Newbie 764 - Game Over

[Korts]

Hi!

I'll be your IC (Inexperience Challenged, meaning I have a couple games under my belt) for this game. I hope you'll enjoy your time with us.

A couple notes of interest: there is a link to the mafia wiki at the top of your page. Feel free to browse and read; however, I advise you not to take every article word for word, some of the things discussed there may be out of date or subjective. Meta changes relatively fast on MafiaScum.

I specifically suggest you read the Commonly Used Abbreviations article. You will find many phrases that will pop up in in-game discussion.

Otherwise, play fair, and try not to get personal. If you have any questions, turn to me, Kairyuu (the other IC), or the mod, and we will help you.

[Korts]

On that note;

vote: Infinis

Familiar faces deserve proper greeting.

[Korts]

Hi Kairyuu.

Chaos, it is important that any vote that is designed to make discussion out of nothing be

arbitrary

and not

random

. Make up something. Have a reason, any reason. Just make sure it isn't random, because random votes have nothing that can spark discussion.

Also Kairyuu, I hatehatehate when somebody states explicitly that their "random" vote is random. It takes away the point of the vote. The only reason I can see for you to that is because you want to diminish the responsibilities associated with voting, and as town you should have no reason to.

unvote, vote: Kairyuu

[Korts]

@Chaos: Quote:
Once the game progresses and discussion develops I will have more solid arguments and evidence to use as a basis.



Any reason you can't try to get the discussion going yourself? Why is it that you need to wait for other people to start the discussion.

I admit that I did little to initate discussion, but as the posts above mine were little more than abitrary votes themselves, I didn't have much to build upon, and whilst I was unsure as to how to begin discussion, it certainly seems to have begun as a reaction to my random vote. But as I don't have any reason (even an abitrary one) to let my vote linger on someone who has yet to post, I'll

Unvote

The thing about theory-related discussion is that it doesn't actually help scumhunting, since a lot of the stances that can be taken are entirely subjective and not a scumtell either way.

I found Korts's accusation of Kairyuu to be fabricated from air, although I appreciate the effort to get the conversation going. The vote itself was actually accompagned with an arbitrary reason (voting for the person before him). Or perhaps our definitions of arbitrary differ, Korts (random=no reason, arbitrary=meaningless reason)?

No, you misread me. What I was saying is that Kairyuu explicitly stated that he was random voting when it was clear that he was, as evidenced by the following quote:

Random vote: Chaos40

for being the last person to post before me.

[Korts]

It's not the fact that Kairyuu's vote was arbitrary that bugs me. It's the fact that he explicitly stated that it's random, pre-emptively defending against any fake cases that might be built on it and giving him another reason to hop off the wagon in case it builds up. If Kairyuu is scum, Chaos is more likely as well--random voting a scumpartner is not unheard of by far, and with the attempt at denying any real responsibility for the vote I smell distancing. (Note that this percieved connection is only valid if one of the two turn scum, with it being more valid if Kairyuu is the one that turns scum.)

[Korts]

I wonder, does the fact that it has become a serious vote since I made it change your opinion of it? As it stands, I didn't like Chaos' response. He backtracked a good deal when I questioned him, and I find that suspicious. So yeah, the vote is serious.

My opinion? This shift in seriousness makes things interesting, but not as much as your comment as above quoted. The shift might seem harmless, and justified, on the one hand. On the other hand, this shift hadn't been made clear in any way before your comment in quoted, therefore any validity or credibility it might have is immediately questionable.

Also, you say he backtracked, when all he did was vote on random numbers and have theory explained to him, in return to which he unvoted--a natural response when you're proven that your vote is essentially useless. Do you think that lack of knowledge or opinion in the business of random voting is a scumtell in any way? You aren't looking at this in the context of alignment, you are just trying to force a wiki-tell onto a situation.

[Korts]

It's a valid strategy, but quite a foolish one to use in a Newbie game. When an IC votes a Newbie partner, said partner is going to feel rather more pressured than if anyone else voted them; therefore making them much more likely to slip up and get lynched.

I would consider it poor form.

This is a fair point, and from the single previous game of ours this is what I'd expect of you. How many games have you IC'd?

This is true of all distancing tells.

Naturally; I'm just adding comments that seem like common knowledge to you for the sake of the newer players.

