Newbie 428: Eat My Shorts! Game Over!

[Arvetis]

Vote: Caliban

because I can't tell if he's a man or a fish.

[Arvetis]

Ahhhh I see,

Vote: New Coldness

Spaces in usernames are evil FYI.

You totally got me. Haut Boy and I are scumbuddies.

Welp, that didn't take long. GG town

[Arvetis]

My response was as much a joke as his message. Notice I didn't change my vote, you son of a witch.

[Arvetis]

At what point do we mvoe from joking around, as much fun as it is, to looking for a made man to lynch?

It seems like someone has to be lynched off the back of wild speculation or a misunderstood joke on the first day.

Give it time. It's true that Day 1 lynching is more shot-in-the-dark than the endgame, but I've seen scum screw up on the first day before. Usually Day 1 ends with the town lynching whoever irritates them the most. Because newbie scum players often feel "under the gun," they sometimes act in strange ways that either gives them away, or pisses off the town enough to lynch them.

[Arvetis]

I dunno, at this point I don't think lurking is TOO scummy. It's not much of a risk for scum to come out of the woodwork and make noise while random voting is going on. It's far more scummy if they disappear when real suspicion is being thrown around.

[Arvetis]

Random phase doesn't really end, I guess, until someone does something scummy. I've seen most random phases end with arguments over game doctrine.

So does anyone find what Arvetis said there to be so blatantly false as to be scummy, so we can move out of random? 'cause I don't. Still in random voting, I guess.

How is what I said false at all? Most scum, if they've read at least one game, have figured out that lurking too much early on gets the town annoyed at them and results in votes. Coming out and voting for people with no explanation, however, benefits them, and the very beginning of the game is the only time they can get away with it. Lurking in the beginning of the game is overrated as a scumtell.

[Arvetis]

Also, I find your "cause I don't" very strange. It almost seems like you're trying to find an excuse to throw suspicion on me, but "get away" with it if nobody agrees with you.

[Arvetis]

You were kind of defending lurking, which was kind of scummy, but nowhere near scummy enough to even warrant an FoS, which was why I didn't give you one. It wasn't even enough to justify an interrogation. What you were saying there was game philosophy that didn't violate any established logical fallacies.

I actually wasn't "defending lurking." It's still bad for the town. It's just far more likely to be a poor town player than a scum doing it these days, in my opinion. Scum have a greater opportunity to lose by lurking.

Which is why I said that I

didn't

find it scummy enough to justify moving out of random. That's where the "'cause I don't" came in: because I didn't. Basically, I might disagree with it a little bit, but that's as far as it goes. You're reading way too much into that "accusation," and if you'll notice, I haven't accused you of anything since.

Then why did you say it?

[Arvetis]

Scum have a greater opportunity to lose by lurking.

...then the particularly active people are the most scum-worthy, like Caliban, Arvetis, Haut Boy, New Coldness, and I.

Ehhh, not really. Just because lurking at the beginning isn't as scummy as people seem to think, it doesn't mean that not-lurking is scummy. Lurking at this point disadvantages whichever side does it. I just think it disadvantages scum more, since it doesn't help them stay under the radar (quite the opposite) and throws away their opportunity to random-vote.

[Arvetis]

Um, not much to say considering there isn't an argument. Nobody's put forward any reasons that I'm scummy. Spectrumvoid didn't call me scummy, his vote was random. I wasn't even his first choice - he misread the vote count and changed his random vote.

You two are either scum or just not thinking.

[Arvetis]

EBWOP: By "you two" I meant JDodge, both for implying that spectrumvoid had actually put forth a reasonable argument against me when he had in fact put forward none, and for implying that a self-vote was good in any way, and Caliban for taking JDodge's crappy argument and running with it.

[Arvetis]

Cool your jets sonny jim!

They're quite cool. I'm just stating what's going on.

I was not 'running with it' I was simply pointing out that you, yourself, said that not addressing suspicion was scummy.

There is no rational suspicion. You could give JDodge the benefit of the doubt and say he's just voicing his gut, but even still he's not presented anything for me to respond to. By implying that there is some kind of real scrutiny, you are, in fact, running with it.

You'll notice, that I did not feel moved to FOS or vote, I was simply calling for your rebuttal.

What do you want me to rebut? Please quote specific arguments.

I was simply interested in the nature of your reply, which could either; be a rational measured post to show that JDodge's vote was rash and not well thought out, or that you would reply with a panicky and accusatory, OMGUS post.

It wasn't panicky or OMGUS. It's quite possible that you simply didn't realize that there was no real argument being given, and I included that in the two possibilities I offered. However, once that's been pointed out, you can't keep demanding rebuttals when there isn't an argument to respond to.

[Arvetis]

Something to bear in mind for later: I currently have two votes and haven't been quicklynched. Either our scum is cautious, or at least one of the people voting for me is scum. Bear that in mind for later if I get lynched.

[Arvetis]

Did he actually cite that quote? I got the impression he just looked at the vote list, saw SV was voting for me, and assumed that SV had actually put forward a reason to agree with. In fact, SV voted for me because I was the only person without a vote at the time.

