Newbie 764 - Game Over

[Korts]

I know I have to post some content, but I haven't finished with the catching up (I haven't exactly started, either). Give me today and maybe tomorrow.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Official Vote Count

Ojanen - 1 (Josh Lyman)

Sando - 3 (Chaos40, Korts, Japles)

Kairyuu - 1 (Sando)

Not Voting - 4 (Bekkatha, Infinis, Kairyuu, Ojanen)

5 to Lynch

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

The silent trio needs to wake up.

Requesting prod for Bekkatha

, her last post was Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:28 pm.
Josh Lyman said she was away until Tuesday morning, well it's Saturday afternoon in my time zone now so I think she should be prodded too.
Infinis posted two days ago, but I want him to butt in on stuff, come on tell us what you think of all this?

I'm gonna try to get my thoughts collected and post properly later today.

Bekkatha was prodded on the 4th and picked up that prod. Josh was prodded on the 3rd and has responded to that prod.

[Kairyuu]

Let's get this thing started shall we?

@Infinis: One point to address from your last post.

The probability of both ICs being scum is extremely low, approximately 2.78% actually. This is determined through simple multiplication. The first IC has a 2/9 chance, and assuming that happens, the second one has a 1/8 chance, making 2/72, or 1/36. or 2.777777778%.

However, that isn't really the issue here.

@Sando: You'll have to bear with me on this. I'm going to condense my argument as much as possible for the sake of time.

1. I no longer feel as strongly that you are scum. You remind me very much of a friend of mine when he first started playing here (playername: Isacc). I think that it is much more likely that you are newbie town pushing back against what you see as suspicion that could only come from scum (the "since I'm town, people who attack me must be scum" point of view). This is a behavior that you will need to move out of. My following points will exemplify the problems with your argument.

2. As soon as you were accused, you immediately went back to dig up anything you could find on your accuser. This is a very bad idea, because it opens you up to all sorts of OMGUS accusations, regardless of whether or not your case is solid. If it isn't, (the situation you are in) then it is even

more

likely that you will be accused of it, because it looks like you are merely fabricating a desperate counterattack to allay suspicion.

3. Your original defense was a load of waffle. You didn't make any serious accusations until your third response post. Instead, your posts were just filler to take up space and make it look like you had a long case, even though you didn't.

4. Instead of actively trying to disprove my case, you came at my credibility as an IC, which irritated me to no end. If you cannot logically disprove my

points

, then resorting to painting me as an unethical player is

not

the way to go. Prove me scummy, not incompetent.

5. When I responded to your points, you took what I said, and you warped it to suit your own agenda. You quoted me, and then accused me of doing things that don't even make sense, and would be far too complicated for me to attempt without making major mistakes (assuming that I am scum, which I am not).

6. When I brought this up, you turned around and accused

me

of the exact same thing. This is terrible OMGUS, and just shows that you are getting backed into a corner and are being forced into a completely defensive, reactionary posture.

All of those are common newbie town mistakes that lead to a high D1 town lynch rate in Newbie games.

And yes, I know that I am changing my position a lot this game. I wasn't able to polarize it to my liking, so I'm still working on my final reads.

@all: Picking up a prod, but not responding to it by posting in thread is a scumtell in my book. I've seen scum do it too many times to ignore it.

vote: Josh Lyman

FOS: Bekkatha

Anything else I forgot to comment on gets to wait until tomorrow, as I'm still busy.

[Ojanen]

Busy too, no time for proper mafia pondering right now. This jumped to me from the page, though.

@Infinis: One point to address from your last post.

The probability of both ICs being scum is extremely low, approximately 2.78% actually. This is determined through simple multiplication. The first IC has a 2/9 chance, and assuming that happens, the second one has a 1/8 chance, making 2/72, or 1/36. or 2.777777778%.

However, that isn't really the issue here.

