Mini 518: Underground Mafia, The Nightmare is Over!

[jerubbaal]

/confirm

[jerubbaal]

vote: curiouskarmadog

[jerubbaal]

Korlash (BTW, I don't actually think the card is that strong, but then again I don't play black much), I haven't heard much out of you except for jokes and a degree of nervousness, which seems misplaced as we are just in the random voting stage. The votes right now (very likely) are not being placed primarily because of suspicion and will not (very likely) lead to a lynch. It's just pressure, and you seem to be squirming a little bit. And if you weren't being defensive before, post 54 was certainly defensive.

Jitsu, decent scumhunting, putting out the facts of what's been going on without much distortion, very good. Clarity is always in the town's interest, and distortion of arguments and actions is always bad, so I'm happy so far.

Jayalay is pretty much the only other person to post a direct question, and we haven't heard from her since. Asking for reasons does definitely seem like a plus, as the more reasons we have listed, the more precisely we can analyze the contradictions in claims. I really like the fact that everything anyone says is permanently on record, so we can look back and make sure everything is consistent.

Everyone else, input would be appreciated. And simply unvoting doesn't seem to move us out of the random vote stage much at all. It's not like there's a hard line when random voting stops and real voting begins. I made this logical mistake last game, asserting that random votes are not "real" votes. Every vote is real and can tell us a great deal of information. We just have to be careful to take all context (such as random voting stage) and/or reasons expressed into consideration and not make those votes mean something they don't mean. Again, clarity is probably one of the best allies the town has.

[jerubbaal]

Massclaim seems pretty dumb, especially as we don't even really know the type of scenario we're in, i.e. which power roles are present, number of mafia, third parties, etc.... It would seem really impossible to evaluate whatever information we got from such a claim, as we don't even really have much of a framework. I can potentially see some scenarios where an immediate massclaim would facilitate the town (I think I read on the wiki about someone breaking a certain format by realizing a massclaim almost always meant town win, don't remember the format or the person, but I think it's there somewhere), but that seems far from wise here with so many unknowns.

However, we do need to start picking out the first candidates for lynch

This is very sketch. We're in no hurry here. I certainly agree, Korlash is at the top of my list of suspicious characters, mainly because he seems to be talking himself in circles, but for the moment I think our priority is to get some constructive discussion going. We have quite a few people who haven't said much at all yet, and it seems much, much to soon to even get started thinking about a lynch. Pressure is all fine and well at this point, but the last thing we want is a quick lynch. I'm not so worried about scum jumping in and hammering, as that would be suicide, but moreso worried about some newbie (I think we have some in this game even newer than myself) jumping on a bandwagon without checking the vote count or some such. You appear to have itchy britches, my friend.

Korlash, you seem to be saying (correct me if I'm wrong) that you don't like pressure votes, and that we should be exploring other ways of starting discussion without necessarily voting. There's certainly something to be said for these alternative methods that you listed, but pressure votes seem to be a pretty surefire way to get someone to respond when they have done something sketchy.

I do like that idea... If all the town claim then it wont matter who gets NKed because we would know the mafia. But the downside is the claim "Vanilla towny" kills this plan off... every mafia would claim it, the vanilla townies would claim it, and some power roles would claim it... so... yeah I don't think it will ever be in play, unless theres a fully power role game ever done.

I'm sorry man, but duh. You're just echoing Nym's reasons for not suggesting such a massclaim and making it sound like your insight.

As for Miztef's comment on a vote, I have said numerous times I do not think a random/pressure vote helps out that much. Especially when you can turn it around as an OMGUS vote. Plus your not really scummy with a fourth vote, so I see no reason to add one on you. And no offense.. but only 3 people have posted sense you voted me, so the odds were against you gaining a vote.

As for my vote or talk thing it was merely for Jitsu's question. Even though there are a million(Exaggeration) things we can do, we still shouldn't do them. I just wanted to make that clear in case anyone tried to hold my flaming/other games info against me later. And while it may seem odd to you (Because you already knew it) to a player who didn't know it might have taken my above speech to say flaming or other game info would help and thus do it. I did not want this so thats why I concluded the way I did.

I'm sorry, I don't follow. Could you possibly state this a bit clearer? You seem confused, but maybe it's just your language that's confused.

[jerubbaal]

The only one of these I've done before was a newbie, and when you're in lylo, as you are after one mislynch, cop claims are inevitable. Seems like a cop claim is likely useful as soon as the cop has relevant information, but until them it seems moot.

Then again, cop claims can't be completely trusted. In my only other game, I ended up getting lynched day 2 as the result of a false cop-claim when we had no cop in the game. I see no reason to assume that we even have a cop, so a lot of this is just speculating in the dark.

Even with a role claim, we have to strongly consider the possibility that the claimer is lying, especially if the claimer is suggesting actions that will make or break the game, in a lylo type situation. Maybe this is just a touchy issue with me, as I lost last game to a falseclaim, but it needs to be considered. We don't know what power roles are in this game, and if we have some situation like a cop and no doc, then a cop claim will get the cop killed (very likely).

On a side note, what is the likelihood of having crazy roles in a game like this, like cops with questionable sanity or docs that don't always work or sometimes do weird things, or such? Most of the games I've read thus far have been newbie games, which are all identical formats, so I should do some reading on these mini normals to see how they tend to run. The standards seem somewhat different, but I'm not quite sure how yet.

Korlash, by talking in circles, I meant you were talking a lot without really going anywhere. It just seems like you're not always being very clear in explaining your reasoning. Try not to ramble and make those ideas less clear than they are in your head. I'm an English major, so I tend to ramble quite a bit too, but I do think that it helps the town to be as clear and precise as possible.

[jerubbaal]

The snarkiness was very probably unnecessary, but I was somewhat in disbelief that he seemed to consider it a novel suggestion that mafia might claim town if we did a massclaim.

Talking in circles mainly referred to Korlash's larger post, since then he's kept them smaller and a bit tighter. His language still confuses me sometimes, but not stating things clearly isn't necessarily a scumtell.

Miztef, you seem rather antsy to me. Seeking to hurry things along is very rarely in the town's interest, it's not surprising that your reactions have been met with a degree of hostility. It could just be impatience, but if it is, then you are correct.

God I am such a bad pro-town player.

Oh, to Actuary, "playing black" refers to Magic: the Gathering. Korlash is actually a card from a new set, and he's a black card (there are five colors). A lot of people think he's the bee's knees, but I haven't been hugely impressed. Korlash is right though, he's big and wins games, so I can't complain too much. I just don't like black decks in general.

Also, is there a reason that you considered my post regarding my approval of jitsu's scumhunting habits more sketchy than the others whom you suggest have done the same thing since?

[jerubbaal]

I think Mexal is making a very valid point here with Nym's post. When someone states an idea in the way that he did, hedging it very carefully with "well, this is probably stupid, but...," it lets one explore a certain agenda while still holding deniability. I think it's pretty well established that a massclaim would be a terrible move for the town at this point, even Nym admits this, but he does still throw the suggestion out. It seems likely to me that he was just thinking aloud, but couching the idea as he did does leave him the option to pursue it if he discovers that we, as a group, are biting on the idea.

In regards to this situation, my inclination is to believe that Nym simply didn't think the idea all the way through before he expressed it, but it is a possibility that the gesture was an attempt to feel out the group's response to the idea of a massclaim (which would be bad for the town at this point), knowing that it was not a pro-town idea.

You cannot speak irresponsibly and expect your actions to be justified by a simple, "well, this is probably stupid," or, "well, this is just a gut feeling" (not used here so much so far, but used a lot, and I hate it and will not accept it).

PS, not having read the entirety of the Korlash/Mexal debate as closely as I should have yet, I get the impression that you both are really having different conversations. To me, it sounds like little more than a shouting match at the moment. Both of you need to chill and present your arguments precisely and briefly, because I for one am not following at the moment (and I really don't think you're following each other).

[jerubbaal]

We seem to be getting past the random vote stage, so I feel my first vote is somewhat out of place.

Unvote

.

I think this discussion has been useful regarding all the parties involved, but I still think that there are some voices that really need to be heard, in particular Sudo_Nym. The only thing we've heard from him was OMGUS regarding this whole thing. I don't know if he's intentionally lurking now, or just not on recently, but I think a bit of pressure on him is appropriate.

Vote: Sudo_Nym

[jerubbaal]

I thought it was time to do a comprehensive post, so I hope all of this is still relevant by the time it goes up.

Abstract Actuary - Next to nothing, only a "gut feeling" on me (I've already mentioned how little I trust gut feelings, it's so easy to say anything and pass it off as a gut feeling). Really need more interaction w/ the discussion from him.

Anata112 - Again, very little. She claims to be more of a passive observer, which is not a position I trust. If you hold yourself aloof, we have no chance to evaluate your motivations and you add nothing to the discussion. She does eventually post a look at Miztef, but it's only reiterating basic stuff that's already been said. Need more.

curiouskarmadog - Has posted a fairly reasonable amount regarding the contradictions in Miztef's posts. Good, fairly accurate reading, little to criticize. Only real possible criticism is the tunnel vision on Miztef, who is the easy target right now. I guess I'd just like to hear more (this is sounding like a mantra).

GunslingerKB - Random vote only, Need more. I know participation is down over the weekend, but if some of these people don't stop lurking, I'm going to start calling them out.

