Open 278: Empking's Five Player

[bvoigt]

Hey, everyone! Do you agree that we should no-lynch on D1?

[bvoigt]

Not for a while. I think we should all have a good idea of our suspicions at the start of D2.

[bvoigt]

I agree with the logic of a D1 no-lynch, but

since it was the first thing brought up obviously all scum has to do is agree

. Of course a lynch would benefit them more, but now they are just along for the ride till the end of day 1. How do we gain any suspicions if there is not people getting on and off wagons and pushing for a lynch? Who would be willing to cast a vote (for us to analyze and over analyze) if we all just agree on a no-lynch. Yes, a no-lynch is better but I wish we had had some discussion before somebody pointed it out.

FOS: Stefunny

It looks like you know I'm town, since I brought it up first and you're saying that scum are going to agree.

[bvoigt]

Not for a while. I think we should all have a good idea of our suspicions at the start of D2.

How do you plan to get a good idea of suspicions?

I guess a no lynch would be a good idea but professing it in the first post doesn't seem to be conducive to helping the town.

I still think we should play it like a normal day (FOS'ing our top scum candidates and everything), then no-lynch once discussion has stalled and everyone has solid opinions.

[bvoigt]

I already have a serious vote.

[bvoigt]

I agree with the logic of a D1 no-lynch, but

since it was the first thing brought up obviously all scum has to do is agree

. Of course a lynch would benefit them more, but now they are just along for the ride till the end of day 1. How do we gain any suspicions if there is not people getting on and off wagons and pushing for a lynch? Who would be willing to cast a vote (for us to analyze and over analyze) if we all just agree on a no-lynch. Yes, a no-lynch is better but I wish we had had some discussion before somebody pointed it out.

FOS: Stefunny

It looks like you know I'm town, since I brought it up first and you're saying that scum are going to agree.

Funny, how does it appear that I know you are town? For all I know you are scum and just trying to appear town. I just think it was silly to bring it up before anybody had a chance to begin discussion.

The bolded implies that I brought it up, and scum are going to agree. At least to me, it seems that you know I'm town.

I meant instead of voting we vote for the investigation. In retrospect, it's not actually that great an idea.

As Cthulu said, why are you backpedaling so quickly?

[bvoigt]

If we vote on who to investigate, what is the best strategy? Vote for someone who is hard to read? Or vote for your top suspect and hope for a guilty?

[bvoigt]

I've never played in a game where a No-lynch was even considered D1. When I count out deaths I count 2 a day, so I was sitting there eating lunch reading the thread on my phone and all I could think was in 2 days 4 will be dead, how does that make sense? Duh, no-lynch, that's how.

Stefunny didn't seem to realize that mafia have even night kills which seems like something mafia would know. I think she is probably town because of this.

You're right about this...Stefunny is probably town. Brokenscraps also looks town so far, so by process of elimination, the scumteam is Cthulhu/bv310.

UnFOS: Stefunny

bv310 hasn't done anything overly scummy, but I still don't like that he was so quick to change his mind when Cthulhu questioned him.

Cthulhu's posts seem to be focusing on defending himself and asking meaningless (not truly meaningless, just non-scumhunting related) questions rather than scumhunting. Also:

If it isn't this then please clarify your argument. However, I wasn't portraying bv310's actions as scummy, I was merely questioning his idea and then stating that I thought it was bad. It isn't scummy to have a bad idea, it is however to backpedal so quickly. Also I wasn't portraying my own actions as a town action; I was saying that I would have done that out of inexperience.

You weren't portraying his actions as scummy, yet you though it was scummy to backpedal so quickly? And as for the last sentence, the point is that you, if town, know that you are town. If you would rethink your own actions as town, why would you call someone scummy for rethinking?

CSI: Cthulhu

[bvoigt]

Slow reader?

[bvoigt]

Your first point is just silly. My last post was solely in defence of myself but the others have been okay; you even acknowledge that my questioning of bv310 was useful. You need to read my posts more carefully and stop misrepresenting them.

Eh, I guess you're right on this point. ISO makes posts such as #25 look much worse than they are.

I made it clear in my last post that I don't think it is scummy to have a bad idea. I didn't think it was scummy for bv310 to suggest his idea that we thought was bad, what was scummy though was his backpedalling. The two are different things.

At one point, you said, "I wasn't portraying bv310's actions as scummy." In other words, you didn't think anything he did was scummy. But now you're saying that his backpedaling was scummy. So why can't you keep your story straight?

I can see that your last point has a slight degree of merit however I think comparing my actions with bv310's isn't credible because they are too different. My rethinking was planning to make a random vote and then looking back at the set up and rules, this is because it is convention for starting a game and I would do that irrespective of my role. bv310's action is different because he backpedalled so quickly, but when the idea was shown to be good with the statistics, he was on side again. This could be seen as flippant and oppurtunistic. The actions are too differnet for a comparison between them to be valid. Your vague assertion that all actions that constitute rethinking are the same and therefore should be treated as either town or scum actions is peculiar. I don't really understand it.

