A Storm of Swords - Lay your swords down!

[DrippingGoofball]

Also Goofball vote is serious. I'm getting the feeling Goofball came swinging out day 1 with a gameplan and the self voting threw a spanner in the works.

Hahahahaha

The self-voting is a spinner for what plan? You're ridiculous.

OH nooooes! The townies are self-voting!!!! What are we gonna do? We can't put away our game-breaking townie-killing gameplan, we MUST FOIL THIS MADNESS!!!

Yeah.

[GreyICE]

Also Goofball vote is serious. I'm getting the feeling Goofball came swinging out day 1 with a gameplan and the self voting threw a spanner in the works.

Hahahahaha

The self-voting is a spinner for what plan? You're ridiculous.

OH nooooes! The townies are self-voting!!!! What are we gonna do? We can't put away our game-breaking townie-killing gameplan, we MUST FOIL THIS MADNESS!!!

Yeah.

I dunno, it was serious enough you threatened to vig people. Everyone tell me if this looks like a joke post:

Hi,

I will vig anyone that raises themselves beyond this post.

So, you tell me. What was so serious that you attempted to shortcut even any DISCUSSION of self-voting? Why are you playing this off like some huge joke? Why are you threatened and defensive?

[danakillsu]

vote: Mikujin

For being the last to self-raise.

raise: DGB

For pointing out how stupid it is to self-raise. We all get that you want to tell us you're town and you trust yourself. It doesn't even need to be stated. Now start trying to play the actual game.

[GreyICE]

I am playing the actual game. I am trying to help the town win by keeping the powers out of the hands of players I don't trust. At the moment that's, well... everyone.

[MagnaofIllusion]

I have infinite multiple dayvig powers. I'm swinging Excalibur.

That’s not a reason. That’s fluff, but I know how you roll so I'm not surprised.

But now that DGB and others have killed the possible useful information that could be gleaned from the self-raise / raise others information I’m going to explain why it would have been better to let it go for several pages before getting all up in arms about it.

I went back to Clash of Kings and did a quick survey. The Day 1 Raise there had 26 players available. For some ungodly reason Unsight never raised. That leaves 25 who actually raised that day.

10 made their first raise themselves.
15 made their first raise another.

Of the 10 who first raised themselves 3 were scum. Of the 15 who first raised another 6 were scum. So a 30% rate on self-raises and 40% rate on non-self raises. Keep in mind this is a brief skim just looking at the first raise vote. Some chose to hold onto their own first raise for a significant amount of time. I’m sure looking at post 1 to 3 first raises versus later first raises might provide even more info. But I’m not going to bother with that now since the rose is off the bloom as it were.

So yes, waiting patiently would have given us some information to mine down the line. But you guys had to go and ruin it. Thanks.

--

THIS IS NOT RVS. SCUM WILL SEEK TO RAISE OTHER SCUM.

Actually I don’t think a single scum in Clash of Kings (8 total Mafia, the SK is ignored since he couldn’t raise a partner) raised a partner in the initial raise votes. There was some interesting cross-raising going on but no direct partner to partner raises.

@MoI - at the moment, 'few' is composed solely of me.

Then really it isn’t a few unless you have voices in your head you are counting we don’t know about. For that reason I don’t buy your hedging here. If you only trusted yourself you would have said “I’m the only player I trust”. For someone who prides themselves on strong oratory skills I’m not sure I buy your explanation.

Noooooottt really, no. Don't have this amazing desire to find out what scum can do with a governor power. Don't have an amazing desire to find out if there's any powers that scum have brought online with this "Hand of the King" mechanic. Don't have any desire to find out that they have some sort of godfather powers or turn cops naive, or can get some cool thing if they're hand.

Clash of Kings says there is no special power provided to anyone by the Raising process other than the explicit Governor ability. Percy as scum was Raised to be a double-voter in Clash and got nothing else with it. So this probably is a little more paranoia than anything.

--

No, you're scummy for Raising without voting and your only justification for self-raising being "a concise way to piss off zoraster."

Explain the scum motivation to pissing of zoraster as a newer player for me again. Because I missed it the first time.

--

How many VIs do you count in this game, Magna?

Based on personal experience and the player list as it is constituted now I see 1 player I consider a lock VI and 3 border-line cases who I might get the pass. There are 3 players I have no direct knowledge about who are new enough that they might also get the VI / newb pass.

Your point in asking?

