Mini 546: House Mafia - Game Over

[Near]

Then he says that the fact she did not attack himself or CKD ruled out 2, thus leading him to 3. I don't know how you get that his premises don't cover it - if Adel does not attack back, then 2) is invalid.

Because according to shaft.ed, if 2) is true, then Adel will counter attack wagoners.
Attacking Adel does not make shaft.ed a wagoner. Therefore, Adel not attacking shaft.ed does not make 2) invalid.
If anything, shaft.ed should have attacked whoever Adel was attacking in order to test 2)

[Near]

Beside the minute details about his logic, still there is something quite weird about his argument. It just sounds so fake.

a) Do you guys think shaft.ed REALLY believed those 3 scenarios he mentioned cover majority of the cases for random wagoning?
b) If he really believed that, then shaft.ed is completely convinced that Adel is a townie?

[Near]

Then he says that the fact she did not attack himself or CKD ruled out 2, thus leading him to 3. I don't know how you get that his premises don't cover it - if Adel does not attack back, then 2) is invalid.

Because according to shaft.ed, if 2) is true, then Adel will counter attack wagoners.

Attacking Adel does not make shaft.ed a wagoner. Therefore, Adel not attacking shaft.ed does not make 2) invalid.
If anything, shaft.ed should have attacked whoever Adel was attacking in order to test 2)

Bolded section is where I misunderstood the original post, isn't it.

[Near]

I am ashamed.

Unvote

[Near]

Vote Shafted

Vollkan says not enough evidence.
But there is some evidence.
and there is hunch.
and no, it's not because i made a mistake day 1

[Albert B. Rampage]

Advice: don't post 5 times in a row.

[shaft.ed]

Attacking Adel does not make shaft.ed a wagoner.

Voting someone generally makes them considered a wagoner.

If he really believed that, then shaft.ed is completely convinced that Adel is a townie?

I would not say I'm completely convinced but at the time it did give me an early read on her as town.

I really feel like you're trying to look like you don't know what your doing in order to milk this "newbie" label as much as you can. The age listing probably gave you the feedback you needed to be sure it was a possible strategy.

And why the vote switching again?

[vollkan]

Bolded section is where I misunderstood the original post, isn't it.

Yup

a) Do you guys think shaft.ed REALLY believed those 3 scenarios he mentioned cover majority of the cases for random wagoning?

They do cover most usual circumstances. As I said, it may be a false trichotomy - nothing comes to mind which makes it one, however. I don't 100% believe him at all. But, he has given a reasonable explanation. What more can I expect?

b) If he really believed that, then shaft.ed is completely convinced that Adel is a townie?

No. I wouldn't think so. Adel just didn't appear to be acting scummy at that point according to his interpretation of her behaviour.

I am ashamed.

You should be.

Vote Shafted

Vollkan says not enough evidence.
But there is some evidence.
and there is hunch.
and no, it's not because i made a mistake day 1

What evidence? As I said, 1 and 3 were valid. 2 is conspiracy. 4 is deflection. 1 and 3, however, don't pass my lynchability threshold.

Oh, and N, I detest hunches.

[curiouskarmadog]

does that mean you dislike my hunch vote as well?

[vollkan]

Yes, now that you have drawn my attention to it. Explain the vote please.

[curiouskarmadog]

mostly his posts on page 29 and his vote(and post) on the top of page 30. When I saw it the first time, I almost switched my vote then, but I really felt I had a scum with TG.

Ergo, what are your thoughts of Near's comments after he casted his vote but before TG's alignment was known?

[Erg0]

In short: not much. Certainly not enough to determine his alignment from them, though I do find it a mite strange that he would go out of his way to do something that he apparently knew would make him look scummy.

That said, I don't think that Near is today's play.

[curiouskarmadog]

but adel is?

[Erg0]

Sure, why not?

Seriously, though: I think that she has crossed the line from gambiting townie to manipulative scum.

[curiouskarmadog]

what post did that?

[Erg0]

I don't know if this qualifies as gut, but I really didn't like this from Adel:

Erg0 is supposed to be a very strong player according to other players I respect, so I'm interested in seeing what else he will add to this game.

