Mini 546: House Mafia - Game Over

[Near]

catching scum, obviously.

But if you're too busy killing me, that's a wasted lynch. Since it's in the best interests of the town for the townies to be alive, self preservation/damage control has to be somewhere on my priority list, right?

Oh, really?

Anyways, I didn't initially vote for pooky because it would look like votehopping, which it basically was.

Now, if

catching scum

is "obviously" a higher priority, as you have just declared it to be, it really begs the question as to why you didn't vote Pooky initially.

If you genuinely believed Pooky to be scum, then (by your own admission) you should have voted Pooky rather than worrying about your own welfare. In reality, you only voted Pooky

after

some pressure was brought to bear on you for not voting, proving that your main concern was actually your own survival.

In other words,

Unvote (if I am...), Vote: TheJiveMachine

Hey guys. I am a new doctor replacing Thantos. I am trying to catch up the conversation, pretty much skimmed through first 9 pages or so, but this post I felt like I wanted to respond to.

Basically I disagree with volkan. Many times, you should balance self-perservation vs. voting for a guy you think is a scum. Especially in the beginning of the game, you might have some clues as to who you think is a scum, and maybe your guess is better than random, but often times you are wrong. We lynch on the first night, not always because we are "pretty sure" but because we have to - and we make the best guess. So, I don't think Jive's posts are in conflict with each other.

It's true that hindsight is 20/20, but looking back Jive's candidness on the reason why he didn't vote for pooky (which was less than "honorable") would have lead me to think that he's not a scum.

Anyway. Nice to meet you!

[Near]

One scum wont vote for the other even when he's digging his own grave, but tries to look suspicious of him to distance himself. How cute.

It's such a fricking rough dilemma to decided which one we should hang up first. There's more room for JiveMachine to build on and maybe be (very lurky, very scummy) town, but the way shaft.ed is squirming is so funny I almost want to watch more of it.

Nah

Unvote, Vote shaft.ed

This strikes me as a very interesting post. Armlx, who was a scum, didn't have to make this post to defend himself. He was not the prime suspect at the time he made this post - the prime suspect was shaft.ed. I am not sure about the exact vote count, but something like 3 votes in a row were being casted on shaft.ed, including one from JiveMachine.

Either:
1) Armlx was trying to go with the bandwagon to kill shaft.ed, who he knows is innocent.

OR

2) Armlx thought that shaft.ed, his partner, is going to die anyway, and by making this post, he can almost guarantee that the next person who will die is JiveMachine (which means, he's a probably good doctor) and prepare to make future arguments for his innocence by citing his decisive post and vote against shaft.ed.

In case of 1), Armlx, I would think, would be concerned about the after-effect of lynching shaft.ed when the mod reveals that shaft.ed was a good doctor. Therefore, I wouldn't expect Armlx to use such "definitive" wording in his post.


I just joined this morning, so I haven't been able to read many posts in detail, which I plan to do in next week or so. So please excuse me if my argument is flawed because of later posts I might have missed.

[/b]

[Near]

In addition to 669, I just realized that Jive was fired and was actually good doctor, which could indirectly strengthen the likelihood of 2) above, because:

A: If 2) is true, then JiveMachine is innocent.
B: JiveMachine is innocent
C: Since B, which is true, does not disprove A, it's more likely A is true?

something like that?

[Near]

FOS: vollkan

FOS: shaft.ed

First, I believe that vollkan is a logical person. This is the premise for my arguments throughout this post.

Yes, there is a balancing act

to an extent

. However, catching scum needs to be the highest priority. Ultimately, town doesn't win by holding back - town wins by catching scum. If an argument is legitimate proof of someone being scum, there is no reason (in all normal circumstances) why I would refrain from raising that argument.

I'm not too sure what your point about "lynch on the first night (sic)" has to do with this.

Yes, winning is the highest priority. Catching a scum is directly related to this priority. Therefore, if I can trade my own "life" with that of scum's, I agree that it's correct play to do so. But when your best suspect is, say, only 60% scum (as opposed to your next best guess at 50%), sometimes it's incorrect put your life in danger, since you know you are 0% scum.

Anyway, we should probably talk about this later @ Mafia Discussion Forum.

Whilst it is true that armlx may have been concerned about lynching townshaft.ed, I am not sure that such a concern really might have prevented him from being so "definitive". Remember that we also had Pooky being even blunter, and the comments by TG and Adel were hardly of phenomenal length either. Given that armlx was first to vote, he might have felt safer given that he wasn't immediately pushing a wagon into danger zone.

First, we don't know whether other people you mentioned (Pooky, TG, Adel) are scums. If they are townies, then they believe who they are voting against are actual scums, so, often they will not concern themselves with "what if who i vote for is not a scum". So I think we can excuse their "definitiveness". It's different for armlx. He knew who the other scums were. If shaft.ed was not a scum, armlx knew that - and he would be concerned about the aftereffect of voting to kill a townie.

The fact that you missed this made me wonder if you were hurried in your defense for shaft.ed.

Certainly, I think the winds were changing towards shaft.ed when armlx voted. It could be armlx wanting to be first on the wagon of his buddy, so he doesn't need to tag on a late vote and look dodgy; or it could just be armlx pushing against a seemingly doomed townie.

IIRC, it wasn't armlx who voted for shaft.ed first. There was at least one (I think two) prior vote and multiple accusations on shaft.ed.