[DrippingGoofball]

I dunno, it was serious enough you threatened to vig people. Everyone tell me if this looks like a joke post:

Oh yeah, everyone is scared I'm going to dayvig 6 players before page 3. That was real serious. And I'm so totally a dayvig, right? Cuz that's totally how I'd use the power, the logic is implacable. REAL CLAIM: Dayvig, yeah!

So, you tell me. What was so serious that you attempted to shortcut even any DISCUSSION of self-voting?

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah? Self-voting is something we should DISCUSS???????????????????? Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah? Let's all self-vote!!! YAY!!! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah??????????????

[DrippingGoofball]

Of the 10 who first raised themselves 3 were scum. Of the 15 who first raised another 6 were scum. So a 30% rate on self-raises and 40% rate on non-self raises.

But is that significantly better than chance? Chance is 36% of players are expected to be scum in either group. So a 4-6% difference from chance with a sample size of 25 isn't significant enough to bother with the actual calculations to determine significance.

[Bunnylover]

Vote: DGB

I have to be in agreeance with GreyICE at the moment. You only know your alignment and no one else's alignment, so self raising is actually the only logical move at the moment.

Raise: Bunnylover

Lets face it, for those who have played with me, you know that the only way for me to be good is to be unlynchable v_v. So those who were in Gorrad favorite ficitional mafia game, unraise your hand for yourself and raise it for me.

[danakillsu]

I am playing the actual game. I am trying to help the town win by keeping the powers out of the hands of players I don't trust. At the moment that's, well... everyone.

Wrong. You are not keeping anything from happening by raising yourself. If we wanted to raise somebody else, we could do so whether you were raising yourself, someone else, or no one. Your job in this game is to convince other people that certain players are town or scum, and a raise of yourself because "you trust yourself and nobody else" doesn't help anyone. Let me put it this way: Do you lynch vote exclusively to see the person you vote for lynched?
If no, then you shouldn't raise vote exclusively to see the person you raise vote for raised.
If yes, you've got serious problems.

[DrippingGoofball]

Vote: DGB

I have to be in agreeance with GreyICE at the moment. You only know your alignment and no one else's alignment, so self raising is actually the only logical move at the moment.

Really? So, not raising isn't an option? You HAVE to self-vote? If you don't, you're illogical? Those self-votes don't all cancel each other out, right? And they're not an excuse for people not to commit, right? And they can't cause a winner with only 3 votes because everyone is busy self-voting, right?

[danakillsu]

I went back to Clash of Kings and did a quick survey. The Day 1 Raise there had 26 players available. For some ungodly reason Unsight never raised. That leaves 25 who actually raised that day.

10 made their first raise themselves.
15 made their first raise another.

Of the 10 who first raised themselves 3 were scum. Of the 15 who first raised another 6 were scum. So a 30% rate on self-raises and 40% rate on non-self raises. Keep in mind this is a brief skim just looking at the first raise vote. Some chose to hold onto their own first raise for a significant amount of time. I’m sure looking at post 1 to 3 first raises versus later first raises might provide even more info. But I’m not going to bother with that now since the rose is off the bloom as it were.

So yes, waiting patiently would have given us some information to mine down the line. But you guys had to go and ruin it. Thanks.

And yet the very fact that you know this statistic tells us that scum could easily have seen this and decided to self-raise because "that's what town does".

[GreyICE]

*snip wall of text*

I'm fine with being paranoid if it means that no one gets us from left field. I've stated before, I'll state it again - I don't like the governor power in play in the first place, and I don't trust whoever gets it.

As for your datamining, it's obviously worthless. One player voted themselves instead of another, and it would be 40% scum voted self, 33% voted town. A swing of one person would reverse your so-called results. That's below the noise level, and no useful data can be gleaned except that scum are reasonably good at blending in with town -

when there's no useful ability to be gleaned.

That was true in CoK. Do I trust it's true here and now? No.

Honestly, I really want to kick you. A 25 person sample is nowhere near enough to get below noise on anything less than a 30-40% difference. I'm glad you brought it up now, because there's a chance you could derail a scum wagon with an argument that fucking poor. If you have any more terrible statistics that are below noise level, please don't share them with us.

[Shadow1psc]

And we've already hit WIFOM. Hurray, congratulations on nullifying an entire argument.

[zoraster]

GreyICE comes across as dumb (he seems unable to understand that just as he doesn't trust anyone else and would prefer to have the power in his hands, everyone else feels the same way), but I'm not sure about scummy at this point.

