to Orange's read on Kick before his posts day 2. Kick only posted once during the night, and I don't see how a #2 scum read turns into a null with that one post. Basically, the only reason I can see for voting FatChunk is to avoid being on the Spag wagon, and the only reason for that is to avoid responsibility for lynching Spag. As for why he voted FC rather than Kick, FC was the more generally acceptable target at that time I think. In fact: ##Unvote ##Vote: Orangeremi Orangeremi, explain yourself. Now. @FatChunk: Still want to see more from you. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 23 2012 12:55 shz wrote: ... What does that mean? If Chrome is scum, I don't think Omni is. If Chrome is town, Omni should be too. So you're saying that you think Omni is town regardless of Chromatic's alignment. Could you justify this some more? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
He's given us absolutely nothing to base his alignment on (aside from supporting lurking, which is WIFOM at best). He's not even putting in a desultory effort to find scum. I didn't push for a lynch on him day 1 because he at least was posting then and I hoped his activity would increase, but this is completely ridiculous. I know scum has a motive to lurk whereas town doesn't (but often does anyway), but at this rate I'll never have a better read on him than coinflip. And there is no way in hell I want Threesr in the game when and if we hit LYLO, he'll be unreadable as scum and a liability as town. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I call it a "policy lynch" because he hasn't done anything in particular to make me think he's scum except for doing nothing at all. Which, given there was no attention on him day 2, is in retrospect a pretty strong tell. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
As for changing his read on you, your post history is small enough that he could convincingly just go back on that whenever it's convenient for him. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 23 2012 21:16 Orangeremi wrote: My explanation for voting FC over Spag is I was convinced Spag was town after reading his long final post before being lynched. At that point I felt it was a toss-up between FC and Kickstart in my mind and I just voted to avoid voting no-lynch (since people seemed to not want me to). I would take all the players I've mentioned with a grain of salt, especially since I haven't made a case for any of them. I guess I can buy that. Your content level is still a problem for me, but Lord knows you're not the worst offender on that count. Could you give your own summary of why you think Omni's scum? I know Chromatic's covered a fair bit of the ground already, but I'd like to hear it in your own words. ##Unvote Gonna have to think about where my vote goes next. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
But, to summarise my thoughts (besides the above) on each of them: Omni's VT claim is really quite fishy. Seems almost too obvious, but the simplest solution is generally the best. Shz's behaviour in general (wanting to lynch based only on information gained, that list post back a page or two) rubs me the wrong way. Orangeremi hasn't made any whoopsies like these but he's lurked a lot harder. Threesr has been Threesr. Maybe we'll get really, really lucky and he'll be scum, forget to vote, and get modkilled today. I can dream FatChunk hasn't posted much at all, but he has committed to stuff a little more. Sylencia has been MIA most of the game. Really not impressed with his performance day 2, when he said he'd be free. Kickstart likewise hasn't done a whole lot, but he has pressured a little. And looking at that list, my choice is fairly clear. ##Vote: OmniEulogy The difference between Omni and the rest of that list is basically the VT claim. I don't like it at all. And I don't think there's a mind looking for scum behind his play. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Well, let's start with your scumreads. Though what I would have really liked to see was you looking for scum and gathering information on your own initiative without being prompted. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 07:15 OmniEulogy wrote: If you want to talk about inconvenient beliefs he's been defending me for the last 2 hours on the belief that I'm town. He made a lot of good points that people ignore. He came to the same conclusion I did, that we need the lurkers to be forced into activity to find anything out otherwise we're going to keep lynching townies. I guess that doesn't count. Damn me, you two aren't helping your "not scum together" case. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
If you want to talk about inconvenient beliefs he's been defending me for the last 2 hours on the belief that I'm town. He made a lot of good points that people ignore. "A lot" of good points? This is the only one I can find: If Omni is scum, the only explanation for his Spaghetti vote would be that Corazon is scum too. Why would he not jump on the Corazon wagon otherwise? Scum wants to kill anyone besides scum, so why start confusion when you just can take the safe bet without getting noticed. M conclusion is: If Omni is scum, Corazon has to be too. But then I don't get why he should still make a case against Cora, even if he backpaddled later? Why draw attenion to your buddy at all? There's also no reason NOT to vote for Spag, if Corazon and Spag are both town. All he has to do is read the Spag case, see that it makes sense and that the Corazon case has mostly stalled, and jump on early. Calling Omni town based on this and only this is jumping to conclusions. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 07:55 OmniEulogy wrote: ah I meant a lot of good points in general not just in my defense. he's really picked it up D2. Like what? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
If you're scum you can do what you like, of course. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 08:25 OmniEulogy wrote: Basically I think we're screwed. Start looking at what happens when I flip VT cause I honestly think the scum have played this perfectly. We didn't go after the lurkers, have lost a massive amount of information and because we didn't have information we turned on each other and made imaginary cases on ourselves because we don't have a clue about the others. Unfortunately, I think you're right. Still can't chase anyone else at this point today (too much WIFOM, and besides I doubt there's enough people here). At this rate Threesr will be modkilled - if he flips green (or blue :/ ) we will be in very deep s***. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 08:26 OmniEulogy wrote: So in these remaining 40 minutes what do you think Aqua? you might as well believe I'm town and try to pinball some idea's off me, if I flip scum you can ignore it but otherwise it'll all be true lol
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 08:31 Chromatically wrote: What? You don't think that Omni is scum? Let's say he's dying like I think a town player would die. Like I said, though, scum might do this in hopes of last-minute deliverance. And if there was a competing wagon I'd feel a lot happier about the outcome of this day. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Chromatic could be mafia... but I don't think it's likely, and even if he is, there's still two scum in the lurkers. And we've killed off enough semi-active players. If I'd known the game would turn out like this I might have left the Spag case for another day because, well... at least he posted. I was so convinced he was the scum's excuse for an active player though. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 08:58 OmniEulogy wrote: hahahahahahaha I guess that sums it up really. If you flip SK I will lol so hard. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 09:02 Dandel Ion wrote: OmniEulogy, as a Renaissance Man has been lynched! GG, hope you had fun. threesr has not voted and is hereby booted from the game. We will look for replacement. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Is this game so painful that the observers aren't even watching for the lynch to give us popcorn? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 12:53 cakepie wrote: Well, this is not a pretty state of affairs. We have failed to trade effectively early, and our lead in numbers, and more importantly, in activity have taken big hits. I do not see any remaining room for mislynching -- even one-for-one trades are not going to cut it now. Aqua, Syl: I take issue with "100%" being thrown around so carelessly again. Thoughts on this, and on Chromatically in general? Would scum go so all-in on a lynch they knew would flip green, when the lynch was pretty much settled anyway? I think it's unlikely. I think there's a consistent thought process behind Chromatic's play, and that its object is to lynch scum. Given the activity level of everyone else in this game, if Chromatic is scum then a) we've probably already lost and b) town does not deserve to win. He's got the most activity in this game by a fair margin. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 13:15 Sylencia wrote: My top suspect now goes back to Kick who was my 2nd choice in the previous day, this is due to his uncharacteristic lurking, which differs completely from his normal playstyle. Indeed, the Kick I know would have jumped all over Corazon and Threesr day one, even with the few posts he did make. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 13:22 cakepie wrote: Your vote was absolutely not required on the Omni wagon. Why did you not find a better use for it, if this is all you had to say about the way the lynch was headed? I had been using it other places for the rest of the day. At the end of the day, I believed Omni was scum up until his final posts, and I think a town player should have his vote on his scumread at lynch time. Leaving a single useless vote on someone else would accomplish exactly nothing. And like I said, letting someone off at the last minute after they've made their "final will and testament" type post raises a huge question mark. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 13:50 Chromatically wrote: Here's my thoughts on the next lynch: I think that shz is scum. However, I was also very confident that Spag and Omni were scum, and they weren't. In addition, by lynching them, we've lost 2 potentially helpful townies. I don't like the possibility of having another mislynch on another semiactive townie, leaving us with a higher and higher lurker:active ratio. If shz is a mislynch, we are left with a 7 person town with at least 3 total lurkers, an extremely bad situation. Given that there's almost certainly some lurking scum, I feel like the scummiest lurker (Kickstart/FatChunk/Syl) might be a better lynch. On the other hand, I think that shz has the highest chance of flipping scum. I really need to evaluate the risk:reward of lynching a lurker vs shz, I'm not decided yet. Agreed. Now that Omni has flipped town, why do you think Shz is scum? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