But, IF armlx was the first person to vote for shaft.ed, I think it makes it a lot less likely that shaft.ed is the other scum. A likelihood of a scum making a definitive accusation at his partner who's ALREADY in the corner is high. Likelihood of a scum casting the first vote at his partner that a few suspects, is not.

Since you *thought* that armlx was the first person to vote on shaft.ed, I would have expected you to say something like this and discount my scenario 2). But your not doing so makes me think you are just trying to go along with me.

That said, 2) seems like the most obvious course of action for armlx if shaft.ed is his buddy. Armlx pulls town credit for lynching shaft.ed scum and can then take down TJM.

If shaft.ed is armlx's buddy, then 2) is the only scenario!

Your post makes me very suspicious of you. It also makes me suspicious of shaft.ed that much more. Because, if you are a scum but shaft.ed is not, you would have found a ways to validate my theory with open arms. Instead, you reluctantly accepted that it's possible. Writing this, what came first to my mind is: "Is vollkan too concerned to dismiss my theory completely but also doesn't want to kill his only other partner?"

You thought that armlx was the first person to vote for shaft.ed. You should have dismissed or at least partially discredited my theory.

[Near]

You miss my point.

Pooky etc. had expressed their suspicions of shaft.ed fairly bluntly. Armlx, if he was pushing the lynch of town shaft.ed, did not run the normal risk of casting an "under-explained" vote because the other attacks made against shaft.ed were all similarly blunt. In other words, armlx could have "hid" amongst the collective "definitiveness".

I'm not saying that this is what happened, but I am raising a reasonable objection to the scenario you presented.

I was embarrassed after reading this. I should have known what you meant. Instead, I thought I saw something, I was wrong.

There were FoSes and accusations, but no prior votes.

I stand corrected.

Uh, no - you miss my point again.

If armlx got a sense that shaft.ed was in a state of impending doom, it would be reasonable for armlx to jump onto shaft.ed asap. Shaft.ed was being called "So scum" and was attracting FoSes and accusations. He looked like a was a lame duck.

We are in agreeement here.

What would discredit your scenario 2 somewhat (always remember that bussing can go to extreme lengths) is if armlx himself had started the tirade against shaft.ed and had himself been responsible for pulling shaft.ed into that state.

True, but in my mind anyway, the fact that armlx was the first person to vote for shaft.ed makes him less likely to be armlx's partner. In retrospect, I think scenario (1) in my original theory is more likely - that, armlx was trying to lynch a townie who he thought had a good chance of getting lynched.

UNFOS shaft.ed

UNFOS vollkan

[/quote]

[Near]

OK, here is something I was thinking about this afternoon and I couldn't derive anything significant from it, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

In the very beginning, when the mod told everyone to pick the teams, scums were allowed to communicate with each other. I'd imagine that scums decided that at least one person join each team. Not knowing what the "twist" is, if I were scum, I'd probably suggest the idea. It has a feeling of "infiltrating" the both teams. This is not very logical, I know, but this is my guess. Coupled with the fact that, after the twist, when each team had to lynch one member from the other team, both teams took quite a bit to decide who to lynch. And in fact, it was the team with armlx that took longer to decide who to lynch. Does it make any sense? (I am hesitant after my previous posts got shut down :p)

Going with this theory, I tried to look for person who stated "awkward" reasons to join the "other team", but the most awkward reason was "Sweet. I've always liked bears" which was stated by Dean Harper, whom I am replacing. I also found vollkan was also somewhat suspicious for being the first person to join the other team, but his reason for not liking "L-unit" was direct enough, so I decided I can't make any inference from this.

And probability wise, it is more likely that armlx's team is the team with 2 scums, than vice versa because the scum died, i.e. if there were two scums on NLU, then it would probably be more likely that they help each other to lynch a townie, rather than armlx, their partner. Unless one or more scum was casting a vote against their partner armlx, it would take unanimous 3 votes from townies to kill armlx. Of course, it is possible that one or more of them were bussing, but then knowing that it would be relatively easy to save armlx, I think they would have opted out of bussing.


Original teams:

L-unit:

Pooky
Dean
Erg0
armlx
TrustGossip

NLU:

Volkan
Karma
Shafted
Adel
Jive

If my "guess" is correct, then there is at least on scum in NLU, and more likely one scum left on each of the two teams.

[Near]

Isn't it possible that CDK is a scum himself? His reasoning of picking vollkan is understandable, but

I am still of the belief that TG is scum (so it would have been a wase of an investigation).

For me, CDK not investigating TG when he thought TG was a scum is difficult to believe. If CDK is a scum, tho it might be desirable to say this in order to try to get TG killed. Of course you couldn't have said "I checked out TG and he's a scum" because then TG would accuse you of being a scum. Isn't this too convenient of a way to try lynch TG? I mean, I am basing most of this on my belief that if you thought TG had highest chance of being a scum, you should have checked him out.

On the side note, despite the possibility of CDK being a scum, I think most likely vollkan is a good doctor. If CDK was a scum, he must have been concerned about other people being suspicious of himself or vollkan sometime down the road. Down the road, if one of the gets lynched or get checked out because of another twist, it would basically prove that the other is a scum also (actually, it would prove cdk is a scum if vollkan was scum, but not vice versa).

[Near]

interesting theory, what happens if TG turns out scum? Did I bus both my partners from the beginning both days? Where does the scum paranoina stop? Given your theory, who do you think we should lynch? TG to test me? Me to test...what?..Vollkan..top test what? NOw that you have put it out there..what now? If my investigation was understandable, why are we having this conversation?

