Based on your reasoning I am a confirmed innocent. You did not acknowledge my confirmed status. Resistance to confirming innocents is scummy. Therefore you are scum. Die scum. Die.
/in-Vitational Game 5, Simon Mafia 2: Game Over before 832
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I missed you too. *sniff*SpyreX wrote:I missed you
Rejected. I cannot forgive so grievous an error.SpyreX wrote:I beg your forgiveness.
So you're blaming me for your mistake?SpyreX wrote:Of course in the future if you don't want that to happen you should make sure to caps your R. Sheesh.
And then suggesting you can't be bothered to read closely?SpyreX wrote:I can only read so closely you know.
Ladies and Gentlemen, obvious scum has been detected. You know what to do.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
They didn't do the same thing. Llama started the wagon. Zazie hopped aboard without comment. And LG jumped on with a "screw the RVS, let's just blatantly bandwagon" vote. Does reasoning, timing, the nature of the vote not factor in to your opinions at all?Battousai wrote:LG and Llamafluff- I'm waiting on more play before I place my vote down again. Right now everyone I fos'd has done the same thing, so I'm going to wait for them to become more active.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I agree that Battosou is scummy. I disagree with your 2nd point, but you're absolutely correct about the quicklynch thing. I've never seen anyone quicklynched day 1 in any game of mafia I've ever played. Using that as a basis behind attacking someone is exceptionally weak. I also think his 3 FoS's while claiming they all "did the same thing" is sketchy, considering they didn't do the same thing, and he's made no effort to distinguish between them.
Don't know if he's scummier than Zazie, though. That'll depend on a few factors.
I haven't thought much about the setup. I'll look at it.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I can see some definite advantages.Nuwen wrote:What advantages does the use of a bellhop have?
I think your caveat is wrong. Check out Special Rule 4. Anyone on the floor is protected from actions and prevented from being able to use actions. People on the locked floor truly are protected from kills.Nuwen wrote:The floor system makes it entirely possible to "protect" a slew of players, with the caveat that they can still be killed by another person on their floor. A death on a locked floor means that someone on that floor has killing abilities, barring the intervention of a bellhop.
I think your faint possibility is actually not possible. The bellhop role says it makes the swap the next morning, so you can't actually whisk someone away to prevent a NK.Nuwen wrote:Does anyone else see a town use for the bellhop? The role seems like a game-convoluting nuisance. There's a faint possibility that the bellhop could secret the target of a NK off to a locked floor as pseudo-protection, but that also injects another player into the controlled atmosphere of sealed floors.
------------
Here is a way to use the bellhop to potentially break the game. We pick a floor. Every single night the bellhop moves a player to that floor. Every day we lock that floor. Eventually we will have half+ the game on that floor, and they will be immune to kills. We will lock the scum out of kills (by moving them onto the floor thus roleblocking them) or at the very worst, we can narrow down who is making kills and likewise limit who the scum can actually kill. Let's say there are only 3 players left not on that floor. The scum would be forced to kill one of those 3, which could be suboptimal, and then we would know one of the remaining two were scum. By doing this, I think we limit scum options significantly.
This would require us to all color claim, though. And that might not be a bad idea, at any rate. Rather than have which floor we lock down be random, I say we make an educated choice based on full knowledge of what floor everyone is on.
Let's say there are 3 really pro-town seeming players on the same floor. We might want to lock that one down to keep them all alive. Or maybe there are a bunch of scummy players on the same floor. We can lock that floor down to limit scum options by roleblocking them.
------
To sum. I think we should color claim. I think we should pick a designated "floor to lock" based on what things look like post-color claim. Every night the bellhop should move players into that floor (either scummy players to prevent them from using abilities, or pro-town players to keep them from being NKed). Eventually we lock the scum out of kills entirely, or force them into making really sub-optimal kills.
One con to this plan is that we also potentially screw pro-town power roles out of using their ability. However, I think removing the scum NK or preventing them from using it effectively is worth the possible downside.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Hmm...yeah. A scum bellhop would wreck the plan. We could use the plan to determine whether or not we have a scum bellhop, but at that point it's probably not really worth it.forbiddanlight wrote:Bellhops can be any alignment. This would be problematic for our plans, ne?