@ Aquanim, Chromatically: what do you think of the connections that shz seems to be implying? Can something be built out of that at all? What about other connections; do you see any that are worth further pursuit and scruity? I had "found" some Omni-shz connections myself, but held off from posting those knowing well how they can seem stronger than they really are with confirmation bias glasses on. Looking back at this and in the light of the environment in this game, I am starting to doubt the usefulness of such links -- I do not think they are worth much unless otherwise moderately strong cases can be made against both sides using other evidence. Thoughts? I think making association cases before a red flip is a bad idea in general. I'm not really sure what shz was implying at all looking at that post, it seems to be almost all data and no analysis. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 04:44 shz wrote: I did, what I think is a good approach and sumarzied every (living) player. I think there is a lot to learn from this, now bundled, information. I commented sometime, but mostly it is just the information. I will draw my own conlusions from that after this post. I may have overlooked something, so you can of course correct me. .... I am conviced we will find connections and answers in here. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I appreciate that it'll take you quite some time to catch up, but when you do we could really use a fresh perspective. I'd really like to see whatever reads you have. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 15:59 Sylencia wrote: Now, for day 3 coming - is it possible for the town to vote based on who they think is suspicious first - with some reasoning, followed by defenses and then switching of votes? I feel that in the first 2 days there were quite a few people who said X was their prime suspect but then voted for someone else because they were the majority. Leaving a suspect out of the firing line is the easiest way scum can get through the lynching phase and gives the enemy absolutely no pressure at all. QFT. I think this is definitely what was missing from day 2. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 17:51 Orangeremi wrote: I'm flabbergasted that Omni turned town. This really puts a wrench in things for me. Well, given that he has, who are your main suspects now? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 24 2012 20:43 Orangeremi wrote: Chrom's going to come under pressure (understandably) but I do think we need to pressure the less active players come next Day phase. I'm really thrown for a loop right now and don't know what to think. Looking over filters and after recent events I'm stumped That wasn't really an answer to my question. Care to try again? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 26 2012 08:36 yamato77 wrote: I'm lurking. Do you have any thoughts about what I have said so far? I agree with most of what you've said, except your read on FatChunk. I'll have my end-of-night post in a couple minutes. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I think I've been overthinking this game a lot since day one. I've been looking for contradictions and for bad reasoning, but townies mess up too (see: Omni's VT claim). I have drunk deeply of the wine about defending the obvious lynch victim. I have made association cases in my head. It has not got me much of anywhere. Let's go back to the basics. Mafia start with more information than town. It is in the Mafia's best interest to keep town from finding information. Conversely, it is in the Town players' best interests for the Town to gain information. Therefore, Townie players:
By comparison, Scum players:
Scum players may in fact be forced to reveal some information so as to appear townie. They may ask other players questions to appear townie. However, the end goal of a Scum player is NOT to look townie, it is to deny town the information they need to lynch correctly. As such, they will reveal as little information as possible, and their questions are unlikely to have a greater and unifying purpose. One case in particular I'll mention: everyone is obliged to justify their votes, scum or not. Unless the explanation is spectacularly good or bad, the presence of any reasoning behind a vote is null for me generally. So, I've looked at everybody's filters with the following two questions in mind: Is this person willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Is this person trying to obtain information from other players? No towny player could possibly be satisfied with the discussion so far, day two in particular. Anyone who wasn't attempting to generate more comes under serious suspicion from me. Shz + Show Spoiler + Is Shz willingly revealing his own motivations and reasoning? I'm saying yes to this one, but with the proviso that some of those reasons aren't entirely convincing. The best example of this would be the day 1 post detailing which of a Corazon, FatChunk and Threesr lynch would give the most information. link Lynching for information alone isn't really a good idea, but Shz is providing this insight into his thought process without being prodded. Could be mafia attempting to control the direction of play, but also could be honest town. He also defended Omni with his own ideas, not anyone else's. In hindsight I was a bloody idiot for sheeping on the Omni wagon, his defence and Shz's should have been convincing. I guess my point is here that these could be entirely fabricated thoughts, or they could be genuine. It's hard to tell. His reasons for jumping on the Spag wagon were pretty much nonexistent, but he argued his views strongly on the day two lynch. Is Shz trying to obtain information from other players? Yes. Not a huge amount, but he is asking some questions which lead in interesting directions. Not so many that he couldn't be scum and just making a good show of it, though. Other comments: Considering how much the tide had turned against Omni in day two, it would take a mafia player with some balls to stand by his defence of Omni. Again, it's not implausible that scum Shz could do this, but it's not the easy route (though beyond a certain point, turning on Omni would have looked very suspicious). He didn't make any other cases for the lynch, though. (otoh, towards the end he was only talking to Omni, Chromatic (who was shouting "Shz-Omni scum team!") and myself, who would he have made a case to?) Also, Shz was probably the next most likely lynch after Omni, so why would Shz defend Omni if Shz were scum? Just too much of Shz scum wouldn't make sense. Summary: Weak town read. This is the hardest read for me. Cakepie + Show Spoiler + Is Cakepie willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Yes. So... much... text. Is Cakepie trying to obtain information from other players? Yes. Not a huge amount, and not much of it's on his scumreads I think. But it's there. Other comments: Scum would have to be really, really enthusiastic to post this much volume in this game. Summary: Town. Kickstart + Show Spoiler + Is Kickstart willingly revealing his own motivations and reasoning? Not a whole lot. He did give the beginnings of a case on Shz, but his case is the kind of half-assed thing I'd expect scum to make to put suspicion on a townie. It rests on Shz' failure to justify his votes and nothing else. Other than that, Kick has only given information about his motives when directly asked. Even if he has very little time, I'd have expected him to push the Shz case harder if he believed it as much as he's said. Personally, there's no way I was confident enough on a scum read day 2 to just park all my suspicions and vote at the start of day 2 then leave, without even a pretence at pressuring anyone else. Is Kickstart trying to obtain information from other players? Nope. He didn't fish for reactions to the Shz case, he hasn't prodded anyone else... Other comments: Lurky as all hell. TBH is probably real life interfering. But there's no excuse for his failure to push his reads, 1-page filter or not. I want to emphasise this: even if you ignore his filter length, Kick's posting this game is unconstructive and not anything like I'd expect from him as town. There's an element of questioning which is just absent. This reminds me of his XXXI scum play - his activity was a lot better there, but again he tunneled hard on one person (esp. day 1) and didn't really pursue anything else. A quick readthrough of XXXII gave me a different impression of him, I think he was more investigative there - Syl and Yamato would be better suited to confirm this. Kick's tolerance for the poor town play this game is INCREDIBLY uncharacteristic of him. Summary: Very likely scum. And not only because his filter is less than a page. Chromatically + Show Spoiler + Is Chromatic willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Yes. Posted a lot of the stuff what got Omni lynched (and, despite being wrong, I think it was good reasoning), and made his read on Shz very clear as well without prompting. Is Chromatic trying to obtain information from other players? Yes. Asks a fair few questions. Just read his filter. Other comments: I keep finding Chromatic posting the same thoughts I was having. I thought this about Sonic Death Monkey in XXXI - he was blindingly obvious town and got NKd night one and night two. Also, I've played against Chromatic scum - and this just doesn't feel like it. Unless his scum meta has changed dramatically in less than a month of obsing games, I can't see this as scum at all. And let's face it, if Chromatic was scum he'd have stopped pushing the town along a while ago. Summary: Town. cDgCorazon + Show Spoiler + Is Corazon willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Yes. Corazon's reasoning has been out in the open all game, I think. Some of it, especially day 1, was not particularly good (his vote for me, "defending himself", jumps to mind here) but his reasons were out in the open. Is Corazon trying to obtain information from other players? Yes. Pushes Orange and Chromatic early day 2. Not so much day one, but given the circumstances that's understandable (if not ideal). Other comments: My gut read on Corazon's play is a rookie walking into day 1, drawing a lot of heat and losing his nerve. Talks to coaches over night 1, comes back with much, much better play. Summary: Rookie town. Became a much better player day 2 IMO. Orangeremi + Show Spoiler + Is Orangeremi willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Nope. He's basically posted nothing unless asked a direct question. Is Orangeremi trying to obtain information from other players? Nope. Like I said, practically all he's posted are answers to questions for him. Other comments: No-lynch votes are null for me. Newby scum and newbie town can both not know why this isn't a good idea. Summary: Lurky scum. FatChunk + Show Spoiler + Is FatChunk willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Very little. As far as I can tell, his only explanatory posts which were not in direct reply to questions or suspicions of him were his end of day one post (which could easily be trying to make points from Spag's green flip) and this post. In which he condemns Omni (who's since flipped town), Shz and Sylencia (for being lurking sheep). The latter are my townreads (not good ones, but still), and why isn't he just as suspicious of Orangeremi? Though he does mention Orangeremi here, I think this is mostly in response to Omni's vote on Orange. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=386911¤tpage=46#909 This post doesn't read town to me. "I'm going to have to vote for Omni tonight because lynching omni gives us the most amount of information"? I mean, there had been association cases drawn between Omni and other players, but really? Is FatChunk trying to obtain information from other players? Nope. No questions for other players, no pressure, nothing. Other comments: Summary: Scum here. + Show Spoiler + Is Threesr willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Hilariously, yes, while he was playing. I almost wrote "lolnope" without even reading his filter, but I'm glad I did read it. He did keep throwing his vote on different people, and gave his reasons - which is VERY DIFFERENT from parking your vote on your one scumread and not moving it. He's expressing his suspicions and applying pressure. Is Threesr trying to obtain information from other players? Only through his pressure, but that's sufficent really. So yes. I'd be happier if he'd been fishing day 2 (when we really needed some more conversation) but, y'know, he wasn't here. Other comments: I have difficulty picturing a scum player completely flaking day two (unless personal issues came up, I suppose - if so, my apologies). I would certainly judge Yamato's play on its strengths alone. Oh, and this post by Yamato is almost exactly what I am thinking about this game. Town points. Summary: Somehow, I've reached the conclusion that Threesr was quite possibly town, and his day one play wasn't actually complete and utter trash. I'm actually not feeling nearly as angry about Threesr's play as I was (except for the whole "completely flake day two" thing). Sylencia + Show Spoiler + Is Sylencia willingly revealing his own motivations, reasoning, etc.? Yes, though only a little. Though Sylencia's filter is short, there are some posts which both contain information and were spontaneous (i.e. not answers to questions specifically asked). Specific example: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=386911¤tpage=34#673 Scum could have got away with a lot less content than that. Is Sylencia trying to obtain information from other players? No, not really. Other comments: I just can't see scum making this post. On December 24 2012 15:59 Sylencia wrote: ... Now, for day 3 coming - is it possible for the town to vote based on who they think is suspicious first - with some reasoning, followed by defenses and then switching of votes? I feel that in the first 2 days there were quite a few people who said X was their prime suspect but then voted for someone else because they were the majority. Leaving a suspect out of the firing line is the easiest way scum can get through the lynching phase and gives the enemy absolutely no pressure at all. When I read this, I realised it was exactly what I should have thought. And the rest of Sylencia's content just rings true to me. A quick bit of advice, Syl: I think you need to be more assertive to get more attention and response in the thread, if that's what you want. Push people harder. If you're scum, just carry on as you are Summary: Town, about half this read is gut though. I think we've been searching for complicated solutions to a really quite simple problem. Three lurkers, hiding among the rest of the lurkers, seems to me to be a quite workable answer. After all, there's plenty of cover: Sylencia's been lurking a fair bit, Shz hasn't been a whole lot better (until later day 2) and Threesr disappeared entirely. While it seems a little odd that there wouldn't be at least one active scum on first glance, remember that it is just before Christmas: scum who planned to be active can be sidelined by real life, just the same as townies can. I can well picture a scum-team relying on Kick, say, to direct the town for them, only to discover that he's mostly unavailable. And let's face it, town has done a pretty good job leading ourselves down the garden path. Why should scum interfere? So I think at least two scum, and quite possibly three, are in {Orangeremi, FatChunk, Kickstart}. If more than one of them is town, there's just too much terrible play in this game to be believed (and some very convincing scum play). If there's scum elsewhere, my next guess would be Shz, followed closely by Cakepie and Sylencia. Threesr/Yamato I strongly doubt as scum, but without seeing more of Yamato's play I can't be sure. I'm very confident in Corazon and Chromatic as town. As for which one to lynch first, I really don't know. I feel scum from each of them about the same. But be very sure to lynch one of them. While I think it's *possible* that there's a single scum somewhere else, hunting for a single scum in six players inherently makes less sense than hunting for two or three in three players. If I die, come back in two days, and discover you've lynched Chromatic I will not be pleased. (Unless he flips red, of course, in which case I will be very impressed. But I'm positive he wouldn't.) The lynches on Spaghetticus and Omni made sense to me intellectually, but with these three I feel scum in my bones. While I still don't like association cases before a red flip, here's a couple of things I'll point out in case I die. Call this spoiler a time capsule, and label it "ONLY OPEN IN CASE OF RED FLIP ON KICK/FC/ORANGE" + Show Spoiler +
And in the day one lynch: The final votecount: Spaghetticus (7): Aquanim, OmniEulogy, Mocsta, cakepie, Kickstart, Chromatically, shz cDgCorazon (2): threesr, Sylencia threesr (2): FatChunk, cDgCorazon FatChunk (1): Orangeremi OmniEulogy (1): Spaghetticus Scum votes spread all over the place on a day where none of them are under threat. Check. Aaaand the day two lynch: Final Votecount: Orangeremi (1): OmniEulogy OmniEulogy (7): Orangeremi, cakepie, cDgCorazon, Sylencia, FatChunk, Chromatically, Aquanim shz (1): Kickstart Chromatically (1): shz Not voting (1): threesr Scum votes a little more consolidated on the main target, and Orangeremi was under some pressure early on. Check. It's not that I'm saying "these three are scum on the basis of these associations, lynch them" - I think they're scum individually and there's nothing about their association which wouldn't make sense from scum. In particular, there's nothing here which stops there being a single scum elsewhere. Oh, and an afterthought: none of these three was particularly interested in either lynch. And if there's an SK... well, good luck with that, I suppose | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
So Cakepie, two questions: - Why Yamato? - What do you think about the issues raised in my wall above? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
##Vote: Kickstart This substance had better be really good. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
FoS: Orangeremi FoS: FatChunk If Kickstart somehow manages to convince me he is town, you are next. Get in here and start posting, pressuring and hunting. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 26 2012 21:16 Sylencia wrote: So the jailkeep gives the same message as a roleblocker? To the best of my knowledge, yes. Could a mod confirm this? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Still waiting on FC or Kick to say anything. And this is Orange's only contribution: On December 26 2012 18:51 Orangeremi wrote: Apparently I've been roleblocked. I'm gonna read up on the thread, be back soon. He never came back. Confirmation bias tells me there's only one explanation for this. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 27 2012 11:50 cDgCorazon wrote: What do we do if none of them give an answer? My plan? Lynch Kick and pray. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