Again, I wasnt sure that vollkan was town. I felt that he has been playing differently this game than others I have been in with him. It is documented in the thread that I have felt that way before we knew the "twist" investigation. This vollkan investigatio has provided us much more information than you are giving it credit

First, if we lynch TG and he turns out scum, then it's still possible that you are a scum. This would be a case of extreme bussing. In fact, because it's so extreme, you might do it. Especially in this game where there is no cop and in the future rounds we don't know what the twists are. If TG turns out to be a scum, maybe you thought there is no way we ever doubt your pro-town.

However, I would say TG and CDK are probably not scums together because: if TG and CDK were indeed two scums left, then I think CDK would have said that he checked out TG and he turned out to be a scum. This would almost put icing on the cake for you, CDK. We will believe you and lynch TG, and we will never doubt you again. And this even checks out with your prior post history because you always doubted TG.

I never said I didn't give you credit for your vollkan investigation. It was the fact that you didn't investigate TG, who you thought was most suspicious.

[Near]

Isn't it possible that CDK is a scum himself? His reasoning of picking vollkan is understandable, but

Near this is a pretty garbage argument. What you need to think of is what benefit do you get from having either outcome (ie scum/town)? If vollkan is scum you get a large benefit because he plays very pro-town as scum and he would be very difficult to weed out. If he comes up pro-town he is a very good scum hunter who is now almost certain to survive the game since it's nightless. If TG is scum we get to a lynch a player that likely would be lynched eventually anyway. TG-scum would have to be one of three surviving players to have an impact on the outcome of the game. I don't see him surviving that long with the cast in this game. TG town saves us a mislynch. But this is offset by the fact that the town now has a confirmed innocent in vollkan so it's not really costing that much.

Also does anyone think the option of what the team leader gets to do could be different if he were town or scum? It seems odd to "reward" a scum who tricks the town into electing him team leader by allowing him to confirm an innocent, point out his scum partner, or falsely label a townie guilty so that they can be lynched following. I know this is meta'ing the mod but it seems worth considering.

shaft.ed. again, my point was not that his investigating vollkan was not useful. please read post 722.

as for the team leader getting a different role if he were town or scum, i doubt it. because the twists are revealed to everyone. it would make it obvious that the leader is a scum if mod revealed that "vollkan was shot during the day by the unknown" or something like that.

I think it's very possible that CDK is a scum. I am starting to really think this is likely but I would like to hear what other people think, since i am a newb :p

[Near]

Taking vollkan's post (post 718) at face value, it seems that TG has made many posts that are inconsistent. Content wise, I can see why people are suspicious of TG. But is being "inconsistent" and "fluctuating" strictly a mafia tell?

In my opinion, TG's posts are way too fluctuating. For example, one post he says vollkan always looks protown, then next he points out that vollkan is definitely acting differently this game. Content wise, yes, this is contradictory. But, if TG was a scum, what's there for him to gain by making this post? Is he trying to LOOK like he's trying hard to figure out who the scums are? He doesn't seem to be concerned at all about how other people will analyze his post and suspect his a scum (at least in the beginning of the game).

Volkan's post was insightful, but it didn't provide enough evidence for me to think TG is a scum. I also feel like I am risking my future credibility by posting this (whether or not TG turns out to be town or scum): but my hunch + fact that TG is inconsistent and almost reckless on who he's accusing makes me think he's a townie.

[Near]

What's your hunch again? That CKD is scum that's blowing his cover in order to get TG lynched?

You. I gave it some more thoughts and I agree with vollkan that the fact that armlx was the first person to vote for shaft.ed did not discredit my theory at post #669 significantly. I think it's still very likely that armlx WAS trying to extreme bus via shaft.ed AND at the same time lynch the other guy (I forget his name) armlx was claiming as shaft.ed's partner.

Two birds in one. Possible, no?

My second hunch is CKD. In the back of my mind, I just know it's him. But then again, I am somewhat reserved in expressing this suspicion, because I am slightly concerned that this is because I think my theory on CKD is kind of cool and I am almost "hoping" CKD is a scum so I can look smart.

[Near]

What's your hunch again? That CKD is scum that's blowing his cover in order to get TG lynched?

Hey shaft.ed I just realized you are in seattle. Me too!

Inconsistency can be a sign of recklessness or opportunism. It's particularly suspicious when a player supports a popular wagon despite havign spoken positively about the lynchee prior to that.

Your first sentence sounds cool. Although I haven't though of it this way before, I agree with you. But IIRC, most of TG's inconsistencies are NOT FROM supporting a popular wagon.

[Near]

Near, I am confused...do you think TG is scum and I am bussing again (wasnt that your theory before, I could be wrong?) or that TG is town and I am just trying to get a townie lynched? Your hunch (and that is what it is because I have them frequently) is that my attack on armix was all a ruse?

Nope. that was not my theory. It was more like I think you are trying to lynch TG, who is a town. As for your attack on armlx, I haven't actually read the posts (I will, eventually), but what makes your attacks different from typical bussing?

I think you just think I am scum, and you was basing all theories around that. What are your thoughts on Adel then? She seems to be agreeing with most everything I say. From anyone else I would be flattered, but from Adel is just freaks me out..your thoughts?

To be honest, I don't remember anything Adel said except for the fact that she called me a newbie. and I didn't even know that she was agreeing with you. I will catch up with these posts.