Might embarass myself here, cause I ain't any mathematician.
But isn't it so that the same probability is true for any given two players selected beforehand as separate from the others?
What I mean is, doesn't any given selected pair of players have the same probability of ending up scum as the two IC's?
Isn't what you said almost like saying "there are to players whose names start with the letter A in this game, so the probability of them both being scum is only 2,78%, therefore extremely low"? Like the fallacy of how extremely improbable our world is, looking back from now?

[Kairyuu]

This is exactly true Ojanen. The problem is that people like to get it into their heads quite often that the ICs working together on anything automatically makes them scumbuddies, when the likelyhood of that actually being the case is only 2.78%. It isn't meant as a defense of anything, only to point out a problem with Infinis's automatic assumption.

[Sando]

Ojanen, it basically means that if you were to pick any 2 people at the start of the game, the chances of you being right are ~2.5%. It doesn't matter which 2 you pick, same chances, assuming you don't use any reasoning. He's saying that if you pull out the 2 ICs just because they're ICs, and not because of their play, then you've just done the 'pick any 2 people' and your chances of being right are 2.5%. And yes, he's completely right in that regards.

Kairyuu.

1: Am I right in assuming this is only a newbie mistake if you're not scum?

2: No I didn't, i posted 2 long posts defending myself. It was while posting those that I started to feel manipulated by you, and i then posted a third accusing you and Chaos, but mainly you.

3: Read above, my first 2 posts were my defence, my third was my accusation, i specifically designed it that way to try and make it a little easier to follow.

4: You still haven't addressed a lot of the points that I've brought up against you.

5: See above, and below, i'll re-ask my questions and some new ones.

6: I've explained why it wasn't OMGUS, and I've shown repeatedly where you've taken me out of context, and all you've done is repeatedly claim it, with no evidence.

Some things I'd like answered:

1) From Ojanen:

-Kai's lack of opposition to quicklynch.
Seriously, we have almost no idea about a third of the players yet. He's very confident that this doesn't matter.

You're change from voting me to JL and Bekkatha I can understand from a townies POV, but not from the POV of someone who advocates a quicklynch. When I accused you of it being a tell for a scum IC, you said:

Others prefer methodical, swift Days, with a reasonably quick consensus lynch after some scumhunting. I am of that second group

You wanted a quicklynch, despite knowing that there were at least 2/3 people who had failed to respond, has your view on quicklynches changed? If not, since you now think i'm a newb townie, wouldn't it have a been a mistake to quicklynch me? This is especially true given that you guys put me at L-1 without requiring a response from the 2 people you're now accusing.

2) Regarding your trap/gambit.

- Why did you think you had caught scum before they had voted for your bait, or FOS'd him even?
- Given that you claim to be a townie, and by your own admission you looked scummy, why wouldn't a scum take the opportunity to accuse you instead of Chaos or Korts?
- You said that scum would jump on Korts because he was a townie, how did you know he was a townie?

3) Regarding Japles

- He voted for me after I lumped him in with you and Chaos as a passing reference, considering your crusade against OMGUS, do you think this was OMGUS from him? And if so, why are you not attacking him for it?
- What do you think about him putting someone at L-1 with no reasoning given?
- What do you think about his failure to actually address any of the problems that I've brought up, and just vote for me?

[Sando]

One other thing, separate from the whole me and Kairyuu thing. I've come to realise that my writing style (long-winded) isn't really appreciated/ is annoying for others, and neither is it conducive to getting people to listen/respond to me. I have to take some responsibility for Kairyuu not responding to some of my points given how much text they were rapped up in. I've made a definite effort to condense my posts, and I won't take any responsibility if Kai doesn't respond to my very clear questions in my last post. The same is true of my accusations of Japles, I feel they are perfectly clear and his lack of response is purely due to him not wanting to respond to them.

I also want to make clear that it is my writing style to be long-winded, it's not just me making filler to make my argument look bigger than it is. I always try and anticipate peoples misunderstandings to my points and address them in my posts before they ask them. I'm making a definite effort to shorten and condense my posts, mainly due to comments from you guys, I don't want to get accused of my style having changed making me scum, it's changed because you've basically asked me to.

