Mini 880 - Mini Quick and Dirty - Game Over

[Zorblag]

So we know that at least one of Charlatan or Papa Zito be scum. This be the sort of situation where there no be a reason to no lynch after the mass claim. Some thoughts and some questions then; as a warning in advance, some of them be minor attempting outguessing the mod.

1. We no be in a hurry at this point. There be no need to rush with the voting. Troll would like to get this right.

2. The setup almost certainly isn't mountainous in disguise. That no would be balanced and both the reviewers would know it. Troll knows that we be going with a backup setup but it still no should be mountainous. We might have lost one or more power roles already but we should have had some in there at the start.

3. Given Vi's part in reviewing, a tracker be entirely believable as a town power role.

4a. If there be a three person scum team scum do have every reason to potentially throw away one of their number in a gambit that had a reasonable chance of getting a town player lynched today. The biggest problem Troll has at this time with Charlatan's claim be that it be too convenient. Him be under little suspicion and so him would be more likely to be believed when crafting a fake claim than most would.

4b. Papa Zito's game has been off from Troll would say the middle of day one or so. Troll attributes some of this to burnout which him mentioned at one point in some thread but no sited as a reason later when Troll asked about it. Him be spending more energy on lashing out at things than making cases during most of that time. Him be an easy target if him be town. Troll also largely expects him to object to Troll's description of his play that but Troll no really cares.

5. Troll had thought by the way AGar's death was handled (differently than Sando's in that we didn't learn his role until after the night was over) that him was likely to have some non-vanilla role. Troll thought scum was the most likely (clearly Troll was wrong) but that if him wasn't scum that him was probably a power role who's power involved something happening or potentially happening upon his death. The lack of his role now be frustrating as Troll no can tell whether the manner of death was just story telling or if it was more significant.

@Papa Zito, what is the name of your role in your role PM? What were your cases on Troll, VP Baltar and Ojanen? How certain do you be about Crypto's alignment at this time?

@Charlatan, please explain exactly what you thought was happening at the end of day two. Your explanation still no fits.

@VP Baltar, who do you think suspected ODDin at the end of the day yesterday?

@everyone, what role did you have in the aborted version of this game? Troll's role then was vanilla townie as well.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[Scien]

[...] 5. Troll had thought by the way AGar's death was handled (differently than Sando's in that we didn't learn his role until after the night was over) that him was likely to have some non-vanilla role. Troll thought scum was the most likely (clearly Troll was wrong) but that if him wasn't scum that him was probably a power role who's power involved something happening or potentially happening upon his death. The lack of his role now be frustrating as Troll no can tell whether the manner of death was just story telling or if it was more significant.[...]

Speculation. But I too noticed what you are talking about. No way to know what the mod was up to though.

[...]@Papa Zito, what is the name of your role in your role PM?[...]

Mean question is awesome. Even if its a bit underhanded. Sneaky sneaky. Enough on that though. Don't want to ruin things.

[...]@everyone, what role did you have in the aborted version of this game? Troll's role then was vanilla townie as well. [...]

What good does knowing that do?

[Scien]

Nevermind on that last question. I am slow as always.

My first role PM was the same as my current one. Vanilla townie.

[VP Baltar]

@VP Baltar, who do you think suspected ODDin at the end of the day yesterday?

crypto and Oj off of the top of my head. I think there were some others who were at least mildly suspicious. I know that even though I hadn't pursued it much in thread, it did cross my mind that his tunneling was a bit scummy.

@everyone, what role did you have in the aborted version of this game? Troll's role then was vanilla townie as well.

I was vanilla then as well.

[Papa Zito]

Troll also largely expects him to object to Troll's description of his play that but Troll no really cares.

XD

@Papa Zito, what is the name of your role in your role PM?

I'm firing a PM to the mod to ask if I can answer this question. I don't see why not but let's not lose on a modkill.

What were your cases on Troll, VP Baltar and Ojanen? How certain do you be about Crypto's alignment at this time?

I've got 30 minutes before a series of meetings eats up the rest of my day, so I'll get you these tonight.

@everyone, what role did you have in the aborted version of this game? Troll's role then was vanilla townie as well.

I'll include this question in my PM to the mod.

[crypto]

Sorry for being dense, but what does Vi's review have to do with the possibility of a tracker?