You were going to make a random vote, but decided it against it because it would be a poor strategic decision regardless of alignment. bv310 had a different idea, but also changed his mind based on its strategic merits. It would have been anti-town not to change his mind, just like it would have been anti-town to random vote. So yeah, I do think these two examples of rethinking boil down to the same thing.

Overall I'd say your case is fairly weak and that you've decided to instruct the cop to investigate me quite prematurely, we are only on the second page, is that enough to get such solid reads as yours?

I'm just treating this as a regular page 2 vote...it's not like I can't change it if new information comes up.

[bvoigt]

bv310 hasn't done anything overly scummy, but I still don't like that he was so quick to change his mind when Cthulhu questioned him.

Doesn't seem right considering you also claim:

bv310 had a different idea, but also changed his mind based on its strategic merits. It would have been anti-town not to change his mind

You think he changed his mind for pro-town strategy ("doing this would be bad for town") rather than pro-scum strategy ("pushing this would look bad on me"), you think doing anything else would've been anti-town, yet you find it scummy (not "overly" but you do call him as part of a scum-team)?

unCSI: Cthulhu

CSI: bvoigt

The first quote refers to post #26, when he changed his mind without any real reason. The second quote refers to...actually, I guess he never explicitly said that he had re-changed his mind, but #33 was mainly adding to what you said in the post before it...using numbers to show why it

was

a good idea to have the cop claim. Basically, #26 was scummy; #33 was null because it would have been anti-town not to agree with your logic.

[bvoigt]

I honestly think BVoigt is probably scum. He was the first one to suggest a no-lynch and when I asked about the no lynch he seemed to get really defensive.

Do you have any examples of this defensiveness?

To the point where he seriously wanted to vote me because I thought a no-lynch suggestion was not a great idea (Granted, it was a good idea, I just was being a dolt.) It was just a quick vote that seemed sort of unfounded.

That's not why I FOS'ed you, though:

FOS: Stefunny

It looks like you know I'm town, since I brought it up first and you're saying that scum are going to agree.

[bvoigt]

How is #26 anything but null?

He was awfully quick to back down under questioning.

[bvoigt]

Do you really consider #25 to have provided any sort of pressure on bv310?

Not much, which makes it more odd IMO.

[bvoigt]

Do you really consider #25 to have provided any sort of pressure on bv310?

Not much, which makes it more odd IMO.

Or it suggests that it wasn't pressure that made him change his mind and he actually rethought whether it was a good idea or not, just like he said?

Maybe, but that's not how I interpret it.

[bvoigt]

I made it clear in my last post that I don't think it is scummy to have a bad idea. I didn't think it was scummy for bv310 to suggest his idea that we thought was bad, what was scummy though was his backpedalling. The two are different things.

At one point, you said, "I wasn't portraying bv310's actions as scummy."

In other words, you didn't think anything he did was scummy.

But now you're saying that his backpedaling was scummy. So why can't you keep your story straight?

You are misrepresenting me again. The bolded isn't true. In Post 27 I say his idea is bad (which isn't scummy), then I mention his backpedalling (which is). Then read Post 39 and Post 43 again where I've explained the same thing twice before. At no point did I mean what you said I meant in the above quote. Your attempts to twist my words and confuse the situation further is quite suspect.

Total misrepresentation. There's no way that "I wasn't portraying bv310's actions as scummy" could mean "I didn't think anything he did was scummy."

You were going to make a random vote, but decided it against it because it would be a poor strategic decision regardless of alignment. bv310 had a different idea, but also changed his mind based on its strategic merits. It would have been anti-town not to change his mind, just like it would have been anti-town to random vote. So yeah, I do think these two examples of rethinking boil down to the same thing.

Your case is ridiculous. I didn't decide against random voting because of it's strategic weakness, I didn't do it because of your post; had you not made it obvious that a no lynch was the way to go, I would not have noticed until afterwards. This is another example of misrepresentation.

Then why did you decide against random voting?

I don't get how it would be anti town not to change his mind, his idea was fundamentally a good one, so to stick with it would have been good. If your case rests on this then it is terrible.

First of all,

you

questioned his idea. And I was referring to when he re-changed his mind, and decided that it was a good idea after all. (Sorry, I should have made that more clear.)

It's very scummy that you should be pushing this case so hard (and voting for the cop to investigate me), especially as this case was first raised by brokenscraps in Post 36.

I feel like this sentence is OMGUS, plain and simple. Why is it scummy for me to push a case on you?