So there's one thing I've definitely learned so far, and yes, i realise how silly it is to post a long-winded post saying I'm not going to be long-winded anymore

[Chaos40]

Well, looking over the thread, whilst "The Slip, TM" is still a big factor in my suspicion of Sando, I've started to look at the case on Japles more seriously and I can certainly see merit behind it.

The remark about a possible combination of Kairyuu/Japles was mentioned in a few short sentences in a post several paragraphs long. Now, forgive me if my theories concerning discussion differ from yours, but I don't think it's possible to falter against a belief that one has argued for adamantly for several paragraphs in three sentences. And I can't help but wonder if the attack on Sando would not have begun if it had been another name mentioned. So I'll direct this as a question towards Japles

@Japles: This stament by you concerns me.

Well, I have read all your arguments against Kariyuu and I don't agree with them.

And now, you have given me, in that last post, what was needed to push me over the line...

Vote: Sando

Mind elaborating exactly what was given that pushed you over the edge? you don't make it very clear in any of your follow up posts

[Josh Lyman]

I know I have to post some content, but I haven't finished with the catching up (I haven't exactly started, either). Give me today and maybe tomorrow.

What he said. My RL has taken a bizarre turn. Be here soon, promise.

[Josh Lyman]

Oh, and

unvote

.

[Kairyuu]

@all: Post tomorrow. Gotta write a book (literally).

@Sando: First, don't change your style because people are bothered by it. I am naturally long winded too. I just have been extremely pressed for time of late.

Secondly, it has not been the length of your posts that has kept me from responding to all of your points (however, your implication that this has been an ongoing thing instead of simply one post made while pressed for time is still not appreciated), it has been the fact that I am enormously busy lately, and am trying desperately to keep up with everything plus Mafia. It isn't quite working.

[Sando]

I said you didn't respond to some of my points, not that you didn't respond to some of my posts. The points regarding your trap/gambit that i posted in my previous post I don't feel you've responded to.

And I'm changing my style because it doesn't seem to be working. People aren't responding to what I'm saying regarding you and others, and people like Japles are getting away with brushing huge posts off with no regard. I don't know if it's the others in the game, or if it's because of my style, but if I try a different style and nothing changes, at least I know it's the people, and not my style. This is a learning game, I think it's the time to try out some things to see what is most effective.

And considering people seem not to like it, too many for them all to be scum, then I figure I should at least try.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Replacing Bekkatha due to inactivity.

Millar13 replaces Bekkatha.

[Infinis]

This is exactly true Ojanen. The problem is that people like to get it into their heads quite often that the ICs working together on anything automatically makes them scumbuddies, when the likelyhood of that actually being the case is only 2.78%. It isn't meant as a defense of anything, only to point out a problem with Infinis's automatic assumption.

I was so engrossed with huge posts I missed this little nugget of misrepresentation. Automatic assumption? Of what that the IC's are scum buddies? I presented it as a scenario, yes, but not my definitive point of view.

I found it odd how you chose someone for your trap, when you could have no way of knowing who is scum and who is not. In fact, you are guilty of exonerating both IC's: Yourself, because no one claims scum and Korts because of his use in your trap.

As to the math of both IC's or any two players randomly selected, being scum is irrefutable. However what you did is not the same.

As a townie, not knowing anything else and looking in on the scenario you've presented, we see that there is 2/8 or 1/4 chance that a person picked at random is scum and a 1/7 chance that the scum is picked randomly from the remaining players. 1/4 * 1/7 = 3.57% better but not good odds. But can we increase the odds? Of course, this townie player assumes the good intentions of the scenario creator, therefore giving 2/7 chance that the first person picked at random is scum while the chances that the second person picked is 1/6 as scum. Therefore 2/7 * 1/6 = 4.76% better still! However shockingly slim chances.

Let's assume you are scum, would you risk losing a team member in order to sail all the way to the endgame? Perhaps. Would you chose two townies to guarantee a scum favorable lynch? More likely.

