Newbie #840 (Game Over!)

[SpyreX]

Define lurking. We'll go from there.

[SpyreX]

This is definitely an interesting start, but I'll continue.

The wiki is a great starting point, but it misses the key issue.

I lynch lurkers. However, I lynch content-lurkers.

The issue isn't when people aren't as active as others* - its the content they provide when they are active. Someone with 100 posts of fluff is a far better (and usually scummier) lynch than someone with only 10 that are well thought out and follow a logical process.

*As with every scumtell, there is context to look at as well as severity. If a player IS active and then opts to lurk chances are high something is up. Or, of course, if they lurk but manage to catch their prods to lurk more.

And, of course you should always use "tells" in conjunction. There are few cases where 1 tell can make a solid case. However, tells when combined and played against the general ebb and flow of the game...

That catches scum.

[SpyreX]

Ahh, see, now we're getting somewhere.

@Cool:

What do you mean by "dont mess with the

family

"?

@Net:

Why are two votes a bad thing?

What makes you think that that vote had anything to do with lurking?

[SpyreX]

Actually, I'm having a hard time stomaching it, overall.

Between the, apparent, slip up (the use of family) and the reaction to the FoS I am bothered.

I'm doubly bothered by Sposh's vote in regards to the OMGUS voting - because it reads as CD is town being pushed up via scum, which is a fairly hard line stance at this juncture.

Although concerned with CD, I find post 44 more voteworthy.

Vote: Sposh

[SpyreX]

Hasty would be if a wagon formed before he does.

The vote is stating that this is serious business, is all.

[SpyreX]

I'm still not sure what you're going on about Cool:

1.) You're saying the "mess with the family" is a setup for the reflective-vote?

2.) You're saying that no one can be lynched because people haven't voted?

[SpyreX]

Wait...

Why would you vote no lynch at this point?

[SpyreX]

I'm missing something, still.

Cool, who thinks that we should nolynch today. Please quote and/or cite where you got that from.

[SpyreX]

Here's the big issue with nolynching* Cool:

You are right there are 7 town versus 2 scum. Therefore,

numerically

, we ARE looking at higher base-odds of lynching town than scum.

So, from the side of "not wanting to lynch town" it makes sense on surface... however, the odds will NEVER be in our favor to hit scum over town (because at that point they would have won already ).

But, that isn't the goal. The goal is to lynch scum. No lynching has a 0% chance of hitting a scum. Further, you turn the game from a proactive play to a reactive play - which is something the scum love.

Yes, we may run up a doc, or a cop and they become exposed. Or, we run up a scum and are well on our way to a win. Can't win without a little gambling.

* There is one major exception to this - when the game is where a mislynch would lose and there are no PR's / "confirmed" players alive (6 players alive, 2 scum left, no one cleared is a loss with a mislynch) - in that situation nolynching and forcing the scum to tighten the odds is a decent play.

[SpyreX]

Well thats the important part of all this. You want to vote for who YOU think could be scum and then explain why and go from there.

As I did when I said Sposh's play in regards to you makes little sense from a town viewpoint.

[SpyreX]

Well, as of now it looks like the only person the people should lynch is me, but it would be almost harisy me to vote for myself right, plus I have no idea who should be a scum. Also if I roleclamed right now it would be of no use to me since you would just shout, "SCUM!!!". In the end since people are now yelling at me to go to bed I might vote change in the morning. Depending on what happens. I will say again I don't know of any one yet that would be worth my vote so thus I null vote until I see someone who should be killed. This will be my new policy all game long, since I will change it latter to a person that might be a scum it won't matter what it looks like at first. But Dad must have drilled too much math in me over the past few weeks/years... I always look at a strict % of almost everything *sigh*.

any way no one yet can I say has earned my vote, but if you guys want to bandwagon someone then I will help you out. That's all I am saying, for tonight, btw nice new avvy Netopalis.

If you know you're town then the answer is never voting for yourself (the flipside being if you were scum you would want to appear town so see above).

There isn't even a wagon on you, so roleclaiming isn't necessary.