And again like I said, if more than one of these guys is town then scum probably deserve to win this. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 27 2012 17:26 cDgCorazon wrote: I do believe you are spot on with your focus on Shz and Sylencia. There are three ways to avoid getting in the spotlight: Lurking (which both have done at points), Sheeping (which both have done), and being ambiguous (which both have done). When they have been contributing, it has only been when they have been called out by someone else. They seem very hesitant to show their hands to us. It is very suspicious, and I feel like it needs more investigation. The problem is right now that so many have been lurking and being this way. For reference, here is a post from Spag (and Spag's been dead for almost a week now): Convenient that the 5 people Spag called out as scum on D1 are STILL being accused of lurking? It is a truly disturbing sight to behold. 100% there is scum in at least one of these lurkers. Our job moving forward is to figure out who is scum and who is not. Putting aside their lurkiness, who do you think is trying to not be noticed with the posts they have made? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 01:59 Orangeremi wrote: I'm really curious if that's the best course of action, Corazon. You seem to just have a hit list that ultimately will lessen the size of town more than anything. Doesn't seem all too beneficial to me. The overwhelming vote count for Kick right now leads me to believe the scum are just hopping on his wagon. If he was actually scum, wouldn't the mafia would find another player to try and start a wagon for to save him. But that isn't happening. I think we need to reevaluate. In the meantime I'm going back to one of my initial reads. ##Vote: FatChunk On December 28 2012 02:27 Orangeremi wrote: FC seems to be benefiting from not being pressure most. He has really not contributed much on the voting front, just hopping on the Omni bandwagon and also voting threesr D1. Scummy? This is not even nearly good enough. JUSTIFY this vote. Show me exactly what in FatChunk's play is scummy. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Nothing about Orange's votes for FC screams "not scumbuddies" to me. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 07:10 Aquanim wrote: If scumteam is Kick/Orange/FC, say, they don't really have a choice - one of them's going down today. EBWOP: And the time taken realising that might be why we heard nothing of worth from any of them for the first 36 hours of the day. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 07:22 cDgCorazon wrote: But if the scum team is so, why would they be trying to bus each other? Orange is voting for FC, and FC is voting for kick. It wouldn't make sense for them to all bus each other at the same time. They would be trying to bus one single person. If Kick just isn't here at all, the only one they could both bus would be Kick - and that might be a little too obvious. On December 28 2012 07:25 Chromatically wrote: That's a good point. I think it's less likely though, given that Orange has voted FC before. Also, I think that Kickstart would have been a better bus candidate, given that he has 0 influence with the town. In fact, I think that this, along with his other scummy posting, is enough to warrant a shz lynch today: ##Unvote ##Vote: shz Could you explain Shz scum to me? I mean, the refusal to make cases isn't great, but when I read his filter I read an thought process looking for answers. Which is not the feeling I get when I read posts made by Orange, FC or Kick. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:18 Chromatically wrote: In fact, you can ignore the thing I posted. There's no reason for a townie to not care at all about the d2 lynch. No pushing, no voting, nothing at all. Not town behavior. Voteswitch time, everyone. What? Which thing you posted? Switch to who now? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:42 Chromatically wrote: shz had no scumreads all of d2 and had no original scumreads all of d1. How is this town play? Everyone who's not switching to shz needs to answer this. Well... it's slightly more town than parking your vote on someone with no explanation who flips town, and then leaving without trying to learn anything or generate any new information. Which is what FC and Orange did, I believe. Same for Kick, with the exception that his vote was for Shz (who hasn't flipped). | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
His timing (at the last minute, when there's the hint of a swing towards someone he could plausibly vote) is just too damn convenient for me. I'm willing to risk the game on my town read of Shz. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
@Chromatic Why the hell didn't you raise your suspicions of Shz, like, 12 hours ago? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:55 Orangeremi wrote: Since that train seems to be going somewhere and scum seems fine with us voting Kick. ##Vote: shz Chrom, if shz turns town I'm looking at you. Hopping off of FC wagon when it seemed to gain momentum was something I was looking for. And my next scumread switches to the only plausible mislynch, while setting up an even worse mislynch tomorrow. Predictable. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
GUYS THIS IS TOO OBVIOUS | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Everything I thought I knew about the game of mafia would be a lie if Kick flipped town after that. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I was panicking and posting the first thing that came to mind to stop anyone else switching to Shz | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
If you were confident enough to last-minute switch (without giving anyone time to think about it) why didn't you push for his lynch earlier? Why did you think Shz was scummier than Kick? Look, trying to push a lynch away from scum at the last minute is just up-and-up scummy. Explain your reasoning. In detail. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 09:28 Orangeremi wrote: I wasn't convinced Shz was scum. My reasoning is based on Kick not being scum. His lynch was clear and nobody tried to intervene and take votes off of him. Why not? If he was scum, his scumbuddies would be trying to vote someone else. But that wasn't happening. Since it wasn't happening, I was convinced he was town. Which begs the question, why wasn't it happening? Chrom switched just as I did, I'd want to know why he didn't push it earlier either. I wanted to push for whichever vote had the better chance of winning that wasn't Kick, since I was under the impression that Kick wasn't scum. You were voting for FatChunk, not Shz. Why didn't you push the FatChunk wagon harder earlier if that was your concern? For that matter what do you think of FatChunk's play now? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 09:45 Sylencia wrote: Having a framer in play suggests there's a Cop in play, right? Not necessarily. Hosts like to troll like that. The reason is basically because if that was true scum would automatically know there was a cop if they had a framer. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 09:49 Aquanim wrote: Not necessarily. Hosts like to troll like that. The reason is basically because if that was true scum would automatically know there was a cop if they had a framer. EBWOP: Scum framer and (presumably) roleblocker against town JK and (presumably) roleblocker sounds kinda balanced. Scum has two PRs, which seems powerful, but framer is completely useless and roleblocker is of limited utility without a cop or doctor to counter. I don't mind discussing it a little, but I don't think setup speculation is particularly useful right now. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 09:48 Orangeremi wrote: I wasn't trying to get anyone in specific lynched because all that was in my head at the time was "Kick is not scum" and my intention with voting for FC was an attempt to view player's reactions (voting wise). I wasn't trying to push the FC wagon, but I was trying to push people to vote for someone also in attempt to get a read off of how they decided to do it. If FC was scum, it seems kind of stupid to take his vote from Kick and put it on a player he knew would flip town (are we convinced shz would flip town?) seeing as it would gain suspicion. If he was scum, I don't know why his vote was on Kick in the first place. Not having a clear idea of who you want lynched other than "not Kick" doesn't really look good for you at this point, I have to say. Who do you think we should lynch tomorrow? Give some thorough reasoning this time. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 12:38 cakepie wrote: @Aquanim: Your thoughts on the hypothesis that "FC/Orange scumteam too easy" Well, if they'd succeeded in pushing a mislynch on Shz (assuming FC/Orange scumteam) then we'd be in a bad way - 3 scum, LYLO, and we'd have to pick the scum from Kick, FC, Orange, Chromatic, and whoever else jumped on to put Shz over the edge. I've believed since the end of night two that FC/Orange were very likely scum and nothing they've done changes that. There's no point in chasing unlikely hypotheses until the obvious one has been eliminated. It's not like we're dealing with Marv or Ace-quality scum in a newbie, after all. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 16:50 Sylencia wrote: ... 1. FC, Chrom then Orange, the difference between my suspicions of Chrom and Orange are very very slim. Honestly, they both look super shady to me. ... Besides the end of day three, what about Chromatic's play strikes you as shady? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
First, I'll just make this clear: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:59 Aquanim wrote: AAAAND my other scumread jumps in GUYS THIS IS TOO OBVIOUS If I'd had more than 15 seconds to make this post, it would have read "THIS IS TOO OBVIOUSLY A SCUM PLOY FOR ANYONE ELSE TO CONSIDER VOTING SHZ". @Corazon: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 18:26 cDgCorazon wrote: I've been looking or the events and posts surrounding Shz's almost-lynching, and I've come up with a few things I'd like to share. I think it's ok to vote for Shz. His play has still been sub-par this game, and I'm not saying that anyone is scum or not just because of how they voted. Cake (Voted for FC)- He already stated his reasoning, and I think that his points have merit. We shouldn’t look too much into Cake’s decision to vote FC. Chrom- While he was not the first one to vote for Shz, he started the whole bandwagon with: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:18 Chromatically wrote: In fact, you can ignore the thing I posted. There's no reason for a townie to not care at all about the d2 lynch. No pushing, no voting, nothing at all. Not town behavior. Voteswitch time, everyone. His reasons for Shz are solid, and I feel the same way. When he says that Shz did not vote on D2, he really meant it. His D2 vote for Chrom was really just a useless vote, and could have been used somewhere else. The OMGUS vote, along with the lurking and lack of contribution, shows that Chrom's vote for Shz was justified and reasonable. Unfortunately, I have to give Chrom the title of shepherd, because what came next became a clusterf**k of sheeping. Kick-Obviously, this is one