I'm curious why you have a problem with this, yet you don't have a problem with my vote on Zazie?forbiddanlight wrote:I dislike the fact that Patrick's exposition only came AFTER his two word vote post, but for now his voting reason, while I disagree with it, is solid enough for this stage of the game...
Eh, this doesn't really work. If your explanation is something that hadn't occurred yet when you voted then you can't use it.forbiddanlight wrote:If they think they can get away with it. It buys time to come up with a good explanation if it's let past. Also can give time for someone to screw up and supply you with a good explanation.
----
forbiddanlight wrote:Hmm...I think I understand your logic and lean towards agreement with it.
What changed?forbiddanlight wrote:I don't see any protown benefit. I'm giving Goat the benefit of the doubt though because I'm not sure if he caught the alignment thing.
----
The search is down, but I saw Zazie posting in other games last night yet ignoring this one. Tsk tsk.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Are you talking about post 86? I'm not sure what you are trying to suggest with it. Looking at the Bellhlp PM, two bellhops would only cancel each other out if they try to target the same player.
And actually, now that I think about it, the fact that the mod expressly noted that in the PM is a pretty strong hint that there is a bellhop for each alignment (or more than 1 bellhop in the game).-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
How will we know which bellhop is which? If we want to confirm a bellhop, we can just have them claim today. Either the scum bellhop counterclaims, and we have a 1-1 or nobody counterclaims, and we've found our confirmed town bellhop.
There are some definite issues with the above, though, because it assumes the setup is 1 town bellhop and 1 scum bellhop. And although that seems to make the most sense based on the wording of the bellhop PM, it would be a bad idea to act off of pure conjecture. If there are 2 town bellhops, for example, we would out them both and then lynch them both. That would be total failure.
I think my plan is no longer viable with the idea of a scum bellhop. I will keep thinking about it, though. I guarantee there is a way to use the setup to our advantage.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
This is a good point. I'm back to thinking we should do this. Even if there is a scum bellhop, we still are able to learn exactly what we're going against and then possibly confirm a town bellhop/protect them indefinitely. Having a confirmed/unkillable player is gamebreaking.Lord Gurgi wrote:Why do we have to force anything? If we just colourclaim and start moving people, that'll work. If it fails, the Bellhop claims. No counterclaim, we have a confirmed unkillable, counterclaim, we have 50/50 of confirmed unkillable or 1-1.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
So if things work out, nobody will have to claim and we'll thwart the scum killing potential. If things don't work out, then the bellhop(s) can claim and we can either find ourselves in a counterclaim situation or end up with a confirmed bellhop.
And even if the confirmed bellhop gets moved around by a scum bellhop, we can always just lock whichever floor they end up on each day. So they will always be protected.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I think it's definitely possible. Maybe not "break" the game persay, but I think the game can be tilted in our favor based on good use of the setup.LlamaFluff wrote:Ok, here is my opinion on trying to break the game: it wont work.
I agree that this probably is a stronger move for today if we're thinking only about what we can gain tonight and not thinking about the game as a whole. I think the other plan is better in the long run. We give up the possible random kill stop factor today in favor of making it tougher for the scum to kill in successive nights.LlamaFluff wrote:The best thing we can do is most likely going to be just to wait untill we are ready to lynch, have the person we are going to lynch color claim then just do a 1d3 on the other colors to see what floor to lock up (this assumes that we are distributed equally). It will RB/protect four players, scum will not know who is NK immune, it basically makes more of the setup hidden to scum, protecting up to four random players. I would rather make four unknown players immune, then make one known immune.
If we leave things random each day, then the amount of information and value of information we learn will also be random.