I am not saying you are scum, what I am suggesting is that the trap you so carefully crafted has a fatal flaw. The assumption that even with a bad argument against them, the second accused player is not scum. You have no way of confirming that.

I can see your reasoning behind Sando's wagon, but he's acquitted himself quite well. Are first impressions more important than well reasoned argument? Honestly slogging through the huge ?PBPA?, is that right, is rough going. But hopefully after a more thorough reread I will find that Sando's arguments may be strong or they may be weak. I however am not in a rush to lynch him based on a flawed trap. If upon reread, I find the results satisfactory then the flawed setup can be ignored, ends justified the means.

As an aside the trap scenario is quite an interesting teaching moment, I hope to learn from it.

[millar13]

HIYA!

[Kairyuu]

'ello Millar. Good to see you again.

@all: My apologies for being so inactive lately. I just started my Easter Break, so I'll be around a good bit more for the next week or so. I'm getting on a post right now.

[Kairyuu]

@Sando:

1: Am I right in assuming this is only a newbie mistake if you're not scum?

No. The vast majority of that post was written in my role as an IC, not my role as a player. The things I accused you of are not up for discussion. You did them, and that is that. They are scumtells, but I believe you are somewhat more likely town backed against a wall and making mistakes because you are new. I will not comment further on my list.

You're change from voting me to JL and Bekkatha I can understand from a townies POV, but not from the POV of someone who advocates a quicklynch.

You are really stuck on this aren't you. Everything anyone does in this game is entirely situational. In this case I saw a stronger tell coming from a different source. That tell has been dealt with to my satisfaction now, so I am moving on again.

You wanted a quicklynch, despite knowing that there were at least 2/3 people who had failed to respond, has your view on quicklynches changed?

Nope. Does switching my vote imply that? How so? I expect full explanations to both of these questions.

If not, since you now think i'm a newb townie, wouldn't it have a been a mistake to quicklynch me?

Townies get lynched. It happens. If we had lynched you, and you had flipped town, I would be disappointed, but not overly distraught. We have 3 strikes after all.

This is especially true given that you guys put me at L-1 without requiring a response from the 2 people you're now accusing.

I am not going to just let the game stall because some people don't feel like posting. A lagging game is far worse than one where we accidentally lynch a townie D1.

Why did you think you had caught scum before they had voted for your bait, or FOS'd him even?

Take a look back at my explanation of it, and point out to me, with quotes, where I ever said that the point was to draw a vote onto my bait. If you can do that, I'll cede my point. But, you won't find it, because that was not the goal. The goal, as I said

repeatedly

was to catch someone who was acting in a specific way which would be conducive to scum angling for an easy lynch. You did that, so I sprung the trap. If I was right then I am going to regret backing off of you, but if I am wrong as I now think, there is very little lost, and it got discussion rocketing off.

Besides, it is a gambit based on

behavior

. There is no way in hell someone can expect it to be 100% accurate. If I can catch 1 scum every three times I try a gambit like that, I will be happy, because it is not an extremely powerful gambit. It got you into a debate with me though, which allowed me to read you much better. I'm calling it a success, regardless of whether or not you liked it.

Given that you claim to be a townie, and by your own admission you looked scummy, why wouldn't a scum take the opportunity to accuse you instead of Chaos or Korts?

That was the main problem with my gambit when I made it. I didn't take that into account, and I had to adjust to the Chaos angle to strengthen it (yes, this means the final product is a weird hodgepodge of 3 different gambits).

You said that scum would jump on Korts because he was a townie, how did you know he was a townie?

Wanna show me where I said that Korts was a townie. I said I believed him to be probably town based on my initial reads, so I used him as my debate opponent.

He voted for me after I lumped him in with you and Chaos as a passing reference, considering your crusade against OMGUS, do you think this was OMGUS from him?