of the more puzzling votes, but figuring out his motives could help us greatly in the scumhunt ahead. The most curious thing about his vote was the timing. His vote for Shz was 10 minutes before the deadline. -Why would he time it that late if he wanted to make a move to save himself? -Wouldn’t a better way to save himself be to defend himself a few hours before? -Had Kick given up, and was just exploiting a possible way to escape lynching, or was he trying to create some last minute chaos to rock everyone right before the votes were final? This is a very likely possibility, if Kick acted alone, it was more likely because of this cause. More on how we should find out at the end of the post. For now, let’s move on to the other two. Orange: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:55 Orangeremi wrote: Since that train seems to be going somewhere and scum seems fine with us voting Kick. ##Vote: shz Chrom, if shz turns town I'm looking at you. Hopping off of FC wagon when it seemed to gain momentum was something I was looking for. This is sheep #1. His whole post says, “I’m a sheep, I’m voting for Shz. The shepherd is supposed to be in charge of me, so if things go wrong with this vote, I can just dump the blame on him”. That is basically how his vote played out. This is textbook scum play. What is one way scum stays out of the spotlight? Joining the bandwagon of someone who has a strong town read from many other players in the game. This does one of two things: Gets rid of someone that scum knows is town, which puts the town in an even worse position. Giving Orange a way out if the vote goes wrong. If Shz flipped town, Orange can just point the finger at Chrom and stay in the shadows while another townie gets lynched. He even admits that is what he wants to do: Sheeping and not scumhunting are two tell-tale signs of scum. He doesn’t even try to defend himself when I directly call him out, he just ignores it and posts. We need to pressure him. He’s gotten away with this behavior so far because everyone else’s behavior was just so bad. FatChunk His original vote post: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:58 FatChunk wrote: okay well I think that either of the two people are scum: sHz and kickstart, and to be honest the last post of shz on the 27th was really scummy to me. I hope we're right. ##unvote ##Vote: sHz His post explaining his vote: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 10:52 FatChunk wrote: Okay so here is/was my thought process. Chrom made some interesting observations about sHz, enough to cause me to make my read slightly stronger about sHz than Kick. After all, kick was a lurker more than anything, and scum lynch > lurker lynch. I was pretty confident in following someone with town rep like chrom, especially someone who is willing to risk his town rep on a scum read. but at this point I think that sHz is cleared, right? if shz was scum, Kickstart, a player with some experience, would not accuse sHz of scum that early in the game: it is just bad play. Unless kick was making bad cases to be shot down and appear to be scumhunting. Distancing himself from fellow scum? I don't know. Orangeremi, kickstart's scum partner, chooses to try and swing the vote toward sHz as a last minute attempt. His explanation is that he didn't think kickstart was scum, and that he voted me to judge my reaction. The part that interested me most was the line: Which contrasts with this post (this isn’t the whole post, but I made sure not to take him out of context): + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2012 04:03 FatChunk wrote: chromatically - I have noticed that he pressures too hard to the point of almost lying and skewing my words and overanalyzing small reactions in order to further his agenda. Faint vibe that I think should be looked into. Also, he seems like an experienced player which is scary if hes mafia. And this post: + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 03:03 FatChunk wrote: Regarding his[OE's] FoS on me: All I ever said was that I had a suspicion of chrom, something that needed to be examined after a lynch of omni, who is the most suspicious right now in my eyes. I also simply mentioned that Mocsta's case should be considered as we move forward. Well, isn’t that a complete 180 from D1 and D2? What gave you such a change of heart? Maybe it was the mislynch of Omni. FC could have figured out that if he says that he believes that Chrom is town, it could be to just keep Chrom around to be the shepherd to get all the townies to lynch themselves (which happened on D2, and possibly almost happened on D3). He could also reading Chrom as town because if the town decide to lynch Chrom off (in the case that Shz got lynched and flipped town), he can defend Chrom and therefore get some town cred if Chrom flips town. While it is not as open as Orange, FC’s sheeping needs to be looked into. He also needs to explain his change of heart on Chrom, and start naming off some suspects if he wants to prove he is not scum. So the question is: Where do we go from here? It seems like the next lynch could shape up to be a lynch for information. In normal circumstances, it is a bad thing, but with all the chaos that finished up Day 3, lynching for answers could be the way to root out the last 2 scum. Now that we have some more breathing room, and LYLO is again just a bad dream for now, a lynch for information here might be very beneficial to the town. Do we lynch Shz, and figure out if his almost-lynch today was a bunch of sheeps, or a mafia clusterf**k? Do we lynch someone who jumped on the bandwagon, and figure out from there if the bandwagon on Shz was an attempt to bus, or a case with some merit, which would put Shz back under suspicion? We're not so far from LYLO that we're not going to lynch the scummiest player. Shz is not the scummiest player, by a long shot. Some possibilities about Kick's vote + Show Spoiler + Why Orangeremi is scum + Show Spoiler + All the reasons I said at the end of Night Two still hold true. Orange has completely failed to give any information unless directly asked (except for the bare minimum reasons required with his votes) and this got worse, if anything, day 3. Neither has he tried to elicit any further information from the thread - which is certainly not what I'd do if I was as unsure of my reads as Orange purports to be. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 10:23 Orangeremi wrote: At this point I'm entirely uncommitted. Of all players nominated for lynching, FatChunk, Threesr, and cDgCorazon are the ones I'm considering. Otherwise, I have a slight suspicion of Sylencia that is based solely on a hunch and little to no evidence. On December 20 2012 10:06 Orangeremi wrote: Your read on FatChunk is very convincing. His reaction to you mentioning Corazon earlier definitely made me question what was going on, but I didn't look into it nearly as much. To be completely honest regarding Corazon's slip up (accidentally claiming mafia), I read it completely normally thinking he did anything wrong and didn't notice until Threesr pointed out that he had. I don't know what that says about me, but if he read it right and I read it right, he could possibly be telling the truth. I do agree with you that they're both acting incredibly defensive. On December 20 2012 20:35 Orangeremi wrote: I'm not fond of how Kickstart is currently playing. He's the #1 lurker right now and I'd put him near the top of my list of suspicion. I want to see more of what he has to contribute, so far I'm not impressed. Corazon has done a lot more than expected in an attempt to redeeming himself. I'm not convinced he is scum anymore but I'd still keep my eye out. The other two players have yet to post anything since they've become top reads, I'm waiting on that. The case for Spag is huge, I'm leaning towards that. It's really the only case so far that has actually made me consider voting something other than no lynch (my previous top choice). I'd currently rate my voting choices at 1. Spag 2. Kickstar 3. FatChunk with a possibility of no lynch if they have sufficient evidence to the contrary. Day One, Orageremi does a lot of sitting on the fence and watching how the day's going to pan out before committing a vote himself. He does NO searching for scum of his own. Townies may be unsure about their reads but then they have NO excuse for not trying to clarify their reads by pressuring, asking questions, etc. He voted for FatChunk in the end, but at a time when it made exactly no difference - he didn't try to push his FatChunk read AT ALL, before or after the day one lynch. + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 13:26 Orangeremi wrote: I don't like how Threesr is playing if he's town. He's helping very little and I could see him playing a reverse psychological scum the way he is acting. I've got my eye on FC, but want to hold off on further judgements until I see him post this Day I'm also waiting on more from Kickstart, I'm wary of how he's playing this game as opposed to his last one. On December 23 2012 02:02 Orangeremi wrote: I didn't vote for Spag. I'm not sure what else there is to say about this. I'd like to argue that the arguments are indeed mine, because I come to the conclusions on my own (as did other players, seeing as they're the same) although I agree they are brief and weak. In your original accusation you said that my lack of names implied either me being afraid of being put in the spotlight or I have not seen anything suspicious (which you doubted). While I'll say I don't like the spotlight, avoiding it hasn't been completely on purpose. But that isn't why. I wouldn't honestly say I don't have any suspicions, but that I don't have any convicting suspicions. That's why my 'reads' are the same as everyone else's and not in depth. I had actually typed up my post (as 'jokey' as it is) before I saw you had posted yours. Day Two, Orange is still sitting on the fence. He puts a safe vote on Omni with little to no reasoning, and doesn't pressure anyone else. Day Three, Orange wanders into the thread with a promise of more content: On December 26 2012 18:51 Orangeremi wrote: Apparently I've been roleblocked. I'm gonna read up on the thread, be back soon. He doesn't come back for another 14 hours. This smells to me like a scum who wanders into the thread, sees wagons on all his buddies and panicks. Given that Orangeremi said he had scum