Also, if we are going to lynch scum, they can simply lie about where they are located and it will throw us off.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
This actually isn't true. We can protect a town-aligned bellhop every single night, even if a scum bellhop is moving them around.Nuwen wrote:Any bellhop claiming right now sounds like a bad plan. There is no incentive for a scum-aligned bellhop to counterclaim on Day 1, and a town-aligned bellhop that outs him or herself today will be biting the night kill if a scum-aligned bellhop exists. That play is combined mod guessing and a coin flip.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
They don't get pulled out until morning. So the following day, we can just lock down the floor the confirmed town bellhop got swapped to.Nuwen wrote:
How? I'm under the impression that bellhops can't self-target to negate another hop's actions ("Doing this will allow you to change the information in the Hotel computer such that it will order aGoatrevolt wrote:
This actually isn't true. We can protect a town-aligned bellhop every single night, even if a scum bellhop is moving them around.Nuwen wrote:Any bellhop claiming right now sounds like a bad plan. There is no incentive for a scum-aligned bellhop to counterclaim on Day 1, and a town-aligned bellhop that outs him or herself today will be biting the night kill if a scum-aligned bellhop exists. That play is combined mod guessing and a coin flip.guestto be transferred onto another floor the following morning"). Even if we lock a claimed bellhop on a floor, he or she can be pulled out again if another is present.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Right, I brought this issue up in post 92, but LG had a good response in the following post.Patrick wrote:Eh, maybe I'm being thick, but I still don't see how the plan suggested covers us against the possibility of there only being a scum bellhop. If we get only one bellhop claim, we're going to treat that player as confirmed? Also, if we have two town bellhops, it seems like we'll end up lynching them both under this plan when they counterclaim each other.
The way to figure this out is to go with the plan I suggested in post 76. If there are two town bellhops, then we should see two players a night being transported to the safe room. If there is only 1 scum bellhop, then we might see nobody being transferred to the safe room.
By carrying through with that plan, we will get a picture of what we are looking at in terms of bellhops. If some people are getting transferred to the safe floor, and some are getting transferred off of it, then we can assume we're dealing with both scum and town bellhops. Then if we get Bellhops to claim, we'll either find ourselves in a counterclaim scenario, or just the town bellhop will claim and we'll have a confirmed townie.
-------------------
If we get everyone to color claim and then choose to lock the floor with the most pro-town players and start shuffling off more players to that floor we can force scum to play our game. If it doesn't work, then we've learned what we're dealing with in terms of scum abilities. As it stands now, things are essentially chaotic and random, and there is absolutely nothing stopping scum from lying about things after the fact to throw things off. Also we have no information to determine whether someone is a scum or town bellhop. If things are random and Johnny Q. Sample gets moved from the Red floor to the Green floor we have absolutely no way of knowing if it was done by a scum or town bellhop. By forcing the bellhops into using their abilities toward a pro-town end (locking scum out of kills entirely), we can corral a scum bellhop into having to either use his ability in a way that is anti-scum or give up on ever being able to claim it. And in the latter case, that opens the door for a town bellhop to claim his role and become a confirmed/unkillable townie.
-------
Zazie was posting in at least one game on Saturday, but hasn't posted in here since Thursday...
I wish the search wasn't down right now, but it looks as though he's avoiding this game.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Sure, but I want him to explain it more. There is a specific reason why I find his vote ultra-scummy and I want to see how he fields my questions. Of course, fielding questions requires posting in the thread, a feat Zazie has failed to accomplish as of late.Battousai wrote:goat- Do you not think that Zazie's vote reasoning was the same as what she quoted?
So yeah...where is Zazie?
-------
SpyreX: What do you think about waiting a day to get bellhop claims, trying out my plan of shifting people to a safe floor in order to determine the nature of the bellhops we find ourselves up against, and then doing bellhop claims later?
So, if multiple people are being shuffled to the safe floor, then we don't need to out the bellhops as they are both acting pro-town. If nobody is being shuffled, or if people are being shuffled randomly, then we should get bellhop claims, and we would then know that we're probably dealing with 1 town 1 scum, or just 1 scum, or what have you.
Basically, it's what you suggested with the idea that first we determine the type of bellhoppery we find ourselves up against, and then afterward get bellhop claims.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Llama, this isn't "solve the puzzle, while ignoring scumhunting". Doing this will just allow us to supplement scumhunting with puzzle pieces, as opposed to doing nothing and supplementing scumhunting with...also nothing...