This was her reason for choosing to vote TG over me on day 2. My immediate reaction when someone tells me how good I am is to become suspicious, especially when I've recently blitzed somebody the way I did TG at the start of day 2 and done a big analysis as I did with the armlx links. I gave her the benefit of the doubt at the time because I agreed with her basic suspicion of TG, but "I hear he's good" is hardly a valid reason not to lynch somebody, especially after her comment on day 1 about Pooky and I being "hard to lynch". Now that I know TG was town, I look back at her FoS on me after the day 1 lynch and her subsequent eagerness to pursue a TG lynch and I'm thinking that she was going after the target that the town would be most likely to follow her on, whilst trying to keep me onside by stroking my ego at the same time.

[Adel]

If you had access to the thread for the scummies 2007 judges I'd link you to where BM was talking about you when we were talking about who should get the best newbie scummy.

[vollkan]

I don't know if this qualifies as gut, but I really didn't like this from Adel:

Erg0 is supposed to be a very strong player according to other players I respect, so I'm interested in seeing what else he will add to this game.

This was her reason for choosing to vote TG over me on day 2. My immediate reaction when someone tells me how good I am is to become suspicious, especially when I've recently blitzed somebody the way I did TG at the start of day 2 and done a big analysis as I did with the armlx links. I gave her the benefit of the doubt at the time because I agreed with her basic suspicion of TG, but "I hear he's good" is hardly a valid reason not to lynch somebody, especially after her comment on day 1 about Pooky and I being "hard to lynch". Now that I know TG was town, I look back at her FoS on me after the day 1 lynch and her subsequent eagerness to pursue a TG lynch and I'm thinking that she was going after the target that the town would be most likely to follow her on, whilst trying to keep me onside by stroking my ego at the same time.

This isn't what I label "gut". It's more a pseudo-conspiracy: pseudo- because the reason she gives for not wanting to lynch you is, as you say, hardly a valid reason, but there's quite a bit of intention-theorising being done here as well.

I'll do up an analysis of someone shortly (still undecided).

Oh, and for laughs, I'd like to present this which I recently encountered. I don't know if the subject is aware of being discussed in this manner:

Your last post rubs me all the wrong ways. Like if Adel was a stripper.

I believe Adel is female? If so, her stripping services are always welcome over here.

[shaft.ed]

Erg0, I interpreted her post as a joke. She told me she wanted to keep me around cause she liked reading my posts. How could anyone seriously enjoy reading my game posts?

[Adel]

I do like reading your post. You keep them short and to the point. You could choose to blather on for hundreds of words at a time, but you don't.

[shaft.ed]

OK as promised analysis of Near. This will be a partial PBP in isolation. Sorry Adel this is a long drawn out post. I guess you're going to have to vote...Oh wait.

Let it be noted that Near replaced into the game mid D2 after the FTA but before the twist. Leading vote getters were pooky and TG at 2 each. His predecessors effectively skated through D1 and early D2 without any possible analysis leaving his slate clean upon entrance and no record of commitments.