reads on FC and Kick day one, and FC and Kick contributed basically nothing day two and early day three, why would Orange not be entirely happy to vote for one of them now? Orange doesn't vote for either of them for MORE THAN 24 HOURS, in which time he did in fact post a little. All you townies out there, ask yourself this: given the activity in this game, would you have chosen to ask NO QUESTIONS and deliver NO PRESSURE for the last three days? Because that's what Orange has done. This is the pivotal point here, the day three lynch is just icing on the cake. Lynching not particularly scummy players for perfectly good reasons was what killed Omni. Orange has NOT been searching for scum by asking questions, etc. He has been finding a justification for his vote in the material already in the thread and not questioning it - and that is not town. I wasn't convinced Shz was scum. My reasoning is based on Kick not being scum. His lynch was clear and nobody tried to intervene and take votes off of him. Why not? If he was scum, his scumbuddies would be trying to vote someone else. But that wasn't happening. Since it wasn't happening, I was convinced he was town. Which begs the question, why wasn't it happening? Chrom switched just as I did, I'd want to know why he didn't push it earlier either. I wanted to push for whichever vote had the better chance of winning that wasn't Kick, since I was under the impression that Kick wasn't scum. If Orange believed Kick wasn't scum for this reason, why didn't he mention this earlier? In fact: On December 28 2012 05:08 Orangeremi wrote: Now a voting trend like this is going to give us a lot more information when the lynch turns and we see who voted (and didn't vote) for it. So much better than us having ganged up on a single player both days before. Please, those of us who have not voted, VOTE! And do it for the player you think will benefit us most. It is crucial. We need to be productive today or else this game is over. His lynch was clear and nobody tried to intervene and take votes off of him. Why not? If he was scum, his scumbuddies would be trying to vote someone else. So was the Kick wagon good or bad? Make up your mind. This is a piss-poor justification for a last-minute switch. Were we all on Kick or not? Also, this: On December 28 2012 02:06 Orangeremi wrote: Well we've just fucked ourselves by not finding any scum thus far and at this point we don't have many options. We cannot afford another townie loss. We need to be certain or very close to certain that our next vote is mafia. I wasn't convinced Shz was scum. My reasoning is based on Kick not being scum. ... So... many... contradictions. Orange's reasons for voting Shz rather than Kick are COMPLETELY INCONSISTENT with what he said just before the lynch, which is entirely characteristic of a scum casting about for some reason why he just did something daft. On December 28 2012 23:17 Orangeremi wrote: Why haven't they been night killed yet? I'm trying to figure it out. I suppose mocsta and yamato weren't bad nightkills, but I think these players (maybe aqua more than syl) should be up there. If they aren't nk'd tonight I'm going to think 1) The mafia doesn't see these guys as a threat. They're on the wrong track or have some other misdirection 2) They are the mafia I'm using they as a term for either one of them here, please excuse me. So, what, now he's trying to set up some grounds for a lynch on his town reads? Why FatChunk is scum + Show Spoiler + All the reasons I said at the end of Night Two still hold true. FatChunk has completely failed to give any information unless directly asked (except for the bare minimum reasons required with his votes) and this got worse, if anything, day 3. Neither has he tried to elicit any further information from the thread - which is certainly not what I'd do if I was as unsure of my reads as FatChunk purports to be. (Dat copy-paste.) Seriously, look through FatChunk's filter (it's small, it won't take long) and try to find all the posts which aren't direct responses to questions/pressure. + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 14:06 FatChunk wrote: Hey guys sorry for my late post, have caught up though. This is my first mafia game on TL, all my experience, as with shz, is with the UMS game. Policy on LAL is fine with me. Lying can only hurt town and I see no situations how this could be beneficial. Regarding lurkers, I think that it shouldn't be set in stone. From my point of view as a newbie, lurking isn't a quality of either mafia or town. It is equally as likely that a mafia/sk will actively post, lead discussions, blend in with town as it is that a townie will, and the same goes for lurkers. Ultimately its a judgement call based on quality of posts, and hopefully the majority will make the right call in that situation. Cakepie, I really liked your post regarding not being afraid to make mistakes as a townie. In this game of newbies, we will learn while asking questions and participating in discussion. I will be fearless. That being said I think at this point in the game, there is very little information available, but I see value in scoping out a possible lynch on the first day. I think we should be looking for players who promote environments where Mafia thrive. Meaningless start-of-game stuff. + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 22:44 FatChunk wrote: I see your point regarding the reason for lurking. Upon reflection, I agree that lurking should be discouraged and if apparent, you will be questioned and proded. I think its very simple, as Mocsta said: lurking is not a free pas to fly under the radar. I also agree with Kickstart regarding lynching scum leads of randomly lynching lurkers. This, I feel, is obvious. As far as I understand an environment where mafia thrive is that of uncertainty, confusion. An environment which contains people who have split views, people that are not confident in their stance and can be swayed by logic, reason, should the situation call for it. Threesr did a good job of contradicting views regarding lurking, diverting town chat paths, and the town seems to be talking a little bit but we are dancing around constructive discussion (not to mention the fact that Threesr has been quite inactive recently). Perhaps this is scum behaviour. I understand policies on LAL and lurking needs to be discussed, and most of the tough thinking will come when it`s time to vote by ultimately making a read. This makes it really important to present strong arguments when it comes to FoS because others will base their arguments upon the information you present. I think we should be asking ourselves a few questions (whether to find scum or to eliminate uselss town), who is contributing constructively to discussion and who is simply causing the town to get hung up on lesser-than-top-priority thoughts and ideas. Top priorities, to me, are: establishing a wagon using a strong argument, reading into feedback and responses after suspicion has been vocalized, and developing an opinion (certainties are non-existen in this game, right?). The town atmosphere seems to be good so far and this is good for finding scum: perhaps we should start prodding the lurkers and advocates of lurking. I say this because inactivity seems to be common, and as we have all agreed, uncontributing town is useless and detrimental to town goals, whether they are mafia or town. My read is currently for Threesr, but am open to discussion. Would liek to hear more from him regarding lurking and why HE thinks it can be benificial for town to allow. ##Vote: theesr Votes for Threesr (who we now know is town) without any real committment. + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2012 09:02 FatChunk wrote: Spag's rebuttle to Aqua's argument was in my opinion, satisfactory. Mocsta your post does not provide any evidence in my eyes, it is all speculation. Your first arguments that spag acuses corazon to be scum, then changes to town, is quite possible. People can probably change their minds in this game, thats the idea behind pressuring right? Thus, inconclusive Part 2. Thus part 3 is a little redundant if you dont value part 2. Also, RE: 3-(4) he does not manipulate town for survival, he manipulates town openly and in the right direction by sacrificing his own survival because he risks coming off as too agressive. Also, if he were mafia why would he openly protect his 2 other mafia mates. Anyway your argument does not sway me, neither did Aquas'. Everyone keeps mentioning that spag is appearing useful while not contributing. Spag has argued that he has been lighting fires under lurkers to gain information. Is this not considered scumhunting, whether direct or indirect? He seems to be contributing in ways that are very obviously pro-town. I do not really see conclusive evidence. But who knows, maybe thats what town's supposed to do on day1. Anyway, we would have stood much more benefit and less to lose by lynching theesr - we would have confirmed theesr as town/scum and in turn shed some light on spag's innocence. Now hes gone. I will do my best D2 to be more useful, as it seems nobody values my posts. Trying to make town points from the Spag mislynch. + Show Spoiler + On December 23 2012 06:15 FatChunk wrote: I'm just curious, why would you assume it's scum RB? Mocsta has some great points, I find it very hard to provide new insight when cases are well-fabricated and I agree with them. While I do not think the evidence is inconclusive against Chromatically (while I always shared a suspicion of him) Omni is a real issue. My stance on OmniEulogy: -I find it very hard to believe that he claimed VT as proper strategy. -His 100% scum read on corazone is very interesting, as he is very easy to sway off that vote when pressure on corazone is removed. This smells of scum trying to mis-lynch, and he is appearing to be useful by presenting his case against corazone. Before I vote OE I will provide more explanation for my vote. Here's what I think happened: Scum omni knows spag will turn town, and pre-claims VT innocent in an attempt to avoid defending against spag's challenges. Otherwise, town omni would genuinely expect spag to turn scum, and then would have no reason to claim VT. This is because scum spag's scum read on omni would be discarded immediately upon spag turning red. @Omni Your reason for claiming VT is that you knew they would question you if spag turns town. Are you