12 votes available, 7 votes needed to lynch.
Deadline is September 16, ~ 9 am PDT.
If you are town you should not be lazy. Being lazy as town does nothing to help the town. Scum still get their kill at night even if noone is lynched during the day. If you are town and are not helping the town you would make a good mislynch. The only reason I can see to not be active in a thread is if you are scum or if you are a PR that does not want to get NK'd N1 (such as a doctor or a cop).UncertainKitten wrote:What prevents townies from being lazy, especially in early game?Fair point on the second. There does exist vote hopping that can benefit scum more.
Again you skirted around this question, care to answer it?tanstalas wrote:EBWOP - Also you didn't explain why you forgot to leave out Zewt's vote on me in your analysis. Sub consciously protecting your scum-buddy?
I disagreee vees zees hyposezisUncertainKitten wrote:No, scum intent is a fuckton more reliable than "scumtells". Scum intent reads the person, not a checklist of what they do. Scumtells catch...the most active person. Regardless of their alignment. Scum intent can actually be intelligently read.
No, I didn't skirt the question, I flatly ignored it because it was ridiculous.tanstalas wrote:Again you skirted around this question, care to answer it?tanstalas wrote:EBWOP - Also you didn't explain why you forgot to leave out Zewt's vote on me in your analysis. Sub consciously protecting your scum-buddy?
I'll tell you what I think, I think you intentionally left it out, just like you intentionally made it seem that I OMGUS voted him, which I didn't; I think you are manipulating what actually transpired to make me look worse because you got caught in a fallacy that you were voting for me because I OMGUS voted someone when in fact it was your scum buddy who OMGUS voted me. Either that or you aren't paying attention to the game that closely, which makes me think you are scum as well.
Let's look how your posts went down
You claim your scum radar went off and you voted me
You were asked for reasons why you voted for me and you replied "Desperation" and that I OMGUS voted
Then after UK pointed out that your scum buddy was actually the one who OMGUS voted you came out and said that I was the one who came out more scummy and then made a summary post with what went down but changed a few key facts to make me look worse.
I really love how everyone seems to ignore the fact that LMP ignored the first OMGUS and instead decided to focus on my HOSing Zwet and finding that scummy. Also that that is the main reason why people have voted for me.Katsuki wrote:Late, me tired, comp not willing to cooperate much, so few thoughts.
Zwet claim/fake-claim - normal
Zwet votehopping/play after - not so much
Head says scum, gut says town.
What I don't get though, was that if zwet was trapping, why end trap to vote first voter... That said, Travis' reaction was quite overly defensive.
However,Vote: Tanstalus. His interaction with zwet bothers me, and he doesn't even vote zwet, but "HOS'es" him. This seems ridiculous to me, and feels like scum afraid to place vote and be accused of votehopping like zwet was. His essentially OMGUS vote on LMP makes me feel good about this vote.
Because I do agree that CT's vote on Zwet looked suspicious, he replaced his RVS vote with a serious vote just because Zwet "looked" scummy but didn't offer any reasons (also why my vote is sitting on LMP now) and he basically said "I have nothing so I'll switch my vote to this BW"Katsuki wrote:I'll iso LMP tomorrow, but for me, zwet OMGUS was consistant to how he played after claiming. Your reaction to his OMGUS was suspect.
Tell me this, why no vote and just a "OMGUS HOS"?
That'd be cause you're an idiot. But it's OK zwet, hopefully that vig will put you out of your misery eventually ^-^.zwetschenwasser wrote:I disagreee vees zees hyposezisUncertainKitten wrote:No, scum intent is a fuckton more reliable than "scumtells". Scum intent reads the person, not a checklist of what they do. Scumtells catch...the most active person. Regardless of their alignment. Scum intent can actually be intelligently read.
Town.tans wrote: @everyone, what alignment is most likely to not pay attention to detail in posts?
Then you're doing it wrong and you'll get a fuckton of false positives.tans wrote: If you are town you are scouring everyones posts for the smallest tell.
tanstalas wrote:
@everyone, what alignment is most likely to not pay attention to detail in posts?
Yes@everyone-Can you honestly say that you get a town vibe from either of these people?