Personally, I'm willing to sacrifice your idealized mafia game if it will give us a greater chance of winning. If bending the setup in our favor is going to help the town win, I don't see how you can possibly justify not doing it.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Meh. It takes 3 seconds, and while I know who you're quoting now, it's a pain in the ass down the line if I'm trying to read you in isolation and have no clue who you're going back and forth with. I have a good memory, sometimes freakishly good, but I can't remember every single post made in a game. It's just an extra unnecessary hassle.forbiddanlight wrote:
That's a pain in the ass. I'd rather not. If you aren't paying enough attention to know who I'm quoting, then you aren't paying enough attention.I would greatly appreciate it if you would provide names with quotes (or at least make it clear who you are quoting).
Anyway, it's not ultimately a huge deal, just a pet peeve of mine. This is the last I'll say about it.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
That. Just. Happened. But yes, I'm right with you. Zazie, then Battousia, then probably some random players that are ignoring Zazie and Bat (TDC off the top of my head? Maybe Llama) is where I'm at in terms of early scum pickage.Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:Did I just blow your mind?
Truly Spartan in nature... Oh and thanks for the name quoting. It makes me feel like an individual and not just a wall of emotionless text. Touching.forbiddanlight wrote:
that'd be one hell of a prod.Goat wrote: My vote on Zazie is pretty mad in it's realness as well. The madness is in fact so real, I'm about to kick Zazie into a well.
Lock: Green-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
The reaction to SpyreX is definitely over the top and unnecessary, but I don't see why it's scummy.
Gurgi, why is it scummy?
As for why I believe DDD to be town:
1.
DDD was absent from the game and wasn't aware that it had begun. Considering the scum were allowed to night-talk with each other during that period, I think this is a definite town tell.petroleumjelly wrote:It is now Pre-Game. Roles that can night-talk can talk with each other during this time. The game will begin on August 10.
2. Post 30
and more recently:
3. Post 201-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Sure, it's possible for him to fake that, but it's simpler and more likely to assume that he isn't.TDC wrote:GR:
So basically, DDD is town for something that can easily be faked and because Zazie and Batt are scum?
And yeah, if my top two scum picks are both pushing the same wagon I feel pretty comfortable in saying it's not going to hit scum.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I will often dynamically base my reads on players based on what I expect other players alignments to be. I'm not sure that Zazie or Batt are scum, but until I have reason to think otherwise, I'm going to not want to lynch anyone that they are both pressuring.TDC wrote:I understand that and it would be decent argument if they were dead scum.
Where I can't follow is how you're so sure about them both being scum that you base your read on another player on it and want to stop the wagon on him.
I do. I don't think either Zazie or Batt fit well as scum with DDD.TDC wrote:Do you think your argument would still make sense if only one of Zazie/Batt was scum?
Why would Zazie jump start the wagon on her scum buddy that early when there was no reason to do so?
Why would Batt throw himself out there early to slow down the DDD wagon, but then start pressuring DDD himself later when the wagon resurfaces?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
The part that reads like this: "you didn't want to color claim before the bellhop claim because FL was green lock floor claim actually after the color claim voted you for it was actually before FL's claim but color claim bad actually color claim good if people don't know what I'm talking about but you didn't know so it makes it no longer good FL claimed bellhop lock green."Lord Gurgi wrote:I'm not sure what element of our exchange was confusing.
In other words, I'm confused out of my mind by that interaction as well. It sounds like you voted TDC, but he refuted your vote, but then you had some double nested gambit that makes your vote still viable, etc. A clear and concise summary of events would be excellent.
----------------
At this point, I'm still waiting on Zazie. I want him to explain why he voted DDD. When you voted him, what made you think he was a lurker and worth your vote?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
That's the point. If a scum bellhop tries to move FL from the green room, she won't be moved based on that rule, while she can simultaneously move other into the green room. Since we'll almost certainly just be locking whatever floor FL is on each day, this will ensure it stays the green floor, and if FL is succeeding at moving people over, then the scum will start to run out of options for who they can kill as more and more people accumulate on that floor.Elmo wrote:
The Bellhop Role PM says "If more than one person tries to move a particular guest to a new floor on the same night, the computer will disregard those commands, the guest will remain unmoved". So, um, no.TDC wrote:Do we all agree that if there's an unclaimed town bellhop, he needs to move fl to green?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I meant on page 2. Post 34.SpyreX wrote:LG has a STANCE. Bandwagons for the of bandwagons is up there with "lol, reactions" voting.
