Mini 642: Bodyguard 7: (Game Over)

[bird1111]

Vote Count:
TDC (1): Slaine Hayes
Slaine Hayes (1): TDC
jonathantan86 (1): CallMeLiam
TheSweatpantsNinja (1): jonathantan86
CallMeLiam (1): BridgesAndBaloons
BridgesAndBaloons (1): TheSweatPantsNinja

Not voting (1): hohum

With 7 alive it is 4 to lynch.

Giving hohum until 48 hours from when I sent the prod to pick it up before I start looking for a replacement.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

It's the best lead I have. You should know that someone saying "I can only assume you're scum" on page 2 means something drastically different then saying it on page 15.

I don't feel like you did much Page 2 couching.

I don't see how you came to think that from my posts. I don't feel that at all.
Also, please explain to me how this comment about being a "big secret" is relevant to scum-hunting, if it is. Even if I was dancing around sticking my tounge out and saying I have a big secret, would that be scummy?

Its relevant when you spend more time caring about how people react to whether or not you ought to completely explain yourself than about whether or not there should be claims day 2.

Also, you completely ignored most of my questions.

me wrote:

Explain to me how looking for slip-ups of scum is not scum-hunting.
[. . . ]
What about my reasons for CML or weak? Are there any other better reasons than that at this moment?

See above, where I wrote: "I also doubt CML is any more likely to be scum because he miscalculated what conditions it would take to automatically win. To what end would he be "misleading the town" by warning that its not an automatic win if the cop investigates the bodyguard? What behavior is that likely to shift to the scum's advantage? "

The better reason is you manufacturing "controversy" in place of scumhunting.

[CallMeLiam]

A spot of really quick thinking tells me that if the cop investigates the bodyguard night one, then the win is no longer guaranteed. I know it's unlikely but just wanted to throw it out there.

Either you're scum, or you're making a heinous error. Considering that I

specifically

said earlier that:

If we lynched a scum day 1, then we automatically win if both the cop and bodyguard claim.

Also realize that the percentages I worked out don't take into account scum-hunting and cop results over n1.

meaning that the cop could literally not investigate anyone and we'd still win automatically.

I have to assume that you're scum trying to mislead the town.

unvote: CallMeLiam
vote: CallMeLiam

If the percentages don't take something into account, then I assumed that taking them into account might change the result. It was also nothing more than a quick think and having made it clear that I wanted to see your working I think it's clear that I don't 100% understand or agree with it.

[bird1111]

Looking for a hohum replacement now.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I don't feel like you did much Page 2 couching.

As cool as the word "couching" is, I looked it up, and I'm still puzzled what you mean. Are you saying that I haven't looked at evidence on page 2 yet?

Its relevant when you spend more time caring about how people react to whether or not you ought to completely explain yourself than about whether or not there should be claims day 2.

It's extremely important there should be claims day 2. I wasn't even considering that people

wouldn't

do that. Bottom of the line, (i just looked at the other scenarios), and no matter what, it helps for any power roles that are still alive to claim.
I would want to explain if people don't believe this, so it's important if anyone needs me to explain myself.

Also, I care about the reactions because I'm

scumhunting

. Scum might want to put doubt in my plan (since it's bad for them) by saying things like it's not an automatic win if they both claim and a scum is dead.

please answer this question with a yes or no response:

Even if I was dancing around sticking my tounge out and saying I have a big secret, would that be scummy?

Also, you completely ignored most of my questions.
me wrote:
Explain to me how looking for slip-ups of scum is not scum-hunting.
[. . . ]
What about my reasons for CML or weak? Are there any other better reasons than that at this moment?

See above, where I wrote: "I also doubt CML is any more likely to be scum because he miscalculated what conditions it would take to automatically win. To what end would he be "misleading the town" by warning that its not an automatic win if the cop investigates the bodyguard? What behavior is that likely to shift to the scum's advantage? "

see right after that, where

To what end would he be "misleading the town" by warning that its not an automatic win if the cop investigates the bodyguard? What behavior is that likely to shift to the scum's advantage?

If everyone doesn't feel like it'll be an auto-win, then the bodyguard and cop might not claim Day 2. This is the exact thing I was afraid of. In the cases I described it helps if both (or if only one is alive) of them claims on Day 2. I need to make sure that everyone understands or believes this.

The better reason is you manufacturing "controversy" in place of scumhunting.[/quote]

uh, no. Did you read my post on 46?

Also, I need you to

specifically

answer this question.
"Explain to me how looking for slip-ups of scum is not scum-hunting."