My suggestion is simply to stop raising anyone at all until things are a little more settled. By halfway through the day, we can make town reads PLUS we can make reads based on Hand raises.

One thing is for sure: the Hand should be picked by at least a large plurality. We can't let it be picked by 2 or 3 people.

[GreyICE]

I am playing the actual game. I am trying to help the town win by keeping the powers out of the hands of players I don't trust. At the moment that's, well... everyone.

Wrong. You are not keeping anything from happening by raising yourself. If we wanted to raise somebody else, we could do so whether you were raising yourself, someone else, or no one. Your job in this game is to convince other people that certain players are town or scum, and a raise of yourself because "you trust yourself and nobody else" doesn't help anyone. Let me put it this way: Do you lynch vote exclusively to see the person you vote for lynched?
If no, then you shouldn't raise vote exclusively to see the person you raise vote for raised.
If yes, you've got serious problems.

I'm town. That's fine.

I'll help you find scum. You'll note I'm voting for DrippingGoofball. Follow my vote. It helps you find scum.

[Bunnylover]

Vote: DGB

I have to be in agreeance with GreyICE at the moment. You only know your alignment and no one else's alignment, so self raising is actually the only logical move at the moment.

Really? So, not raising isn't an option? You HAVE to self-vote? If you don't, you're illogical? Those self-votes don't all cancel each other out, right? And they're not an excuse for people not to commit, right? And they can't cause a winner with only 3 votes because everyone is busy self-voting, right?

If you really think this player list is stupid and will actually allow someone to win with 2 or 3 hand raises, then my vote is where is should be <_<.
Raising the hand and not raising the hand means at the last moment possible someone could raise their hand and win with 1 raised hand. Do you want that to happen? Frankly I would because that would confirmed that person as anti-town/scum.
IF your going to raised, the logical move is to do it on yourself. You know I was excluding the possibility of not self-raising.

This is just like Super Smash Bros. Brawl where we had to nominate a person every day to get the smash ball. Eventually, were going to pick a person as a town and give them this power.

[Magua]

How many VIs do you count in this game, Magna?

Based on personal experience and the player list as it is constituted now I see 1 player I consider a lock VI and 3 border-line cases who I might get the pass. There are 3 players I have no direct knowledge about who are new enough that they might also get the VI / newb pass.

Your point in asking?

Because I am leery of people who say "Policy lynching a VI D1 is the smart move" when there's more than one VI.

GreyICE thinking that DGB was serious with the day vig claim is worrying. However, GreyICE's #61 with the statistical rebuttal to Magna is so incredibly townie I had to go and change my pants.

[Twilight Sparkle]

Explain the scum motivation to pissing of zoraster as a newer player for me again. Because I missed it the first time.

There's no motivation for either faction. But someone who's scum is more likely to be primed to troll. Especially since this is Shadow's first large game on mafiascum. Scum tend to like to show false bravado, in my experience.

Based on personal experience and the player list as it is constituted now I see 1 player I consider a lock VI and 3 border-line cases who I might get the pass. There are 3 players I have no direct knowledge about who are new enough that they might also get the VI / newb pass.

Zdenek any of these people?

And we've already hit WIFOM. Hurray, congratulations on nullifying an entire argument.

Expand on this.

My suggestion is simply to stop raising anyone at all until things are a little more settled. By halfway through the day, we can make town reads PLUS we can make reads based on Hand raises.

This is where it's at.

-hito

[Shadow1psc]

And yet the very fact that you know this statistic tells us that scum could easily have seen this and decided to self-raise because "that's what town does".

"Scum could be self voting because they know its town. Or they could be self voting because they know we know scum knows its town" etc etc etc.

[Locke Lamora]

Unvote; Vote: DGB

I'm not seeing the usual aggressive scumhunting/unfounded declarations in the vein of 'x is town and y is scum' that I expect from a pro-town DGB. The LMP vote is weak and hasn't been followed up on, which makes me doubt how scummy DGB found either of the things she based it on.

[Shadow1psc]

Summation; there's absolutely no way to call self voting and such a low volume of content scum or town.

[MagnaofIllusion]

But is that significantly better than chance? Chance is 36% of players are expected to be scum in either group. So a 4-6% difference from chance with a sample size of 25 isn't significant enough to bother with the actual calculations to determine significance.

As I said it was a quick glance at the raw data. The more useful data would probabaly have been to look at the ratio of those who self-raised in their first 3 posts versus those who didn’t and then look at the rations of those who self-raised in the first vote later versus those who didn’t.

But as I said … it’s pointless now.