By the way, as a note: it should also be said that when noticing a connection, you should always note the direction that is implied in. For instance, something makes you think A and B are connected; it's not irrelevant whether A committed a tell that implies the connection or B; in the former case, A is scummier than B, but if B was the one who slipped, he is the more suspicious. It is a common mistake, one that I still frequently unconsciously make, to consider A and B equally suspicious, but this is a wrong assumption and can lead to false conclusions.

(sorry for the double posting, I haven't slept much and forgot to complete my post)

[Korts]

If his vote is arbitrary, whether or not that is a bad thing, wouldn't you want to preface it with that fact? Assuming he were town, and a BW did start on the target of his arbitrary vote, if he then decided to simply remove his arbitrary vote, wouldn't it seem like a huge scum tell by someone merely removing an arbitrary vote? By saying it was arbitrary, no real meaning will be read into him removing it.

Note that all first votes are arbitrary due to there not being anything to base them on. It is not to be assumed otherwise. Therefore the act of explicitly prefacing the bolded vote with the word "random" seems like a conscious maneuver, and one that has purpose. There are no good pro-town motives other than fishing for reactions (which should only be done if you're not achieving it by doing something scummy) for this.

Note that these are what I mean by random and arbitrary: random is based on nothing at all, and decided only by luck/chance/call it whatever; arbitrary is based on something, anything, and is decided by cognitive functions of the player. I don't care if you vote for a player having a stupid avatar or because their name sounds silly, just make note of the fact that

randomly

voting is counterproductive.

He initially just said he was waiting on discussion to get going, but did not pull the vote. It was not until I pressed him further that he unvoted. He did not unvote when the theory was explained. He unvoted when I kept questioning him. Quite possibly an attempt to placate me, which shows he is hesitant to enter a debate. This, in turn, implies that he does not want to be put in the spotlight, which is a scummy mentality.

I didn't notice the delay in unvoting. Noted, thank you.

Kai's Lesson 1 of being a good scumhunter: The town does not need to know everything about everything at any given time. If they did, then this would only tell the scum exactly what to do. Yes, it is pro-town to share your reasoning, but it is also pro-town to catch scum, and the two things do not always coincide. Use your best judgment as to whether information you have would be best revealed or kept to yourself.

Korts' addendum to Kai's Lesson 1: There are multiple schools of thought; full transparency of motives is a valid stance as well, since if you state all your thoughts and the processes leading up to your decisions it will be easier for town to read you, any flaws in logic will be remedied faster, and your thoughts may evoke others to find important clues as well.

Kairyuu, you seem to not understand the term WIFOM. It is correctly applied only in a situation where there are two scenarios of scum and town and neither is more likely than the other.

And yes, I endorse Tarhalindur's tells in general. Note that, like Kai said, it is important to consider scum and town motives while contemplating a tell's validity.

Personally, it seems to me that quite a lot of discussion has begun in response to my unvote, hardly killing the discussion. Granted, I've become a main target in the eyes of one of our ICs, a dangerous position to be in, but it seems an acceptable trade to get discussion going in earnest.

Sparking discussion by becoming suspicious yourself is not something to be proud of. In fact, if this is done consciously, you are misleading and hurting town, and not actually spawning constructive discussion since you'e drawing suspicion to the only player you know the alignment of.

Japles is commenting only on things that directly reference him--he might be unresponsive scum. Then again he's pleading technical difficulties, so we'll see.

It was quite a fun play to make. I was disappointed that people didn't like it much.

The interesting thing, is that this quote paints you as rather scummy in my eyes. You claim to have read the game in question, where there were several townies played it correctly, and you saw my and Albert's comments on that matter. Why then, would you need to work out how to respond if you were town? Ironically, that is almost exactly the description that Adel, from the time MoS came up with it, gave when linking to the game in MD.

This is a very good point. And I can attest to Kai having played it safe in the past as scum in at least one game; but this is not a significant sample size, Kai, and I don't particularly like the implication that it is.

To be honest, I don't particularly trust the result of your gambit, Kai, since it comes down to whether a particular player felt your arguments were stronger than mine, which opinion may be entirely independent of alignment. At best it is a minor implication toward Sando being scum. His slip is a far stronger point.

I have town reads of Ojanen, and Kairyuu. Japles and Chaos are scummyish. Sando seems like a very good place for my vote.

unvote, vote: Sando

[Korts]

Ugh. This is just like me, getting a wall'o'texter newbie game on my hands... I'll be catching up soon.