claiming that your scum read on spag was insufficient to base your vote on, realized that you sheeped the vote, and began to prepare for spag to turn town? This is the only explanation IMO that can come from a townie. This being said, I would like to hear from sHz and Sylencia, two players who have been posting infrequently and pretty much agreeeing or disagreeing with others without providing reasons. I honestly don't know why these players have been given a free pass, with nobody prodding them during their time afk. sHz: -Basically he's a lurking sheep. Agreees with any arguments that multiple people have approved. He switches his vote from corazon to spag juts because spag defended him. -He does not provide any new information when he posts, and does not participate in very much scum-hunting. -A list of people he has been suspicious at one point or another: Mocsta, Corazone, Spagetticus, me, threesr. His arguments for suspicion against these players are not very well presented, and are based on things like "the case against X is convincing to me". Votes based on desire to lynch anyone. -He appears to be useful when not actually being useful. I would like to hear what he has to say about Mocsta's case, he has been active for too long. I would like to see him actually scumhunt, ask questions that reveal important information. Sylencia: -Lurks, comes out with opinions out of the blue that, quite frankly, nobody takes seriously. -One page filter can serve one purpose: provide as little information as possible so that nobody can make a read. ---Ironic. Unless I see increase in useful posting from him he goes up in my scum suspicion. -away excuse gives him free ride for 1-2 days? -Has less attention put on him for these reasons -Votes corazone D1 because he's the easy target (has the most votes) and tries to appear like he is emotionally torn apart by making this choice. Attempt for sympathy can only be scummy to me. Does anyone agree with any of these points? What are your opinions of shz and sylencia? Aqua, I thought there was a relationship between theesr and spag, as spag was advocating theesr as town. If we lynched threesr and he turned town, you can probably expect spag to be town too. However if we lynched spag, and he turned town, we would be stuck with the non-useful townie. A list of reads - condemning Shz and Sylencia for lurking, but not Kick or Orange. + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 03:03 FatChunk wrote: Well so far I'm going to have to vote for Omni tonight because lynching omni gives us the most amount of information. Also I pin him as someone trying to cover up a slip, especially because he puts the FoS on me when it was not only me who shares suspicion on him and chrom. I guess I am an easy lynch-target? Then he proceeds to vote orangeremi because he is the only alternative, and then posts 1 sentence on his justification for his vote. I also did not like his defense of his scum slip. Cakepie in his case post on Omni identified that I strongly agree with this, as I have presented in earlier posts. Regarding his FoS on me: All I ever said was that I had a suspicion of chrom, something that needed to be examined after a lynch of omni, who is the most suspicious right now in my eyes. I also simply mentioned that Mocsta's case should be considered as we move forward. + Show Spoiler + you are misunderstanding pretty badly. Or intentionally trying to twist what I am saying. I did not say that I claimed to give more information. I said that it makes sense to claim VT even if I thought he was scum because if he isn't I would be put into this position one way or the other. You argued how I'd know he is town, I replied by saying I didn't, I was pretty confident AND when he flipped scum the information we would gain would be far greater than scum learning my role. I'm not changing any story I'm just giving you more information behind my thought process because you've asked the same question in different ways about 3 times. I have to go into more detail. Nowhere in there do I say I claim to give town information. ##FoS: Chromatically This is twice you've tried to either twist my words or intentionally misunderstand to try and get your own agenda out. In the first sentence again no less. followed by: I think this could have been handled better. He places FoS too hastily on someone he has a town read on. I dont think his justification for FoS is valid. He is quite defensive as a general posting theme. All this seems to give me a scum vibe. My stance on threesr is: vote him out on a day that we have weak scumreads, or have a vigilante take him out. Orangeremi: -Claims he has suspicions but no scum reads, is reluctant to accuse anyone. When he does vote, he votes to bandwagon and gives no justification for his choice other than that person X presented the case before me. Sounds like he's trying to free-ride. -"take this with a grain of salt", "I'm not convinced of anyone being scum D1", "although I agree they [OR's arguments] are brief and weak" - quotes like these (not exact) make him appear to contribute without doing so. He is playing VERY safe and gives alot of uncertain reads, or reads that require more information before they can be justified. -IMO: lazy bad town, or bad scum. ##Vote:OmniEulogy And an unconvincing vote for Omni, who's flipped town. In short, the only posts FatChunk has made when not directly asked to do so have clear scum motivation. This is the pivotal point here, the day three lynch is just icing on the cake. Lynching not particularly scummy players for perfectly good reasons was what killed Omni. FatChunk has NOT been searching for scum by asking questions, etc. He has been finding a justification for his vote in the material already in the thread and not questioning it - and that is not town. Let's examine his reasons for switching to Shz: On December 28 2012 08:58 FatChunk wrote: okay well I think that either of the two people are scum: sHz and kickstart, and to be honest the last post of shz on the 27th was really scummy to me. I hope we're right. ##unvote ##Vote: sHz This... is terribad. Why would he change his mind based on a post from yesterday? This is a complete copout. On December 28 2012 10:52 FatChunk wrote: Okay so here is/was my thought process. Chrom made some interesting observations about sHz, enough to cause me to make my read slightly stronger about sHz than Kick. After all, kick was a lurker more than anything, and scum lynch > lurker lynch. I was pretty confident in following someone with town rep like chrom, especially someone who is willing to risk his town rep on a scum read. but at this point I think that sHz is cleared, right? if shz was scum, Kickstart, a player with some experience, would not accuse sHz of scum that early in the game: it is just bad play. Unless kick was making bad cases to be shot down and appear to be scumhunting. Distancing himself from fellow scum? I don't know. Orangeremi, kickstart's scum partner, chooses to try and swing the vote toward sHz as a last minute attempt. His explanation is that he didn't think kickstart was scum, and that he voted me to judge my reaction. This post STILL feels like a scum trying not to commit to anything. He's calling Orange scum, but at this point the scum have to bus to have even the slightest hope of survival. Their late switch onto Shz and away from Kick wouldn't be enough to damn them on its own, even though it's the only thing they've been decisive about the entire game - but there is simply nothing town-motivated about their play in the entire game. Why FatChunk and Orange are scum with Kick + Show Spoiler + Well, now we've had a red flip I can open the sealed file: In Night Two, Aquanim wrote: While I still don't like association cases before a red flip, here's a couple of things I'll point out in case I die. Call this spoiler a time capsule, and label it "ONLY OPEN IN CASE OF RED FLIP ON KICK/FC/ORANGE" + Show Spoiler +
And in the day one lynch: The final votecount: Spaghetticus (7): Aquanim, OmniEulogy, Mocsta, cakepie, Kickstart, Chromatically, shz cDgCorazon (2): threesr, Sylencia threesr (2): FatChunk, cDgCorazon FatChunk (1): Orangeremi OmniEulogy (1): Spaghetticus Scum votes spread all over the place on a day where none of them are under threat. Check. Aaaand the day two lynch: Final Votecount: Orangeremi (1): OmniEulogy OmniEulogy (7): Orangeremi, cakepie, cDgCorazon, Sylencia, FatChunk, Chromatically, Aquanim shz (1): Kickstart Chromatically (1): shz Not voting (1): threesr Scum votes a little more consolidated on the main target, and Orangeremi was under some pressure early on. Check. It's not that I'm saying "these three are scum on the basis of these associations, lynch them" - I think they're scum individually and there's nothing about their association which wouldn't make sense from scum. In particular, there's nothing here which stops there being a single scum elsewhere. All of this still holds true, and the day three lynch is the final piece of the puzzle. We finally have a wagon on scum. Orange and FC were the only other seriously discussed lynch targets for most of Day Three. If one or both of them comes in and tries to start a different wagon it's going to be really, really obvious - it'll be their first real action of the game, with a blindingly clear scum motivation. So, they wait for as long as they dare for another target before posting. When it becomes clear that there's not going to be any alternative (and NOT BEFORE), the scum proceed to bus one another. I don't think the fact that they didn't all bus the same player is relevant. When Chromatic came in with his vote for Shz, all three scum jumped at the opportunity to grab a mislynch. If they hadn't done this, Kick would have been lynched for sure; even though they wouldn't have been in as bad a position as now, they'd still be the scummiest players in the game and needing two mislynches to win. It's difficult to see where those two mislynches would come from (a lynch on myself, Cakepie, Chromatic or Corazon would be very hard to swing). On the other hand, if they'd managed to swing the vote onto Shz then we'd have to find three scum in the five players voting for Shz without making any mislynches AT ALL. The reward outweighed the risk; just because the play looks bad now that it's failed doesn't mean it was a bad idea. Which is why this play isn't too bad to be true. As for why it happened at the last