If you don't see someone who should be lynched, then keeping your vote off entirely is a better proposition than nolynching - however, look for scum! If there is something that strikes you as off vote, explain the vote, and see what happens. That is how we get information in this game during the day.

%'s can help, but remember the end all and be all is lynching scum - nolynching guarantees that a scum wont be lynched.

So, how about this: What do you think about my vote for Sposh?

I don't think it's a hard stance to take at all! I mean, scum have to try to move the game forward somehow... and I just didn't see it being an OMGUS. Seemed like a stretch. So either Snow Bunny is a mafia trying to set up a townie death or SB's just an overeager townie!

Also, I'd like a clarification on the whole family thing! Seems like an easy mistake to make, but how far SHOULD we be reading into it?

Scum AND town have to move the game forward even if the results are different (scum are interested in survival / finding mislynches whereas town are interested in finding scum).

Does anything in your stance change when CD admits it was an OMGUS?

What do you think your vote for SB means in relation to CD?

Why is "family" an easy mistake to make?

[SpyreX]

Not to mention the other things that can happen with a lynch. For example: Day 1 we pull it together and hit the Mafia RB.

That opens up some serious possibilities for the next day. In that situation, what do you think could happen?

[SpyreX]

Ohh, awesome.

I was trying to lead to conjecture on if we hit "a" RB and, instead, I said "the" RB - the idea being that, if that occurs and there IS a cop a day 2 claim would be all but game-breaking they are SURE there is a cop present.

That wasn't a scumslip, but an actual grammatic mistake because I got ahead of myself.

Although, yes, you are definitely in the right for a vote for it.

[SpyreX]

@Net:

No, I wasn't -trying- to imply knowledge but it could definitely appear that way. I actually find the absence of a vote odder than the SB vote.

[SpyreX]

From you - It's far easier to assume the worst and push on it (even if you're wrong) than to give the benefit of the doubt.

Of course, when I say "odder" I don't mean a drastic difference, just a twinge.

[SpyreX]

Which is correct. However, coming from positions of no extra knowledge the assumation and jump by SB makes a bit more sense to me.

All in all I'm not too concerned by either.

[SpyreX]

Now THAT would do it right there.

[SpyreX]

Sposh, you seem to be avoiding cognitively tackling the issue of cooldog as possible scum. As a side note, if CD does come up guilty, Sposh might be a worthwhile lynch.

This is true but based on those actions I could see Sposh independently being scum higher than CD. Hence, the vote that way.

Right now, I'm really seeing no downside to voting to lynch CD. Even if he is town (which I feel is ridiculously unlikely), he would be a huge liability in an endgame situation and I feel relatively certain that the scum would never kill him. Therefore, even if we DO lynch incorrectly on him, there's still something of a benefit. Note that I am not advocating lynching a townie, just advocating lynching a scummy player who, even as town, is a serious problem to a town victory.

Now this is a tricky train of thought. There is always a level of risk-reward to lynching (I tend to assume its going to be mislynches so). However, you can't lose sight of the fact the aim is always hitting scum.

In general statements like that garner a lot of suspicion because, as scum, pushing on someone who is cracking IS a pretty solid mislynch.

Well, true is that CD is scummy, and even if he's not mafia, as Neto said, he's a liability to town. However, right now SpyreX's slip draws all my attention. It could be, as Neto claims, a theoretical discussion, but I really don't buy that. Slips are always worth looking for, and for me that's a huge lead, even bigger than CD's scummy and erratic play.

As I am saying as well. I was trying to illustrate the best-case scenario of a lynch AND have people look at the setup and the interactions (thus, if RB is hit the cop should claim).

However, part of CD's erratic behavior IS a slip. What is the difference there?

I really don't like post 93. Define "not helpful" contextually.

On the flipside, I DO like post 95. Not that I agree 100% but this is actually looking for scum - the very first case we've seen.

Unvote

There's a difference between not posting much, and posting a lot, but with no content. The latter is often used by scum to gain trust among pro-towns, because of activeness.

Show no content.

Look, SB, just out from what I've seen so far, he seems suspicious. (And you seem like a perfect scum buddy if he is)

Explanations.

I'm voting for you for acting town by posting lots of short posts.

