Mini 1281: Walrus Mafia (Game Over)

[Magister Ludi]

Vote: Hoopla

You are scary as scum.... too scary to be left alive...

[Magister Ludi]

Don, I modded you.

Are you more afraid of good players when they are scum, or VI's?

[Magister Ludi]

And a few questions I need answered,

Exley;
1. are you interested in town exploiting any advantage it has to win?
2. Should people who purposefully seem to play anti-town, (such that they fail to maximize the chance town has to win) be lynched straight up?
3. Is information and activity pro-town?

[Magister Ludi]

And,

Unvote
Vote: Ellibereth

[Magister Ludi]

Not that I know of. I can elucidate more after he answers.

[Magister Ludi]

I actually think Elli's no lynch vote was a planned move that looks likely to come from scum.

It allows him to parlay his vote into either a vote on some random townie that ignores his vote under the pretense of 'scum ignoring my controversial move so as not to get their feet wet' Or vote anyone that votes him under the pretense 'scum looking for an easy target, revote; boomheadshot', (since common site metagame is that self voting is scummy,)

Town motivation looks minimal. He doesn't actually want a no lynch, and if he does (lol?) that is vote-able. I suppose he could be trying to 'shake up the waters', but since he doesn't appear to be doing that, I've discarded that avenue of thought.

[Magister Ludi]

Ninjaed. I'm not asking random off the cuff questions here. I have a purpose, rainbow.

Also, examining the abstract, if you think no lynch voting is a null tell, I have a hard time seeing how you connect the dots to theory discussion being not a null tell.

[Magister Ludi]

Hoopla, the premise you're operating under is that things more likely to come from scum than town should be ignored if we think the player in question is too stupid (which I see nothing to support Elli is stupid) to think about the possible negative ramifications acting in such a (scummy) way could cause them?

[Magister Ludi]

Exactly, the point is his no lynch vote is not a mean to an end to no lynch. He voted no lynch for a purpose, and those are the reasons I outlined above. He can turn around his vote onto a hapless town player (assuming he is scum) with 'legitimate' reasoning. I don't really see any town motivation for voting no lynch. That leads me to believe it is anti-town motivated.

So I disagree that there is no sneaky thought out motivation unless he does this in every game (and I don't believe he does).

[Magister Ludi]

I quickly skimmed through about six completed games of Ellibereth's . The only game where he voted no lynch out of the gates is

Open 328, where he was scum.
Prozacs Basic Theme 3, also scum

Other games I looked at were;
TvTropes
Momento
mini1256
mini1219

all where he was town, no no lynch vote.

Now, I repeat, my questions were not 'pointless theory'. I already said I would explain them, after I was answered.

[Magister Ludi]

Yeah, but Ellibereth hasn't engaged in pro-town debate of any sort. It has been you and me.

[Magister Ludi]

Another completed game, Mini 1236 he was scum and did not self vote I believe those are now his seven most recently completed games.

[Magister Ludi]

Were you scum in that game Elli?

[Magister Ludi]

Hoopla, for one thing 3/4 of Ellie's last completed games as scum started with a no lynch vote. I appear to have been (from a quick skim), the only person to actually call this out. You like Empirical evidence, right?

I attribute negative and positive consequences directly to the player in question. If Ellie had parlayed his no lynch vote into something pro-town, he would get townie points. If no one commented on his no lynch vote, it would still have had all of the negative connotations I described, but none of the positive that have sprung from it. I hardly see trying to figure this out is silly.

[Magister Ludi]

Elli, you had seven different players post after you, all ignoring the no lynch vote, or at least avoiding directly commenting on it, since my vote means I wasn't ignoring it. If you wanted to make some argument that scum were 'ignoring your outlandish play' you could have done so. But you didn't

[Magister Ludi]

Erm, you only seem to vote no lynch out of the gates as scum. The evidence is there. There seems to be a semi direct connection between Elli scum and no lynch voting, outside of anything else entirely. This is both not funny and pretty important. And to the negative, an easy vote move onto a weak player with crappy reason that appears justified but is actually contrived

I sort of amazed at the number of times you have done it as scum. I actually doubted myself after seeing the number of times that you would do it again. But obviously that didn't stop you on the second or third time, and you weren't directly called out in those games, so I see no reason you would stop on a potential fourth. You probably thought it was really 'townie looking'

[Magister Ludi]

Hoopla, what? Your first sentence makes no sense. Can you rephrase. I think you missed my point.

If after 7 games of looking, he's committed the action primarily when he is scum and only as scum, there is enough probable cause there for me to reaffirm my suspicion enough.

[Magister Ludi]

Ok. That weakens that point to a degree.

The percentage of times you've done it as mafia seems to outweigh the number of times you do it as town. Am I wrong in saying this?

[Magister Ludi]

I've sort of changed how I play as town. I used to assume scum would be smart and willy enough not to commit anti-town actions, and would avoid actively committing them. (this seems to be site meta) That wasn't working so well. I've seen a greater correlation with someone flipping scum if they are playing in a manner I determine is anti-town. I think scum believe town won't figure this out.

So I call it like I see it. I think no lynching is more likely to come from scum than town. You voted no lynch. I acted accordingly. It was nothing against you personally. I'm not going to be brushed off because you may have this meta or that meta in previous game (and the meta in this case did nothing to disuade my suspicion)

[Magister Ludi]

Rainbow, you asked for some evidence, I provided it, now its not good enough? Can you explain what exactly were you looking for?

10 out of 10 games as scum voting no lynch but not ever doing it as town???

[Magister Ludi]

No it doesn't. Lets use your rope example. You pick up a rope and hang someone. Kill them. This is all negative. Now just by chance, Bill Gates is walking by, gets inspiration from the hanging scene, and invents a teleportation device. (who knows why he got inspiration, he just did) Just because another person caused something positive from the action of hanging someone doesn't mean I am attributing positive to you at all.

Your action was only detrimental, it was just by chance there was a net positive attached to it.

What I'm saying is, voting no lynch to me is scummy. Had nothing else happened, the pristine unblemished scum tell would still exist on Elli's record in this game. It is all negative. Yet, someone comes along, me, you, joe blow, whoever,and turns it into a positive (if we are assuming the subsequent discussion is positive) Attributing this positive externality to ellibereth is illogical.

[Magister Ludi]

I'm not ignoring evidence, Elli, I already acknowledged that that particular point is weakened by the fact you do it as town. If you still do it a greater percentage of time as scum, like 3/4, 75% vs 5/massive town database, then it conceivably still exists. If you only did it as town, a la the pooky promise (metagame breaking essentially) you would have a point. But you don't seem to, and to characterize me as ignoring your town no lynch votes in the past is not true.

You're telling me, also, that voting on what I think is scummy and anti-town is silly? I don't believe that.

[Magister Ludi]

Ok, hoopla. If the rope was additionally extra negative, that is even worse. What I am saying is that the initial action was rotten. Negative. By itself, pristine, without being birthed into this blender of a game. Anything else is incidental. I found the initial no lynch worthy of a vote. Just because 'good' has come from it means nothing, just as if 'bad' comes from a 'good' action. The initial good action is not blemished.

I am not saying it has net negative. I am saying the originating action(s) was negative.