What Japles did was not OMGUS. You lumped me in with him on page 3. He made 2 posts between the point where you accused him and the one where he voted you. OMGUS would imply that as soon as you accused him (more like voted, because that is what OMGUS is more often associated with) he went and built a case against you that culminated in a vote. He addressed your points, but didn't vote you until later. That is not OMGUS. His reason was crap and utterly destroyed my town read on him, but I prefer to work on one front at a time.

What do you think about him putting someone at L-1 with no reasoning given?

He gave a reason, but the reason was crap. I think he is suspicious, but not enough to warrant my vote or attention right now.

What do you think about his failure to actually address any of the problems that I've brought up, and just vote for me?

Dunno. Wasn't paying attention to that debate. He should have addressed you points, but I don't know the exact situation (and am too lazy to go look it up right now) so I can't comment fully.

I said you didn't respond to some of my points, not that you didn't respond to some of my posts.

That's what I said:

Secondly, it has not been the length of your posts that has kept me from responding to all of your points

And I'm changing my style because it doesn't seem to be working. People aren't responding to what I'm saying regarding you and others, and people like Japles are getting away with brushing huge posts off with no regard. I don't know if it's the others in the game, or if it's because of my style, but if I try a different style and nothing changes, at least I know it's the people, and not my style. This is a learning game, I think it's the time to try out some things to see what is most effective.

Suit yourself. I like the long posts, and except for one time I've gone through and responded to everything.

@Infinis:

I was so engrossed with huge posts I missed this little nugget of misrepresentation. Automatic assumption? Of what that the IC's are scum buddies? I presented it as a scenario, yes, but not my definitive point of view.

If you present the scenario then you are making an accusation. If you are not making a direct accusation, then you are trying to see if anyone else takes it up and pushes it.

I found it odd how you chose someone for your trap, when you could have no way of knowing who is scum and who is not. In fact, you are guilty of exonerating both IC's: Yourself, because no one claims scum and Korts because of his use in your trap.

How have I exonerated anyone? Is it D2, and am I a claimed cop with an innocent on Korts? If not, then I have not done anything but express my opinion on a fellow player.

As to the math of both IC's or any two players randomly selected, being scum is irrefutable. However what you did is not the same.

Yes it is. I took the setup

without any player involvement

, which is what the point of my explanation was, and I analyzed it mathematically.

As a townie, not knowing anything else and looking in on the scenario you've presented, we see that there is 2/8 or 1/4 chance that a person picked at random is scum and a 1/7 chance that the scum is picked randomly from the remaining players. 1/4 * 1/7 = 3.57% better but not good odds.

You cannot look at it from an in-game perspective. That skews the numbers, because it factors in alignment of the player making the argument, which is ambiguous to everyone else, and therefore makes the numbers subjective and therefore wrong.

But can we increase the odds?

Why are you trying to raise random odds? Is there a purpose for you to want to prove it likely that two people are scum based on random chance?

Of course, this townie player assumes the good intentions of the scenario creator, therefore giving 2/7 chance that the first person picked at random is scum while the chances that the second person picked is 1/6 as scum. Therefore 2/7 * 1/6 = 4.76% better still! However shockingly slim chances.

Hypocrite. You accused me of 'exonerating' Korts by using him in my gambit, but yet you then claim that people should trust you because you are making a scenario involving random numbers? Are you serious?

Let's assume you are scum, would you risk losing a team member in order to sail all the way to the endgame? Perhaps. Would you chose two townies to guarantee a scum favorable lynch? More likely.

No to the first, and yes to the second. However, I don't like to gambit as scum, as I have stated over and over again. It is too risky, and puts my teammates in a terrible position if it fails.

I am not saying you are scum, what I am suggesting is that the trap you so carefully crafted has a fatal flaw. The assumption that even with a bad argument against them, the second accused player is not scum. You have no way of confirming that.

Well duh. I never said that my word was law. I expressed my reads, and nothing more. If Chaos or Korts is scum, then that is just one more uncontrollable variable intrinsic to gambiting. There is no surefire solution for catching scum. If there was, then this wouldn't be much of a game, now would it?

I can see your reasoning behind Sando's wagon, but he's acquitted himself quite well.