Jayalay - Only thing so far is a direction question. Good, but, again, need more. Dirty lurkers.

jitsu - Did the an early (mostly) comprehensive review, which I respect, and seems to be considering most arguments well. He does make some logical fallacies though in more recent arguments which stand out to me.

It's likely that one of you and Sudo_Nym is scum and the other is not, but I don't know who to believe at this point.

This is a false either/or. I see no reason to believe that this argument isn't simply between two townies over a misunderstanding, or similarly between two scum attempting to bus each other. By locking the debate into a false dichotomy like this, you limit the options for us to consider and lock us into potentially misleading conclusions.

Let's suppose for a moment that you are indeed telling the truth and Sudo_Nym is scum.

This one is a more severe fallacy. Mexal is not claiming Nym is scum, he is claiming a suspicion that you all failed to acknowledge, that Nym's suggestions might have been meant to test the waters for the idea of a massclaim (If I am reading you right, Mexal). You are putting words in his mouth, and I become very suspicious when people do that in order to discredit an argument. Mexal addressed this fallacy in his last post, but I think it bugs me more than it did him. These fallacies are not huge deals, and not really even as big as those committed by other players, such as Korlash, but jitsu has shown himself to be a careful and perceptive reader. I am less inclined to believe that fallacies such as these are mistakes rather than intentional. I'm not screaming scum or anything, just saying that distortion is very suspect, especially from players who seem to be perceptive.

Korlash - Seems to be somewhat confused in general, strikes me as one of those players who just don't get it. Those kinda of players are really dangerous as it's very easy to pass off their mistakes simply as mistakes, not necessarily as tells. Spent quite a bit of time early game complaining about pressure votes, and lately has been defending Nym. I really don't think he ever quite "got" Mexal's point in the whole shouting match.

Mexal - You seem like an angry person to me, but your scumhunting has been very solid and your arguments coherent and valid. Still I think your frustration has gotten the better of you occasionally. A large volume of your posts are "don't you get it" or "didn't you read what I said" or some such. It's pretty clear some people are not getting what you are saying, i just get really tired of reading through all of the idiot-thrashing in order to get to your content, which is usually pretty good.

Miztef - A lot's been said about him, and I don't feel the need to restate it all. He was impatient in the early game, and started to cry for it to slow down once he took some heat. He even unvoted. Any way you cut it, impatience is scummy and inconsistency is scummy. Just because you are scummy does not mean you are scum, but you're at the top of my suspicious list right now.

oEJo - Infrequent poster, but some content. Posts a comprehensive list (props), but jumps on the swing-back Mexal wagon. Another one who doesn't really seem to acknowledge Mexal's point. Maybe a misread, but a hasty vote nonetheless.

Sudo_Nym - Expresses idea for a massclaim, OMGUS's Mexal, and says everybody else defended him well enough. He really needs to enter this conversation and speak for himself.

I thought it was important to expand our vision, as we've been focusing mainly on a few people for a while now. We need to hear from those lurkers. I think we're developing a reasonable picture of what's going on, but it's still incomplete with so many people missing.

[jerubbaal]

[quote="Sudo_Nym]And yes, I do realize that that requires people believe I'm telling the truth in a game of mafia. [/quote]
I'll trust you as far as I can throw you, at least until you're dead or the game's over. So whether or not people choose to accept your explanation of your actions, which seems a reasonable explanation, the possibility that it was all a ploy will remain.

My statement that you were lurking was not necessarily from your inactivity, but rather from the fact that your only recent post was kind of a nothing post. You showed up, said "Hey, thanks for defending me guys, Mexal was the only one who misunderstood me," (I don't think this is misrepresenting, correct me if it is) and nothing more. It felt like a lot had happened concerning you since your last relevant post, so I probably used the lurker tag a bit prematurely. There's just a lot of lurking going on in this game and I'm getting kinda frustrated with it. You're certainly not the worst perpetrator.

[jerubbaal]

Grr, messed up my tags. I think you all get the way it should be.

[jerubbaal]

why is he an easy target? maybe it is because he is playing scummy?..shouldnt we pressure those we feel are scummy?

I'm certainly not complaining about your pressuring Miztef, I think it's a good thing to do. The only thing I was concerned at all about was that you've only posted on Mizef. You mention one of Korlash's posts approvingly and as jitsu what exactly he's asking for, but as far as analysis, it's pretty much all directed at Miztef. I think I just want to know that you're looking at this whole situation holistically, instead of just focusing on the one guy who's acting scummy. Not that you should let up on him, but it's good to see more than just the obvious targets.

Anata, I'm not quite sure what exactly it is that you're not agreeing with me regarding jitsu? I simply pointed out some logical fallacies in his arguments, which he has addressed (see post 151). Whether you agree with me or not, those fallacies are present. I'm not nailing him to the wall for it, but even he admits he made some mistakes.

[jerubbaal]

I'm sorry Korlash, but I just do not think that your arguments are usually internally consistent and/or address the relevant points of a discussion. For example:

Hey just because I do not agree with his point does not mean I don't get it. Jumping on an obvious suspicious thing, putting a pressure vote (Along with a lot of discussion, questions, reasons, etc.) and defending your statements are all very good things and I respect that. However, jumping on people's attacks with your own skeptasism can have the same effects. So I merely countered attacked a point I did not fully agree on, and you think I'm an idiot because of that? Huh... So we should limit our focus of attack on only those who post things and assume the ones attacking them for it are town? (Note that was rhetorical and I am in no way trying to twist your words here. I am merely illustrating my point. Thanks ^^)

Overall, this one's not terrible, but I still have difficulty working through the tangled mess of your language. For one, I'm not sure what "jumping on people's attacks with your own skeptasism" [ooo, that hurt to type] means here. I'm certainly not criticizing you for being overly critical, I'm criticizing you for being incoherent.

I in no way have a problem with you disagreeing with an idea. Throughout the argument between you and Mexal, he continually posted frustration because you were not addressing the relevant points of the argument. He would write about one thing and you would respond with an entirely irrelevant statement. The fact that you were not answering his arguments or even his direct questions to you seemed indicative to me that you were not understanding those questions or the points expressed. I think it might be a healthy exercise for you to be very deliberate about posting the statements you are responding to and posting succinct and direct responses, like one or two sentences.

As far as an example of fallacies or inconsistencies or whatever, here's a good one.

My views on random/early pressure votes: To a good player,

they will not help out too much

. As long as a player knows they are in no danger they should not over react. So I try to avoid making them myself.

Proside of random/early pressure votes: They can help in starting active discussion.(Not always about the voted, sometimes about the voter.)

So one or two votes may hep make a person talk, others may require a few more, as you see I only needed 3 to fully begin talking

.

So while I agree they can be helpful I am against making them... I know it's hard to understand that but I feel that the other 11 players will make enough that I don't have to, while I am confident I am fully able to create discussion through just that, discussion.

No iffy votes to use against me later, no hard feelings right off the bat

.

Mostly it's because I feel you get more info from the voter then you do from a smart voted...

First bold point, okay, so a smart scum might not trip up if some pressure comes on him, but a dumb one might. I'm entirely fine catching dumb scum. How good a player is has nothing to do with whether they are scum or not. So here you note that they're not very helpful against good players, don't acknowledge the idea that bad players might respond differently.

Second bold point, you claim that the pressure of three votes was sufficient to get you talking, despite the fact that you just claimed that a good player shouldn't feel any pressure from votes. Are you claiming bad player? But here you admit that they can be helpful getting people to start talking, despite the fact that just before you said they weren't helpful against smart players. Are they only helpful in making dumb players talk? Were they helpful in making you talk?

Third bold point, I don't see any players here getting huffy about the random votes placed on them, except potentially you. The other players can do the work, which is apparently important and relevant work, as it got you talking. The only thing I've really ever seen people bringing up random votes for is scum bussing their scumbuddy(s) early on. You seem to acknowledge that random votes have little meaning, as you admit that smart people shouldn't feel pressure from meaningless votes, so why are you so worried about people holding those votes against you later.

That was a bit longer than I had wanted it to be, but I think the point stands. My problem with your arguments, Korlash, has been their lack of internal consistency. You don't seem to know where you're going or how to get there. That's why I'm suggesting much tighter, accurately cited posts, so we can actually get to the point of what you're saying and see how it relates to the argument, because right now I just don't see it.

[jerubbaal]

Not really huffy, but you certainly started speaking out against pressure votes once there were a few pressure votes on you.

And you really have nothing to say about the rest of my post?

[jerubbaal]

Pointing out the tendencies of town power roles does certainly seem to not be a pro-town thing to do. I do not see at all how this helps the town at this point. Perhaps this would be a relevant point once claims start occurring, to reflect on the validity of those claims, but at the moment, all you seem to be doing is pointing out likely mafia targets. What particular advantage did you think that this knowledge provides the town at this point?

I would not so much say that knowledge is power as that information is power. The scum are inherently privileged here, as they at the least know their own group (yeah, there are exceptions and weird traitor scenarios, but we're speaking in general terms here). We can gain some information from the cop eventually (assuming we have a cop and assuming he does not get killed early), but even cop claims have to be carefully examined. When you share information, you are sharing it with the mafia as well. Some things should not be discussed in the thread, such as information which only benefits mafia, and I think this is one such case.

[jerubbaal]

Korlash, I appreciate your clarity on that last one. You answered specific questions with relevant answers. I do really apologize if you think I was calling you an idiot. Your logic has seemed very confused to this point, but it seems like you've proven you can post well when pressured.

As far all this stuff lately, I'm glad that we finally have some of our errant posters back. Still no Jayalay, so might a mod prod be in order soon there?