Near, I notice you have a lot of theories but no votes (not even an FoS atm) ...seems like you are playing it safe..if you think I am scum, place a vote on me...ask me some questions, pick my brain...but this eluding is silly (and slightly scummy).

Shrug. if you really want it...

Vote: CKD

Near...please provide three reasons why you think I MIGHT be scum.

I don't have 3 reasons. I have hard time trying to come up with one. I was going to bring up the fact that you didn't investigate TG even though you thought TG was the most likely candidate, but I learned from Erg0 and vollkan (from a diff game) that most people investigate NOT who they think is most likely mafia, but who they think is least readable.

I didn't think about this before, but I think the reason why I didn't vote for anyone is because I am humbled. I started my first game here about a week ago, and at the time I thought I was a very good mafia player. But in the newbie game, I keep making mistakes. Here, I FOS vollkan only to get schooled. I come up with a theory that CKD could be mafia, but everyone seemed to have dismissed it and no one seems to care except you.

[Near]

Unvote

[Near]

to sum up my "attack" on Armix, didnt like his voting habits then he tried to push that I was scum because I over reacted and that in his book was a classic scum tactic....which is/was bullshit. because a.) it wasnt an over reaction and b.) doesnt give any indication of alignment.

but you really should be reading the game thoroughly before submitting ideas and theories. My attack on armix and reference to Adel are both quite obvious and is not hiding in this thread...

I might have decent insight if you actually inform yourself first.

that being said and even though I think that TG is scum....dont hammer until you have read the thread

Could you give me the post numbers?

[Near]

Finally sitting down and reading the posts from the beginning! I am jotting down things that I find interesting. I am using the + and - notations to indicate whether the cited post makes a player more or less likely to be a scum. For example CKD+ means that in my opinion CKD is more likely to be a scum as result of the post

Post 119. Armlx says that he's 80% sure on Adel and Shaft and only 40% sure on CKD, but still votes CKD, says he's smacking Pooky too hard for wrong reasons. (CKD+)

Post 124: CKD says he understands Shaft's reasoning for voting him (CKD+) But his accusations on Adel (rather than defending himself) sounds pretty geniune (CKD-)

Post 170: armlx says "One scum wont vote for the other even when he's digging his own grave, but tries to look suspicious of him to distance himself. How cute. " then votes for shaft.ed (shafted+++)

post 183: shafted's famous post that removed suspicions from all that suspected him EXCEPT armlx. Why didn't armlx go with the "bandwagon" and give shafted a pardon? It was a very convincing post, indeed. Stubborn distancing that, in armlx's mind, its benefits outweighed the suspicions that might be directed to him for not being convinced by a convincing post. (shafted++)

I also want to make another note, shafted post in 183 was smart in both cases 1)if he was a scum 2) if he's a townie. if he was a townie, he probably meant it and planned the whole thing from the beginning. 2) if he was a scum, he probably came up with reasons behind his actions AFTER THE FACT. I am hesitant to believe that there are more than handful of people smart enough to actually plan this (i.e when he was accusing Adel). therefore, in my mind, 2) is more likely. (shafted+)

Post 246: TG goes against the crowd and says armlx is neutral and difficult to read. He says this even though armlx is on the same team as him and therefore TG cannot vote against armlx. A scum could have found this as a convenient way to suspect his partner (a scum) without actually contributing to vote against him (TG--)

Post 252: armlx (who's at L-1) says: "With Adele jumping in early on such a low threshold as well as following all my votes and the TG votes early is really suspicious" A scum before death trying to incriminate a innocent? (Adele-, TG-)

Post 314: TG says: " I am completely swooning over Pooky and Adel. There's a reason why Adel is crystalline logic and Pooky just came through with the resolution of an after-school special. I am held under their sway not because of charisma, but by the involiable stuff of credibility. They make complete and perfect sense and are actually playing the game. " (TG++) Hard to explain this one. Even though it sounds like TG is trying to buddy up with Pooky and Adel, but it's so full of scummy flavor, I was somewhat hesitant to count this.

Post 328: All Pooky says is: "Armlx=total scum. "
Six minutes later. Post 329: TG says: "For once I tend to agree with Pooky. His post feels a little barnacle-y, in addition he was barnacle-y to Adel's playstyle. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't two barnacles make a scum?" (TG++++)

First of all, all Pooky says is one sentence, without any explanation. Yet TG jumps on the bandwagon against Armlx, who he considered "neutral and difficult to read" prior to this. "little barnacle-y"? "two barnacles make a scum"?

I can't suppress my mind from screaming "just lynch TG"

Post 350: Votes against Jive Machine by accusing him of "It's been more than 72 hours since you've promised content." [TG+]

WOW AND FINALLY 351, 353, 354

SEALS IT

for me.

In 351 he calls armlx "acting as scummy as possible". And then, unfos-es armlx because he "agrees with armlx's assessment on CKD"?!! What? [TG++]

[Near]

I am re-reading my post.. to see if it makes sense.

breathe in...
breathe out...

Vote: TG

[Near]

A bit surprised you dropped a vote after that analysis Near. Your scoring put me tied with TG yet he was the obvscum after it was all said and done.

In 351 he calls armlx "acting as scummy as possible". And then, unfos-es armlx because he "agrees with armlx's assessment on CKD"?!! What? [TG++]

So I guess you're not running with that CKD is scum idea anymore?

Yes, I realize I'd look pretty suspicious whether or not TG turns out scum. But in my defense (sort of) I got pretty worked up and emotional.