0: Argues a bit with vollkan's reasoning behind pushing against TJM. States he wouldn't have mislynched him. Bit suspicious.
1: Makes a valid point linking me to armlx. Points out that in the same post armlx states that scum would never vote for their partner and subsequently votes me, while also leaving himself open to vote TJM in the future. I disagree with his dichotomy of interpretations as he states that armlx was either trying to take down an easy innocent, or trying to bus a partner early. I would argue he leaves out the third possibility that armlx was tying himself to me by stating scum would never vote for their partner, and then voting me. However, armlx wasn't really in much danger at the time so I don't know that he would be thinking along these lines. Feels townish.
2-4: Back and forth with vollkan involving FoSs for me and vollkan that are quickly retracted. This is the first taste of the newbie wishy/washy Near we've all come to know and love. He goes through a lot of complicated 1's and 2's and A)'s and B)'s just to set up a false dichotomy so that if TJM is town armlx's actions means I must be scum. I would argue there are many other reasons for his actions, especially as I was the apparantly easier wagon at the time. This section made my head hurt, was overly complicated and I felt it didn't really amount to much. I would suggest experiencing first hand to get the entire jist if you wish to. Feels a bit like scum trying to set me up.
5: Puts forth the idea that scum would have divided into a group of two on armlx's team and one on NLU, thus leaving one scum on each of the original teams. Not a bad argument and a slightly useful insight. Slightly town.
6-7: Posits that CKD is possible scum since he chose to investigate vollkan and not TG his top suspect. Greatest hits of this section include, vollkan is a good doc regardless of CKD's alignment; if TG turns up scum CKD could just be bus'ing him throws spin on the too townie fallacy for good measure. Bad argument, not seriously scumy.
8: Even after the week argument, says he really starting to think it likely that CKD is scum, did I mention very possible. Can we say mixing certain verbage "really, very" with totally could be wrong about what I'm saying verbage "likely, possible." This has a tinge of scum due to wording.
9: After his great insights to CKD made him very likely possible scum, he asks whether TG having opinions of people that fluctuate all over the map is really that much of a scum tell. Contradictions between conclusions of CKD and TG vs. evidence is striking. Scummy.
10: Re-affirms that even with the CKD sidetrack he still think I'm mafia because armlx was trying to bus his "partner" while lynching TJM by voting me. I really think this argument has been pretty discredited, but maybe more talking about it would clarify Near's/my alignment a bit? Also says CKD is his second hunch, and is reserved about expressing this opinion even though he "just knows it's him." Again with the unceratin and certain verbiage mixed together. States he's hoping CKD is scum so he looks good for taking him out. Tad scummy.
11: Mildly argues with Erg0 about the relevance of TG's inconsistencies relating to scumminess.
12: Responding to CKD's smackdown of Near's "case" against him. Again restates he thinks CKD to be scum prefering a TG lynch so investigating someone else. Says he didn't even notice Adel (are you reading the same game as the rest of us?). Votes CKD because he was told to. THen can't come up with three reasons, not even one for his suspicion of CKD. Says he's not voting because he's new and humbled.
13: unvotes CKD very rapidly
15: would definitely read this section first hand. This is his scoring of scumminess early game. In the end TG and I come up with an identical Near Scum Score. But in some kind of orgasmic PBP analysis (not going to happen hear unfortunately) he is totally persuaded that TG is scum.

WOW AND FINALLY 351, 353, 354

SEALS IT

for me.

In 351 he calls armlx "acting as scummy as possible". And then, unfos-es armlx because he "agrees with armlx's assessment on CKD"?!! What? [TG++]

Kind of odd posting.
16: This is the vote post. Totally over the top mello-drama:

I am re-reading my post.. to see if it makes sense.

breathe in...
breathe out...

Vote: TG

Note that while reading the most to see if it made sense he didn't notice that his hammer was dropping on someone with an identical scum score. Bit scummy.
17: Weird posting some more here. This is the "I wish I can take back my vote. " post. Scummy.
18: Says he's changed his mind on CKD. Then says he didn't actually count his + scoring system.

What the hell was it for then, just to look like you're scum hunting?

. Then he admits he didn't even finish rereading the thread. He was just "certain" and acted on it. How convenient that he can claim ignorance. Very scummy.
19: He frequently gets emotional and worked up when playing mafia, especially dropping hammers.
20: States that no matter what TG's alignment comes up he would look scummy because he's either bus'ing or mislynch hammering.

Yes, I wanted to take my vote back. I don't knwo! I wasn't sure anymore.

This is more of what I think is a newbie facade. Kinda scummy.
21: Near's response to vollkan pointing out the obvious contradiction in Near's recent post string:

Oh well, I know saying this could make me more suspicious, but: I wish I can take back my vote.

I just reached a stage where I was certain it was TG... and I acted on it.

How are these two posts cogent with each other? You were certain, but now you aren't?

As CKD said: What changed?

They are related to each other because 1) I thought people would be suspicious BECAUSE I reacted all suddenly SO 2) I explained my unusual circumstances for it.

Yes, I was certain at the time. THat's why I voted.

And yes, almost immediately after I submitted vote, I wasn't sure anymore.

I kept hitting refresh wanting to hear Adel's or CKD's approval.