I really don't like Gunslinger's analysis. It's been halfassed and mainly rooted on what he calls his feelings about things. Be particular. If you aren't pointed and specific about what you find wrong with people, everyone else here has no reason to believe anything that you say. I have absolutely no reason to trust your "feelings." If your only justification of an idea is a feeling, I'd rather you keep it to yourself than throw it out there to distract other people. Follow it up, if you want, and find something hard, but I'm not going to waste my time chasing down a feeling of someone I have no reason to trust.

I'm not sure I bite on all this weird role stuff with Sudo. It's certainly possible, and we shouldn't discount that he might be something strange like a traitor, but it could just as easily be that he is a townie making bad townie plays or a scum making blatant scummy moves. Maybe he's just a bad player and maybe he just didn't think his arguments through all the way. It seems presumptuous to assume that his strange moves can only lead him to some strange role.

[jerubbaal]

Ok, I have a couple serious suspicions which I think need answered.

Miztef - Stop posting wishy-washy junk and follow through on some of these ideas. You were impatient, and now you're being noncommittal. Of your three suspicious characters, Gunslinger is the only one you actually mention a solid case against. If you want anybody to listen to you about CKD and Korlash, give us a reason to listen to you. I frankly don't give a darn about your "vibes."

Gunslinger - I mentioned before that I really didn't like your analysis, and I think CKD did a good job of taking it apart and explaining the contradictions. Between only two to three posts, you have managed to commit a huge number of inconsistencies. And you've been vote hopping as well in those posts. Not good. You have joined Miztef at the top of my list, which is pretty amazing considering how little you've posted.

jitsu - Trying to guide the cop is committing a number of bad things. One, you're claiming not-cop, which makes it easier for the mafia to find the cop. Two, it does sound like scum attempting to manipulate the actions of the town. I'm not so much demanding an answer for this one as pointing out that such guiding is really not a pro-town move. CKD kinda already called you out for this one.

[jerubbaal]

All we have is feelings. Gut instincts

. There are no absolutes, unless you are on the mafia. To talk about absolutes in mafia, is absolutely foolish. If you need to absolutely believe that someone is mafia before you vote for them, I'm not sure how you will ever vote.

Sure there is some evidence out there, like inconsistent arguments and poor plays,

but still all we have is a feeling about those plays

. Those plays alone don't make a player guilty or innocent.

I certainly hope you have more than "gut feelings" if you actually want me to give your opinions a decent hearing. You're creating an absolutely ridiculous dichotomy between gut feelings and absolute truths. No, we don't have any absolute truths about anyone, just claims to analyze and posts to dissect. But there's a lot of ground to cover between gut feelings and absolute certainty. This is what we've been doing to this point, discussing the possible motivations and reasons for certain posts being done the way they were and where that leads us. I am very new at this, I'll confess, but if the only way that we can try to find the mafia is following our "feelings," I think the game is severely flawed. Nothing is solid until someone is dead or the game is over, but we can follow paths of evidence and actually understand something about why people are playing the way they are playing. And, yes, this does make me rather slow to vote for a lynch, but when the time comes that a convincing case can be made or a decision must be made, I will make the best decision I am able to with my understanding of the actions the people concerned have made.

My central point with all this is I will not allow stupid or anti-town comments to be justified by gut feeling. I did not mind your comment on my post overmuch (it is a possible contingent interpretation, although I certainly do not agree with it), but I asked you to justify it and you said that it was just a feeling, and you didn't even really remember. I think that gut feelings might give us some possible leads, but don't expect me to consider your opinion unless you back it up by responsible analysis.

And, to be quite honest, I'd almost rather not hear it if you can't back it up somewhat. It's very similar to what we were talking about with Sudo, it's really easy to throw out little tidbits of ideas backed by nothing but feeling or pondering to see who might bite on them. It is very easy to attempt to absolve yourself of the responsibility for your comments if you disguise them as "just a feeling." So unless you have reasonably thought out arguments and points, don't clutter up the thread with meaningless speculation. Its' distracting and not helpful.

I certainly shared some of Mexal's sense of resentment when I read the post, probably slightly more because you were attacking my playstyle. There are different ways to play the game, and if you want us to give your way a decent consideration, participation would be a good first step.

[jerubbaal]

Well, the current commonly regarded most scummies are Sudo, for irresponsible posting, and Miztef, primarily for inconsistency (at least in my book). I'm curious what you think about them.

[jerubbaal]

I'll add an amen to most of the above. Any way you cut it, lazy and distorting analysis doesn't help the town. The general ineptitude of Anata's analysis leads me to believe it is more likely bad reading and bad reasoning than deliberate attempts to mislead, but bad reasoning and bad reading are anti-town as well.

I also think that this has the fortunate consequence of bringing Sudo's actions back into the discussion, as Anata seems to have attempted to color his actions in a favorable light. I personally was never very satisfied by Sudo's answers (which is why my vote was on him up until now), so perhaps this might cause him to actually respond to the issues.

However, for now I'll ride the gathering bandwagon. Anata has a lot that needs to be explained. At the least, lazy analysis is unacceptable. Three votes seems like significantly more pressure than two.

Unvote, Vote Anata112

[jerubbaal]

And my answers were never designed to satisfy anybody but myself, and for good reason. I don't know you from Adam; to attempt to soothe your nerves would be a fruitless endeavor. I post to satisfy myself, mainly, as I'm the only member of the game whose mind I know, and I do this regardless of my alignment. It works out well for me, normally, but occassionally gets me into trouble.

Are you saying that you refuse to talk to us, or to answer any of our suspicions concerning your posting? This is a game about

interaction

. It strikes me as simply dumb to think that you're posting for only for yourself. The point of this game is to win, and you do not win as an individual (well, if you're an SK, fine, you do, but I doubt you're claiming SK). This isn't your personal blog.

This is a game, and the point of a game is to win. If you're playing a game well, you're playing it with the goal of winning. This "lynch me or don't lynch me, I don't give a darn" thing is utterly stupid. If you want to win, I'm pretty sure you don't want to get lynched, because it never serves the side you're on to get lynched. Unless you're a jester or something, this is just stupid gaming, plain and simple. If you're just in this thread as an expose of your personal theoretical genius, go make a blog somewhere and post there. Don't mess up the game.

I

would like to win, and if you're a townie, I would prefer that you hop off your high horse and make yourself useful.

[jerubbaal]

But declaring that it's for pressure is what seems counterproductive

You might actually be right on that one. It seems like a difficult line to walk sometimes, between making your intentions clear to the town, so that they don't get suspicious of unexplained action, and hiding your intentions from the maifa, so that they can react in a way that exposes them. I personally tend to err on the side of exposure, but maybe that's not the best way to play.

[jerubbaal]

I said I agree because,.... I agreed. I think Jitsu made a reasonably solid case about you and I think it would be to your benefit to read through his primary post against you and attempt to answer some of the questions put to you directly. The above post does not answer much.

I'll be out of town this weekend, (ATM, I'm in Chicago), but I might have time to post a little bit. I'm visiting the gf, so time is somewhat of a premium. Probably will give a more in-depth reading of the new stuff on Sunday night or Monday.

[jerubbaal]

I am slightly confused why you have such a hard time with Mexal's vote but not with mine. Any reason in particular?

[jerubbaal]

And if I am able to "slip out of any argument" then I have to either be a very good lier or have some damn good arguments. Maybe even both eh?

Lynch all Liars. You still make no sense to me.

[jerubbaal]

My impression is basically that karmadog is either mafia going after the easy lynches, or just has a grudge against me for voting him earlier.

I find this very ironic, as you decide to hop on the ckd train as soon as Mexal begins questioning his motives. Yes, it does seem very OMGUS-y, and very opportunistic.

My biggest thing against you is your switch of approach in the beginning. You start out hot, and even claim that everyone always thinks you're mafia in the early game. However, you catch heat from it almost immediately and then decide to back off and lay low (playing carefully, something you actually said that you do when you're mafia). You have avoided seriously entering into any of the discussions. You had a little spat with Korlash recently over nothing substantial, and now come in and suddenly jump on the one player who's had a vote on you all this time. I have seen absolutely nothing constructive from you in all this time. Until Mexal, the one who everyone's putting up as the great townie leader, expresses an opinion against ckd, you have done nothing, and all you're doing now is echoing suspicions from the one guy who everyone seems to think is a townie. You've done absolutely nothing to help the town, and, by your own confession, you're playing like you play when you're mafia. I really do not like this vote against ckd.

Unvote, Vote: Miztef

FoS or whatever the hell against Anata and Gunslinger. I really don't like their play either, but I'm willing to wait and see what they have to say.

Mexal, I'm actually really disappointed by your long rebuttal. The whole thing essentially a list of "why the hell can't I do this," and "how the hell can you say that," and long lists of rhetorical questions. This is simply not helpful posting. It takes a lot of wading to get to your actual points. The whole post is just this flood of questions.

I apologize if this is reductive, but I seem to understand that your post is primarily attacking ckd's assumption of Anata's laziness for the explanation for her action rather than questioning her motives. Laziness was my first reflex to explain her action as well, simply because her posting was completely inept. Whatever the post's goal was, to mislead, clarify, confuse, state suspicions, whatever, it was badly done and accomplished absolutely nothing other than to create suspicion. While incompetence cannot be used to excuse anti-town action, it is also not inherently scummy. I was content to place a pressure vote and wait for a response. I think laziness and ineptitude is certainly a possible reason, but you seem entirely convinced that she could have no other reason for posting as she did than to mislead and create suspicion. You actually go so far as to put words in Jitsu's mouth regarding this whole matter.