[bvoigt]

I agree, it is total misrepresentation again. You have taken it out of context; read Post 39. If you isolate a quote like that and then paraphrase it, so it looks like it has a different meaning, it's called misrepresentation. I have stated several times that I thought bv310's backpedalling was scummy, therefore your unnecessary paraphrase is incorrect and misrepresenting what I said. What the quote actually refers to is post 25 where I ask bv310 about his idea, the second part of the sentence (which you conveniently failed to quote) refers to post 27, where I do portray his actions as scummy. I admit that my sentence was poorly structured.

Oh, I think I finally get what you're saying.

However, I wasn't portraying bv310's actions as scummy, I was merely questioning his idea and then stating that I thought it was bad.

It isn't scummy to have a bad idea, it is however to backpedal so quickly.

These two look like a contradiction at first...but I guess it makes sense if they're referring to 2 different posts.

Your case is ridiculous. I didn't decide against random voting because of it's strategic weakness, I didn't do it because of your post; had you not made it obvious that a no lynch was the way to go, I would not have noticed until afterwards. This is another example of misrepresentation.

Then why did you decide against random voting?

The answer is in the quote. I didn't do it because you posted and made it clear that a no lynch was the best stratergy. Had I been the first to post I would have random voted then looked at the set up.

Sorry, I misread that. But it sounds like changing your mind

was

a strategic decision, just like bv310's changing his mind. (For those who have forgotten the original point, it was: "If you would rethink your own actions as town, why would you call someone scummy for rethinking?" BTW, this is my last quote wall for a while.)

I feel like this sentence is OMGUS, plain and simple. Why is it scummy for me to push a case on you?

It isn't, you are welcome to push a case on me, but it becomes scummy when your case is so weak that it's a waste of time.

I think it helps the town more to make a somewhat weak case than it does to focus on defending yourself and do no scumhunting at all.

[bvoigt]

If we're investigating the top suspect: Cthulu.

If we're investigating a more neutral suspect: bv310.

[bvoigt]

I think it helps the town more to make a somewhat weak case than it does to focus on defending yourself and do no scumhunting at all.

I don't know about that. However, you admit that your case on me is weak, but I am still your top suspect? To justify your 'cop vote' on me, would you mind backing it up with some evidence?

Unless someone scumslips badly, any case on page 3 will be weak. I think I've given a fair amount of evidence for this point in the game.

[bvoigt]

Unless someone scumslips badly, any case on page 3 will be weak. I think I've given a fair amount of evidence for this point in the game.

If you concede that your case is weak, and I haven't made a bad scumslip then why are you willing to waste an investigation on me, and end the day now. If you've given a fair amount of evidence, you won't mind quoting it.

A weak vote is better than a vote with no case behind it at all. As for the last sentence: feel free to ISO me.

[bvoigt]

We all seem to have a decent idea of our suspicions, and the game has sort of stalled, so....

VOTE: No Lynch

[bvoigt]

Naturally, since I'd prefer to get a guilty result, I'd rather have bv310 investigated. He could be town, of course, but I

know

I'm town.

From your perspective, brokenscraps, it also might be a better choice because bv310 hasn't posted as much as me. For that reason, I think he'd be more difficult to read.

[bvoigt]

CSI: bv310

[bvoigt]

Naturally, since I'd prefer to get a guilty result, I'd rather have bv310 investigated. He could be town, of course, but I know I'm town.

In post 69, you said I was your top suspect, with bv310 your neutral suspect. Why are you now wanting your neutral suspect to be investigated? Is it an admission that your case on me was rubbish? Why didn't you suspect Stefunny when both bv310 and Stefunny have been equally as apathetic?

You are still my top suspect, but the choice for investigation seems to be between me and bv310. I don't suspect Stefunny because she wasn't aware that scum could only kill on even nights.

[bvoigt]

Also, that last quote was out of context, so I added the next sentence back in.

[bvoigt]

You are still my top suspect, but the choice for investigation seems to be between me and bv310. I don't suspect Stefunny because she wasn't aware that scum could only kill on even nights.

Your first point is sort of Meh. On your second point, is that all it takes to convince you? You unconditionally think she's town because of one thing? Sounds a bit convenient.

At least in my experience, once someone "town-slips," it's a bad idea to go back on that read.

[bvoigt]

Lies! brokenscraps must be the

real

mafioso!

VOTE: brokenscraps

[bvoigt]

I'm a miller, I swear!

[bvoigt]

@mod:

In my situation, I really don't see any value in posting. Will you replace me if I don't post?

[bvoigt]

Crime is underrated.

[bvoigt]

UNVOTE: brokenscraps
VOTE: bvoigt

I might as well end the day with as little discussion as possible.

[bvoigt]

Yay.

[bvoigt]

Yeah, I wasn't a big fan of this game either. No one did anything wrong...it was well modded and everything, but just didn't hold my interest. I'm not sure if that was a fault of the setup or just caused by inactivity.

After arguing with Cthulhu for much of Day 1, I really didn't think he was going to be lynched. Nice job, bv310.