No. No he hasn't. his defenses have been weak and scummy, and if this was anything but a newbie game I would still be pushing.

Are first impressions more important than well reasoned argument?

Nope. Can you point to where I said they were?

Honestly slogging through the huge ?PBPA?, is that right, is rough going. But hopefully after a more thorough reread I will find that Sando's arguments may be strong or they may be weak.

PBPA is correct. Also, this is wishy-washy. Don't comment on a situation without reading it first. Also, why is it that you claim that Sando has acquitted himself when you haven't read his responses to my accusations?

I however am not in a rush to lynch him based on a flawed trap. If upon reread, I find the results satisfactory then the flawed setup can be ignored, ends justified the means.

More wishy-washy-ness.

OK. Let's analyze this. I made a completely unimportant post that mentioned you in passing, but focused on the pure math of the setup. It didn't even contain an accusation. However, as soon as you saw it, you got up in arms and completely overdefensive. I don't like how that post reads.

unvote

and

vote: Infinis

Hypocritical behavior and overdefensiveness is stronger than lurking.

@all: Based on recent developments, Bekkatha's lurking was a null tell, as she flaked instead of sticking around but not posting.

Also, Josh's is too now, since he has given an out of game reason for not being around, which I accept.

[Ojanen]

'Kay. I'm beginning to have a hard time figuring out Kairyuu.
I don't know if he's irritated at us naughty newbies or what.
Looking at a couple of his points in his last post here.

From KvS

You wanted a quicklynch, despite knowing that there were at least 2/3 people who had failed to respond, has your view on quicklynches changed?

Nope. Does switching my vote imply that? How so? I expect full explanations to both of these questions.

This isn't addressed to me, but because I have also noticed this I really feel like pointing out two older quotes of yours, Kai. I hope I understood right that you were saying nope to wanting quicklynches in the previous quote.

I like quicklynches

. As soon as I am confident that someone is scum I want them lynched so that I can move on to the next scum. It's the way I play, and it is reasonably effective (which, of course, you know, seeing as we lynched the scum roleblocker on page 8 and had a 24 hour D2 that ended the game in Newbie 750, which you seem to only want to cite when it serves your purposes). You can stop taking jabs at my credibility already. None of them have been valid, and I highly doubt that any will.

A quick note though. Your last two posts are complete misreps of everything I said.

Why exactly haven't you been lynched yet?

You said these before Infinis/Josh Lyman/Bekkatha had said much anything at all. You unvoted (from L-1 situation) and switched vote after Sando and I had expressed concern/suspicion over this quicklynch business, which might not be relevant but shouldn't be forgotten either.

From KvI

Hypocrite. You accused me of 'exonerating' Korts by using him in my gambit, but yet you then claim that people should trust you because you are making a scenario involving random numbers? Are you serious?

English isn't my first language so it's possible that I misunderstood Infinis, but it really looks to me like you did. Don't understand at all where he suggested that he should be trusted.

Let's assume you are scum, would you risk losing a team member in order to sail all the way to the endgame? Perhaps. Would you chose two townies to guarantee a scum favorable lynch? More likely.

No to the first, and yes to the second. However, I don't like to gambit as scum, as I have stated over and over again. It is too risky, and puts my teammates in a terrible position if it fails.

We cannot believe you though just because you say so "over and over again". Or because Korts has one game of scum-meta from you. On this I comment mostly because of the overtone.

Regarding your talk on the overdefensiveness of Infinis, can you elaborate overdefensiveness over what? And why is this more noteworthy than Japles's behaviour, which to me seems like defensiveness directly related to his own persona?

[Ojanen]

EBWOP: Also meant to include this in the quicklynch quotes in previous post.

So I'm scum based on a case which has literally zero actual valid points? Sure thing. This is OMGUS dressed up with straw men, IIoA, and attacks on my credibility instead of actual scumtells.

I am happy with my vote right where it is, and would not be adverse to lynching you right now.