Nuh-uh. (See what I did there?)tanstalas wrote:I really love how everyone seems to ignore the fact that LMP ignored the first OMGUS and instead decided to focus on my HOSing Zwet and finding that scummy. Also that that is the main reason why people have voted for me.Katsuki wrote:Late, me tired, comp not willing to cooperate much, so few thoughts.
Zwet claim/fake-claim - normal
Zwet votehopping/play after - not so much
Head says scum, gut says town.
What I don't get though, was that if zwet was trapping, why end trap to vote first voter... That said, Travis' reaction was quite overly defensive.
However,Vote: Tanstalus. His interaction with zwet bothers me, and he doesn't even vote zwet, but "HOS'es" him. This seems ridiculous to me, and feels like scum afraid to place vote and be accused of votehopping like zwet was. His essentially OMGUS vote on LMP makes me feel good about this vote.
Also LMP's responses so far have been a bunch of denial and deflection. Seriously, look at his ISO and tell me that doesn't look like scum.
In a lot of his posts in the game he seems to "misinterpret" or didn't pay attention to the posts.
ISO-3/4 - admits he didn't read the post he was referencing properly
ISO-5 - Votes me without any reason
ISO-6 - Claims he voted me because he is wary of people who shout OMGUS at first opportunityhe was asked for reasonsafter
ISO-7 -it is pointed out to him that Zwet was actually the first to OMGUS he makes up a little post and says that I voted when I didn't and leaves out the fact that Zwet actually DID Omgus voteAfter
ISO-8 - Says "oops - I thought you voted when you only HoS'd" Another reading comprehension fail I guess?
ISO-10 - Refuses to answer my question, calls the rest of my post bullshit
@everyone, what alignment is most likely to not pay attention to detail in posts?
If you are town you are scouring everyones posts for the smallest tell.
Look at LMP, and ask yourself, does it look like he is really paying attention to the game?
Even if LMP is town he is being very lazy with his posts. He posts with not enough facts/information in them. Twice other people (other than me) have pointed out this.
*Waits eagerly for LMP's "Nuh-uh" rebuttle post.*
Also in regards to Zwet - UK asked him a few questions as well, and he refused to answer them. As well as VasudaVa.
@everyone-Can you honestly say that you get a town vibe from either of these people?
On a sidenote - where the hell is drmyshottyizsik?
I don't think they're common, but they're a possibility, and I know this for a fact:In the aforementioned Ghostbusters game, I was scum and the mod specifically gave us three characters who weren't in the game, that we could use as fakeclaims. So yeah, that could be a possibility for this game as well.Dekes wrote:But to ask a little game theory: Are provided fakeclaims a common thing around here? I've read/skimmed a couple of themed games and I don't think I've ever come across mod-provided fakeclaims.
I don't think full claims are better early in the game. In fact, I don't like claims early in the game, because a townie making a fullclaim is just giving the mafia a target, while fakeclaims and soft claims are just pointless and distracting. What I do think is that once it's time to make a claim, full claims are better, because otheriwse it just feels like I'm neing teased with half the story and not the whole thing. Basically, I don't like claims to be used until necessary, but once they're used, I prefer full claims.UncertainKitten wrote:Coach Travis: Why are full claims better in such an early situation? Do you understand the (slight) benefits of locking claims vaguely as opposed to explicitly?
No-lynching is just plain bad, because lynching is the town's main weapon, so to waste it is to just give the mafia a free day to not worry. Basically, no-lynching means you have no chance of catching mafia, where lynching means you at least have a slight chance, so we may just have to smart with our lynches, make sure we're confident we're catching scum. Either way, not lynching is not an option.tanstalas wrote:On the topic of no-lynches though, what are your gyncuys opinion on a no-lynch? Since I asked the question I will answer it as well. I believe that a no-lynch can be a good strategy later in the game, however D1 town should ALWAYS get a lynch, even if it ends up being a mislynch as we can gain valuable information from whatever the person flipped, who was pushing hard for the lynch, etc.
tanstalas wrote:@everyone, what alignment is most likely to not pay attention to detail in posts
Not from zwet, no, but I actually like LMP for the most part. Aside from some mistakes in his recap, I think his points so far have been very good, and I definitely feel he's explaining himself well enough. You just don't like him because he's voting for you.tanstalas wrote:@everyone-Can you honestly say that you get a town vibe from either of these people?