LG was basically bandwagoning for the sake of bandwagoning and later clarified his vote as a "lol, reactions" vote. You posted immediately afterward but didn't attack it.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
You missed it???? You posted numerous times on that page. I find that hard to believe.SpyreX wrote:Huh. I absolutely missed that.
Where does he lol, reactions define it? I saw the quote from above - is there also the other?
He doesn't definite it precisely as "lol, reactions" but he calls it useful in seeing who will rise to DDD's valiant defense, which can basically be translated as "I want to see how people react to this".
I don't see how it's ambiguous. I'm attacking SpyreX over his inconsistent application of scum tells.Lord Gurgi wrote:Goat, you know as well as I do that on page two, random bandwagoning and lol reactions is the pinnacle of scumhunting. If someone doesn't do it, we sit around in a circle staring attentively at eachother's faces. I've since provided more explanation. I'm not sure if you're calling me out for something I did, or if you're attacking SpyreX, and the ambiguity bothers me.
I agree with you. If I had a problem with your vote there, I would have pursued it at the time instead of going after Zazie, and calling him the worst on that wagon.
I played one game with her, she lurked and got replaced and was town. I don't think it can be considered a tell at this stage.Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:
I've played one game with her, she got replaced, she was scum. Hardly conclusive, but now that it's been brought up it bothers me.Nuwen is also lurking. I don't think it means anything, since I've never known her to lurk, ever.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Yes. Are you in the habit of ignoring stuff that happens on page 2?SpyreX wrote:You find it hard to believe I didn't really pay close attention to page 2?
This post suggests that you were aware of the DDD wagon, else why acknowledge Batt's defense of it?
Ok, fair point, and I agree. There is a difference between doing something for reactions and using "lol, reactions" as a defense for something that wasn't done for reactions.SpyreX wrote:Lol, reactions isn't just about doing something for reactions. Its more when you do something that people go "huh" and your response is some form of lol, reactions.
You called shameless bandwagoning scummy, but LG's vote on DDD was like the poster boy for shameless bangwagoning.SpyreX wrote:And you can call it inconsistent but something is to be said for you trying to apply consistency to LG's vote and subsequent play and Zaz's vote / lurk / explanation of vote.
Since they're not the same.
I'm not making the argument that Gurgi's vote and Zazie's vote were the same thing and should be evaluated as the same. I harassed Batt about that point earlier. My argument was that Gurgi's vote looked the same as what you had labeled Zazie's vote as, and you had voted Zazie for it while not voting Gurgi earlier.
Had you not missed Gurgi's vote, would you have pressured him over it at the time?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
The last game we played in, he lurked for a long period and was scum. Once/If search is back up, I want to compare his posting frequency in this game with that of him in other games.Nuwen wrote:Zazie needs to post or die.
We should move pro-town players to green, not scummy players.
People are aware when they get room-swapped. If one mafia member gets room swapped, then one of the others will make the kill. It will take a while to prevent the mafia from killing by following this idea, and in the meantime we are leaving pro-town players as vulnerable kill choices. By moving pro-town players, we limit the mafia kill options as early as possible and will honestly stop them from being able to make kills just as quickly.mod wrote:There are at least 3 Mafia Members.
---------
Town hunting and scum hunting are 2 sides to the same coin. If you find enough townies, you've found the scum. I think it's a valid strategy in any game, including this one.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
There are 2 problems with this.Nuwen wrote:Howeeeeever, putting scummy players on lockdown (combined with lynching) will result in faster and more direct scumhunting than protecting pro-town players. While I agree that an experienced scumhunter is a powerful town tool, the mechanics of this game allow us to restrict and control mafia kills. We should take advantage of that offensively, not by defensively moving pro-town players.
1. It will take us probably 2 days minimum to get all the scum over to green, and this is a "best case scenario" kind of play. Realistically, it could and probably will take longer. In that period, we are giving scum free reign to kill anyone not moved over, which in this case is a group of pro-town players.