The reason I didn't mention it as apart of Jitsu's post is because I dont' think he believed it. He is new and he doesn't have the conviction in his cases more experienced players do. He was making excuses for her just in case he was wrong because he's not 100% sure. But I don't think he truly believes she's just lazy...I know I don't.

Let Jitsu speak for his own beliefs. If he does not state otherwise, I'm not going to assume that Jitsu is qualifying his suspicions simply because he's not sure. I was completely fine with your "I agree" post, but I really don't like it that you're going back and filling in what Jitsu "really" thought.

I've been impressed with the clarity and sense in your logic so far, Mexal, but this last post is really a disappointment. I think ckd might be somewhat inappropriate in overstating laziness as the likely cause for Anata's ineptitude, but I think you're also out of line in suggesting that the only possible interpretation for ineptitude is scum. It's a really easy argument to follow when a person never proves logically capable of defending themselves, or really even perceiving the arguments against them. Inept =/= scum. Inept needs to be answered and explained, but your logical leap is inappropriate. It's possible your interpretation is correct, but to refuse to acknowledge any other reasonable interpretation is entirely inappropriate.

[jerubbaal]

Those questions weren't rhetorical? There was something like 20 or 30 questions in just the first three paragraphs or so. That seems absolutely crazy. If they're real questions that you expect answers to, that seems kinda insane. Go back and count those.

I certainly sympathize with the frustration about incompetence, but over the internet, I suppose that's going to be unavoidable in most games. It does seem like about half of the people here just don't get the game. And I'm not criticizing you about pressuring incompetent moves. I voted for Anata as well. I'm criticizing you for assuming that the only possible reason for stupid moves is scum.

In my first newbie game (my only completed game so far), a dumb noob that lurked for the first week or so of the game shows up, posts a bunch of really scummy crap, and just clearly does not get the game at all. So we up and lynch him pretty quick (scum actually hammers, but nobody seems to blame him or suspect him for it), and he turns out to be townie. Just really, really stupid townie. Part of me wonders whether it's not more difficult to tell a stupid mafia from a stupid townie or a good mafia from a good townie. There has to be some sort of standard to go by.

It just seems somewhat opportunistic to me to attack the dumb ones all the time, as even if they were entirely well-intentioned townies, they couldn't give any real reason anyone else should believe that. If we just say kill the stupid ones, that's half the group, and I see little to discern between, say, Gunslinger's stupidity and Anata's stupidity (I guess the situation has changed now that she is gone, but the point is still valid).

I think it bothers me a lot that you basically called ckd scum because he suggested that laziness might be a better explanation for ineptitude than scum. I don't think that laziness is necessarily a better explanation, but I think it at least needs to be acknowledged as a possible explanation.

The thing which bothered me most was you posting what you thought Jitsu "meant" instead of what he said. Even though Jitsu said that it could easily just be laziness, you basically said, well, he doesn't really mean that, he's just not confident enough yet. If you're agreeing with someone's argument, you can't really say that oh, I agree with the argument that he really meant, not the argument he presented. A lot of people pushed you to clarify your agreement (for largely stupid reasons, I think), but you never qualified anything. If you didn't think that laziness was a reasonable explanation, as Jitsu suggested in the argument, you might have qualified that.

Myself and others might be quicker to presume the innocence of a certain gesture, but that's not always entirely a bad thing. You have expressed very sincere doubts about a great host of players, and they simply cannot all be valid. At the very least, you have advanced arguments against Sudo, Anata, Miztef, Gunslinger, and ckd, none of which appear to have been answered to your satisfaction. It is very simply not possible that all of them are scum (or this is one f***ed up scenario), so you must be jumping at shadows somewhere. The ckd scenario confuses me the most, as, unless I misunderstand you, you seem pretty confident that ckd is scum because he defended your attack against Anata. I think his analysis is decent, if somewhat optimistic regarding Anata's motives for certain actions. I certainly did not think that it led to the level of certainty you seemed to express in affirming his guilt. If we find out that Anata (or whoever is replacing her) is guilty, then it seems to add much more credibility to your case, but for now it feels like building a house of cards. Your whole case hinges on Anata's guilt, which is still an unknown, at least for the time being.

To everyone else, this day

is

really starting to piss me off. All the chaff has stopped posting, and the few of us who are still here are simply butting heads. Please post something semi-useful and prove to us that you're not all idiots. I am beginning to see more of Mexal's first post to me, saying that there is a point when dialogue begins to hurt the town instead of help. It's getting to the point where some sort of decisive action is important, as the arguments are all starting to fold in on each other. Until some of you guys actually post something different, I feel like we're just beating a bunch of dead horses.

On a side note - do you find that it's usually scum under fire who replace out or bored townies, or is it really a neutral thing and shouldn't impact our decision much? I could easily see it going either way, a townie frustrated with being accused of being scummy all the time or a scum convinced that they're going to lose anyway. Just curious what experience seems to say in this matter.

[jerubbaal]

I have never really had a problem with you pushing people, whatever your argument. I'm just a little confused who you actually think is scum, and who you think is the correct lynch for today. I would like to hear from our replacements and scarce posters first, but I think it's time to start focusing in.

I'm quite happy in that department with my vote on Miztef, because I find that his entire pattern of action has been very scummy. Comes out hard, gets heat, backs off very quickly, lays low for a while, and finally, when the heat seems to have faded, pokes back in and places a quick opportunistic vote. He's done essentially nothing to contribute to the conversation, yet he has apparently been present for the whole thing.

The other big scummies at the moment are Anata and Gunslinger. I'd be willing to join an Anata lynch mob, depending on how her replacement deals with the situation, primarily because, if Anata turns up scum, Mexal's case against ckd becomes much stronger. Two for the price of one. The case against Anata is reasonably strong and she did nothing to answer it in her last post.

Gunslinger showed up, made a bunch of bad scummy posts, and we haven't heard from him for quite a while. With as little information as we have on him, it seems difficult to discern if he just posted badly or is actually scummy. I don't like him, but I'm willing to wait until I hear a bit more.

Korlash, you've been whining about your need for a read-through for a couple days. Just shut up and do it. I don't need to be pissed off at people who are here and lurking in plain sight.

[jerubbaal]

Whoever replaces Anata is still the same role, so, in some way, he/she is still very responsible for the misplays of Anata. I'm not willing to scratch her off the list just yet.

And yes, I don't give a damn about the windup, just post so we can read it.

Everyone, I have a really gigantic post coming, but I am still reading over it to check it for inconsistencies. I'll have it up in a bit.

So we have permission to nail you to the wall if we find inconsistencies?

[jerubbaal]

Nice summary, I think it accurately addresses most of the relevant points of the gamestate. Actually, it was a touch more summary than I might have liked. It was a touch too much rehash and not a lot of new analysis, although your looking into the strategy of who to lynch is really important.

This is, of course, a reduction, but I would tend to agree with the sentiment expressed by Jitsu and Mexal that either Miztef or Anata is our lynch for today. I would consider either valid, but I think that the case is stronger against Miztef. His whole pattern of behavior has been scummy, not just a couple comments here or there.

It is tempting just to shoot for an Anata lynch because she bailed, and then we wouldn't have to deal with a replacement coming in, but that's more an argument of convenience than logic. My biggest problem with the argument against Anata is accepting this:

As for Anata, if she is scum, she is the scary kind. She was lurking enough for people to not get much of a read on her at all, and it took a good post by me to expose the possibility that she even could be scum. If she was deceiving people, it was in a subtle, calculated way. If she is scum, she is the scum that is the most dangerous to keep around.

Not addressing arguments placed against you doesn't seem like a subtle, crafty thing to do, it just seems dumb. None of the analysis that she did was very insightful or useful at all, it just seemed random. She did seem to try to throw suspicion at you, so maybe you see her as a devious mastermind, but her case against you was badly made and not likely to convince anyone. Don't pat yourself too hard on the back for "exposing" her posts as scummy, I don't think anyone found them particularly satisfying (at least I did not). Her analysis was inept, her posting was inept, her play was inept, I'm having a hard time believing she is devious, crafty, and subtle, as you suggest.

However, the case against her is strong, and I do find it somewhat damning that she ran away when she came under fire. I would not be displeased with an Anata lynch, but I think Miztef is the better choice, simply because I think the case against him is stronger (maybe just because I've been pushing it lately, so maybe it's my pride getting in the way).

[jerubbaal]

Because him and jitsu are both so "pro-town" I'm inclined to believe at least one of them is scum, but I've yet to see any major flaws in mexal's arguments, so I see no reason to consider him for lynch

Does this not make any sense to anyone else? I don't think I need to say much on this one.

All in all, this post is entirely what I would expect considering your action so far. It seems like a very weak attempt to justify yourself (by claiming civilian? what do you expect that to accomplish?), to praise those who are supporting your position, and attack those who are speaking against you. Your criticism against me in particular seems ill-founded. Popping in and out??? WTF, I've posted a helluva lot more than anyone here excepting your two heroes, and I'm pretty darn close to on par with them. I'm not terribly surprised you don't find my posts useful, considering lately they've been against you. I am increasingly pleased with where my vote is.

[jerubbaal]

The problem is, everyone is inept. Gunslinger is inept. Sudo is inept. Miztef seems inept. Anata is inept. Korlash even seems inept on some points. This is pretty much a newbie game and

if everything that looks scummy is considered inept, then how am I supposed to find scum?