Oh well, I know saying this could make me more suspicious, but: I wish I can take back my vote.

[Near]

As for CKD, yes, I changed my mind. What was a hunch before, I don't think it's him.

Also, I didn't even realize that you had same number of +'s as TG, I didn't actually count. I didn't even finish reading all the posts. I just reached a stage where I was certain it was TG... and I acted on it.

[Near]

But in my defense (sort of) I got pretty worked up and emotional.

About what, and why?

I don't know the answer to either question.

But, I just do. And it happens pretty frequently to me in real life and it already happened once in the newbie game. When I start to think I have a pretty good idea on who the mafia is, I seem to go into this "emotional mode" where I get scared. Does it ever happen to you guys?

[Near]

why would you look suspicious if TG turns out to be scum?

wait what? you want to take your vote back?..why? What has changed in between voting and now?

I was thinking this even when I was analyzing TG toward the end, that if TG turns scum, I'd look suspicious BECAUSE it would be look like I am bussing TG. I was not at all convinced it was TG just a few posts ago, all of the sudden, I think it's TG who is sitting at L-1 RIGHT AFTER vollkan expresses his opinion that he's willing to vote against him. That's what concerned me.

Yes, I wanted to take my vote back. I don't knwo! I wasn't sure anymore.

[Near]

Oh well, I know saying this could make me more suspicious, but: I wish I can take back my vote.

I just reached a stage where I was certain it was TG... and I acted on it.

How are these two posts cogent with each other? You were certain, but now you aren't?

As CKD said: What changed?

They are related to each other because 1) I thought people would be suspicious BECAUSE I reacted all suddenly SO 2) I explained my unusual circumstances for it.

Yes, I was certain at the time. THat's why I voted.

And yes, almost immediately after I submitted vote, I wasn't sure anymore. I kept hitting refresh wanting to hear Adel's or CKD's approval.

[Near]

But what changed in between your vote and your regret?

My guess is: I calmed down.

[Near]

I am re-reading my post.. to see if it makes sense.

Also, I didn't even realize that you had same number of +'s as TG, I didn't actually count. I didn't even finish reading all the posts. I just reached a stage where I was certain it was TG... and I acted on it.

So methinks TG's turning up town, right Near? Care to save us the time for Claus to log in?

Is what I did that suspicious? Really?

[Near]

Reference me to you losing control in a Newbie game.

Removed Reference to an ongoing game
-- Claus

[Near]

I am re-reading my post.. to see if it makes sense.

Also, I didn't even realize that you had same number of +'s as TG, I didn't actually count. I didn't even finish reading all the posts. I just reached a stage where I was certain it was TG... and I acted on it.

So methinks TG's turning up town, right Near? Care to save us the time for Claus to log in?

FOS = Shafted

for being the first to "know" TG will turn town and trying to blame me for it.

[Near]

Yes it is. Is it against the rule to reference an ongoing game? if so, please take down the link.

Done
-- Claus

[Near]

it's shafted.

[Near]

Everything lines up well, if shaft.ed is a mafia.

1. armlx says: ""One scum wont vote for the other even when he's digging his own grave, but tries to look suspicious of him to distance himself. How cute. " then votes for shaft.ed" Also associates Jive with shaft.ed, which makes this theory more believable because we think armlx was trying to lynch Jive along with shaft.ed, his scum partner.
2. Shaft.ed's famous post at 183. Really, don't you guys think it's more likely that shaft.ed made up the story for his failure to discern random adel's random bandwagon-ing AFTER he was accused?
3. the fact that armlx was so stubborn to accept shaft.ed's very persuasive post (at laest, everyone else thought so)
4. the fact that he foreshadowed TG turning town and used that to frame me. i doubt that a townie can say such a thing.

[Near]

This is conspiratorial. I think it is possible he made it up, but that demonstrates nothing.

Well, if you think it's possible that he made it up, if he was a good doctor, wouldn't he be honest as to why he mistook adel's random bandwagon-ing? Instead (supposing he made this up after the fact), he fabricated a very logical case by case analysis on why he acted the way he did.

Oh, and Near, could you please give your ages?

Here are the possibilities of "twist" I came up with:

1. The oldest (or youngest person) gets to check out if someone is a scum
2. Divide into two teams of oldest group/youngest group. Maybe not likely tho, because we have odd number of people.

Probably 1 is more likely. We should put the people we think are good doctors in both extreme end of the age spectrum and put everyone else in the middle?

[Near]

Ok, knowing that you are testing me, I will go along with you.

If everything was up to me:

Vollkan 15
Adel 20
Shaft.ed 25
CDK 30
Erg0 35
Pooky 40
Near 45

But I know people will not agree with that, so I propose:

CDK 15
Adel 20
Shafted 25
Ergo 35
Near 40
Vollkan 45

Could you guess my reasoning?

[Near]

I don't really understand the difference in your two lists outside of you putting the confirmed townie from the youngest to oldest position, and removing pooky from the game. It also seems odd that you would provide two lists. That would be a scum tell to me showing that you are doing something different than your desired play so as to look more townish, but scum generally don't come out and say it so clearly. Bit perplexing.

Also your case against me is a bit late to really mean anything at this point. If you were so sure of it, I don't understand why you bring it up during the FTA and why you voted TG. Your only new point is the action of armlx. I can't really defend for another player's actions, but a vet with his experience ought to know how to frame up townies.