--

Lets face it, for those who have played with me, you know that the only way for me to be good is to be unlynchable v_v. So those who were in Gorrad favorite ficitional mafia game, unraise your hand for yourself and raise it for me.

Let me be frank Bunny. No way in hell. In Gorrad’s game your strength was that you were deemed unkillable and were left alone by the scum for Nightkills. It wasn’t your stellar scum-hunting or decision making.

--

And yet the very fact that you know this statistic tells us that scum could easily have seen this and decided to self-raise because "that's what town does".

Enter WIFOM. And those who didn’t play the first game are less likely to know the history and thus aren’t going to be influenced by that knowledge.

Let me ask you dana – did you know this statistic? You played in the first game.

--

As for your datamining, it's obviously worthless. One player voted themselves instead of another, and it would be 40% scum voted self, 33% voted town. A swing of one person would reverse your so-called results. That's below the noise level, and no useful data can be gleaned except that scum are reasonably good at blending in with town - when there's no useful ability to be gleaned. That was true in CoK. Do I trust it's true here and now? No.

Dismissing that any possible information can be gleaned from information in a similar past game is short-sighted.

Honestly, I really want to kick you. A 25 person sample is nowhere near enough to get below noise on anything less than a 30-40% difference. I'm glad you brought it up now, because there's a chance you could derail a scum wagon with an argument that fucking poor. If you have any more terrible statistics that are below noise level, please don't share them with us.

Did you miss the part where I said the real important data would be mined at a deeper level? Ok thanks. And the little strawman you throw out here about ‘derailing a scum wagon’ is noted. You are pre-supposing how the information would be used when there is no evidence that it would be used in that manner. Especially since, as I said in that post, the likely relevant trends from Clash have been rendered useless the discussion already.

I notice you didn't address my response to your statement that your all-caps statement about scum seeking to raise Partners. Do you really think they would go out of the way to immedaitely draw links to each other?

--

One thing is for sure: the Hand should be picked by at least a large plurality. We can't let it be picked by 2 or 3 people.

Are you honestly suggesting no-one would be moving their Raise votes as play developed? That’s rather foolish to assume. A similar pattern happened in Clash (lots of early scattered raises) and eventually Percy was raised by Majority based on his Town looking play (which was a facade of course).

--

Because I am leery of people who say "Policy lynching a VI D1 is the smart move" when there's more than one VI.

Yet that’s not the point I was making thanks. I expanded on Benmage’s ‘policy lynch’ statement that brought forth the concept of VIs to specifically state that VI players should not be given a pass if they play scummy.

If I supported a Day 1 policy lynch on Chess I’d be voting for him.

My question to you – why no direct questions for Benmage based on this reasoning? He suggested that there are more than one VI in his post.

--

Zdenek any of these people?

No. I’ve played with him in multiple games. He’s not Glork but he’s far and away not a VI.

There's no motivation for either faction. But someone who's scum is more likely to be primed to troll. Especially since this is Shadow's first large game on mafiascum. Scum tend to like to show false bravado, in my experience.

So you are saying Shadow, as scum in his very first Large game, would be well served trolling and bringing attention to himself? Sorry, I don’t see the logic there.

[Shadow1psc]

To be fair, I don't see many games hit the ground running so hard. There's usually a few pages of random-whatever-stage before people start harping on things, so I threw down some comedy. Though I'm glad I could be a catalyst of discussion.

[danakillsu]

Enter WIFOM. And those who didn’t play the first game are less likely to know the history and thus aren’t going to be influenced by that knowledge.

Let me ask you dana – did you know this statistic? You played in the first game.

"Less likely" doesn't really matter. Let me sum it up:
1) Some people are less likely to even know about the first game, but we don't know which ones do know.
2) Non-self-raisers (based on the first game) APPEAR to be less likely town than self-raisers, but we don't know which ones of the non-self raisers are maf.
Add in the fact that many of the people here DID play in the first one, and your theory is shot.
Yes, I did know this general trend, though I didn't know the actual statistic. I was maf in the first one and didn't self-raise, because I genuinely thought it was stupid.

[chesskid3]

/waits for ChessKid to come in and create 10 pages based on why people should mass nameclaim for governer status.

Mini Theme != large theme. Shut up.

Unvote

Vote: Shadow

Go read Pirates mafia that just ended, this idiot blew it in LYLO in a spectacular fashion.


..GreyIce is also scum. Fake "lol i don't trust anyone but me" is fake.

Raise: Dana

<3