If I don't like something, I'm going to post about it, regardless of the experience level of the player. Random.org does not discriminate. It wouldn't be the first time a newbie played a scum role poorly. It's not the easiest thing to play in your first game, especially when you cannot talk with your partners during the day to help work out what you're supposed to be doing. This is the most likely time you'll notice mistakes by new scum...when they have no help from anyone else. So while you might see my post as a disappointment, I do not.

This is annoying. Miztef is scummy...very scummy. CKD's last post proves it. But there is a nagging doubt that I have that he's town...mainly because he's so scummy it hurts. He's such an easy target that it just bothers me. I've made similar cases on people before...most recently in a game on SA where I was scum. There are town that make it incredibly easy to make a case on and Miztef seems like he's one of those. But...he could be scum so meh. It's day 1 and it's hard to get a better case than that which really bothers me.

I really don't like this strain of argument. You seem to be arguing against yourself here. Originally, you posted on the importance of being able to hold people accountable for their actions, even if they made really stupid mistakes, i.e. mistakes that seem too obvious for scum. You directly argue against the assumption made by many that laziness could be an excuse for bad posting, and in this last quote, you're making the WIFOM point that Miztef is too scummy to be scum. You're doing exactly what you criticized others for, assuming ineptitude instead of scum.

What is it about Miztef's scuminess that is qualitatively different than Anata's also obvious scuminess?

He's not far off when he says someone can be so pro-town that they're probably scummy. I play a fantastic scum. I know several others that come across as the most pro-town player you'll ever see. There are other ways to catch these people though as you won't do it normally by just their posts.

I don't bite. I'm not saying that someone who appears to be entirely pro-town can't possibly be scum, but at the same time, I don't see any possible way that you can stand on that reason to make a case. That's almost the definition of WIFOM: he's so pro-town, he must be scum.

You suggest that their are other ways to catch pro-town looking scum, and that's very true. Seems like these generally come in on later days, when we have cop investigations to help out and such. For the first day, I really don't see what else we have to go on other than scummy posting and your vague instinct that Miztef is too scummy to be scum.

[jerubbaal]

Well this is really damning. It kinda shoots down that whole just lazy/dumb thing that myself and others have been pushing. She does seem to have aroused everyone's suspicion, again, in this one, but she is at least addressing the arguments that are placed against her. She never did so much here. Nice find Jitsu. We seem to be in kind of a lull right now, waiting for replacements so we can decide between our two likely lynch candidates, so maybe now is the time to do some serious meta-work.

I would be pleased with either a Miztef or Anata lynch at this point, but honestly I'm leaning a bit toward Anata after Jitsu's last find. I'll stay where I am for the moment, but if there's enough momentum gathering for an Anata lynch, I'll happily jump on.

[jerubbaal]

I have a couple things I'd really like to say about the stuff that we've found out, but I'm really not sure of the rules on the matter. This issue is really complicated, as Anata now has hidden information concerning this active game, yet now has no involvement with the current game. There really should be some sort of policy regarding the requesting of replacements if the person is planning on continued play at this site. If there is such a policy, I would like to know of it.

If her behavior here becomes a meta-issue in the other game, I could see the whole thing getting out of hand. All in all, I am very unsure of what is/should be allowed in this situation, but I'm going to wait until we hear from NabNab concerning what we can do with the information we have, as it seems very relevant. Clearly, we all know about or have access to all other public goings-on at this site, so the knowledge is available to us, but I am unsure what uses me may put that knowledge to.

[jerubbaal]

Sorry, it's been a while since I've checked the thread, but I really don't think much has changed. Hurrah to see Gunslinger back, at least there's one that we don't have to hunt down. I'm still torn on an Anata/Miztef lynch, but I think there's adequate cause for either.

As far as the Anata replacement situation, I don't think we'll really get much from the replacement that we can find useful. We need to decide now if the contributions of Anata to this point are adequate cause to lynch her (I think most agree that they are) rather than looking to her replacement for adequate answers to our problems with Anata. Since the cat's out of the bag regarding her other posting, I find it much less incompetent than what she did here, so the incompetence excuse doesn't hold much water any more. It's kinda tricky, because Anata's guilt/innocence translate to her replacement, but her content does not, so we need to evaluate them independently. Any cases on Anata will be solely on the information she has posted currently, which seems to be sufficiently scummy, and we should be careful about allowing the content of her replacement justify her comments.

Still, Miztef has been adequately scummy as well, and his case seems to be more straight-forward (ckd says it best, look at his stuff, I need not rehash). I feel like I can stand more confidently on that case than a lot of the ambiguity in Anata's case, but maybe that's just because I made some of the case on Miztef as well. Anyhow, that's where my vote lies now.

I do not anticipate posting much until Monday, so hope all goes well until then. I'd be surprised if much more happened before the replacements showed up. It doesn't seem like much has happened lately, and I've missed a couple days.

[jerubbaal]

Gunslinger and Korlash have both managed to say a bunch of dumb things in these posts, but the biggest inconsistency seems to simply be in the logic of Gunslinger voting for Korlash when his reason for doing so is that he's defending his scum partner, allegedly Anata. If your whole case on Korlash is based on whether Anata is scum, why not lynch her first and then you can actually know if your assumption is correct? The whole thing's just OMGUS, which is not pro-town.

Normally I'd jump at Mexal suggesting that we just lynch someone and get on with it, but I find myself wanting the same thing. He mentioned earlier that there's a point when discussion no longer helps the town, and I think we've gone beyond it. We have several likely candidates with reasonable support for a lynch, so let's lynch one of them and get on with it.

[jerubbaal]

In the end, nothing's really going to happen until we get replacements, as we would have to almost be in complete agreement to lynch someone with the amount of people we have (and that doesn't seem like it's going to happen). Not much to do but wait.

[jerubbaal]

Jitsu, I don't think I can say it explicitly, but I will try to work my suspicions in as we go. For now I'll just say that I find it more difficult to buy the incompetent reading excuse than I did before.

Honestly Korlash, I found you difficult enough to read before, and you make absolutely no sense when you seem to be angry. I honestly have very little qualms about lynching someone who can't defend herself, especially day 1. There is little to no structure to the proof on day 1 (unlike day 2 when we likely have claims and stuff to deal with), so we have to go with the person who has seemed the most scummy from the comments they have posted. Even though Anata's post volume is so low, those few posts are quite scummy. Even though I would prefer a Miztef lynch, as I think he's scummier, I'd be quite happy with an Anata lynch. Her replacement won't be able to really tell us what Anata's earlier posts mean, so once we get that replacement, we really have to evaluate him/her like a new player. The replacement situation in general is just unfortunate, as it creates a certain discontinuity in the game which cannot be avoided.

I'm somewhat slow to vote for Anata partially because the low volume of her posts makes it difficult to put together a composite picture of what she's been doing in the game. It's harder to evaluate what could be a mistake and what could be scummy when you have so little information on a person. Might I suggest meta work?

[jerubbaal]

Korlash, I am going to go absolutely frickin insane if I read any more ellipses in your posts. Seriously, it's painful. Write real sentences.

[jerubbaal]

I struggled for a bit, but this is absolutely pointless. Losing a huge number of words is intensely frustrating and I blow enough time on this dumb game already, I don't need to spend more to censor my work of certain letters.

My intention was not to be a dick, but the ellipses make your content impossible to understand. Sentences make thoughts nice, clear, and distinct (ideally). I struggle with keeping my ideas separate too, but it's more something to help the people reading your posts. I get the idea that I might appreciate much more of what you're trying to say if you actually posted in a way that was coherent. As it is it's always a long ramble of vaguely related thoughts which run together in this ugly mish-mash. I am sure that I'm not the only one frustrated by your style of posting. I can't tell you how to post, but I can tell you that you're not making it any easier for others to understand your arguments. I am somewhat frustrated, and I am rather sure frustration is not an attitude you want to foster toward yourself.

[jerubbaal]

Thanks Korlash, I really do appreciate it. It makes your posts eminently more readable. And I think your logic has actually gotten better as well, or at least makes it easier for us to understand it.

Doesn't seem like too much to do here, maybe go back and do a full re-read or some meta work or something if you're bored out of your skull. We just have to wait for the replacements to hear what they have to say. Korlash's posts which Jitsu pointed out is really valid, it would be nice to at least have something on the replacements going into day 2. Just because it seems like Miztef or Anata are the lynch today doesn't mean that we need to stop considering other people, especially tomorrow.

I don't feel like we've heard from NabNab for a couple days now, since Saturday I believe. Does this replacement thing usually take this long?

[jerubbaal]

Going to be out of town Thurs to Saturday, low posting, if any, expected. Seems like not a bad time to be away.

[jerubbaal]

I have to admire the amount of work that you've put into this whole presentation, but I'm curious how exactly you're drawing conclusions from this whole thing, particularly why I'm his most likely scumbuddy. Is middle-of-the-road activity supposed to indicate scumminess? For all the good numbers work, this seems like a flawed assumption.

I'm not inclined to jump on the Korlash train until Adel shares a bit with us how his whole profiling system works. I have seen people use generalizations before to go after people with scummy activity patterns, but this seems a lot more thorough than I've ever seen before. I really like this approach for a day 1 lynch, but it seems like there are a lot more factors you would need to consider for a day 2.