Oops, I forgot pooky. Put him in the middle. But my list really doesn't matter. Vollkan was testing me, and I am saying to vollkan that I am not a scum. That is also why I came up with the two list. On the first list, I put myself at the very top of the ladder because I wanted vollkan to see that I am not forgetting that I know I am a town.

[Near]

Could you guess my reasoning?

I'll take a guess:

You just speculated that oldest/youngest might accrue an investigative power, and you also speculated that there may be an age division leading to it being a good idea to have good doctors at both ends. Thus, I think the first list you produced is based on an assumption that you, Near, are protown.

The alternative list you have given looks like an attempt to be more objective - by not giving yourself the "youngest" position which you have speculated to be likely to gain a power.

Pretty good, I actually forgot to consider the age division part, but my list seemed to have worked out well for that.

I also thought there *could* be some kind of benefit for being exactly in the middle, so in the original list, I put CKD there, and in the second list, I put someone other than shaft.ed.

[Near]

Wow, people think I am stupid..

Anyway, based on what ARB said, I am going to submit a new list:


1) Erg0 31
2) curiouskarmadog 60
3) vollkan 25
4) PookyTheMagicalBear 20
5) Adel 30
6) shaft.ed 40

[Near]

Post #780

*facepalm* Says the guy who hammered, then wished he could un-hammer.

I really thought that would earn a headdesk.

Doesn't this sound like shaft.ed is "excusing" my voting on TG? It sounds like he's agreeing with Vollkan, that my mistake was most likely due to my lack of experience OR like everyone seems to think my immaturity.

But then, he says:

Ummm... Did you guys read the end of yesterday?

He seems to think that I am a scum. Yes, it's possible that upon a re-read, shaft.ed changed his mind. But it is very possible that his first "headdesk" post was to simply agree with vollkan.

Also, this above post (#840) is a response to CDK and Erg0's votes that (to me) look like "random votes" to get the conversations going, but shaft.ed doesn't seem to realize this. It's possible shaft.ed could have meant "let's get serious guys" but he starts the post with "Ummm" which to me, sounds like shaft.ed is simply missing this fact.

In my experience, scums are usually less logical in certain situations because they are more focused in looking less like a mafia, then to genuinely looking for a scum himself.

Also, read my post at 787.

Vote Shaft.ed

[Near]

Post #780

*facepalm* Says the guy who hammered, then wished he could un-hammer.

I really thought that would earn a headdesk.

Doesn't this sound like shaft.ed is "excusing" my voting on TG? It sounds like he's agreeing with Vollkan, that my mistake was most likely due to my lack of experience OR like everyone seems to think my immaturity.

This headdesk argument is complete bunk. The player who ellicited headdesks my previous game with vollkan to which I am refering to was Roach in 492 who turned up as scum. Headdesk is performed in response to seriously illogical arguments regardless of alignment.

"The player who ellicited headdesks my previous game with vollkan to which I am refering to was Roach in 492 who turned up as scum. "

How is that relevant? It's not.

But, OK, my headdesk argument sucked. And I was wrong about random voting by Erg0 and CDK. But read my post 780.

shaft.ed, to me, it looks like you are picking on a guy who made a mistake of being suspicious before day 1. you think i'm a good lynch target, I am a newbie, showed sign of being emotional (which you think you can take advantage of by keep accusing me) and I said stupid thing like "I wish I can take my vote back."

my vote stands. it's shaft.ed

[Near]

Near, your "outburst" of emotion following the TG lynch was one of the scummiest things I have seen in my breif time on MS. I have more against you but lack the time right now to put a case together. I will get that up in the next day or so.

Yes, I got emotional. Do I think my posting that I wish I can take my vote back immediately after the hammer would make me less scummy? No. I knew that my doing so would make people to become suspicious of me. At the same time, I don't believe it is the scummiest thing you've ever seen. I can imagine someone else regretting immediately after hammering someone, before knowing the alignment of the person lynched. And I am sure this has happened before (although I am new so I haven't seen it). And if it hasn't happened frequently, my guess is it's because the person hammering was afraid of getting the suspicion for exactly what you are accusing me of.

[Near]

I have to ask one thing: if you knew it would make you look scummy, why did you post it?

Hmm. A question no one asked before. I haven't thought about it.

If I have to make a guess, maybe I wanted people to know how I felt. If TG turned scum, then I did a good job so my posting that I want to take my vote back would make me look less smart but this would not bother me as much as TG turning town and me having to take most of the blame?

[Near]

So, you basically said it for the purpose of reducing your own culpability?

Dang. Pretty sharp response.
That was only my guess. So maybe.

[Near]

As I said, 1 is valid evidence of a link. 2 is pure conspiracy and I cannot accept it. 3 is also valid evidence of distancing. This really looks a lot like you just deflecting culpability for your vote onto someone that attacked you for your vote.

Let me think about that.

No, I don't think so. Yes, I felt bad after TG's mislynch, but I am not so immature (contrary to what everyone else seems to think) as to try to find someone to blame so people would more easily forget my mistake.

Even if you think 2 above is pure conspiracy(which I disagree with you and I think I know why), don't 1 and 3 give you some kind of suspicion that shaft.ed is a scum?

[Near]

Only your guess? Why do you have to guess what the purpose of your own actions are? And you're the one accusing me of making up reasons after the fact.

Because sometimes I act without thinking, don't you ever do that.
At least I didn't try to make up a fake reasons to try to cover myself.

[Near]

It isn't a question of immaturity. You cocked up badly (no matter what your alignment) and so you turned around and tried to pull arguments against an accuser. "Poor little me. I made an oopsie-daisy and now all the bad scum are picking on me."