minute? Townies are more likely to make mistakes when time is short. They hoped to panic another townie into switching to Shz (I confess I thought about it for a moment after Kick voted). "Why didn't scum try to direct the lynch away from Kick early on?" is a VERY good question. To my mind, the only reasonable answer is "All of the other wagons and suspicions were on scum too." Oh, and they NKd Yamato because he was on the right track. I was thinking along more-or-less the same lines as Yamato, but didn't make that crystal clear until very near the deadline. Oh, and people are calling the late vote switch too bad to be believed. I disagree, but even so - bad scum plays are generally bad because they have no town motivation. Just because it's a bad scum play and therefore scum are less likely to do it doesn't mean there would be any reason for town to do it. When the impossible is eliminated only the unlikely remains - and I just don't believe that a town Orange or FC would choose this as their first decisive action in the entire game. Why Shz is not scum + Show Spoiler + I agree that Shz's failure to push a scumread of his own day 2 is a scummy thing to do. And his hopping on the Spag wagon wasn't exactly a clearly town move either. But remember, there are reasons WHY these things are scummy. Sheeping, and not pushing your own reads, is scummy because a) it doesn't expose your own thought process and reasoning, which is in mafia's best interests, b) it isn't the best way to pressure and get answers, and c) it takes less responsibility for the lynch. However, I would say that Shz is in fact exposing his own reasoning (at least somewhat) elsewhere, and he is pressuring a little and asking questions. I don't think scum Shz would have played all the little things (his little questions, his list posts, etc) as well as he did but play the big things (his behaviour at lynch) suspiciously. My town read on Shz was mostly a gut read - the above isn't a perfect explanation but I think it's the best I can offer. All this aside, we're left with Kick's vote for Shz, which he set up Night One. Kick didn't even mention the Omni case (which in retrospect was a blindingly obvious tell), and that makes me think the purpose of the Shz vote was just somewhere reasonable but noncommittal to put his vote. However, his points on Shz were reasonable (if brief), and given the sheepiness of day one townies might very easily have sheeped him. Scum almost always only bus as a last resort, and Kick simply had no reason to bus at the start of day two. Why Chromatic is not scum + Show Spoiler + He's active, he's open-minded to new possibilities, he's pushing his reads, his reads make sense (even if they're wrong), he's interested in the lynch, he's pushing for information, he's revealing his thoughts voluntarily, this is nothing like his XXXI play... need I go on? A quick point on everyone else + Show Spoiler + Anyone else could have switched to Shz and saved Kick. For the same reasons as above this would be a good play for them if they were scum. Basically, the message here is "Don't WIFOM your way out of an easy win. Only try convincing yourself that Chromatic, Cakepie, or someone voting for Kick is scum IF Orange or FC, the obvious scum, flip town - not before." I'd prefer to lynch Orange first, if only because both he and Cakepie were roleblocked night two - assuming that there is one town RB and one scum RB, and that scum wouldn't fake a RB on themselves, a red flip on Orange confirms Cakepie town. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
/obs please | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:20 cDgCorazon wrote: Well we would've had a better chance if the other two scum would've actually tried. There were points were I got really frustrated at them cause they just lurked forever and didn't do anything. I think that if we had a scum team that was half good, we could've won the game, because you guys had a lot of mislynches and bad arguments. If cake had not drawn up that post with the possible RBers, I wouldn't have claimed. O'course, the other side of that is that if the rest of the scum had been more active, there might have been better arguments to be had than "this guy is so very lurky". I mean, there were other aspects of Kick's play in particular which were scummy, but you just can't make much from a 1-page filter. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I will have no time to play XXXIV | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:59 Hapahauli wrote: Nope! Haha, glad you learned something from our PM's. A couple of townies were trying to put together scumteams, and I think that's a pretty faulty way of playing. Your job is to lynch the scummiest player, and then make the associations. Association cases can catch really straighforward scum plans, but against any decent scumteam, such cases are worthless. For example, I just finished a game (Witchcraft Mafia) where two scum members spent most of the game double-bussing each other. Bleh - I tried not to make association cases as such, but if I hadn't just assumed Orange was scum finding Corazon would have been a fair bit easier. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 15:07 Mocsta wrote: I didn't pay detailed attention to the thread when I died.. but I thought in Night 1 though, I made some posts saying to leave you alone, because you appear to be playing the same town game as in the past. Found it.. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=386911¤tpage=35#689 The moral is, its important to be confirmed town. Well, I pushed the Spag lynch a lot harder than I pushed the Kick one in XXXI - even though Kick was scum in XXXI, noone really paid attention to my case, so I figured I should be more assertive about it. This game, I push the wagon a little harder, everybody sheeps on, and Spaghetticus flips town. Go figure. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 15:19 Hapahauli wrote: There's not much to comment on your play-style because I found it really focused and effective. Good job! I think you played a really good game overall. You're an effective communicator, an active player, and a good case-writer. All that's left for you to do is play some more games and refine your scum-hunting a bit. In particular, I suggest looking at some of the townies you were pushing this game (Spag, Omni, and Orange) and try to figure out where you went wrong. Regarding Spag, I think you correctly identified a deviation in his play, but didn't consider if that deviation was scummy as much as you should have. In addition, I think you let yourself get caught up in some confirmation bias and didn't objectively consider the defenses of a fairly active townie. Regarding Omni... VT claims are not scummy. They're stupid, but not damning by any means. Townies can do really stupid things, and as you grow as a player, you need to move away from objective reads (i.e. claiming VT under no pressure = scum) to a more subjective, case-by-case standard (i.e. is this particular player capable of doing this as town). It's tough stuff, but it's what separates the top town players from the solid ones. Regarding Orange... really can't blame you for finding him scummy =P Yeah, I applied nearly no critical thought to the Omni wagon. Sheeping on that was my biggest regret later on. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 15:32 Spaghetticus wrote: I think the fault in your thinking is that you assumed a stable meta from me. This was my second game, and I think I need to get all my experimenting out of the way before my meta 'settles' and any deviation is considered scummy. The 'fault' was completely understandable, and a non-issue in more advanced play me thinks. I was tinkering with the extent to which one can be precise without losing town to WIFOM. I was about to start actually making cases, but you bum-rushed me so hard I was gone without a chance to adjust. Of course, if I was scum, your play would have been a crushing victory. IMO a solid play. To be honest, I think I'd have pushed you hard without the XXV meta - that was just what made me overconfident. My problem wasn't that you were different from before, it was that you were being very active (and getting town reads) without doing anything that scum couldn't easily mimic. I left it as late as I possibly could to give you opportunity to make cases, but between sleep and work I simply didn't have any more time to wait. These things will happen, I suppose =P EDIT: So you know, if you play like that again I will push you again, because I stand by my statement you could play like that as scum very easily... but next time there'll be a warning shot first. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 21:38 OmniEulogy wrote: it's a bit late but Aqua I think you played really well. If I wasn't a complete amateur I think D1 we could have had a nice conversation and bounced idea's off eachother and possibly saved Spag instead of me just jumping on the wagon. Too bad you wont be in the next game Thanks! Unfortunately, I probably wouldn't be able to make any lynch deadlines for the next month and a half (as in, not present for 4 hours either side), and missing them all is really annoying. I'd also have to spend every one of my few free moments playing Mafia for an entire week like I did in XXXI, and I don't think I could do that again. I'll be back on Valentine's Day On December 31 2012 21:53 Spaghetticus wrote: No Aqua next game?! Why not? I guess that answers this question too | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I will join you in the one true faith of "Host will write postgame at some point" | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On January 23 2013 10:10 Promethelax wrote: Overall I felt town played well this game but probably would have lost if Yamato did not replace Threesr, without him scum could (and probably would) have killed aqua on night two and chrom on night three by which point cDg would have been the strongest 'townie' remember guys, replacements OP. I'd like to think that if Threesr hadn't been replaced by someone like Yamato but Orange hadn't been modkilled that his cop checks and Cakepie could still have carried it home, but I guess we'll never know When you point out Corazon's play day one it looks obvious... :/ I still find it difficult to tell scum from a town that just doesn't know better. Didn't Kick frame Omni night one? | ||
| ||