I've been very suspicious of Miztef already, and Korlash's panicky reaction here would seem to indicate he's scummy, so I would agree with two of his three proposals. If it turns out you're only wrong about one out of the three, I will be really impressed.

[jerubbaal]

the vast, vast majority of Korlash's posts are nonsense spam posts like this one. Their major function is to clutter the thread and make it harder for townies to extract useful information.

He has a very high post count in this thread, but his signal:noise ratio is about the lowest.

This is the case against Korlash which I find the most convincing. Especially lately, his posts have been very frequent and contained absolutely nothing of content. However, I'm still not convinced he's smart enough to clog up the thread intentionally. I do believe there's something to Adel's whole profiling thing, but I'm not ready to accept it until he justifies it a bit more. He's basically said that sharing it would break it (which I find somewhat hard to believe, but I guess if I did that much work I'd want to protect it too, does the the meta here really shift that dramatically and quickly?), but hiding it makes it useless to the rest of us. I'm not really willing to take a leap of faith for you, especially as I know at least one of those conclusions is off.

Regardless of the legitimacy of Adel's whole system, it's really nice to have all those stats in the thread. Gives the rest of us mere mortals something to reference for our petty "traditional" arguments.

[jerubbaal]

jerubbaal caught on that there may be some real muscle behind my system, and is now distancing from both the Miztef and the Korlash wagons.

I'm slightly hazy on how the comments I made in those posts can be construed as "distancing." I can respect your stats thing (even if you won't really share it), but your prowess does not put you beyond reproach. Distortion is still distortion.

I think you're right about Miztef, it's been my contention for most of day 1, and it seems very possible that you're right about Korlash, considering his reaction. My position on Miztef has been consistent all game, I see no reason to change here, and Korlash has been frantically posting fluff since you've accused him. I

do

think there's some muscle behind your system, but I know that it's not infallible. For now, I'm comfortable taking your confirmation of my suspicions of Miztef and leaving my vote where I think it is the strongest.

[jerubbaal]

Only very summary. I believe he has two completed games on record, in which he was once scum and once town. Honestly, he acts like quite the donk in both of them. His noise/content ratio seems to be naturally crappy. He's one of those players about whom I never quite know what to think, because it seems like he can't really think straight.

[jerubbaal]

Looking for an audience, Adel?

[jerubbaal]

Sorry for the lack of contributions lately, commitments prevented me from posting at the usual frequency.

@Setael, I only have one completed game, and I was town. If you would like the link for that, I can provide it.

I'm honestly really surprised by the degree to which Adel's behavior and confidence has changed since Flay got into the thread. Adel's been making a huge deal out of the fact that Flay hasn't done a mini-normal before, while it was pretty clear that NabNab said that he was going to try to find people he trusted to replace into the game. You do realize, Adel, that you're almost suggesting that NabNab tried to entice Flay into the game by offering some sort of crazy role, don't you? You seemed to elevate yourself up to this unreachable pedestal of logic before Flay showed up, and since then you've been paranoid, provided crappy arguments, and even gone renigged on your certainty with Korlash. I mean, you even gave numbers for the likelihood of his being scum (which seems terribly arrogant to me).

I don't like the cryptography, I think it really pushes the bounds of the rules of the game and entirely violates the intent of those rules. If it would be possible to get mod action and get that decrypted, as Adel seems unwilling to decrypt it, that would be desirable.

If Flay is right about Anata's leaving and returning being a big scumtell, (and it seems like it would be), I would support her lynch or Miztef. Miztef has also been hopping around his vote recently, adding to his inconsistency. I find Miztef to be a very suitable lynch and want to be done with the day, so I'll stay where I am.

[jerubbaal]

Apologies.

I still disagree with encrypting, nothing has changed there. Korlash, you seem angry or something.

I suppose someone has to (or should) ask, what brought you over to Miztef's wagon at the last minute, Adel?

I'm still not sure what to think about the Korlash thing. I think my inexperience hurts me here, as I don't know how common the role is or how likely it would be in this situation. My uninformed inclination is that it's an safe claim that avoids the risk of false-claiming something like doc or cop.

Also, the mafia would know whether his claim was false or not, so I would think they would kill him if his claim was true. There are a couple other explanations, but I find none of them likely. If there was a chance to kill someone with a power role (is roleblocker considered a power role?) this early, especially someone under as much suspicion as Korlash and unlikely to receive a doc-protect, I would think someone would take the chance.

I find Setael's analysis notably crappy and irrelevant.

[jerubbaal]

Very sorry for the inadequate posting habits lately, things have been crazy. The GF will be around until the weekend, so, for the time being I expect posting habits to continue to be low. Although I'm pretty sure I'm ending the day right now, so at least we get a couple days off.

The case against Korlash is very strong and based on very little speculation, so I see little reason to drag the day out any longer. Kudos to all those who caught the contradictions. I hope the cases continue to be this clear.

Vote: Korlash

[jerubbaal]

I'm honestly surprised that I'm catching flak for hammering Korlash. The case was entirely clear cut - he made a fishy role-claim and then was caught in a flat-out lie about it. You don't get many cases clearer than that. There might not have been any harm in waiting til the weekend was over, but I saw little advantage in it either. I don't see why dragging out the lynch of an obvious liar is supposed to be profitable for the town.

AA, how the hell does that post "scream scum?" The case was completely clear, and I think Setael's point made it even clearer. You would have to be a donkey not to see the lie after so many people pointed it out.

I do think one of the late jumpers on is probably scum. CKD found the lie and Adel started the case on Korlash when no one else was really pushing them, so I don't think they're scummy in this incident. The vote which actually confuses me the most is Flay's, because, despite the fact that Korlash was clearly caught in a lie, he still stated that he would prefer to lynch Gunslinger. His reason for going for Korlash instead wasn't that he thought the case was stronger (which it was), but it was that people didn't seem to have the will to lynch Gunslinger on that day. And here, in the beginning of this day, he' doesn't even list Gunslinger among his suspicious persons or even mention the possible relevance of him leaving the game. I find this conspicuously inconsistent.

Also, regarding the scenario, it seems very odd that we should have no NK last night. The most obvious situation is a doc-block, which does potentially give us some information in the future, but little right now. As last weekend was a holiday weekend, the suggestion that the mafia may simply have forgotten to send in an NK holds more credit than it usually would. However, only having one kill night 1 and none night 2 would seem to suggest that we do not have an SK, something that I understood was common in mini-normals as a way to balance the game. The other explanation here is that we do have an SK, but it is someone who is inactive, like Gunslinger. I am curious what the common mini-normal setups are which don't use an SK, and if this situation is likely to be one of them.

[jerubbaal]

@AA - It was cut and dry. Korlash lied. LAL. I don't really think there's a ton to say here.

@Flay - I understand that dropping isn't scummy in and of itself, but I didn't understand your pressure on Gunslinger to be a post or perish approach. You seemed fixated on him as the best case for the day, beyond even what had been caught regarding Korlash. I'm not sure how getting a replacement changes the case on Gunslinger, aside explaining some of his lack of activity. If his lack of activity was the only reason you were so hot on him day 2, I don't think that's sufficient reason, especially compared to the Korlash case.

I really don't like what you're doing here. You go through and explain your own tendencies as scum and then describe exactly how you don't meet those tendencies this time around.

I'm known for at least two things that make the current bandwagon suspicious: Throwing partners under the bus (in which case there was no reason for me to wait for CKD to point out Korlash's lie), and overly analytical posts (in which case the supposed "framing" of Setael is laughable).

Saying "This is what I do when I'm scum, and I'm not doing that now, so I must not be scum" is hardly a valid argument. The fact that you are self-aware enough to identify your own foibles as scum suggests that you are smart enough to adjust those tendencies when necessary.

However, the idea of a clever Korlash makes me giggle as well.

[jerubbaal]

I need to do more reading on Set before I express an opinion, but I expect the next couple days to be pretty busy. You may have to still your beating hearts and wait a couple days for my masterfully conclusive analysis which will make everything clear to all minds, without a doubt.

Or maybe I'll just tell other people to think for me.

Whoa..... I just had an Adel moment.

[jerubbaal]

I won't have time to do much reading until the weekend. You will have to be patient until then.

[jerubbaal]

Wow, very sorry for the lack of activity lately. I was expecting to have some time this weekend and didn't. I'll try to be better about this in the future, or at least make it more clear when I'll be unavailable for a while.

I will try to have a stronger and longer post up tomorrow, but for the moment, I am most suspicious of Flay. Have mentioned some of my reasons in brief and will have a more comprehensive post with all my reasons up sometime tomorrow (hopefully).

[jerubbaal]

Dude.. go meta me or something... This is how I play... Every game...

So which is it, do we have no life for meta-ing you, or should we meta you more often?

I find it is an awesome strategy. Firstly, if someone wants to build a case they have to wade through tons of fluff. (Good strategy for both town and scum)

Secondly, It also gives me that "idiot town" look that even you have mentioned. I get by with that claim almost every game. (Again, good for both town and scum)

By all means please question me. But don't think that what I am doing is such an obvious scumtell... Cause it really isn't...

Your first two paragraphs are damning enough, really. Strategies that make you harder to read are not necessarily pro-town, because it means we either have to waste a Cop investigation on you every game, or lynch you to discover the truth. Better if you can show ways in which you are helpful town and avoid either of those scenarios.

I think the 585/644 thing is useful information, but more importantly I'm becoming convinced that Korlash is not an asset to the town, and may indeed be a hindrance.