Also, are there any other bigger leads other than CML or I right now? Because if there aren't, then you can't criticize me for using weak reasons.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Sorry, TDC. I missed your questions earlier.

It seems like a pointless debate. Have you learned anything from it?

Yes. TSPN is admantly not picking a side. He's being really careful. Also, he seems weakly* defensive of CML. I expect this information to be far more useful later in the game, but it's nice getting these details.

*emphasis on the weak part.

What do you see in his post that suggests otherwise?

Nothing. You're right. I just wanted to see what brought

you

to say that.

[jonathantan86]

A spot of really quick thinking tells me that if the cop investigates the bodyguard night one, then the win is no longer guaranteed. I know it's unlikely but just wanted to throw it out there.

If the percentages don't take something into account, then I assumed that taking them into account might change the result. It was also nothing more than a quick think and having made it clear that I wanted to see your working I think it's clear that I don't 100% understand or agree with it.

CML, what was your working? The percentages won't change because the probability of winning is 100% already and both scum-hunting and cop investigations can only increase that number. (All this is assuming both power roles survive, of course.)

Fixed your tags. In the future put quotation marks around the person's name when using quote tags in order to make the quote tags work.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Also, are there any other bigger leads other than CML or I right now? Because if there aren't, then you can't criticize me for using weak reasons.

Um, yes. Yes, I can. I think this thing that you are calling a scumtell is in fact a null-tell, and as such, I don't support the wagon. Not only that, I think you intentionally generated this thing you are calling a scumtell, which is why I'm voting for you.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

please answer this question with a yes or no response:

Even if I was dancing around sticking my tounge out and saying I have a big secret, would that be scummy?

Also, I need you to

specifically

answer this question.
"Explain to me how looking for slip-ups of scum is not scum-hunting."

Let me get this straight. In the beginning of the day, when there are little leads in the game, and I choose to follow one, you disagree and thus I'm scummy? And what wagon are you talking about? I'm the only one voting and no one has voiced any opinions to follow the wagon.
Do you honestly think I'm dumb enough to follow my vote for the rest of the day? Did you stop to think that maybe, just maybe, I was pushing for a reaction from CML?

Oh, and since my vote accomplished as much as it's probably going to,

unvote

I don't like votes that just "sit."

I really don't like how you have ignored questions I have directly asked you twice already in the span of two pages. This is the third time I have asked these questions (if I counted correctly). Anyway, at least tell me why you're avoiding the questions.
If you don't answer at least

that

. Well, [insert threat here].

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I'm pretty clearly

implying

this, but I'll spell it out: I don't think you're actually looking for slips. If you are, you're doing a poor job of it. I think you're faking it.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I don't think you're actually looking for slips.

Earlier:

I'm starting to feel like BAB has been calling so much attention to whether he's going to reveal the "big secret"

just so he could find a "slip" to jump on

.

You can choose not to believe me that I've been looking for slips when I actually attacked the first person who made a mistake. I explained why what he did benefited scum. Do you not understand my reasonings for attacking CML?

Anyway, as far as I can tell, you haven't made any new things for me to defend myself against, correct? I'm not trying to change the subject, and I'll defend myself if you bring out more points, but for now...

I don't like this lurker*.

Vote: Slaine Hayes

*

Hohum wasn't as much of a lurker as he just probably completely forgot about this game. Slain, on the otherhand, hasn't posted for 3 days. There could be other lurkers but Slain was the first to pop out to me.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

omg why I posted that I think I understand what you're attacking me for.

You are accusing me of manufacturing fake scum-tells in order to attack townies for weak reasonings? Is that right?

At this point in the game, I don't see how that's scummy. None of my votes/attacks in the begining are really going to affect how I personally am going to be suspecting the most later on. Even if I was manufacturing fake reasons (which I wasn't), those reasons were CLEARLY weak enough so that they wouldn't create a lynch. So why would scum do that?
In fact, regardless of whether I made up reasons or not, me attacking CML is an attempt to get reactions. It also unearthed a lurker, Slain. I'm more than happy what pro-town goodness resulted from my attacks. Do you consider that all of the reactions provoked are not pro-town?

[CallMeLiam]

CML, what was your working? The percentages won't change because the probability of winning is 100% already and both scum-hunting and cop investigations can only increase that number. (All this is assuming both power roles survive, of course.)

I honestly don't remember my exact train of thought there, it wasn't much though.

[TDC]

Yes. TSPN is admantly not picking a side. He's being really careful.