What the hell is that last line about. Before you didn't even know Adel existed. And why are you seeking approval from anyone? And why specifically Adel and CKD, didn't you just suspect CKD as scum trying to mislynch TG? Scummy.
22: He regreted his vote because he calmed down. Does not compute to me.
23: Responds to my more terse assessment of his post vote breakdown. Asking if it really was all that scummy.
24: Attempt to link to ongoing game demonstrating his emotional play.
**About here is where TG"s alignment is finally revealed**
25: Tries to flip my accusation of his scummy play post hammer by saying I knew too much about TG's alignment not him.
28: Comes at me with full guns blazing with a 4 point argument. Point 1) is what I consider an already debunked attempt to link me to armlx based on armlx's vote originating my early wagon. Point 2) is also what I consider a debunked argument regarding my early sloppy statement of why I unvoted Adel. Point 3) Is completely backwards stating that armlx didn't buy my persuasive argument ( I thought you just stated it was garbage) so he must be my partner. I would imagine a scum partner would be quite relieved that his buddy was managing to get himself out of trouble, don't know if harping on it would be the common play. Point 4) Is him trying to flip my accusation of his response to voting TG on to me for accusing him. Garbage, scummy from my perspective. (*Note I will be happy to go back to points 1 and 2 if anyone would like to rehashthem)
34: Opens up the voting with more garbage attacks on me. Says my stating his play deserved a headdesk meant that I was excusing his behavior as not scummy. votes me.
35: Says my refutation of his argument was irrelevant, but his point was bunk anyway. Starts playing the poor little newbie getting picked on routine. Nicely coincides with the town demonstrating they find him immature as a player.
36: Points out that people don't show their regret following a vote but before reveal because it would look really suspicios.
37: After Erg0 points out that being really suspicious might not be such a pro-town way to play Near states "Hmm. A question no one asked before. I haven't thought about it." First what the hell is a question no one asked before? WOuldn't most questions be unique? Then he says "If I have to make a guess." I would like to ask again, why the hell does he need to "guess" as to what he was doing? It makes no sense. Kinda scummy.
38: After vollkan then points out that Near was expressing regret to avoid culpability Near states"Dang. Pretty sharp response.
That was only my guess. So maybe." Oh how convenient that your reply to Erg0 in regards to your own action was "only a guess." Maintaining such wiggle room is very suspicious to me. Scummy.
39: Uninterpretable back and forth with vollkan about why I'm scummy. Freaky self teaching + time machine moment.
40: OK so after I raise the point that people generally don't have to guess about their own actions Near replies:

Because sometimes I act without thinking, don't you ever do that.

Note how much this contrasts with his actual TG vote post:

I am re-reading my post.. to see if it makes sense.

breathe in...
breathe out...

Vote: TG

Seems like a lot of thinking went on in there to me. Hella scummy.
41: After vollkan further shoots down Near's attacks on me, I still "feel scummy" to him even though his "evidences suck." Then asks the rest of the town to make sense of his posts for him. More newbie card.
42-46: More illogical back and forth with vollkan in regards to my Adel vote early game. Although the string seems to end with this post:

I am ashamed.

Unvote

Post 47 comes 5 minutes later:

Vote Shafted

Vollkan says not enough evidence.
But there is some evidence.
and there is hunch.
and no, it's not because i made a mistake day 1

Just so you know you weren't in the game D1.

[shaft.ed]

Also in regards to my reasons for voting Adel being contrived. I made this post:

unvote vote: Adel

armlx I'd really like to hear where you got 80% scum read on me, and 20% on vollkan so early in this game.

So you would rather see some bullshit statistics? I'm moving around & stirring the pot.

Do I look like an easy target to you?

So you're going for the "I'm going to play scummy and then call people scummy for voting for me" tactic?

The day of my vote and 2 days before post 183. It clearly demonstrates that I was interested in Adel's reaction to me.

[Adel]

I'm pretty sold on shaft.Ed being scum.

I'll make any townie a deal: you give me links to 10 games where shaft.Ed got lynched and I'll give you an exhaustive comparative analysis of how he defends himself against a wagon, with alignment as the independent variable. Unlike my previous approaches I will produce both a coherent methodology to identify

unvote

expect details in about an hour while I write it up.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Vote count

Adel 1 - (Erg0)
Shafted 1 - (Near)
Near 1 - (Shafted)
Erg0 1 - (CKD)

[Albert B. Rampage]

Uh oh...twist time approaching.