[Kairyuu]

'Kay. I'm beginning to have a hard time figuring out Kairyuu.
I don't know if he's irritated at us naughty newbies or what.

Nope. I'm trying to point out bad logic and weak arguments as well as providing my own points. I'm attempting to keep myself polite. If I'm failing then please tell me, because it is not my intention to be rude.

This isn't addressed to me, but because I have also noticed this I really feel like pointing out two older quotes of yours, Kai. I hope I understood right that you were saying nope to wanting quicklynches in the previous quote.

Nope. That's wrong. The question was whether or not my views about quicklynches had changed (aka. do I not support that view anymore). My answer was that no, I had not changed my views (quicklynches are still good in my eyes). I merely changed my vote, and asked if that implied somehow that I changed my views, as was being claimed by Sando.

I'm not going to bother commenting on the rest of the quicklynch stuff, because you seem to have simply misunderstood the question and my response.

English isn't my first language so it's possible that I misunderstood Infinis, but it really looks to me like you did. Don't understand at all where he suggested that he should be trusted.

Good point. I misread his point. When I went back just now I saw that he was presenting "me" as the "scenario creator," not himself as I originally thought.

@Infinis: My apologies. I withdraw the point on being hypocritical. That was my mistake. The overdefensiveness still stands though.

We cannot believe you though just because you say so "over and over again". Or because Korts has one game of scum-meta from you. On this I comment mostly because of the overtone.

You have these sources:

1. Myself, right now.
2. The game Korts and I were in together (Facedown and Thirsty Mafia, a Mini Theme)
3. Newbie 750, where I state the same thing as town.
4. Wheel of Time Mafia (another Mini Theme) where I was scum, and didn't make a single gambit even though there were several gambits in place from other people.

I haven't been scum except in 2 and 4, and I don't remember mentioning my views on gambiting as scum in any other games I've been in (though you're welcome to dig through them if you'd like).

Regarding your talk on the overdefensiveness of Infinis, can you elaborate overdefensiveness over what?

I pointed out that his assumption did not work with the math, and he went up in arms trying to defend himself when there was no accusation of scumminess in my math bit.

And why is this more noteworthy than Japles's behaviour, which to me seems like defensiveness directly related to his own persona?

Japles isn't interesting to me right now. He is scummy, yes, but not as much so as Infinis, so I am focusing on the scummier target. It's just the way I do things.

[Ojanen]

Gaah. Why can I see my misunderstanding regards to quicklynching exchange so clearly now but not before posting? Thanks for your patience.
What I'd like to ask though, is that why do you like quicklynches? You now say you think Sando is more likely town than scum. So from your perspective, if you're a townie, your judgment has changed quite a lot due to some more discussion. What is the benefit to quicklynching?

Nope. I'm trying to point out bad logic and weak arguments as well as providing my own points. I'm attempting to keep myself polite. If I'm failing then please tell me, because it is not my intention to be rude.

Looking back, I think I was actually a little rude there. I do appreciate your ICing.

re: your gambiting meta: ok, thanks. I'll glance at those, though I'm still undecided on how much credit it is wise to give to meta (also this gambit really wasn't drastic like the doc one in N750).

I pointed out that his assumption did not work with the math, and he went up in arms trying to defend himself when there was no accusation of scumminess in my math bit.

I read his post again carefully and generally the part I where I didn't follow you was about defending

himself

. He did say that his previous argument had been misrepresented. Other than that it was math and pointing at what he thought were flaws in your gambit.

[Sando]

I'll try and get something comprehensive later, but it's my birthday today, I might not have time for a day or 2.

Regarding the maths, Inifinis does have a point in that you need to work out the 'random 2' using 8 players instead of 9. Obviously you're not going to include yourself in that. So the chances of picking any 2 people completely randomly and them being scum are: 2/8 x 1/7 = 3.57%

However, i was thinking, and this was in relation to Kai's gambit, what are the chances that he randomly picked 2 people and 1 or both were scum? I haven't done maths in a while, but it would seem to be 1-(6/8 x 5/7) = 46.43% chance that of the 2 people you randomly pick, 1 or both will be scum.