Unvote, Vote: Korlash

- I'd still prefer to string up Gunslinger today, but the will is not there from other people apparently (which is disturbing to me).

More people need to post in this game than just Adel, ckd, Korlash, Jitsu, and myself!

This is the first post where I have some trouble with the basis of Flay's reasoning. I believe the contradiction was well established by this point, yet Flay seems reluctant to lynch Korlash. He finds it necessary to make it clear that, if Korlash is a townie, he's a lousy townie (which is absolutely true), and this seems to be a more central reason for Flay's vote than Korlash's lie. It seems like a dumb, live townie is usually better than a dumb, dead townie. The fact that Korlash's playstyle is a hindrance to him being helpful to the town is not a good basis for lynching. His lie, however, is.

Also, he seems set on Gunslinger as the lynch, despite the strength of the case on Korlash. Once Gunslinger disappears, however, Flay drops any push he had against Gunslinger and says that his actions are explained by Not Being Present, not necessarily lurking. However, pushing to lynch someone against whom the primary charge is lurking in the face of a case where a lie has been reasonably well established does not make sense. Gunslinger lurked like mad, Korlash lied. The case against Korlash is clearly better. Why then, Flay do you still state that you would prefer a Gunslinger lynch to a Korlash lynch? (I would actually appreciate an answer to this)

Also on this topic, I would appreciate a response to my post 829, which was the last one directed at Flay.

Regarding 881, the turn seems very sudden. I am confused at the logic behind point 1. I was not under the impression that Setael's discovery of Korlash's contradiction in-thread was something that she was deliberately holding on to. Also, if you understood Set to be deliberately holding back information, why does that make you unvote her? I simply don't understand the line of reasoning here.

I'm also curious what came of the line of reasoning that you began in 643, that Anata's dropping and coming back were a major tell? It seems to me to be a big point against Set that no one is acknowledging any more. Have you abandoned this as a major tell? Adel disagrees with your pretty much right away, after a brief misinterpretation, but the idea still seems to hold some water. I'm kind of surprised you dropped it so quickly when Adel disagreed.

I think Jitsu's questions in 882 are reasonably made, and the Flay's response does not really address the relevant points. In general, many of my problems with Flay have to do with an unwillingness on his part to address the relevant points. This confuses me, as I understood you to be a very experienced player. I like very much the sentiment of looking at the less visible players (I'll have to go back and re-read AA to evaluate the argument here, on a first read it seems to hold some water), but you just seem to be all over the place, Flay. Perhaps you're doing something I don't get, but your lines of reasoning this game have made little sense to me.


I've been more or less absent from this thread for quite a while, and I'm kind of surprised by the lack of new content until Flay posted his recent stuff. Things have stagnated, and that's never a good thing. I have yet to do a very rigorous read-through, but re-evaluating early stuff seems important in light of what we now know. Bringing up stuff like Flay does regarding AA and remembering that Set did replace Anata could help us bring some of this stuff into perspective.

[jerubbaal]

Oman, Flay expressed in that post that he preferred a Gunslinger lynch to an Korlash lynch. The cases against the players concerned were Gunslinger for lurking and Korlash for lying. It makes little sense to prefer lynching a lurker over a confirmed liar.

Flay did address Jitsu's questions regarding me, but his answer regarding his move away from Set is not developed any further than his vague sentiment that something is wrong with Set's wagon. This may be true, but I don't see the difference and would appreciate a stronger explanation.

Although I like some of the sentiment in Flay's logic lately (looking at less visible players, etc...), some of the moves that he has made recently seem rather forced. If the move away from Set toward AA is truly a move based on suspicion, I would appreciate a more thorough explanation. I don't find that the current one suffices.

[jerubbaal]

895 was posted after I started my last post, so it's a bit out of date. I think Flay addresses most of the concerns rather well.

I understand your opinion on pushing for Gunslinger over Korlash now better than I did. I don't agree entirely, but it does make your action more consistent. I agree about your assertion regarding usefulness to the town for day 1, but the case in question was day 2. Seems like the frame should be different regarding townie usefulness day 2, especially after lynching a townie day 1.

I would appreciate some real information from Adel and would like very much to hear Oman's impressions after a read-through.

[jerubbaal]

My only completed game so far was with Oman, and this behavior seems very out of character for him. I don't see why Lynch All Lurkers should be any different day 3 than day 1. Seems like a better rule, if anything. I'll add the third vote since Jitsu seems unwilling.

Vote: Oman

Seriously Jitsu, it almost seems that you're opposed to lynching. More talk usually benefits the town, but paralysis does not. That FoS is a joke.

Flay's action continues to confuse me some. I am glad that he seems to be acting on his stance against lurkers, but he hasn't clarified a lot of stuff, notably what was wrong with the Set wagon. He acknowledges this, though, and I'm happy to wait for an answer for the time being.

Set, any reason behind voting AA?

Adel, I don't think lynching Oman is so much putting the day on pause. I agree with lynching him if he continues not to post, but the scenario will likely change between today and tomorrow. Saying that we're just pausing the day seems like a misnomer that deemphasizes the importance of a lynch. I agree with the course of action though.

[jerubbaal]

Sorry for the lack of posting lately, I've been getting bogged down lately with other games and other things. I've said what I want to about Flay and I think he's a fine lynch for today. I'm not thrilled about the quality of Oman's post, but it's a post. I'm confused how that still meets the criteria of Active Lurker. Agree that this day needs to move towards a close, the only thing which broke up the paralysis holding up the day was the whole lurker thing with Oman, but now that he's at least proven that he's here, hopefully we can get something done. Caution is good, paralysis is not.

Vote: Flay

[jerubbaal]

Hypocrite, no.

Bandwagoner, yes.

[jerubbaal]

See post 887 for the most reasonable summary of my problems with Flay's action so far.

I should be clear, I think Flay is the best lynch for today. It would take a lot to convince me that someone else was a better lynch. I sincerely doubt anyone else has committed a Korlash, especially as claim-light as this game has been.

[jerubbaal]

I'm pretty sure I was the first one to formalize a case against you, and I'm being opportunistic? The Oman thing resolved alright, he posted, albeit not terribly impressively, but he's not lurking any more. I don't see a case against him other than lurking. If he goes back to lurking, I'll be happy to go after him, but as long as he's participating, I think you're a better target.

OMGUS much? You're just taking swings at the people who voted on you - how is

that

pro-town? You didn't have a problem with Adel's "calculated risks" until they came to bear on you. I would think an experienced player such as yourself wouldn't resort to "you suck" posting after only two votes during a lull in the day's conversation. I don't know if Adel's "I'm not moving" vote was just to produce a reaction, but it certainly did.

[jerubbaal]

Sudo, I think you're really missing the point. The question is not whether Adel is serious or not with her "I'm not moving vote." I don't see how that has any relevance to the case on Flay at all. Have you read that case as Jitsu presented it (I do realize that you posted only two minutes after, but do read the post, it's a better summary of Flay's inconsistent action than mine)

Your second paragraph is cryptic fluff.

I was not aware that my bandwagon was terribly quiet. I think Flay is scum, ergo... vote. Are you simply not reading carefully?

Hypocrite, no.

Bandwagoner, yes.

You have really yet to enter the conversation of this thread at all, in any way, on any day. Some participation would be rather appreciated. I personally am rather surprised Flay never sunk his anti-lurker claws into you. You seem to fit the profile of active lurker much more than Oman at this point.

[jerubbaal]

Thanks, sorry, missed the mod's correction. I was actually curious what Flay's jab about the vote formatting error was.

Unvote, Vote: Flay

[jerubbaal]

Ok, this is largely a summary of what is contained in 887, point by point.


1) Flay continued to support a Gunslinger lynch after Korlash's lie was established. Of the points mentioned, I think Flay answered this one the best. I don't agree that lurking>lying, but Flay has continued to consider lurking a serious offense, so he appears to be consistent here.

2) A complaint against the move flay makes in 881, and I think this one still stands up rather well. The move away from Anata/Set was not justified at all, other than a general discomfort with the wagon (which he began), and the logic implicating AA was forced. On a related note, he doesn't ever follow up on the case against AA, or why the wagon on Set was wrong. It is possible to read 927 as an admission of the faultiness of post 881, but I'm not sure, and it certainly was not made explicit.

3) Flay basically drops the point on Anata's leaving and picking up again, which he calls a major scumtell, merely because Adel criticized him. If you do consider it a major scumtell, your action regarding Anata/Set is inconsistent. This is just another example of his stance toward Anata/Set being confusing and contradictory.

4) Jitsu places several questions to Flay in 882, and Flay does not answer the questions regarding his move away from Set and to AA. Flay's response to this criticism from me is placed at the bottom of post 895. The early part of the post deals with his action toward Gunslinger and Anata/Set (where he suggests that she did originally leave due to pressure, yet he does not follow through on this either), but his response to my criticism is essentially a promise for more content addressing the issues, which never comes.


Those were the initial points which I brought up against Flay and some of their follow through. I think Jitsu's summary of the recent activity in 982 is fairly accurate and makes a better case for the whole Flay/Set scumpair scenario, which does seem very probable at the moment.

[jerubbaal]

I expressed suspicion before 881, (see 879), but I find 881 to be your scummiest action in the game by far. The primary reason I'm now voting you is for you inconsistent attitude toward Anata/Set, exemplified by 881. You start the Set wagon, are rather quickly joined by Jitsu (which is not surprising, since he's been after Anata/Set all game) and Adel (who is apparently very high on your town list), yet you jump off citing that there's something wrong with the wagon. It does make it look very much like, when the wagon took off quicker than expected, you needed to find a reason to jump off. The case on AA is very contrived, and even you seem to be backing off it since it has been met with hostility.