Ok, this 1.) doesn't mesh with what you initially said and 2.) shows an enormous amount of cognitive dissonance:

If you think Net is scum because of "lots of short posts" then how is that different in a scum-way from your "few short posts".

Your own thought process would lead you to thinking that you, yourself, are scum. Which means that, on some level, you are not being genuine.

Vote: DarkLightA

It seems like you're really defending Neopalis, Snow Bunny. How can you defend someone so actively when you don't even know what role he has?

SB's position is an attack on your case which ends up appearing as a defense of Net but, at heart, isn't - there is a big difference.

Much like mine.

[SpyreX]

Ahem. That's a wrong statement. I think dark is scum. I'm not sold on you but I'm not raising a scum klaxon at the moment. I am leaning town on SB and I'm pretty sold on Net being town.

So.

[SpyreX]

Partially play, partially a function of the bizarro world attack from Dark.

[SpyreX]

Which is what I'm getting at.

[SpyreX]

Yea I'm cool with this lynch BUT I would much prefer the last two to at least chime IN before it happens.

Further, DLA was around and, oddly enough, commented on the posts right before mine - and didn't comment further. I don't like that at all.

[SpyreX]

Unvote

No. Don't push it to L-1 (or fake the attempt) when we still have two people MIA.

[SpyreX]

4 votes + one of the two coming in and voting = hammer = bad news at the moment.

[SpyreX]

No. Not in the slightest.

However, that does not alter the fact that we need everyone contributing. Which, at this point, an L-1 with two people not even in the game doesn't help.

[SpyreX]

Which is what I did. Because you voted

[SpyreX]

No. Once they are ACTIVE in the game it'll be reassessed AND he'll talk AND then there will be a lynch.

[SpyreX]

@Geek:

The speed of the wagon is a little disconcerting.

However, DLA's responses are lackluster at best. I'm really not fond of him just wooshin' on by my post without comment.

[SpyreX]

Alrighty, I waited and even eluded to it and the fact that DLA has just opted to ignore my original vote is enough, even this early, for claimin' time.

Vote: DLA

And yes I'm active And I was biding my time waiting to see what he would do, or not do in this case.

[SpyreX]

Well, DLA: You've got one chance to remedy that claim.

Say which power role you are - a vague claim like that is not beneficial for town.

Not to mention I find it kind of hard to believe but.

[SpyreX]

muh you have some massive explaining to do.

Massive.

[SpyreX]

I dont like the apology. DLA was playing scummy - however after he DOES claim doc finally how in the zeus do you come in and hammer?

I want that explained, asap.

[SpyreX]

No. No. Thats not the point of contention:

Why after he solidified his claim of a power role would you THEN opt to hammer before it could even be discussed?

The fact he was scummy is pretty clear. However, you opted to avoid new information in favor of a hammer.

[SpyreX]

Hold up a second.

The day isn't going anywhere and a RIGHT hit here benefits us a lot more than a wrong one does.

No willy-nilly hammers while we parse this out.

[SpyreX]

No, I say that because IF Net is telling the truth and we lynch him then I am the NK and we lose a confirmed innocent tomorrow.

Not to mention that having tomorrow be looking for the other scum versus hanging the one we screwed up today is the better solution.

[SpyreX]

Actually, looking at it closer SB is telling the truth.

Net simply opted to reinforce a supposed connection between us for the mislynch tomorrow.

We're not going to get much more discussed NOW about this until its taken care of.

Did either of you cops opt to breadcrumb your role somewhere?

(I will be voting for Net, just not yet)

[SpyreX]

Well thats unhelpful.

BUT! There is something that just dawned on me.

S_B's reaction to thinking I slipped up about the RB makes perfect sense if she is the cop!

Unvote, Vote: Netopalis.

You're busted scum. Kudos on trying to drag me down with you.

[SpyreX]

Awesome. I come back to one from hammer.

Net set me up for the lynch. I will go back today and parse out his play for actual connections (or, more specifically, the absence thereof).

I'm a little worried about CD. I'm STILL more worried about muh's hammer.

But, it'll take me a bit. Lets not hammer me before I can get my information out, k?