I spy with my little eye a Troll getting ready to jump on the hotter wagon.

[charlatan]

A lot of questions my way. I'll try to answer them all in this post and get to some other things in a subsequent one:

Oh look, charlatan's the only PR.

You keep harping on this point. We were told this is a limited reveal; is it conceivable that we've already lost power roles and were just given alignment? I honestly do not know the answer to this question or even if it's a stupid one. To me it's certainly possible, but even if I am the only power role it wouldn't be the first time that's ever happened.

Yes, you have to come up with this

after

you figured out I was prob scum and a good track candidate, amirite?

I never figured out you were scum beforehand, but probable scum does not, in my mind, make a good track candidate. I'm as fallible as anyone, and scum slip under my radar just as readily. In general, unless I have a very strong read on someone (and I admitted pages and pages ago that I was not getting the kind of reads I want in this game) I will track someone who I have come to conclusions about without a great deal of evidence. In your case, I agreed with some of your points in theoretical discussions and had no problem with your Day 1 bandwagon. However, when I asked myself

why

I thought you were a pro-town role I found that I could not think of good reasons. Considering you were more suspicious to other players (and I believe in the wisdom of groups), I thought I could solidify my murky read on you with a track. I'm glad I did. So yes, now I have to re-evaluate my entire read on you with the new knowledge.

-----

This is in response to Scien and ABR, who have asked about my actions today. I'll simply go through my entire train of thought leading up to the claim.


Coming into today, I knew I would claim. Due to the schedule of hours during which I play, I came back and already the idea of a mass claim was being discussed. As such, I had a choice: do I claim outright and derail the massclaim, or do I wait until my turn and then drop what I know? I had to think about pros and cons of each, and ultimately the pros outweighed the cons in my mind. For instance, I had gotten nothing on Scien on Day 1, but his opposition to the idea of a massclaim seemed somewhat suspect and obviously, not targeting someone (while it lends some creedence to his VT claim) does not clear them. I suggested he go first knowing that, if he were scum, he'd have to roll the dice and decide whether to fakeclaim or not without the luxury of prior claims. If he fakeclaimed something other than VT, there seemed a decent chance he was lying.

Also, although I found Raskol townish and have no problems with crypto's place until this point, I thought there was a small chance crypto would fakeclaim as well. When I did my initial read after replacing in, Raskol's 161 made me double-take, as he made two references to "tracking" players. I thought it might be the kind of vague breadcrumb that scum would seed, something casual enough to simply leave if a fakeclaim never became necessary, but feasible to pass off in the event that he did need to. crytpo is low on my list of suspicions, but I've been wrong plenty of times, both in the past and in this game. It was a small thing, but it nonetheless contributed to my thinking.

It also occurred to me that if someone claimed a power role and then attempted to clear Zito with that claim, I could double up that way. Or, perhaps, that Zito would try to clear someone else with a fakeclaim of his own -- that would be much more WIFOM, but would still potentially be worth noting. Point is, I felt that my results would be much more useful in the midst of a mass claim than in isolation. Whether I was wrong or not is one debate, whether that makes me more likely to be lying is another entirely.

What's more, I considered the reason for the mass claim and the current situation. If we're in MYLO today and we bagged scum based on this information, we'd most likely be in the same position tomorrow and be looking at the possibility of a massclaim again, only most likely I would have been nightkilled and scum would be able to fakeclaim (or not) with increased safety.

@Charlatan, please explain exactly what you thought was happening at the end of day two. Your explanation still no fits.

I don't know really how to explain it better. Technically, I think I had wrong in my head what was about to happen. In rereading the rules, I had read that a simple majority decides the lynch, and had it in my head that in the case of a deadline this meant that the wagon with a higher number of votes would go to lynch. Hence, my post 612 -- I thought the hammer was a formality, which is also why I did not do it in the posts leading up to the deadline, when I was partially joking around and asking for last minute reads, etc. I realize that the end of Day 1 should have driven it home in my head, and I really have no excuse there. I've not been entirely with it lately, and have had extreme difficulty keeping my head straight. I expected to take more heat for it today, but I also don't really know how fabricating a mistake of a no-lynch would be a viable strategy for scum. Or, do you suppose that I got cold feet and then hammered at the end to try and undo it? Like I wasn't going to be under a spotlight the next day? Why wouldn't I have just lurked right through and told everyone something came up? It was stupid and anti-town and embarrassing to have done, but even as another player I don't think I would see it as something scum would do. The menial payoff for an almost certain loss of a scum player? Part of me hoped I'd be investigated by a cop as a result of it (after the fact), so that when this situation came about I'd have one less person to convince, but no dice.