I'll be very clear with the questions: What was it about the Set wagon which bothered you so much, and why was your case against AA so contrived?

[jerubbaal]

Will very likely be unavailable through the weekend, picking my gf up from school and all that.

[jerubbaal]

Ok, do you acknowledge that the case on AA was weak and why did you feel that it was worthy of a vote at that point?

[jerubbaal]

This post seems to acknowledge that you felt "forced" off of the Set wagon by the additions of Adel and Jitsu. I understood, at that point, that you still considered Adel and Jitsu to be rather pro-town. Jitsu has been pretty hard after Anata/Set the whole game, I find it hard to believe that you considered him jumping on the wagon strange. And, despite your hostility toward him, you still seem to consider Adel as fairly town. If your move is not predicated by suspicions on one of both of them as scum, the rationale doesn't hold together, at all. Please be precise about your suspicions in the matter and the rationale behind your action.


There is enough content that has been brought up in this conversation that the excessive fence-sitting which has been going on is entirely inappropriate. Far too many people are playing the "wait and see" game without contributing to the conversation at all.

[jerubbaal]

Flay, your explanation chooses to focus on generalizations (wagon speed) without acknowledging the particulars (who was on the wagon). If your explanation is true, it's very sloppy play, which I wouldn't really expect from you.

I would appreciate hearing from those who have not been willing to enter this conversation, particularly Oman and Sudo. I think the case against AA is very clumsily made, but I'm curious what he has to say about it. CKD seems to be very present, but he's fence-sitting, waiting for something. Not sure what, but I would like to hear from you.

[jerubbaal]

I'm confused on the Adel case as well beyond "He changed his mind." It seems like Flay is riding the hatred of Adel's playstyle pretty well. I still like the case on Flay way more than the case on Adel (which hasn't really even been fully stated yet). Even in the post when Flay votes Adel, he points out that the way Adel is playing is "too stupid" for scum. I think what he's doing is fairly legit, but it makes no sense for scum. Plus I don't buy the "oops" explanation from Flay.

If I understand what Adel has said about his methods at all (which, admittedly, is not much), a lot of his decisions seem to be based on profiling, and there's only so much profit in arguing profiles.

I would also like to know why I'm being linked to Adel, other than not minding his style of play so much.

[jerubbaal]

I will be gone leading a church youth thingie from Wednesday to Sunday.

I'm afraid Adel just made you look terribly dumb, Oman. You really don't appear to be standing on anything other than OMGUS. What are those other reasons you mention?

[jerubbaal]

Sorry it took me so long to get back to this after the holidays, I'm kind of in a time crunch at work right now.

I really like Adel's 1102. Flay's position has been far from consistent toward Adel in this day, and there appears to be very little to justify such a change in position other than frustration. It's kind of cool to see Adel's whole refusal to present an argument actually working.

Flay was one of the staunchest supporters of Adel's townieness until this incident. Up until now, Flay had absolutely no problem with Adel arguing from authority, but now that it serves his argument, it's the main point against Adel. The logic seems very.... flexible.

[jerubbaal]

Set and Oman are highest on my list right now, after Flay, although my evaluation of Oman is somewhat dependent on Flay's alignment. After that, I'm somewhat nervous of Sudo, as he's been entirely a non-contributor all game, but I'm not quite sure what to do with him at this point.

[jerubbaal]

I think Set is being significantly more of a backseat driver in her support of Flay, which is darn scummy, whether Flay is scum or town. If the scum loses another member (assuming 3 in this scenario, which seems likely), the game starts to look pretty hopeless for them. After our last game, I'm convinced you have the balls to defend your partner blatantly, if it was in the best interest of your game plan. I'm suspicious of Set regardless of Flay's alignment. If Flay comes up scum, I'm really not sure who I'm more suspicious of.

[jerubbaal]

Well, at least things are moderately clear now. CKD's falseclaiming, so that inclines me to believe Set's claim, and that gives us our two scum, AA and CKD. Honestly, CKD being scum floors me, because I had him on my nigh-confirmed town list after finding the contradiction in Korlash's posting day 2, but I guess it was a bus after Adel started pushing on Korlash day 1.

I sincerely doubt a redirection type role exists in a mini normal, so I'll go with what I know and

Vote: CKD

[jerubbaal]

The odds of there being 3 mafia at this point are extremely low, not to mention unbalanced. I'm unsure where this conjecture is going, or why it is necessary.

I'm voting you, CKD because knowing that you are scum only depends on knowledge of which I am certain, that I am town, instead of relying on knowledge which is likely, that Set is telling the truth. The odds of a double false-claim are low, and I don't see why it would be done, but voting you requires less logical jumps.

I'll happily vote AA if that's the lynch today, but for now I'm voting the person whom I know to be scum rather than the person who is likely to be scum.

[jerubbaal]

3 mafia left. That would mean that there were 4 mafia in this scenario, and that's a really high proportion. Assuming one NK a night, that puts the town in lylo after one mislynch.

[jerubbaal]

Agree with Jitsu, we need to lynch one of the cops and go from there. Lynching anyone but a cop simply does not gain us the necessary information. At the moment, I can't see a profitable scenario for a double falseclaim, but I know CKD is lying and I'm only really accepting Set's claim by default. Obviously, I think we should lynch CKD, but I would rather Set be lynched than anyone else other than CKD.

[jerubbaal]

Ok, as long as we assume a 3 person scum team and that both cops are not innocent (both of which are extremely, extremely likely), we should just lynch both cops. If the first one we lynch is innocent, then we're set, lynch the other cop and then the innocent cop's target, that's only one mislynch. If we lynch the guilty cop first, lynch the other cop, confirm that it's not a double falseclaim, and then lynch the innocent cop's target. That's still only one mislynch, and gets us out of the only scenario in which we really lose, the double falseclaim.

This actually gets us out of an alternative losing condition as well, which is that one of us (AA or myself) is a secret miller, which seems much more likely that either a 4 man scum team or two falseclaiming innocent cops. Just to show how we we would lose in this scenario according to Jitsu's plans:

Lynch Set: guilty
Lynch me: innocent
Lynch CKD: innocent

And that's our two mislynches. It would be a strange role for a mini, but if this game is concerned much about reveals and partial information, I could see it fitting with the whole flavor. Anyhow, I think lynching both cops gives us the most information and the best information, so we should start there. I would prefer starting with CKD, but I am willing to start with Set.


@CKD, obviously it's absurd, I'm not scum. Don't know how much more to say there.

Another note, if there were 3 scum left, we would have lost by now. With as many votes as have been flying around, they could have quicklynched someone by now. Seriously, we should discard this possibility.

[jerubbaal]

The only explanation I can think of is the miller thing. CKD's investigations have been pretty confirmable, and Sudo's the only one we don't have an investigation on, so he must be the last scum.

Vote: Sudo

[jerubbaal]

As far as I know, I'm vanilla.

[jerubbaal]

Ah heck, this is silly. We decided to make the gamble with the cop claim because we hadn't killed any power roles yet and, if there was an active cop still going, the game was pretty much lost anyway. If the claim worked, we get a mislynch, Set gets lynched, and then we get down to the endgame w/ myself and two others. As long as they are the right people, I shouldn't have too much trouble winning.

Anyhow, props to Adel for nailing it pretty hard right away. We actually felt we had to kill you, despite it being a fairly easy lynch the next day, because if your analysis of the situation got out, we were toast. Should have done it earlier. The blocked kill was when we went after Jitsu, who was considered a confirmed townie by most. It was between him and CKD, so I guess we made the wrong choice there. Game would have been pretty different. With one more kill and the cop dead, I think we would have had a strong chance.

Good game to all, I tried to come up with a scenario where we should lynch both cops to figure it out, but they were all stupid and useless. I was dead as soon as CKD was revealed to be the real cop, even if I got him lynched. Hope to play with you all in the future.

Vote: Jer

[jerubbaal]

Nah, no power roles. I do think that this scenario is slanted toward the town fairly well. If we can't find the cop early, this game is going to run long and the advantage goes to the town. We hadn't hit the cop or had a claim after three days, so we made the gambit. In the end, I think it would have come out exactly the same. We still needed two mislynches, and we weren't going to get them with an active cop.

I've seen this scenario or similar quite a few times, but it almost always includes an SK. I think the SK helps the scum considerably, if by nothing else speeding up the game. At the end there, I just kept figuring through the possible lynches and scenarios by which we could still win, and there really weren't many. Maybe I'm just being a sore loser, but a game with only one active killing role as well as cop and doc seems to favor the town pretty heavily.

[jerubbaal]

Your flavor is kinda disturbed, NabNab, not gonna lie.

[jerubbaal]

Adel had it pretty much pegged for quite a while. I seriously thought about going for her earlier, but general consensus was that she was the most townie, so I figured she's get the doc protect. This seemed like the time when her alignment was most in doubt, so we could get in. I guess I overestimated just how townie everyone thought she was, since we knew how spot-on she was the whole game (cept, of course, when she was gunning for you, which was possibly the most satisfying thing in the whole game, to get the two most experienced players at each others throats). End conclusion was that she was going to be too much of a threat if she was given the chance to get all her opinions down in the thread, as she would inevitably shown up townie when lynched. If it were lylo, I would totally have let her live and go for the throat.