[SpyreX]

Ok, time for some analysis on Net.

Namedrops:
CoolDog - 36 (4 of CD)
Darklight - 24 (3 of DLA)
Geekalicious - 4
Muh - 17
Santos - 3
Snow_Bunny - 13 (8 of SB)
Sposh - 8
SpyreX - 3

Now, this is definitely not 100% correct because there IS a lot of interplay in what he was saying (talking to SB about me, etc).

However, it is a starting point for some weird connections. Namely the lower end of it: (Geek, Santos, Sposh, SpyreX) versus the highest (CD, DLA).

DLA being up for lynch makes it make sense. CD STILL is a high-end outlier even with the beginning of the game.

Which makes me think that the obvious connection is the right one. For a few reasons.

Lets look at the interplay between Net and CD:

Coaching (quotes by individual post count)

FOS: Cooldog
I refuse to respect your ridiculous capitalization scheme and question your logic. Care to explain your vote, aside from the OMGUS angle? You seem to think SnowBunny is lurking, when clearly she has posted more than many other players here.

An FoS at this point and then the questioning is a method to coach a partner you see slipping up.

In re: the earlier question - two votes are bad if they are random because it makes it easier for someone to be lynched at random. I should think that this is fairly self-evident.

CooLDoG - if not for inactivity, why your vote for SnowBunny when she already had one on her?

More of the same.

Ok....Sorry about that. Turns out that I have a few moments before my next class. My FoS on you was not a joke, Cooldog.

I'm honestly having a bit of trouble getting to exactly what you're talking about....I just find you to be rather suspicious, nervous and generally odd. Call it a gut feeling.

No time to post the rest of my thoughts - I'll be back after class.

Italics is important here. Especially considering the use of "honestly" from scum and the qualifying language.

I took the quote without the "Don't mess with the family", counting that as a slip of the tongue to mean that he was setting Snowbunny up for a vote as she hadn't said a great deal. Looking at it again, I see that yeah, it's setting up the OMGUS. I wish he'd be a bit more clear about the intent of his posts...My apologies, but I find him to be nearly incoherent.

This serves as a defense for the slip that CD hadn't really covered in a meaningful way.

*sigh* Just unvote. Don't vote no lynch unless you actually want the town to waive their lynch for today.

More coaching.

I never said I wanted no lynch, I said that there is no good reason to put two votes on someone randomly without any real reason. Big difference. Major difference. We need to lynch somebody today....

I'm going to go ahead and Vote: Cooldog, as he seems a bit too reactionary for my tastes. He seems rather nervous and is acting as I would expect a newbie scum to do after a small amount of suspicion was placed on them. Note that I am not wanting a bandwagon on him....yet.

There is a difference in his approach to this vote versus some of the others. Notice the tentative nature of his reasoning (seems) and the outright saying he doesn't want a wagon, yet.

Posts 13 AND 14 are, again, more coaching.

Then we get him defending my "slip" (which was masterful BTW, Net). Until we get this gem:

Sposh, you seem to be avoiding cognitively tackling the issue of cooldog as possible scum. As a side note, if CD does come up guilty, Sposh might be a worthwhile lynch.

I bolded this because I want emphasis here. This statement, after seeing him flip not just scum but the RB, makes a lot of sense:

1.) If CD is his partner, he is creating a tie for a future mislynch as he knows CD would come up scum.
--- The tinfoil hat says that this was setup for the inverse though - that CD is town and Sposh is the partner and its a scenario where because CD IS town Sposh appears to be townier.
2.) It is sacrificing the goon to protect the RB.

Right now, I'm really seeing no downside to voting to lynch CD. Even if he is town (which I feel is ridiculously unlikely), he would be a huge liability in an endgame situation and I feel relatively certain that the scum would never kill him. Therefore, even if we DO lynch incorrectly on him, there's still something of a benefit. Note that I am not advocating lynching a townie, just advocating lynching a scummy player who, even as town, is a serious problem to a town victory.

Now, this gives me pause. A lot of it actually. This, in retrospect, reeks of pre-defending a mislynch. However, notice that finally we have stronger terms of CD being scum (ridiculously unlikely, etc).

