Newbie 594: (Game Over!)

[silence]

I confirm.

[silence]

And I ask this to everyone right now... why should I think you are town?

No sensible answer to this question. You can have any idea about my alignment only if you are scum.

About the who are the IC's question - of course the setup is random and it doesn't give any information about alignments. But in abundance of better information But if we have to lynch at random, it might be beneficial to at least to be able to decide whether we want experienced or inexperienced people alive (although I'm not even sure which is better to town, other things equal).

[silence]

There is no such thing as a random lynch. Under deadline pressures Day 1 (and only day 1 because there is information garnered during night in subsequent days), there has to be something to go off of for us to want to lynch somebody.

What? Do you suggest a no lynch if there is nothing?

[silence]

If anything, this post screams out that you just want to go and attack the weakest link.

Why should one not want to attack the weakest link?

[silence]

There is a difference between a weak player and a scummy player. To me, the weakest link is the person who looks the most open to attack, for bs reasons.

Should have answered this earlier. Misunderstanding/different use of words on my part, I would have defined weak rather as 'in greatest danger to get lynched' - person open to attack only for bs reasons isn't really too weak as those reasons won't get him killed. But with the definition you gave - of course we want to kill the scummiest rather than the 'weakest' player.

[silence]

Atticus: why are you still having your vote on me?

[silence]

Atticus: why are you still having your vote on me?

I am not still having my vote on you.

Sorry, somehow missed the unvote.

[silence]

Defensive again, you see. Although, I just did some of the hated metaing and that could be a bit of a town tell for you - you seem more comfortable as scum.

Can you post some links to what you think are most relevant games for this?

[silence]

Thank you for pointing out what the action the scum need to take here.

I don't think he pointed out anything not obvious.

[silence]

Hi, I am here, was a few days away. I'll read and comment today.

[silence]

If you did I think it is possible that some of you tried to warn your scum partner not to lynch him and make themselves seem very scummy.

FOS: Battousai, Nocmen, Atticus

Shouldn't this logic equivalently apply to your own voting of gorillaman too? By getting Rickeon out of L-1 you ensured that your scum partner does not lynch him and make himself look very scummy?

Anyway, as they all (per this logic) 'warned their partners', at least one protownie did this and thus it probably isn't much of a scumtell.

[silence]

I didn't fos the people because they were on the wagon, but because they were potentially telling their partner not to hammer RIckeon already.

Related to this, I'd like my post 187 commented..

[silence]

It's a newbie game. I don't see why we shouldn't be speaking openly about the choices players should make. Even first time scum might need help.

It's a newbie

game

. We should try to win. I'd almost say that a player who wants to help scum should be lynched even if he was town.

[silence]

If you are to accuse someone along those lines, you must make sure you are not guilty of them yourself.

Why? If behaviour X is more likely to be performed by scum than town, then someone else behaving X makes him more likely to be scum (than before giving the tell), even if you do it yourself, too?

On another note, why did weilawei wanting to help scum pass undiscussed?

[silence]

silence, you got it exactly backwards. I'm 100% for discussing everything. Notice I was questioning people who said we shouldn't discuss scum. I feel that any sort of hidden information or attempt to limit discussion is automatically on my scumdar.

Nope, I think you got my point wrong. I did not even consider whether discussing everything is good or bad. What I commented on was that you implied scum should be given help as this is a newbie game. I don't want players on my team that want to help opponents.

[silence]

People who aren't voting - thoughts?

Posts ~155-174: Nocmen puts Rickeon at L-1. BlackWolf states he won´t vote because it's L-1. Then zu_Faul switches his vote. On post 174 zu_Faul attacks three other people but not BlackWolf about 'possibly warning their partner about the L-1', when BlackWolf was the one who most obviously warned everyone about L-1. This makes any sense (except as a mistake) only if zu_Faul is scum with BlackWolf and therefore does not want to attack him. After BlackWolf's post the Rickeon bandwagon does not have much changes to cause a mishammer and thus zu_Faul switches his vote.

FoS: zu_Faul, BlackWolf

[/b]

[silence]

I haven't been commenting much as I don't have any good intuition to what is/isn't scummy and thus haven't a lot useful to say.