[Korts]

I know I have to post some content, but I haven't finished with the catching up (I haven't exactly started, either). Give me today and maybe tomorrow.

[Korts]

Sorry! Got prodded. Unfortunately I have been busy with another game and I'm three pages behind still. I'll catch up soon, promise.

[Korts]

Infinis, what's the point in the vote for me? It seems more of an alibi-vote than anything.

[Korts]

Posting things as I read up.

By the way, as an IC, how come that you know that a quick lynch is almost never good for town, you know i'm at L-2 (you just posted) and yet make no mention of it. Thanks for confirming my views on you.

L-2 is not a serious threat at this game size. This is a very big overreaction, especially considering that you aren't overreacting to the L-2 directly, rather overreacting to a reaction to the L-2.

[Korts]

Catching up still.

Sando's massive multi-posting on page 3 in reaction to Kairyuu and the building pressure seems like desperation, although I can't yet decide whether he's overreacting town or panicky scum.

I do agree with him, though, that he wasn't OMGUSing Kairyuu. OMGUS occurs when the sole reason for voting is out of spite because your target voted you--and that never occurs in action, with any halfway competent players.

Kairyuu is town. His layered gambit(s) look like a not to thoroughly thought out scumhunting plan rather than a post-slip explanation. I'm not comfortable with Sando's absolute certainty that Kai is scum.

With that, I'm up to page 4. I'll keep reading.

[Korts]

What’s an alibi-vote?

What I meant by it is that Infinis, by voting me who is admittedly behind with the game, is ducking out of having to take a real stand and fingering suspicions.

[Korts]

Saying "I agree with Kairyuu/Korts in their debate" =/= taking my case against Chaos and spitting it back out almost verbatim as your own.

Different scenarios even. I didn't manipulate you into doing anything. I predicted what a scum would likely do in a given situation, and you fit the

description, so I voted you.

The problem with this is this was after Sando's reaction. Naturally you aren't expected, nor

should

you describe the theoretical scumreactions to

your gambit, but I'm sure you realize that the credibility of saying that "

that

is what I expected you to do, scum!" is, to say the least,

questionable.

No, you pretty much proved that is was by doing something very similar to what I did myself D1 in the first game I was scum

Didn't you say you were only scum once before?

@all: As a general rule, it is said that discussion is good for the town, and quickly ending the Day is good for the scum. That is based

on some playstyles. Others prefer methodical, swift Days, with a reasonably quick consensus lynch after some scumhunting. I am of that second group. As

long as there is enough information for a lynch, I tend to want that lynch to happen. That is just my style, and other styles are perfectly valid as well.

Addendum: in general, quicklynches are not beneficial, because quicklynches are, by definition, lynches that are

too

fastly executed. However this

does

not

mean that days should drag on indefinitely--considering the three week deadlines in this particular game we don't have to worry about that,

but once we have a concensus there is no reason not to lynch, it'll only stall the game. There's a fine line between too little and too much.

@Kairyuu: Confirm vote: wasn't mentioned in the rules, what is it, a game mechanic or a rhetorical device for weight?

It essentially just means that I have been further convinced that my vote is in the right place. More of a rhetorical device than anything.

Meaning it's useless theatrics, like using bolded

FoS: scummyperson

; there is no practical use, and it doesn't strenghten any argument. Use it if

you will, but there are some like me who just get annoyed by it.


---------------------

Doc Game Kai says: "Don't treat newbies with kid gloves"
This Game Kai says: "Treat scumbuddies with kid gloves"

It's not a complete contradiction, but it is at least a partial contradiction. Changing your play style between games would be a tell in my books. Also,

claiming that you're still developing your play style simply doesn't wash.

This is not relevant. I'm not sure Kai was directly telling you to treat scumbuddies with "kid gloves", it'd make more sense for him to

expect

people to do so. Can you give me a quote, since I can't find this (I'm on a train with no internet access while writing this)?

Also, even if Kai is scum, and we assume he follows his own outspoken advice to treat scumbuddies with kid gloves--he never treated Chaos with kid gloves

like you're saying. He made a perfectly reasonable conversation starter vote, with an argument leading into pseudo-serious discussion. The fact that he was

satisfied with Chaos' reactions to a minor situational accusation means nothing more than Chaos holding up to scrutiny--unless you can give quotes to prove

that Chaos' reactions were not close to being as favorable as Kai presented them to be.