Then we get into the attacks on DLA. I'm not posting them now but give it a reread - the terms used are stronger overall than his attacks on CD were.

Then, he ties the two together:

Due to the weird vibe between Darklight and Cooldog, I think that the following situation may have transpired (based on my suspicion of them being a scum pair):

Darklight didn't quite read the whole thread, he only read the page that he was on, in which I do have a number of shorter posts. They do have content, I would maintain, but it makes his comment make a lot more sense. He then proceeded to attack me, so as to be contributing and not seen as a lurker.

Cooldog, who is Darklight's partner, had never played the game before, but knew that he was in a joint win condition with Darklight. He decided that he should stick with and back up everything that Darklight said.

When Darklight attacked Cooldog, he was rather taken aback and backed off of most of the attacks.

Later on, as Darklight gained more and more suspicion, Cooldog decided that a bussing was in order and decided to try to disavow any alliance between himself and Darklight, in hopes of surviving to the end based on his sudden non-association with Cooldog.

This seems like a fairly plausible scenario and would explain the odd play on the part of both Darklight and Cooldog. Of course, it is just suspicion and nothing more...

As we see one half of this pairing (DLA) was false which sets up this entire scenario (CD being scum) to be false as well.

And then we get some more coaching style posts:

Cooldog, cooldog, cooldog.....

Roleclaiming gives us much information. Let's say that the person claims cop or doc rather than town - if that's the case, the real cop or doc can counterclaim. Sure, we lose the power role, but in exchange for a mafia - more than a fair trade. As for DL not having posted in a while, it's only been a number of hours, and we don't expect every single player to check this site every hour on the hour. And yes, you are most certainly next on my list. You're lucky that Darklight made such ridiculous claims today, or it would be your head on the chopping block, most likely. As for other players that we should be concerned about, I'm not convinced that we really need to dig down that far just yet - we have two excellent suspects - should we exhaust those, then I would be more than willing to state my other, far lesser suspicions. I guess I could anyway, if you folks want, but they're really rather tenuous....

Cooldog, I didn't think it was possible, but you did it - you convinced me even further that you're mafia. Good job, kiddo! Your hastiness to lynch is a bit over the top. What did your partner ever do to deserve such a harsh bussing?

Note, here, again - it is setting up a scenario that once proven false makes the total (CD being scum) appear false as well.

Cooldog, we don't want to force a claim until Muh and Santos both evaluate his play and give their opinions. We also don't want to lynch without a roleclaim. If you're not willing to understand the reasonings behind these actions, then I don't know what to tell you - we've tried to explain these several times.

DO WHAT?!?! WHAT DO YOU WANT US TO DO, COOLDOG?!?! LYNCH!?!! FORCE A CLAIM?!?!! HAVE YOU NOT BEEN READING THESE LAST POSTS EXPLAINING ALL OF THIS STUFF?!?!?!

I'm taking a break before I say something I really shouldn't say...

and it goes on and on....

Cooldog, I want to thank you for taking the time to reread. Your last post is also much more coherent.

Try to keep this up for the rest of the game, and you'll be OK.

Italics could very well be a true slip. The rest of "the" game implies him not getting killed.

And then we're at day 2 which looks like more of the same before the cop claim:

CooLDog: Your actions day 1 are rather odd. You first align yourself closely with Darklight, then back off and completely go the other direction. What is your explanation for this? Is it because he started garnering suspicion? It seems that you are rather survivalist - this is generally anti-town. Care to respond to this?

My biggest issue is the simple fact there are

so many

connections there.

But, I will for now do the following:

Vote: CoolDog

(notice I haven't went through his yet, this is just the one sided interplay that doesn't include the issues with his play personally).

I will, next, do a quick summary on the other players.
Then, finally, as I am at L-1 defend this business.

[SpyreX]

The other players:

Geek - A moderate stance on lurking is fine. However, when the play has been bordering on lurking is a little bothersome. A defensive-attack on DLA for saying that Net was too involved makes sense (as I would agree) but is also a good spot for correctly defending a partner. Then, 1 post day 2...before the cop claim/cc. And the quickvote start of today. Overall, not impressed.