@everyone, what role did you have in the aborted version of this game? Troll's role then was vanilla townie as well.

As a replacement, I do not know what ekiM's previous role was.

[crypto]

Attn: If PZ gets the go-ahead and posts his official role name, NOBODY conclusively respond to it and NOBODY affirm/deny it.

[crypto]

That's really poor English. I mean that I don't want anyone do to either of those things, and if anyone does, I will get very, very, very, very,

very

angry.

[crypto]

And mean, yes, angry and mean.

[charlatan]

A lot has already been said re: Zito as scum, so I'm going to contribute observations that have occurred to me in re-reading him after my track results. Even if it's helpful to nobody else, I've tried to break down his relationships with others in this game as if I were doing so after his flip. If I cannot convince others to vote with me, I'm a total failure as a power role, but more importantly, it stands to reason that I'll be dead by tonight either way, so I want to get out thoughts on relationships before that happens.

Firstly, even had I not gotten a track result on him, I would have held him accountable for his AGar vote, and I'm frankly surprised it's not problematic to anyone else. He has consistently listed AGar as townish, even going so far as to say he feels he has a particular strong ability to read the guy. When it's clear that AGar is probably going to be lynched, he jumps aboard, offering the following statement, which I suppose is supposed to represent a shift from everything he's been saying up until that point:

AGar sounds like his townself but it's hollow.

That's it.

More on relationships with living and dead players. He spends most of his time talking to or about the following players in the first two days:

SerialClergyman
VP
Troll
ODDin
Sando

I'd assert that he mostly speaks with the first three, though the last two are the ones he has gone on to help lynch. His Sando hammer is particularly convenient; he has mentioned him in the margins of his play throughout the day in passing, and included him in a scum list along with ODDin and Troll, but despite his apparently high level of suspicion does not actually say a single word to Sando or respond to anything Sando has to say even once during the day. That night, SC is killed, which may mean nothing, but also may mean something. I would argue that Zito was, in a sense, attached to the hip to SC at this point, and the nature of their interaction would require that he be involved with SC in upcoming days as well. In my experience, it is not uncommon for scum to want to whack someone in a position like that, as it frees them up to pursue other avenues of attack. Even before tracker results, I thought his Scien interaction the next day was a little shakey, way too ready to support WIFOM in a manner that deflects suspicion:

This is exactly where I'm coming from. It seems fairly obvious that they looked at us sniping back and forth at the end of Day 1 and decided to see if they could push for a mislynch today. I'm both honored and amused given my horrendous play thus far.

This idea can be extended to ODDin -- he was a suspicious player and a likely mislynch, but knocking him out frees Zito to cast new suspicions elsewhere. This does not account for the NK preferences of his scum buddies, and it's a fair amount of speculation on my part, but I do think it makes sense.

What's more important here are the living players. His interaction with Troll is something everyone should be looking at, especially as it feels a bit like spinning his wheels. Troll is something of a town leader, and Zito's accusations against him can be mostly boiled down to "you're fence-sitting." If he's a scum buddy, this is a pretty safe way to distance; Troll has no real way to argue against that, as it's largely a matter of opinion -- as such, Zito does not look horribly scummy for suggesting it, but Troll is basically in no risk of being lynched on account of it, either. Alternately, it may be a method of buddying up through attacking, but I find the former slightly more likely at this junction.

Worth noting is also that he's expended a great deal of energy arguing with VP, though he has not cast a vote that way at any point. Their interaction does not feel contrived to me, but I would still expect votes to become involved in their ongoing debates at some point. I am unsure at this time as to what that might point to, to be honest.

[charlatan]

Sorry, in that list above of players he's interacted with, when I said he went on to help lynch the last two, I meant kill in general.

[Ojanen]

Dammit with the access. Own laptop doesn't want to cooperate.
Seems like I should not make promises but if it's in my power, tonight will be the night.

Looking at charlatan's case superficially, finding PZ's Sando hammer scummy seems plain wrong, it ignores the deadline context. Charlatan, do you really find hammering suspicious in that context? Does that have something to do with your failure to hammer on time D2?

[charlatan]

Looking at charlatan's case superficially, finding PZ's Sando hammer scummy seems plain wrong, it ignores the deadline context. Charlatan, do you really find hammering suspicious in that context? Does that have something to do with your failure to hammer on time D2?

It doesn't ignore it. I think the deadline was a convenience. I don't think hammering at the deadline is scummy at all in and of itself, but I think keeping someone on the periphery of your suspicions while not interacting with them at all is scummy in that it attempts to create wiggle room to switch votes later. It's easy to say "p.s. this guy is scummy too" and not try to investigate him yourself at all, and on a growing bandwagon it can be (and is) used to set up a switch to the popular wagon later if it's beneficial. Even if there had been no deadline, I believe he would have switched, personally.

[charlatan]

Oh, and no, it has nothing with my near-failure to hammer yesterday. In what conceivable context would one have anything to do with the other?

[Papa Zito]

Arrite, I got the go-ahead.

I didn't actually get a role name, per se. What I got was "Town."

I didn't keep my previous PM. I was vanilla townie there, but I had an "Item" - a bulletproof vest.

charlatan's 760 is about as poor as I expected it to be.

[Scien]

[@ Zito] Saying we're mountainous (I learned a new term!), is nothing but an assumption. Are you suggesting that it is more likely mountainous than other possibilities Zito?

Also, I take it that you are holding to your VT claim Zito? Not holding anything back?

[VP Baltar]

Zito, why are you inclined to believe this is a mountainous game if you had a bulletproof vest in the first installment?

[Papa Zito]

[@ Zito] Saying we're mountainous (I learned a new term!), is nothing but an assumption. Are you suggesting that it is more likely mountainous than other possibilities Zito?

Also, I take it that you are holding to your VT claim Zito? Not holding anything back?

It's an assumption based on every claim made, except for our "Tracker" who I know is lying. I'm suggesting it is more likely mountainous than other possibilities yes.

I'm not holding anything back no.

Zito, why are you inclined to believe this is a mountainous game if you had a bulletproof vest in the first installment?

We're playing a different setup.

[VP Baltar]

We're playing a different setup.

Yeah...incorrect answer. Correct answer would be "because I'm not scum and didn't target anyone".

Scum confirmed.

[Papa Zito]

We're playing a different setup.

Yeah...incorrect answer. Correct answer would be "because I'm not scum and didn't target anyone".

Scum confirmed.

Yeah. If only that made sense.

Of course I didn't target anyone. I don't have a night action. We're playing a different setup and I don't get my bulletproof vest anymore.

[VP Baltar]

Ok, apart from my initial point about what a town member would have responded...how does you not having a bulletproof vest indicate that we are more likely to have a mountainous setup than anything else? That's not exactly conclusive evidence.

[Papa Zito]

Ok, apart from my initial point about what a town member would have responded...how does you not having a bulletproof vest indicate that we are more likely to have a mountainous setup than anything else? That's not exactly conclusive evidence.

There's not going to be conclusive evidence, VP. You know better.

Again, here's how I came to the conclusion.

1. The point of limited reveal is to hide something about the setup.
2. Nobody claimed a role-based action on Day 2.
3. Every claim, bar the scum's, has been VT.

If we're going to play the mod-guessing game, BigBear had to quickly turn a setup around so he picked a mountainous so there's no worry about PR balance issues. But I really don't care about this and just want charlatan lynched.

[Scien]

Coming into today, I knew I would claim.

Oh? Why? You would have pushed away from the no-lynch option based on your null tell on me and a guilty?

[Scien]

1. The point of limited reveal is to hide something about the setup.
2. Nobody claimed a role-based action on Day 2.
3. Every claim, bar the scum's, has been VT.

Speculation is fun, but with 4 dead pro-town people, and no way to know their role, there is no point in trying to determine setup. Just because we have a bunch of VT claims now doesn't mean everyone was VT.

Actually more to the point, trying to throw suspicion on someone based on them being the only person claiming a role is silly.

You think that I am wrong here? You think that ignoring what in townie shoes would be a fake guilty, that it is suspicious that there is only one claim?