I really don't think so. Yes, if I were you, I would have thought that what you are saying is likely, but it's not. It's because you think my evidences suck/not enough whatever - he still feels scummy to me.

Explain to me why 2 is not conspiracy.

Can I ask other people to help me answer this? because I am not sure, I wrote down a paragraph, but it doesn't make sense to me. Yet, I still feel like I am right. anyone?

[Near]

Explain to me why 2 is not conspiracy.

OK. Let me try again.

I've actually never played in a game with unabashed bandwagon hopping to the extreme that Adel was using. The times I have seen heavy bandwagoning it has been either from scum or from townies that end up outing power roles, so I don't like it. The uses of heavy bandwagoning in my experience are 1) to pressure a player into a poor response thus building a case on them [usually scum], 2) to counterattack players who vote the wagoner [generally from scum] or 3) simply to generate discussion and latch onto "odd" reactions to the wagon

. Since Adel was jumping off wagons before they could get going I knew it wasn't #1.

So I wanted to see how she would react to some votes being added to her in order to discern between 2 & 3.

She didn't heavily attack me or CKD for our votes and she did point out JiveMachines discrepency, this lead me to believe she was motivated to move the game out of random and generate some useful leads. My post saying as such was obviously lazy and incorrect.

According to your argument, if you really wanted to discern between 2 & 3, shouldn't you have "voted for the wagoner" and see if she counterattacks you?

How Adel will respond to your votes on her and how that depends on her alignment are not at all covered by any of your premises.

Shaft.ed argument sounds so logical, yet it has a flaw. I admit I didn't notice this before until now, but maybe this is where "feel" and "hunch" didn't let me accept the alternative conclusion.

[Near]

Then he says that the fact she did not attack himself or CKD ruled out 2, thus leading him to 3. I don't know how you get that his premises don't cover it - if Adel does not attack back, then 2) is invalid.

Because according to shaft.ed, if 2) is true, then Adel will counter attack wagoners.
Attacking Adel does not make shaft.ed a wagoner. Therefore, Adel not attacking shaft.ed does not make 2) invalid.
If anything, shaft.ed should have attacked whoever Adel was attacking in order to test 2)

[Near]

Beside the minute details about his logic, still there is something quite weird about his argument. It just sounds so fake.

a) Do you guys think shaft.ed REALLY believed those 3 scenarios he mentioned cover majority of the cases for random wagoning?
b) If he really believed that, then shaft.ed is completely convinced that Adel is a townie?

[Near]

Then he says that the fact she did not attack himself or CKD ruled out 2, thus leading him to 3. I don't know how you get that his premises don't cover it - if Adel does not attack back, then 2) is invalid.

Because according to shaft.ed, if 2) is true, then Adel will counter attack wagoners.

Attacking Adel does not make shaft.ed a wagoner. Therefore, Adel not attacking shaft.ed does not make 2) invalid.
If anything, shaft.ed should have attacked whoever Adel was attacking in order to test 2)

Bolded section is where I misunderstood the original post, isn't it.

[Near]

I am ashamed.

Unvote

[Near]

Vote Shafted

Vollkan says not enough evidence.
But there is some evidence.
and there is hunch.
and no, it's not because i made a mistake day 1

[Near]

Unvote

[Near]

Because he's L-1

[Near]

48 hour is still a lot of time, and I would like to hear from vollkan, CDK, and Pooky to say things.

And Erg0 and Adel both went up in scum-iness in my radar.

[Near]

shafted your thoughts on Near unvoting you because you were at -1?...was it a ploy to save his ass, or does he really want information in the next 48 hours?

CKD, 48 hours is a lot of time.

[Near]

I am going to do a re-read tonight, and hopefully post something more meaningful later. First few thoughts: shaft.ed is still at the top of my scummy list. In fact his latest post:

Well obviously letting Near be fired will not bother me.

Here is what I find weird: even if shaft.ed suspects that I am a scum, when he finds out that I will be fired in 48 hours if no one else is lynched, I would expect shaft.ed to at least *reconsider* if he's making a mistake lynching me. The fact that he maintained "he's fine with letting me die" is something I would expect from a scum.

Both Adel and Erg0 so quickly jumping to vote on shaft.ed is also weird. It's especially weird for Erg0 who hasn't expressed his suspicions toward shaft.ed before (or am I wrong?) 48 hours is still 2 days away, and they voted immediately, which imo make both of them more scummy.

[Near]

Near, if shafted was up for lynching in 48 hours..would you act any differently than he?

Yes. In fact, when I saw Erg0 and Adel voted for shaft.ed at the same time, that was what I thought. Maybe this was the basis that provoked my suspicion for shaft.ed post.

[Near]

In short: yes, you are wrong. I found him scummiest after my armlx analysis yesterday and I have said that I supported wagoning him today. My vote for shaft.ed should not be a surprise to anyone.

I stand corrected. In that case, I am not surprised by the fact that either you or Adel voted for shaft.ed. In fact, now that I think about it, you guys didn't realize shaft.ed was at L-1 since you claim your votes were made simultaneously.

I would like to hear vollkan's analysis.

[Near]

unvote, vote:near

proving that "too townie" can be a valid tell!

I can actually understand where your suspicion is coming from.

[Near]

Can we bring up Mod's posts in order to make a point on a player(s) alignment in this game?