I don't want to place a vote now as it could help lynching someone (well, BlackWolf) prematurely. But I will place a vote before deadline if it enables a more favorable outcome.

At the moment my ranking of day outcomes would be to lynch (from most favorable to least favorable)

1. zu_Faul (explanation of my read in post 291)
2. Blackwolf (post 291)
3. weilawei (statement about helping scum in a newbie game and especially denying it)
4. Atticus (Claiming the roles might not be randomized in post 14)
5. Nocmen (Without reads I'd rather lynch an IC than a non-IC)
6. Mr. Blonde
7. Battousai
8. gorillaman (being voted by those I suspect most)
9. No lynch
10. me (well, obv.)



I think we should, if possible, agree before deadline who we are threatening so that he has time to claim (and on the other hand, so that no-one needs to claim unnecessarily). At this point obv. BlackWolf is under threat so if the situation doesn't change soon, he should claim if he is a powerrole.

[silence]

I was asked to claim if I was a power role, and I felt I had enough votes on me to warrent a claim.

At the time of your claim weilawei had more votes...

[silence]

Btw, who is lynched if more than one person are tied at half majority at the deadline?

If two people are tied for the same number of votes, and the number is high enough to lynch, the person who got there first will be lynched.

[silence]

Silence, you want to lynch me or BlackWolf only because I didn't attack him? And because I switched my vote after he posted?

Didn't understand this is a question, I thought you meant only state that you think my accusations are weak. I want to lynch you or BlackWolf based on the reasons I stated. Because you attacked other people for a reason that applied better to BlackWolf. That may be the weakest accusation you ever saw but everything else I could come up with is even weaker and I think it is generally accepted that a no lynch is even worse.

How is not voting 'staying under the radar' when everyone else is voting? Certainly it would be easier to avoid attention by voting just like everyone else. Also, see newbie games 435 and 504 for evidence of my reluctance to vote as a townie.

Anyway, the deadline is approaching and I finally realized that because of the tiebreaking rule it is better to vote sooner than later, so

Vote: BlackWolf

[silence]

For now the rest of us should play like there isn't a cop (as thats the worst case scenerio)

Why should we play according to a worst case scenario?

"Hasn't benn" being the important part here. When BW posted, Rickeon still was at lynch -1.
I seem to have overlooked his post, because I checked only the posts after my unvote for people giving advice not to lynch Rickeon.

Shouldn't warning someone at L-1 be more significant? Also, why did you not try this defense yesterday instead of calling 'weakest accusation ever'?

We shouldn't be directing the cop.

Why not?

[silence]

For he town's sake yes, but for the game's sake no as it is auto win and takes the fun out of the game. What does everyone feel about this?

Not trying to win takes fun out of the game as well. If claiming is good for town, of course cop should claim. If it ends the game, let's have more fun in the next

However, I'm not yet completely convinced whether cop should claim (with a guilty result, of course, but otherwise). I will think about the issue and give my position later.

[silence]

The main problem that can happen, though, is if the doc is lynched today.

Maybe the cop should come out only after we have agreed who to lynch, and that person has not claimed doc.

[silence]

Scum cannot fakeclaim cop: if there is no cop, there is no doc and scum will get caught with a massclaim on a later day.

[silence]

This is not too relevant but the chances of having cop&doc are a bit less than 50/50 (in the eyes of a townie) when observations of two townies are taken into account.

Have we agreed on a optimal cop/doc strategy?

Anyway, my 'weakest accusation ever' was already correct on one scum, I see no reason to stop believing it, thus I still suspect zu_Faul most.

[silence]

I have reason to assume that right now, we do not have a cop or doc in this game. Though, if someone has a guilty result, I suggest that now is the time to claim.

How can you have any more reason than others?

Also, Battousai was lynched unnecessarily fast (for example, I was not questioned about being inactive).

[silence]

How is that not reason enough?

May be a problem with my reading comprehension but I don't understand this comment/question. What do you mean by 'that'?

[silence]

How can you have any more reason than others?

I said, "How is that not reason enough?"

Argh. This is frustrating. Apparently either you or me does not understand English. You still did not explain what 'that' refers to, and I still don't understand the question.