Muh - I really don't like the hammer. Really, really don't like it. Very apologetic for their mistakes which also rubs me a bit the wrong way. However, the actions AFTER the hammer do feel very genuine. I've gotta lean town.

Sposh - Overall, I lean town. There's a few questionable comments (someone being pro-town just means they are pro-town) but I've gotta go with gut and say town.

Now, as for my defense:

Net set me up solid. Real solid.

However, and WIFOM all you want: if you're CC'ing cop saying the actual cop got an investigation on you - are you going to say that your partner is innocent?

Especially in a newbie game, overall no. The general take (insert surprise) is to assume scum is lying and thusly (as we've seen) to lynch their innocent... which gives their actual scumpartner a solid wagon to sit on without too much concern the next day.

When you look at how much Net was playing for the game as a whole versus short term it makes sense. If he had claimed a guilty on someone I -probably- would have been all over them because that checks out a lot more.

Instead, he took the fact he had been rubbing shoulders with me, added on a fake investigation and chose to let you guys do the rest. Especially when coupled with actual worry by the real cop around my "slip".

It's not a bad lynch to lynch me even though it is the wrong lynch. I'd put money that the scum has hopped on already via play and the fact that it was setup so well by Net.

[SpyreX]

No, far far from it.

Like I said my concern with you being the scum partner is that its TOO obvious.

I could see Geek via skating through that whole claim-counterclaim and jumping on what Net setup as scum.

I could see Net setting you up for a ML to try and clear Santos. Although I don't have as many problems with his play.

Even with the issues with the hammer I think the thought process is genuine from muh.

The biggest worry I have if I am killed after my flip (and doubled by your statement there) is that you ARE town and thus a power hang tomorrow for the loss of the game.

The fact I haven't been hammered does say something. It makes me a bit more confident in the scum being one of you and geek (although Santos said he WOULD hammer).

The only one I'm betting on being town, which makes me itch, is muh. Santos is a raw gut read.

[SpyreX]

Which begs a few things (the family) comment non withstanding:

1.) Why would you assume your roleclaim (which at this point HAS to be vanilla) would get you lynched for "SCUM".

2.) With Net flipping scum and your weird relationship, your post 14 is very off.

3.) Post 40 - What was the thought process behind "if he claims doc my vote stays".

4.) Post 51 - If you didn't buy his claim, why would you want to give him one more chance?

5.) Post 52 - If you didn't buy his claim, why would you want a confirmation of which role he was? In fact one could say this implies you knew both roles where in the game.

I can do more, but I really don't like the way this is going. As it sits if CD is NOT scum the game is going to be lost, all but guaranteed.

[SpyreX]

Because I fully expect to be lynched and I want this out there via tomorrow? And, well, everyone has done at least something to warrant suspicion?

And when the attack is, ultimately, based on what a scum said it IS WIFOM.

I'm really not impressed with the fact your vote is on me and this hedging about whether or not I'm actually scum.

[SpyreX]

That is going to come back to haunt me.

I was talking about the reasons for lynching versus no lynching and in this setup the best possible outcome is hitting the roleblocker.

I just managed to use the absolute worst wording for it.

Oddly enough, I find that logic backwards. I look at the way Net played me as far more "convincing" (albeit wrong) than a simple slip would.

AND, ultimately as vanilla defending myself IS secondary to getting the information out there. Thus, if something were to happen (such as a hammer) it happens after I give said suspicions and BEFORE I give a defense that didn't change anything.

[SpyreX]

I think its all tied up and in your hands Sposh.

I'm putting money on the scum being one of (Green / Cool). And if its green I think its a scum win come tomorrow.

[SpyreX]

Net - you played a great game. I wouldn't have suspected you without the cop investigation. Double kudos for implicating me AGAIN on the way down.

I don't think the pun had anything to do with it.

---

As soon as I was NK'd, I was absolutely positive that it was geek.

Considering what I said the day before, there was only one of you that I was really suspicious of. So, me being the NK really only helped one of you - geek.

Either of the others should have left me, if they were scum, for the mislynch.

Couple that with the early no-fear lylo vote. Yea.

Especially when muh didn't even crossvote.