[Near]

I'm not entirely sure what to make of it. If I were a in his situation I would prefer anyone's lynch over mine since I know my alignment as town but cannot know anyone else's. Therefore lynching anyone but yourself would be in the town's best interest.

That is obvious. I'd rather anyone else other than vollkan get fired than myself . I unvoted you because we were given a 48 hour window in which we get to discuss who else to lynch. But in retrospect, I do wish that I didn't unvote and someone else just hammered you.

Add on the fact that I'm his leading suspect for scum and his wanting to be careful just doesn't compute. However, we've seen how wishy washy he has been throughout the game. Also I agree that I found Adel and Erg0's quick votes on the troubling side. Adel's moreso as, has been pointed out, Erg0 has recently called for my lynch.

Because, while I thought and still think you are our best scum suspect, it doesn't hurt to be careful.

I'm also curious who he was worried would come in and drop a frivolous hammer. Pooky hardly ever posts or votes, and CKD & vollkan are two very deliberate players. I seriously can't imagine any of them wandering into the thread voting and screaming HAMMAH!!!@!11 without any thought.

For argument's sake alone, it's a good point.

I would write this up a scum trying to look townie by playing the caution card. But Adel's vote does give me pause. I'm looking at this the way vollkan is. Is there anyone that who is more scummy than Near? I obviously don't think there is given my previous posting, but I am a bit worried about Adel's recent play. I should have time to get in a read of her before deadline.

Also, I'm getting uncomfortable with Pooky skating through this game without posting. While I don't think this is the situation for pressuring a lurker, I would seriously like to see him post.

If you are a scum, this is a good post.

[Near]

says he didn't actually count his + scoring system.

What the hell was it for then, just to look like you're scum hunting

?

Do you really have to ask this question? What do you think my answer would be. I think it's obvious. Shaft.ed ++

And yes, almost immediately after I submitted vote, I wasn't sure anymore.

I kept hitting refresh wanting to hear Adel's or CKD's approval

.

What the hell is that last line about. Before you didn't even know Adel existed. And why are you seeking approval from anyone? And why specifically Adel and CKD, didn't you just suspect CKD as scum trying to mislynch TG?

[/quote]

Specifically Adel, because she wanted me to vote against TG and call it a day. So maybe I thought she'd approve. I am not sure why I wanted CKD's approval... oh that's right, he wanted me to spend more time thoroughly reading past posts to do scum hunting.

[Near]

says he didn't actually count his + scoring system.

What the hell was it for then, just to look like you're scum hunting

?

Do you really have to ask this question? What do you think my answer would be. I think it's obvious. Shaft.ed ++

It's not obvious. What is the point of a scoring system if not to look back over it to see what your feelings were in summation?

The point was exactly that. I just failed to execute it the way I planned.

[Near]

Anyway, here is something that I found interesting. This dosent' really defend my case actually it seems to incriminate me, but in case I die and people miss it: I want to a reference to our Mod's post #806

I advise you to take the FTAs instructions literally instead of acting in accordance to what you think the twist will be. This is in your own interest, trust me.

This was pretty much in response to my theory that youngest person or the oldest person may get a special power. We know the twists are pre-determined, so mod knew that it is in our best interest to keep the people we thought was a townie out of the youngest spot. Also, at the time ARB made this post, there was only one age distribution suggested (which was by me).

The list was this:

CDK 15
Adel 20
Shafted 25
Ergo 35
Near 40
Vollkan 45

My thinking is that, if ARB's post was a direct response to this list, then CDK is safe. If it was my thinking in general (that we should put people we do not suspect at youngest and oldest), then it leads to a conclusion that people we thought were suspicious (at least one) at the time are indeed scums.

[Near]

I dont follow that last post at all.

Basically:

1) I suggested that we should assign people we trust highest and lowest ages
2) ARB hinted that is not in our best interest.
3) If ARB is on townie side, this means that people we trust are not scums.
4) Specifically, there was only one age list at the time (submitted by me) which had CDK at the lowest age. This makes me think that CDK is a townie.

[Near]

Regarding what ARB said about strategies for deciding on people's ages: I know it doesn't help my case, but it's a information I feel could be useful later.

Back to the important topic. Saving me.

Vote=shaft.ed

[Near]

To be honest, i'm not as sure as I was before. But Shaft.ed is still my best suspect. At this point tho, I am willing to vote for anyone other than vollkan (even CKD) if my vote can hammer them.

[Near]

Reminder: deadline is 7:40 PM tonight. Unfortunately, I am in the process of moving so I don't think I can check this game regularly. I will try to sign on by 7:00 PM ish and see if changing my vote can lynch someone.

Can you guys try to find a best lynch candidate before then.

Possibly my last post;

Adel: I am 26
Vollkan, please do a re-read. At this point, I have confidence in you.
Please for my sake get some discussions going and try to find the best lynch.

[Near]

I am surprised. I thought we'd lose because shaft.ed didn't have the day kill. I thought for sure vollkan would ask shaft.ed to daykill. I expected shaft.ed to either say he is going out of town or just lurk until the deadline hits.

Good job shaft.ed

[Near]

To be honest, if I was the last scum, I'd probably lost. After pooky used his day kill, I would have confessed immediately that I don't have a daykill. Because I would have thought that even if vollkan doesn't suspect me, he will surely make me do a daykill to end the game. That's what I was thinking anyway. Very fun game to follow even after I died.

[Near]

Really good game setup ABR. The twist dynamic really made this an enjoyable break from the standard night-day thing.

I second.