If he was cop or doc, he certainly would not have reason to believe there is _no_ cop or doc in the game, so I don't understand why you are talking about that. And, if he is town/scum, he doesn't have any greater information than other townies, which I understand 'I have reason' would indicate.

If he meant that it follows from public information X that there probably is no cop/doc, why did he not say "Because X, there probably is no cop/doc" instead of claiming that he specifically has some reason?

Nocmen, could you elaborate on what 'reason' you have?

[silence]

And, to clarify, I also find it unlikely that there is cop/dop. Probability about 5 %, I can give calculations if anybody is interested.

[silence]

Uh. Let's not lynch for such reasons.

[silence]

Some reason: I don't see BW ever mention anyone of Atticus or Weilawei.

Why would he not mention his scumbuddy?

[silence]

Second thing is. . . I believe I found a point where we left the cop/doc talk and move on to discussing whether my predecessor (and now me, I guess. . .) is scum or not.

I believed we should have talked more about that, the correct strategy was not completely analyzed (at least nobody posted any calculations). It need not have prohibited discussion about whether you (weilawei) are scum, it's not like the amount of posts is somehow restricted.

he's sticking to thinking zu is most suspicious, but I'm unsure if he ever explained why.

I referred to my accusation from D1, explained during D1, in post 291:

Posts ~155-174: Nocmen puts Rickeon at L-1. BlackWolf states he won´t vote because it's L-1. Then zu_Faul switches his vote. On post 174 zu_Faul attacks three other people but not BlackWolf about 'possibly warning their partner about the L-1', when BlackWolf was the one who most obviously warned everyone about L-1. This makes any sense (except as a mistake) only if zu_Faul is scum with BlackWolf and therefore does not want to attack him. After BlackWolf's post the Rickeon bandwagon does not have much changes to cause a mishammer and thus zu_Faul switches his vote. FoS: zu_Faul, BlackWolf[/b]"

oday, Nocmen says he doubts there's a cop/doc, which sounds like a pretty simple statement to me, but Silence questions it and there's some discussion over it. I just don't really see it as needed at this point. Is it really that necessary to delve further into that subject when we should be focused on finding the scum left among us?

Am I the only one to think "I have reason to believe" is a pretty strange way to state something if one does not have a private reason? I was curious about this wording, especially as during D2 Nocmen used "I have reason" to state that there probably _is_ cop&doc (which I (naively,stupidly?) read as hinting that he is a powerrole and was surprised when he was not nightkilled). But the explanation he gave about gorillaman was satisfying to me, so no more about that.

I cannot comment anything special on your first point, I only hope that you believe my inactivity is due laziness and not having anything worth saying, not due intentionally sitting back.

[silence]

My list, from most to least likely to be scum.

1. Nocmen

- Hammering D2 when there where questions waiting to be answered (and without forcing me to contribute much).

2. zu_Faul

- my suspicion from D1 still stand. See last post.

3. Atticus

- Suggesting a weilawei lynch today for a non-game-related reason.

4. Game and Watch Forever

[silence]

As for why I voted so quickly Day 2... I feel that a lot of my post with the hammer explained it, but I suppose I can add more. It seemed that at that point, we had him cornered, and it was the perfect opportunity to take out someone who I thought was scum. If he wasn't scum, it wouldn't be game over right away. The only thing we had to lose was him as a townie, while if I waited we may not have had as good an opportunity to lynch and see if he really was town.

This still does not make any sense to me. Why could not we have lynched him later? Only reason for that would have been that we had found an even better candidate. Why not let this happen?

One more question to everyone this time: What was your opinion of gorillaman yesterday?

Had no specific reads about him. Probably town. And as you see from my D1-list, I considered him the least likely to be scum. N1 and D2 discussion didn't change my opinions much.

[silence]

It just makes me uneasy. The problem with the idea though is that the doc would still be lynched, and I really think he wanted to have a clear target as who would be the Cop in this case.

Maybe you misunderstood somehow. The doc would not be lynched as obviously we would pick another target if the candidate claims doc. Also, this gives no 'clear target as who would be the Cop', because the cop doesn't claim if the doc has claimed (which was the point of the idea).

[silence]

Hi. Prod received.

The suspicions are pretty scattered, I don't know how to proceed from here to obtain a majority.