2. If we are moving scummy players to green, we will also want to lynch those scummy players. If we lynch someone we move over, then we effectively wasted the ability. By moving pro-town players, we quickly limit the scum killing ability because we will both be transporting likely townies to green as well as lynching players not in green as that is where the scummy players will be residing. That will effectively count as "2 moves" a day.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
My reasons for voting Zazie are closer to yours than you might expect. I want to see how he answers my questioning before I reveal them though.Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:Zazie: Jumped on a bad bandwagon, my problem is different than goat’s though. I don’t have a huge problem with an “lol reactions” bandwagon, but Zazie supplied evidence actually pushing the argument the bandwagon was based on. Added to the fact that we’ve not seen anything remotely useful or helpful from him and he’s my number one suspect far and away.
Gotta love when it's page 15, and you still haven't gotten an answer to a simple question from page 2. Damn, do I love me some lurking.
Has Battasai said anything of value in the last 5-10 pages? I can't honestly remember a post of any interest he's made in a while.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I'm basically just glazing over the walls on this page. The one thing I really want to know is how TDC feels about Llama.
In terms of color claiming, an early claim would have helped us. I doubt scum are going to lie if pushed into color claiming on like page 5. At this point, though, they can lie about being on green, and invalidate, or at best throw serious doubt on any conclusions we would have been able to draw from NKs.
Right now, I don't think a color claim helps us for that fact, but it was definitely the play early on. Locking people into claims is more beneficial than random chances of stopping kills if lucky.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
This is my main issue with Zazie, and I wanted to milk information out of him before jumping on this, because there was definite possibility he would slip, but I seriously doubt he is going to be back and provide anything relevant before the deadline.
He voted DDD only 1 minute after his previous post in the thread, suggesting he didn't take a lot of time deciding to place that vote, yet he both claims DDD exhibited anti-town behavior (How in the hell would he have a chance to evaluate that in 1 minute?) and later provides evidence to support this after Llama suggests that DDD had been active on the site but not posting in this thread. The way Zazie goes about providing that information later is deceptive, and suggests the idea that Zazie was using that as a basis for his vote, despite the fact that there is no way Zazie could have possibly evaluated all that information in the short period of time he used to vote DDD.
I don't think Zazie bothered to actually look into whether DDD was lurking or not, and the de post facto rationale for his earlier vote is shady as hell. I don't buy the explanation that he voted DDD for "anti-town behavior."-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
This makes absolutely no sense at all. This is basically the same point I called you out on earlier. You are applying a blanket "everyone is scummy on this wagon" statement and making no effort to differentiate what is what. You can't honestly tell me that you found a random vote on DDD to be at the same level of scumminess as Zazie or Gurgi or Llama's vote?Battousai wrote:Whether or not your vote was scummy, you were on the wagon. I felt the wagon was scummy, so you kinda have to be included since you were on the wagon.
The idea that a wagon is scummy, thus everyone on it gets "scum points" is absurd.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Ok. I have no problem with this. I looked back and he did post numerous times but didn't jump off the wagon, so you have a valid point.Battousai wrote:You misunderstand. Spyrex's vote was random and not scummy. Then the wagon started and the 3 votes on the "lurker scum" wagon are scummy. Spyrex didn't unvote once this happened, thus he perpetuated the wagon.
This isn't the impression at all I get from you saying "I kind of had to include you" though. Why would you say that if you actually did think he was scummy for sticking on the wagon rather than jumping off? Wouldn't you want to include him?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I didn't have a specific answer I was looking for when I asked that question. I simply wanted to understand how much the deadline factored into your pressure on zazie. Was it the sole reason you pressured him? Was he a suspect of yours and the looming deadline was simply the final straw that pushed you into action?
It matters because it's important to understand why people do the things they do. Having that information makes it easier to evaluate if people are consistent or inconsistent in their play when you measure them up later in the game.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
My experience is him doing it as scum. I don't think him disappearing is a tell, since collectively we've seen him do it as both alignments, but if he's been posting elsewhere but not here, then that is a definite tell. I caught him doing it that one night, but I don't know if that's been a trend or a 1-time deal.LlamaFluff wrote:I would actually go for an Elmo lynch before a Zazie lynch at deadline. I have had multiple bad experiences lynching zazie for being a lurker, although I can not remember a game with him where he was scum. I can point to two games where he did disappear (but not get replaced) though as town.