[Korts]

If you think he's scummy enough for a hammer, hammer away. I can catch up during the night.

[Korts]

Bah! I completely forgot about catching up... This is what happens, boys and girls, when you rely on your watched topics list on whether you have any reading to do.

For now, I am split between Kairyuu and (based on Kairyuu's meta read) millar. Kairyuu based on his D2 opening post, because he mentions that scum must have been power role hunting, but doesn't mention at all that Chaos acted like a power role--in a very general sense, cops act aggressively and hop wagons, while doctors try to stay as much in the background as possible while still helping town. While I haven't finished reading up, I don't recall Chaos' contributions particularly resembling either. Also, Kairyuu, in stating that he's suspicious of millar partly because both ICs are alive, made the baseless assumption that I am town; this is a possible scumslip.

But I won't take any definite stance until I have caught up.

[Korts]

For what it's worth I can't readily imagine Kai killing off a player he

himself

called likely town while others didn't particularly have the same read on Chaos.

[Korts]

GUYS

PLEASE TRY TO BE SUCCINT IN MAKING YOUR POINT

OTHERWISE I WILL STAY FOUR PAGES BEHIND FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE

[Korts]

- You said that scum would jump on Korts because he was a townie, how did you know he was a townie?

This an interesting question. He didn't say anywhere as far as I'm aware that I'm definite town per se, but let's play ball. Assuming that I'd attack Kai-intentionally-acting-scummy regardless of my own alignment (which I would, purely to spark discussion), the only way his subsequent arguments that scum would attack me for the reaction make sense is by assuming I'm town--since newbscum would generally shy away from actively pursuing their ICscum partner. So the gambit is completely flawed in that there are two scenarios based on my alignment, and scum reactions in those two scenarios would be completely opposite, therefore any reaction without knowledge of my alignment is mostly useless.

Nevertheless it got discussion started, and I think that was the primary purpose as opposed to catching scum in a single move.

One thing I'm suspicious of Sando for is because he has frequently expressed that if he turned scum upon his lynch, we should ignore his posts. This is scummy because looking at a confirmed scum's interactions can tell us a lot--it is possible that they left fake links, trying to incriminate townies, but in general it is helpful.

On that note everyone should go back and read Japles' posts. Take note of who he is wishy-washy on, who he ignores, who he echoes, whose attacks he takes particularly badly, etc. Since Josh Lyman was and is MIA, and I was behind for a considerable part of the game, we don't have a full spectrum of interactions, but anything is more than nothing.

mod: if the mafia doesn't send in anything during a night phase, is their kill randomized?

[Korts]

I don't agree with a cop claim at this point. Unless you have an innocent and they're about to be lynched, stay put. You still have another night to be investigating.

[Korts]

I apologize, I haven't done any reading recently. I had a lot on my hands. Tomorrow is all going towards this game, though.

[Korts]

I can't seem to progress fast enough through the walls of text, so I'm going to try something else, considering the strict deadline and my lack of interactions recently.

I want to ask for a summary of most important events, tells and slips in the game that might help find scum, from the following people: Kairyuu, Infinis, semioldguy. Ojanen and Sando are welcome as well to share their opinions.

One thing: keep it concise and try to make only those points that are relevant to alignment.

[Korts]

Oh, and another thing: if you're referencing someone else's post, please use links (to link directly to a specific post, right-click on the small paper icon on the left side of the date stamp of that post and copy the URL) and not quotes; quotes make walls of post even bigger.

Code: Select all

[url=https://forum.mafiascum.net/postURL]textgoeshere[/url]

[Korts]

I've done my best to convince you I'm not scum. I would also like to see input from millar's replacement.

That being said I think we have a path to victory, starting with

Vote: Kairyuu

That's L-2 me and L-1 Kai

Infinis, before you try to push a lynch through, can you give me a summary of major points of interest in the game like I ask in post 252?

[Korts]

Hm. Ojanen's post detailing the Kairyuu-Japles link is convincing.

The problem with Kai I have is that the focal point of his defense seems to be that he, according only to him and a scum meta of two (!) games, doesn't gambit as scum. This is a weak argument by all means, considering the statistically insignificant pool of his games as scum and the biased perspective he's presenting.