Infinis did tend to falter off after he got 3.57% and started bringing in completely arbitrary numbers, which could be him trying to 'force' the numbers to give him the result that he wants. Seems a bit dodgy, but I also think Kai's case against him is pretty forced.

I'll try and post more later, some more relevant stuff, but at least a few more people are talking, which is good. And welcome Millar

[Kairyuu]

@Ojanen:

What I'd like to ask though, is that why do you like quicklynches?

They keep the game moving. Getting bogged down in weeks and weeks of arguments is boring, and gives the scum longer to influence people's reads. I prefer to let the scum have as little Day influence as possible, limiting them to Night game to redice their effectiveness.

You now say you think Sando is more likely town than scum. So from your perspective, if you're a townie, your judgment has changed quite a lot due to some more discussion.

Meh. I changed my mind. People do that all the time. I would regret lynching Sando if he flipped town, but I'm still not 100% on him, or on anyone for that matter. It's all a matter of comparison.

Looking back, I think I was actually a little rude there. I do appreciate your ICing.

No worries. I didn't read it that way.

re: your gambiting meta: ok, thanks. I'll glance at those, though I'm still undecided on how much credit it is wise to give to meta (also this gambit really wasn't drastic like the doc one in N750).

Obviously you should take everything with a grain of salt. And this gambit is more complicated than the doc one, even if it wan't as large-scale. Hell, the doc gambit was the largest scale gambit I've ever made.

I read his post again carefully and generally the part I where I didn't follow you was about defending himself.

General Patton was a strong holder of the belief that a good offense is the best defense. His completely unwarrented attack against me for a comment that was not even close to an accusation, followed by an extremely weak justification of that attack amounts to a pointless defense against a non-attack. That's the way I see it at least.

Other than that it was math and pointing at what he thought were flaws in your gambit.

He was attempting to disprove my math for most of his pot, not attack my gambit. My gambit had nothing to do with the math at all.

[Infinis]

I'll try and get something comprehensive later, but it's my birthday today, I might not have time for a day or 2.

Regarding the maths, Inifinis does have a point in that you need to work out the 'random 2' using 8 players instead of 9. Obviously you're not going to include yourself in that. So the chances of picking any 2 people completely randomly and them being scum are: 2/8 x 1/7 = 3.57%

However, i was thinking, and this was in relation to Kai's gambit, what are the chances that he randomly picked 2 people and 1 or both were scum? I haven't done maths in a while, but it would seem to be 1-(6/8 x 5/7) = 46.43% chance that of the 2 people you randomly pick, 1 or both will be scum.

Infinis did tend to falter off after he got 3.57% and started bringing in completely arbitrary numbers, which could be him trying to 'force' the numbers to give him the result that he wants. Seems a bit dodgy, but I also think Kai's case against him is pretty forced.

I'll try and post more later, some more relevant stuff, but at least a few more people are talking, which is good. And welcome Millar

Happy birthday Sando! and Bravo! Your Math seems to be dead on.

As I said in my post, I was just looking at the gambit itself not the success or fail of it. The numbers should never dictate your actions. Kai got a read he used it and that's that. Justifying or disproving the gambit with numbers just leads you into posts like my previous one.

I think the flip flopping on your vote Kai should be noted. I guess you don't FoS anyone? Straight to vote?

I defended myself against a misrep. If you thought it little so be it, but I thought it was a good launching point for my discussion of the gambit. OMGUS voting me, really... as an IC?

I have to take you at face value. You like aggressive play and sometimes end up flailing. I am still pondering scum versus town.

As to the others, I guess looking at Sando and Japles has been pushed so a reread sometime this weekend will be in order. Sadly I havent had the energy to hack through everything that has been said, I skimmed through it and the gambit was where I decided to begin since I was attacking the gambit itself. The gambit cannot exist in a vacuum, we have to look at the one running the gambit and the caught person.

@Kai In the end as I said this may be moot and you were correct in your reads.