In terms of Elmo v. Zazie, they are scummy for two different reasons. Zazie has been directly scummy (exaggerated reasons for voting DDD, shady mannerisms around that wagon) whereas Elmo has been indirectly scummy (lack of meaningful opinions, weak stance on DDD).
My preference is definitely Zazie, because his actions are something actively scummy whereas Elmo's are passively scummy (aka, could be explained by him not closely following the game) but I would not shed tears if Elmo was lynched.
I will say this much. If either of you are town, do us a favor and get replaced (or genuinely stop lurking). Seriously. If you know you're not going to actually play the game, get out now and let someone who will get in. Responding to prods but then following it up with doing nothing is destructive.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
This is a lot of words but not much is actually said. First you say the lack of a counterwagon suggests DDD is town, but then you say it could be because the scum don't have much influence on voting patterns. That's a long way of saying "they could be scum or town."Elmo wrote:@LF: Well, generally if a scumbag's getting wagoned, their buddies tend to try and start a wagon on someone else, especially early on when wagons don't need much to get started, but no-one really seemed interested in trying. (My reasoning here is kinda like JDodge's in Open 55.) But for example, if Zaz and Danny happen to be scum (with 3 scum total), the single leftover mafioso isn't going to have much influence on the voting patterns. So the more it looks like no-one would be wagoning regardless of alignment, the harder it is (or less reliable) to tell why scum aren't wagoning.
..I think this makes sense.
I want to know what you personally think about DDD and Zazie.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
It's entirely the opposite of this. Zazie's push on DDD was actively scummy. Elmo's lack of meaningful contribution is passively scummy.forbiddanlight wrote:
The thing is, we don't have enough data from Zazie. I'd prefer he be replaced, because from what I'm reading it's his active lurking you are lynching him for. A.K.A, a passive tell versus Elmo's active tells.I just don't see how what you point out that is definitively scummy doesn't apply to ZazieR. The rest is flimsy conjecture.
What do you think of my reasons for finding Zazie scummy?
It depends on how you define it. Active lurking defined as "following along with the thread but not posting" is a huge tell. Active lurking defined as "posting every 3 days but not saying anything and not keeping up with the thread" is less scummy.SpyreX wrote:Active Lurking is one of THE biggest tells, IMO.
I don't understand why this matters. Is there a huge difference between a lynch wagon of 4 votes, and a lynch wagon of 7 votes where the last 3 votes are just people piling on for the purpose of achieving a lynch?SpyreX wrote:As an aside: I'm going to be ultra-pissed if we don't get an actual majority lynch. Seriously angry. As in if someone is awesome enough to not help push a real wagon as we get close or, god forbid, not be voting I will vote for them every day I'm alive.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Who is lynching for information? This is completely irrelevant to whether or not Elmo is scum and completely irrelevant to whether or not we should lynch him.Nuwen wrote:Answer my question about alignment splicing other players, please. If you think Elmo is scum, name his suspected partners. Can you? If not, is that really the best informational lynch possible?
That post had such a complete lack of emotion that I don't see how it could possibly "scream" anything.Nuwen wrote:"Meh, don't care, should stop posting" screams exasperated and bored town.
I'm not reading Elmo as scummy, but in the same vein I hate Nuwen's defense of him. The "who are partners" reason is a complete non-issue as to whether or not Elmo should be lynched, and the complete ignorance of the equally sized Zazie wagon is bothersome. Her play isn't "stop wagon's on lurkers/non contributors" as she claims, but rather "stop wagon on Elmo".
Nuwen: Your thoughts on Zazie? Do you have an alternative choice to the lynches today? You've stepped up to defend Elmo, but you're ignoring the equal sized wagon on Zazie completely. Why is one wagon on a non-contributor worth your efforts to stop but not the other?
-----------------------
Anyway, here is an actually valid reason as to why we should not be lynching Elmo today and should be lynching Zazie or Batt instead.
Batt FoS'd Zazie early on in the game, yet he joined the Elmo wagon just now, and why? It's strictly an "inactive" lynch. There are two huge problems with that.
1. Elmo is more active than Zazie.
2. Zazie is an inactive who Batt has already expressed suspicion on this game. Why the hell would he go for the other inactive, who is less inactive, when he was already "suspicious" of the first?
It's a blatant attempt to save Zazie.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA