Mini 1023 - City Watch Mafia - Game Over!

[jimfinn]

I, jimfinn, swear to uphold the Laws and Ordinances of the city of Ankh-Morepork, serve the public trust, and defend the subjects of his majesty Vetinari without fear, favor, or thought of personal safety; to pursue evil-doers and protect the innocent, laying down my life if necessary in the cause of said duty, so help me God. God save the King!

(I think I did that right)

[jimfinn]

Vote:VasudeVa

because I don't trust people with non-consecutive capital letters in their name

[jimfinn]

I don't really know the flavor, sorry. And yeah, the intro made it sound like he was haha.

[jimfinn]

Wait what? I have four votes? This seems suspicious, so I'll

unvote vote:Thor

for being the third vote on a wagon. Major scumtell.

[jimfinn]

Wait, reading the wiki for scumtells is bad? How are you supposed to learn to scumhunt?

[jimfinn]

I would say that scum wants to increase the number of people on a wagon in order to create pressure on a player, in the hopes that they make an exploitable mistake, yet when that player flips town, they will note be blamed for the lynch. With seven to lynch, 3rd vote is not to blame, but starts the ball rolling (same could be said of 4th, I suppose). One or two votes in RVS is not suspicious, but the third and fourth votes are (at least to my understanding).

[jimfinn]

Generally, wouldn't town want more discussion before starting a quick wagon, especially in a 12-player game (as opposed to 7 or 9)?

[jimfinn]

EBWOPDTCOT: I would say that to get the ball rolling would be a reasonable thing for scum or town to say, and is thus a null-tell.

[jimfinn]

@TBM: What does #41 mean? Sorry, confused by it.

[jimfinn]

@Fake: Alert players wouldn't accidentally lynch, and a wagon is much easier in a smaller game to shift as necessary.

[jimfinn]

The vote itself is the tell - because it has an inherent blamelessness should town lynch wrong. The reason for the vote would be a good way for scum to act town, or for town to act town. Basically, the vote itself is the scumtell, the reason provided is a null-tell

[jimfinn]

Edit By Way of Post Due To Conflict of Time (for the acronym explanation) (We posted at the same time)

I still believe the third vote on my wagon was the most suspect thing so far this game, and is the most major scumtell we have at this point. And not all third votes are scummy, RVS third votes are scummy (or at least as scummy as anything in RVS until someone dies).

[jimfinn]

Data as in...?

[jimfinn]

I don't have the numbers, no. I was just going by the article I read on scumhunting about two weeks back, and adding my own reasoning as to why. If this is considered poor play, I will

unvote

[jimfinn]

Can someone explain jellybean please? Never heard it and couldn't see it on the wiki.

[jimfinn]

I've gathered that in many mini themes, a name claim may be beneficial. I personally have no knowledge of the series from which the flavor is taken, but would it help here to those who are familiar with the flavor?

[jimfinn]

thanks - but the real question is, will a massnameclaim help the town?

[jimfinn]

@ Town as a whole: What should I do, full claim, name only, or no claim?

VOTE COUNT

jimfinn (4): Chronopie, FakeGod, VasudeVa, Mysterio
Tasky (1): TheButtonmen
FakeGod (1): Thor665
Mysterio (1): KHG
Chronopie (1): Tasky
Narsis (1): Plum
VasudeVa (1): Budja

Not Voting (2): Narsis, jimfinn

With 12 alive, 7 votes are needed to lynch.

[jimfinn]

I'm still trying to decide whether or not to claim, but Mysterio's insistence that I claim now certainly feels like scummy PR fishing, so I'm going to VOTE: Mysterio

[jimfinn]

@players on this forum for a long time: Is a scum with doublevote unthinkable? Perhaps he really does have a hidden doublevote, and is still scum. Just throwing another possibility out there.

[jimfinn]

Yes I do think he is scum, or at least has acted the most scummy of anyone so far. His odd comments and too-aggressive insistence on a MassRC sound like scum trying to skate by on a safeclaim and out PRs. However, I can't find any reason he would make up the one day double vote and expect us to believe him unless it were true (it's such an odd thing to claim), but he seems pretty scummy. I wanted to know if anyone else had experienced a D1-doublevoting scum before.

[jimfinn]

vote count please?

The "Calm down, there's one at the top of every page" VOTE COUNT

Mysterio (5): KHG, Tasky, VasudeVa, Narsis, jimfinn
jimfinn (2): Chronopie, FakeGod
Tasky (1): TheButtonmen
FakeGod (1): Thor665
Narsis (1): Plum
VasudeVa (1): Budja

Not Voting (2): Mysterio

With 12 alive, 7 votes are needed to lynch.

Everyone is well within the prod boundaries, I think everyone's actually posted in the last 24 hours. Good stuff.

[jimfinn]

I believe I am currently voting for Mysterio, but if not VOTE: mysterio

Ah, yes you were voting, my mistake. I'll edit it into the count.

@mod: I posted #150 knowing it would lead to a new page and thus a vote count; I just wanted to see it again.

OK. No worries!

[jimfinn]

@Buttonmen: Mysterio's still at L-2, not L-1

[jimfinn]

I missed FakeGod's vote thanks

[jimfinn]

@chronopie: from a person who doesn't know the flavor, which is the odd one out?

and one little thought regarding Mysterio: any chance a town PR (such as the thief mentioned) would want to claim VT and try to avoid the NK? If this is a reasonable possibility I might be tempted to unvote, for while I find him scummy, I certainly would rather not risk lynching a potential town PR day 1

[jimfinn]

I'm starting to feel a bit of suspicion towards VV for that vote as well, and I would also say that I don't see much of a case against Narsis right now - almost too off the wall to be scum - I would think scum would try to blend in more. I'm going to read FakeGod in iso now and see what I think, but I still find Mysterio PE#1

[jimfinn]

Can't figure out how to do more than one quote in a post, but I'd take a look at FakeGod's iso #11-13 in which he claims that role claims first help the town, then help the scum, then are very luck based and still scum leaning.

In other words, he wanted to encourage the massclaim at first, then on seeing opposition backs off to look more pro-town by admitting the massclaim

he supported

two posts earlier would actually benefit scum more. I find this rather scummy, and would say he has moved to being my #2 suspect after Mysterio, with #3 being VV

[jimfinn]

EBWOP: #187 was started when #182 was the last post made and I have not yet read anything more recent.

[jimfinn]

@Fake: I probably should not have used the word "claim" in 187 as a synonym to "suggests" or "appears to believe" given the context. Poor choice of wording. But either way, I would say that your ISO #11 appears rather strongly in support of a massclaim, while #12 and #13 appear to be backing off from this position/reversing it. It's something definitely for the rest of the town to take a look at, at least (though I am by no means suggesting a quick wagon-switch to your lynch)

[jimfinn]

@Thor: I'm advocating other players to analyze FakeGod more closely, as I do find his stance regarding the massclaim scummy, however, I think it is less scummy than Mysterio's actions, and think that the pressure should be kept on Mysterio.

[jimfinn]

@VasudeVA: How do you differentiate between pro-town and pro-scum wagoning in your opinion
@Mysterio: I'm still waiting for an explanation of your opinions regarding D1 massclaims. Please do so, or I will not move my vote.

[jimfinn]

@VV: Please answer the question in my last post: how do you bellieve scum players' wagoning differs from that of town players?

[jimfinn]

@ Mod: would it be reasonable to delete the post made by KHG's alt, since it is quoted in full later, just so that we don't become confused later?

I'd love to delete it, however, the forum won't let me. I'll get onto that.

[jimfinn]

EBWOP: haha same thing same time.

[jimfinn]

I am definitely starting to lean towards changing my vote to VasudeVa for his odd voting habits, though his analysis of the other three suspects does seem reasonable. I'm still waiting for an explanation of Mysterio's opinion switch regarding the massclaim.

[jimfinn]

The odd voting habits refers to what buttonmen pointed out in #225

[jimfinn]

Plum certainly makes an excellent case on both Tasky and KHG in #237. I don't want to move my vote away from Mysterio until I hear from him again, but Plum has brought me closer to voting for one of those two. I'm still holding suspicions on VV as well, though I would say he is my fourth suspect after the three above.

[jimfinn]

I've decided that Narsis and Tasky are buddying far too much, especially in the light of the arguments made in #246. I've also been slightly appeased by Mysterio's attitude in his most recent post, even though I'm still a bit suspicious of his original insistence on the massclaim. However, I think it is worth the vote switch, so I will

unvote

VOTE: Narsis

[jimfinn]

Two players that buddy extensively are likely to both be scum; Narsis's attack against the votes on Tasky certainly felt to me like one scum trying to save another. Narsis had a wagon on him already, Tasky did not. It was post #246 that made me reread Narsis, and agree that his posting habits have been suspicious at best, and especially in light of Mysterio's latest post, which did feel rather pro-town, gave me a reason to switch my vote.

[jimfinn]

Perhaps you are using the word buddy differently than I am. Scum are trying to save players who they KNOW are fellow scum from a lynch, and thus have incentive to aggressively attack these votes. A town player trying to save a non-confirmed town player would be less aggressive than attacking each individual vote, in my opinion.

[jimfinn]

@Thor: I am under-21. Do I assume that American beer is weak? Also, grok is roughly equal to gather, correct?

[jimfinn]

VOTE: Narsis as the other two players with votes on them at the end of Day 1 are now dead.

[jimfinn]

No, I'm saying that of the three under the most suspicion, only you are still alive.

[jimfinn]

at least, the discussion ought to start there, right?

[jimfinn]

except if it's a one day role, it doesn't do scum any good to find it, does it?

VOTE COUNT

Narsis (1): jimfinn
Chronopie (1): Narsis
VasudeVa (1): TheButtonmen

Not Voting (7): Chronopie, Budja, Plum, VasudeVa, Tasky, FakeGod, Thor665

With 10 alive, 6 votes are needed to lynch.

[jimfinn]

I think if someone didn't know Mysterio could doublevote, they might accidentally lynch a wagon Mysterio was part of when trying to L-1 someone. So yes, the information could help us I suppose.

[jimfinn]

I think there are many scummy players; too many for them all to be scum. Narsis is certainly one of the scummier players, but I won't say with confidence that he is.

[jimfinn]

UNVOTE: VOTE: FakeGod on the basis of voting for someone who they don't believe is scum. Encouraging the town to lynch VIs is very scummy play.

[jimfinn]

Re: Narsis

I still find him to be scummy, but less so than FakeGod.

General theory discussion relevant to this game but more in general:

Scum know that they need a certain number of mislynches to win the game. Encouraging the town to lynch a VI rather than true scumhunting, or encouraging the town to lynch a player who someone believes is town due to an annoying playstyle accomplishes scum one of those mislynches and minimizes the number of people who will disagree with them for pushing the lynch. Therefore, it is a good idea for scum to lynch VIs, and that is why I voted FakeGod.

@ Thor

I was going by the wikitell of 3rd vote on an RVS wagon is scum simply as a way of starting discussion and because I had read the wiki in the hopes of trying to improve my scumhunting ability. I don't think anyone (including myself) ought to use such a broad scumtell once the RVS is over (as it now is)

[jimfinn]

Dorfl could be a safeclaim if not counterclaimed, don't let the claim get him off the hook.

[jimfinn]

@everyone: I forgot that Dorf'l was the power of the day when I said it could be a safeclaim, probably due to my lack of knowledge of the flavor. I am now inclined to believe his claim and that he is town.

[jimfinn]

Responding to massprod, I'm feeling more and more pro-town about Thor, and I don't want to lynch FakeGod today (though I certainly won't ignore the possibility later), but I'm not particularly sure who I want to vote for right now, as all the suspicions I've been having are lessening and the pro-town players looking scummier until it's all a giant mess.

[jimfinn]

Having reread page 25, I'm getting a very scummy vibe from the interaction of VV and TBM. TBM seems to be beating a dead horse way too much over the Vimes claim issue, and acts like flailing scum. I am prepared to hammer, but will not do so until the end of Plum's V/LA in order to allow her to post regarding all that has happened in her absence.

[jimfinn]

@Thor: could we be looking at an 8:4 with a massively powerful town? That might explain the vanilla goon despite day and night town PRs

[jimfinn]

I agree with the above that the use of Strength after nearly the full town told him not to, as it would be inherently an anti-town move, makes FakeGod likely to be scum for either acting against the town's best interest or for not reading the thread carefully.
Therefore I
VOTE: FG

[jimfinn]

Your initial claim made me not want to lynch you today, FG. Your use of your power after it was generally agreed that it was anti-town to do so, however, feels very scummy. My vote remains on you.

[jimfinn]

Post 710 is a serious statistical fail. The chance of the one player being chosen Day 4 in this scenario to be scum (assuming no scum are lynched D3 or killed N3) is 2/7 = 28%, not 75%. The chance of scum being chosen on any individual day is simply scum remaining over total remaining. You cannot assume that the previous choice of town has any impact on future choices. This is the Gambler's Fallacy.

[jimfinn]

I am Constable Shoe, Vanilla Townie.