I think this day's gone as far as it'll get.

vote: Kairyuu

[Korts]

Hi Starbuck. Don't worry, I'm in the same time zone as you. It won't have any particular impact.

[Korts]

Either Kai or Sando is Scum, if it's anyone else they lurked too hard to get any kind of read. Old guy is making some valid points to get townie points.

I really don't like the random lash out at semioldguy. It seems more than anything a move designed to ensure that he'll have multiple suspects to push tomorrow. Not to mention that it is an entirely baseless and invalid accusation.

[Korts]

Not to mention that a Sando kill is more or less in line with Infinis-scum.

[Korts]

Any counterclaims?

[Korts]

Unless Starbuck counterclaims, we can assume that either Infinis is really the cop, or we don't have any at all and he got lucky.

WIFOM aside, scum usually kill the players who suspect them the most, and a Sando kill definitely indicates Infinis. Then again, Sando's intentions of going on to lynch Infinis were quite clear, so it may have been a frame job. Infinis' play has been scummy, but I'm starting to get the feeling that he may just be the designated scapegoat here.

About the claim: since Infinis was likely on the top of everyone's scum list anyway, I discount the claim itself as a null-tell for now; Infinis-scum would have motivation to claim cop today, before he's lynched, and if there's a counterclaim, he'd be able to make the chances of him being lynched 50-50 rather than, in my opinion, a considerably higher chance otherwise considering Day 2.

The innocent claim and the lost investigation make sense from a town and scum perspective as well; while I understand investigating me, and a Sando investigation based on the reasoning in 287 (general paranoia) is acceptable if not really the best play, here's the scum motivation as I see it: it being 4:1 right now, the town still has a mislynch before LYLO, so a guilty claim is out of the question.

The lost investigation is a little harder to explain from a scum perspective, since it would be much easier to buddy up to another player as well, but here is an explanation: another innocent claim would needlessly rule out a mislynch candidate.

But it is the timing of the claim that particularly bugs me. A good town power role should be played thus: unless there is a very imminent threat, it should not be claimed, particularly if investigative. While there was a very strong anti-Infinis stance from every player, there was, at the time of the claim, a lack of any votes; there was still a chance for it to blow over and suspicions to move elsewhere.

That being said, if we lynch Infinis, we should lynch him tomorrow rather than today. An additional investigation, fake or not, may go a long way in determining his alignment as well as the obvious value of the investigation itself.

I'll give opinions on others a bit later. Hopefully I'll have a post from Starbuck by then to go off of.

[Korts]

Very good point about Infinis' Day 2 play, Ojanen. With that, I'm convinced of Ojanen being town as well; scum wouldn't validate a cop-claim with citations of previous play.

So the scum, it seems, is one of semioldguy and Starbuck.

[Korts]

vote: Starbuck

[Korts]

Starbuck, there was no contradiction between Infinis' claim and later statement about a false claim. Note that the latter statement was speculation from a scum perspective, fakeclaiming a role that they do not have.

[Korts]

Okay, first of all I'd like neither of you to vote before we've had time to converse. If you're town, and happen to vote for the other town, you're basically handing the game to the scum.

That said, I'm pretty set on semioldguy. While his predecessor's lack of contribution can be explained away more than satisfactorily, and his analysis, on a skim, seemed accurate, I have had a solid town read on Ojanen all the way through the game. Now I will read all the posts both of you made, and recalibrate my scumdar, but from my current perspective it's hard to see that I'd come to any other conclusion.

[Korts]

Good point, I forgot the investigation result on me. You might as well cross-vote each other. I'll make some time later this week for a thorough analysis.

[Korts]

I would still like both of you to make concise cases on each other. You may make a valid point that I'd otherwise miss.

[Korts]

Argh. Haven't gotten around to reading either of you, nor your cases; this weekend will be going towards that cause, I promise

[Korts]

Ok, both your arguments make sense, and I didn't find leads on a reread, so I'll have to go by my gut here...

vote: semioldguy

[Korts]

I was gonna hammer you at first, but my gut changed gears midpost.

[Korts]

Dr. VRK, classy modding as always.

I'd comment on the players, but I'm tired right now and all I can do is apologize for my abysmal activity levels and general lagging behind in this game. I hope to see all of you around on the site.