Light-kun wrote: Fishythefish wrote:Light-kun wrote:If Fishy was on the Danny wagon at L-3 and then swapped to Freeko, I think that fishy is scum.
Why do you think I am scum based on this swap, given that both wagons were on townies?
It is because both were town that this is useful and implicates you. You seem to say here that you are not scum as both were town. But if you were town, would you have not presented a new case or tried to expand your thoughts. As vig, I knew I could kill two birds instead of one. So, my suspect (or someone like DDD who threw me for a loop) could easily be eliminated. You don't have this power and still seem to be subtly looking for the more scummy since, if scum, you would know who is/isn't a townie.
(obvious correction made)
1) Minor point- you seem to be saying I think my switch a towntell. I am not arguing this, I am arguing it is null (as a vote alone- case analysis is a different matter).
2) I don’t quite understand. You are saying I should have tried to present a new case or expand my thoughts. At that time, we had two players who were by far and away scummier than all the others. I made my thoughts on these players clear. Your last sentence I don’t understand. If you are saying that I was subtly looking for the scummier of DDD and freeko, you are right except for the word subtly. I wanted to lynch the scummier of the two scummiest players, as they were the most likely to be scum. This is pretty much the point I’ve been making for a while now- scum and town alike would vote for the scummier of DDD and freeko from the middle of day 1 (assuming town thought one or other of them were scummy).
L-k wrote:
Fishythefish wrote:
L-k wrote:And while Nuwen has made errors, Fishy seems unconfortable with the analysis, as though he fears the possible conclusion of Fishy=scum. Sure, town would too, but I might just be reading too much into it.
Well, if you think I disagree with the analysis simply because it fingers me (as well as two other players) as more likely scum, then that is scummy. In fact, I just don't see Nuwen's logic for thinking that the late switchers are more likely scum. My other disagreement was over point 3), which I think is factually wrong.
1. Why are you not denying it and just agreeing with it as a possibility?
2. Well, arbitrarily (and based somewhere from experience), people tend to think that certain parts of a wagon are more likely to be scum based on the person's play style, manner of the switch of vote, etc.
3. I forget what you're claiming is factually wrong. May look at this later.
1. I don’t understand where you are coming from on this one. I am denying Nuwen’s logic, I don’t think his conclusion that the people who switched later are likely to be scum is valid.
2. I certainly agree that judging scum based on play style and manner of switch is valid- on the other hand, if you are saying that certain parts of wagons always contain more scum, I disagree. You have to look at the circumstances of the wagon- and in the case where there are two realistic lynches, both townies, I don’t think late voters look any worse than early ones.
3. Not very important.
L-k wrote:
Not really. Serial killer should always rationalize that killing the mafia is better because he cannot win if mafia lives. Mafia should think the same thing. As a result, Prisoner's dilemma is a theoretical town win. (This assumes mafia cannot no kill and sk doesn't have a vest.)
You misunderstand- you also assume the SK knows the mafia. Unimportant.
L-k wrote:
Fishythefish wrote:I think that DDD's wagon is more interesting than freeko's. By the time freeko's got rolling in any serious way,
This is where you joined....which you exclude. Okay, go on.
Fishythefish wrote: it was clear that he or DDD would be lynched,
Maybe for fear of being called out on it but did anyone actually claim this? Why not make a case on someone else?
Covering both these points- I feel that before I joined freeko’s wagon, freeko’s aggressive attacks on DDD made it highly likely that one of the two would be lynched. No other player was close to them in scumminess. No, noone said this yesterday. Why not make a case on someone else? Well of course I was looking at other players, and thinking about the possibility that neither of the main suspects might be scum. But there was no-one approaching these two in scumminess.
L-k wrote:
Fishythefish wrote: and scum have an easy time sitting back and voting for the scummier of the two.
Which would then include the later of Freeko's (or DDD's) wagon.
Yes. If the scum weren’t on these wagons to start with, it was easy for them to join. Alternatively, if townies weren’t on these wagons to start with, it was the right thing to do to join when they thought freeko/DDD was scummy. This comes back, again, to the point that late on day 1 the sensible courses of actions for both townies and scum were the same- since the scum's sole concern was to vote like a townie, vote analysis becomes pretty useless.
L-k wrote:
Fishythefish wrote:If there is scum impetus behind a wagon, it is most likely either right at the beginning of freeko's or at any point on DDD's wagon.
Particularly with the Freeko wagon, why are you not making a case? You're just stating opinion while being mildly amiable to everyone. Nuwen isn't in this game to do all the work you know.
Agreed that serious case analysis needs to be done. I will do this, when I have more time (this will happen, it could be a few more days though). However, I think this is slightly oddly targeted- in day 2, there has been practically zero case analysis, and a lot of vote analysis, in which I have been disagreeing with other players. It seems odd to accuse me of being “mildly amiable” and attacking me for not doing something that noone in the town has done. As for stating opinion, Nuwen has in affect labelled three players as scummier than the others. I disagree. This seems pretty important, and so I'm arguing my side.
L-k wrote:
Fishythefish wrote: After this of course scum may have joined/moved wagons, but probably not in a way which is different from a townie.
So, you're either saying townie would be just as scummy in hopping or scum would be just as innocent in hopping. Meh.... I see specious reasoning here. Where's the proof? The back up? *Ding* IRONY! (Is referring to self, shut up.)
I have explained my position on this multiple times, before you made your post and in this post. "Proof"? I am pointing out what I perceive to be a flaw in Nuwen's reasoning. Proof does not come into it. You are attacking me in an absurd way, isolating statements which do not stand alone, and ignoring my explanations and arguments.
L-k wrote:
You are telling me this for what purpose?
I was trying to express my opinion that vote analysis is most useful in conjunction with case analysis. There had been no case analysis done yet and I felt the vote analysis that had been done to be lacking.
L-k wrote:
This entire reason reads as bullshit.
That’s really helpful. I disagree- can you point out where you don’t agree with me and why, wherever you haven’t already covered that point?
@ Howard; my main point about my first vote for freeko is that, if you read it only in the context of what had happened when I made it (rather than all that followed it), it no more looks like an attempt to bandwagon than any other first vote for a player.