[silence]

Again Atticus is pushing for a quicklynch for non-game-related reasons. What 'good set of new knowledge' you think lynching gnwf just to avoid replacement would give?

[silence]

b) We'll have all the knowledge we had before, Then we'll know that he was town, that I was pushing for a simply lynchlynchlynch on him, and that you were against the lynchlynch.

There is no connections, we already know that there is only one scum, and thus a player P is scum only if all others are town. Finding out GNWF is town therefore does not have any impact on relative likelihoods of other players being scum.

And, anyway, today is going to end with us lynching someone and either winning or learning he is town. You failed to explain why lynching gnwf would have some special informational advantage. And what possible needing replacement has to do with anything.

[silence]

You're saying that all three people who have played the role of the original split9012 have no connections whatsoever? Come now, don't be so trusting.

I meant that he has no connections with any of the remaining players as he trivially isn't a scumbuddy of any of them, and thus lynching him doesn't give any information about the others.

But perhaps I misunderstood and your point wasn't to lynch him because of the possibility of acquiring 'a new set of knowledge'?

[silence]

So now someone has to be scum to be connected? Not that he isn't, but it was my impression that scum more commonly connected themselves to town than to their scumbuddies, simply to make things harder for us. I know, they are so mean.

My point was that no additional information about relative scumminess of other players is gained by lynching someone.

If there are some information to be gained by oberving weilawei to be town, it can be analyzed already now assuming he is town.

[silence]

Then you are wrong.

What I said is trivially true. What information you think magically appears if gnwf is observed to be town?

[silence]

Ok, the night kill would be new but I don't believe much conclusions can be drawn from that.

[silence]

Lost internet access, back on Sunday.

[silence]

Ok. Returned from vacation and thus have Internet access now.

zu_Faul, why did you hammer yesterday?

[silence]

If I were to pick someone to lynch just based on my gut today, I would say silence. He was adamantly against lynching GNWF, which to me said that he knew he was town. He continually tried to stop it, claiming that there was no information to be gained.

Whaat.
- Let's lynch player X
- Player Y opposed lynching X, he must be scum.

If it worked this way, you could have forced any lynch you want as anyone opposing is scummy based on aforementioned lynch.

Silence, why

didn't

you hammer yesterday?

Why would I? I did not consider him to be most likely to be scum, I would rather have continued the day and tried to lynch either my previous top suspect zu_Faul or Atticus for pushing the GnWF lynch.

We had a majority wanting him lynched rather than replaced.

But why did you want to lynch him rather than, e.g., try to get a majority to support lynching Atticus?

[silence]

The fact that you called out two innocents and have labeled the remaining two as scum before we were the remaining two seems pretty convincing. And pretty convenient.

Not quite sure what you are implying here. Are yuo aware that I labeled you and zu_Faul the most likely to be scum already day 3?

I could not get a read on him because he didn't post that much, therefore he was very possbile scum.

More possible than Atticus? When and why did you change your opinion about this?

[silence]

You said nocmen was more scummy than either of us.

Argh. This is correct. Somehow I misremembered my own suspicions.

However, the point of my explanation of not wanting to hammer gnwf still stands - he was last on my list so I would have wanted to lynch anyone else rather than him.

[silence]

I still don't like lynching gnwf but you both are equally 'guilty' of that, so no clues from that.

From previous days, the only possibly significant thing I find is still leaving BlackWolf out of

I don't know whether all of you missed that he hasn't been on L-1 for some time. If you did I think it is possible that some of you tried to warn your scum partner not to lynch him and make themselves seem very scummy. If you did not miss it I don't know what you wanted to accomplish.
FOS: Battousai, Nocmen, Atticus

So,

FoS: zu_Faul

[/b]

[silence]

You find that more scummy than BlackWolf leaving me out of everyone of his posts? That's strange.

He could have had multiple reasons for that, like simply not having anything to say about you, whereas I see no explanation for zu_Faul's post 174.

btw, zu_Faul is on vacation so obviously he has not been able to hammer me even if he is scum.

[silence]

Well, we could also lynch zu_Faul now..

[silence]

Ok, zu_Faul didn't hammer and thus is town,

Vote: Atticus