At the same time he is, however, clearly antagonizing you, which I can't see as "careful".

Slain, on the otherhand, hasn't posted for 3 days. There could be other lurkers but Slain was the first to pop out to me.

My last post was just before his last post. Any reason why he "popped out" first? I'm wondering, because you had answered my questions from that very post a few hours earlier.

In fact, regardless of whether I made up reasons or not, me attacking CML is an attempt to get reactions. It also unearthed a lurker, Slain.

Reactions by whom? CML or other players?
And how did attacking CML show that Slaine is lurking?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

You are accusing me of manufacturing fake scum-tells in order to attack townies for weak reasonings? Is that right?

Yes. And I think the whole "should I reveal my reasoning" thing was an extension of that. Also, for scum, appearing to be scumhunting has benefits beyond just trying to get town players lynched. It makes you look pro-town, as well.

At the same time he is, however, clearly antagonizing you, which I can't see as "careful".

You'd think so.

And how did attacking CML show that Slaine is lurking?

I was thinking the same thing.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

At the same time he is, however, clearly antagonizing you, which I can't see as "careful".

However, he avoided taking a side on the issue. He decided that he was completely indifferent and didn't choose one side or the other. I consider this as being careful. I was very puzzled why he was doing it which I was I asked numerous time why he was being so indifferent.

My last post was just before his last post. Any reason why he "popped out" first? I'm wondering, because you had answered my questions from that very post a few hours earlier.

Cuz I've seen a weak town-tell coming from your posts.

In fact, regardless of whether I made up reasons or not, me attacking CML is an attempt to get reactions. It also unearthed a lurker, Slain.

Reactions by whom? CML or other players?
And how did attacking CML show that Slaine is lurking?

Reactions by CML and the other players.
One reaction was for Slaine to sit on the sidelines and not voice his oppinion on the matter. I mean, if two people are arguing that're both not scum, chances are the other scum is waiting to see what happenss.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

ebwop I think I addressed all of TSPN's points in my last post also. Let me know if I didn't.

[TDC]

At the same time he is, however, clearly antagonizing you, which I can't see as "careful".

However, he avoided taking a side on the issue. He decided that he was completely indifferent and didn't choose one side or the other. I consider this as being careful. I was very puzzled why he was doing it which I was I asked numerous time why he was being so indifferent.

I think you've missed my point. Openly attacking someone has much more potential to "look scummy" than taking a side on the "should BAB reveal"-issue. Quite frankly, I can't see how picking either side could be seen as particularly scummy. Thus not taking a side on it seems to be a null tell to me.

I mean, if two people are arguing that're both not scum, chances are the other scum is waiting to see what happenss.

What do you mean, the

other

scum? Who's the first one?

[TDC]

To elaborate a bit on the first point, because I fear it's still not clear:
Being careful as scum means trying to avoid questions where your answers could be telling. The question whether you should reveal or not does not seem to be such a question, either answer is acceptable and no answer will be proven wrong during the course of the game.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I might be ignoring this game right now because another game I'm in. It's LYLO and I'm devoting my attention to that one. It should be over very soon.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The question whether you should reveal or not does not seem to be such a question, either answer is acceptable and no answer will be proven wrong during the course of the game.

Exactly. Which makes me wonder why bab is making such an issue of something that shouldn't really be an issue.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I'm back. The other game just ended.

What do you mean, the other scum? Who's the first one?

When I originally wrote this, I was trying to include both scenerarios that it was no scum arguing, or one scum and one townie into one sentence. I

ended up mixing up the two. What I meant to say was that "I mean, if two people are arguing that're both not scum, chances are

that one of the scum are waiting to see what happens. If one scum and one townie are arguing, chances are that

the other scum is waiting to see what happens"

Italics are what I added.

The question whether you should reveal or not does not seem to be such a question, either answer is acceptable and no answer will be proven wrong during the course of the game.

You know what, you're right. I think I was reading too much into people's responses this early in the game. Maybe it'll never be an issue.

I just don't like the random voting stage and I want to try to get out of it as soon as possible.

[bird1111]

Alabaska J replaces hohum.

[Alabaska J]

hey rereading, shouldn't take me long.

[Alabaska J]

vote: BaB

Really feels like scum to me hiding behind a strategy that would help the town. Note: not using too townie, as things he has said make me feel this way.

Also, I would like you to explain the maths that make it possible for us to automatically win and whatnot. I don't doubt you, I'm just bad at this kind of stuff usually.