[Arvetis]

Whoa, I just realized that JDodge was the one who pointed out that SpectrumVoid's vote for SilverPhoenix was actually the second vote for SP, and not the first as he thought, promping SV to change his vote to me. Funny, you'd think he'd realize that SV's vote was completely random, considering he was involved in the interaction.

[Arvetis]

Hello? Is there anybody out there?

[Arvetis]

I seriously doubt that Arvetis is scum, and I see Spectrumvoid getting a very, very undeserved free pass.

Unvote; vote Spectrumvoid

Can you be more specific? What's he getting a free pass for?

Does anyone else think JDodge was pretty scummy on the last page? I do.

[Arvetis]

Spectrumvoid is lurky and hasn't responded to anything I've said to her. And everyone is just ignoring what she's doing and is focusing on her accusations against you, which I've found to be pretty weak.

Arvetis, I think you're town and I think Spectrum is trying to wagon you. And I think she's succeeding.

OK, this is what I don't understand. Did I miss a post somewhere? I don't see where spectrumvoid has said anything about me. She's just random voted for me because I was the only one on page one with no votes. But both you and JDodge have acted like she's attacking me. WTF?

[Arvetis]

I haven't read through your entire M-M-M-MEGAPOSTS yet oman, but I need to point out that the "son of a witch" thing was not an aggressive response, it was a Shakespeare joke based on Caliban's name.

Also, you seem to be reading a lot of emotion into my posts where I intended none. For example, the post you label as "defensive" is just a reply addressing the point he brought up. I don't think it's safe to assume that the post I was responding to was entirely joking. You label me as "aggressive." I would disagree with that - I just respond to anything thrown at me.

[Arvetis]

I think at this point it's safe to

unvote: Caliban

and

Vote: JDodge

.

And Oman, the reason I didn't do that earlier isn't "fake reluctance." What the heck is that even supposed to mean? I was giving him a chance to respond before I changed my vote. In a game where there have been several bandwagon attempts already, I think it's a good idea for us to discuss our votes before we go messing around with them, don't you?

[Arvetis]

I'm actually not sure yet - I realized yesterday that for the first few pages of this game I had Silver Phoenix and SpectrumVoid confused

After work, I can go through the thread and pick SP's posts apart.

[Arvetis]

Yikes... sorry guys, something came up, and I have to hop on a plane to Florida. I'll have Internet access where I'm going, so I don't need to be replaced or anything, but I might not be able to post more tonight or tomorrow. I'll work on that post breakdown as soon as I can.

Noob argument = scumtell? Honestly, that argument was horrible..that doesn't mean scum...that means noob.

An illogical argument doesn't necessarily mean noobishness. The town's job is to find the truth, and the scum's job is to obscure it. Because of that, illogical arguments are one of the scum's tools.

[Arvetis]

OK, here's my promised take on SP, later than anticipated. Sorry, but better late than never.

Overall, he actually seems rather neutral to me, with perhaps a few newbie mistakes. There is a little bis of suspicious stuff, but no more than what I can see from others, too.

One strange thing is Haut Boy's removal of his vote from SP on page 2, I think. No reason given, just a vote change. Obviously that's something out of SP's control, but why would Haut Boy do that? Any idea, SP?

I will be watching the first person to vote to -2....

This is perhaps the scummiest thing SP has said. Discouraging votes (at -2 no less, not even -1) is very anti-town. Votes are the town's only weapon. On the other hand, if this is a scum move, it's a very clever scum move. No offense, but that doesn't fit in with other things SP has done, like

...then the particularly active people are the most scum-worthy

and

I wouldn't expect the scum to screw up yet. Even though it is a newbie game, it can take at least until D2 or even D3 to have the scum falter. Of course at that point it is almost too late...

Both of these arguments are not only false, they're just silly. I suppose they could be distraction techniques from a scum, but frankly they just rang newbish to me.

Later, SP votes for SV, but doesn't really defend it much, beyond "I agree with New Coldnss." SP, could you give some more specifics on why you decided to do that?

That’s just plain wrong. At this point in the game I’m playing numbers, since nothing scummy had been said. Chances any player is mafia 2/7. Chances any player is lurking 2/7 as well (two lurkers) = 2/7 * 2/7 = 7/25. Therefor its unlikely. Lie, scumtell.

Oman, I have to point out that this is actually wrong. SP admits that it's unlikely that BOTH lurkers are scum (which is what your calculation would be for) but says it's a good chance that ONE of them is. It's been a long time since I took statistics, and I've forgotten how to calculate the odds of something like that. I think you have to start with 1 and subtract the odds for each person NOT being scum? Either way, the chances are, in fact, a lot more likely. It seems like you misread what SP was trying to say.

[Arvetis]

I'm not sure we need to get into the statistical minutia of it. The statement, "two lurkers prolly at least one scum", is kinda dodgy, it smells a lot like some knows who the scum is and is trying to deflect attention.

Actually, doing the math, I think it comes out to being slightly more likely that one of any two given players are scum than that neither are scum.... go figure

[Arvetis]

Oman, you do realize that if SP gets lynched and turns out to be town, the focus of suspicion is going to be on you, right? I don't mean that threateningly, I just think it's true and I'm pointing it out.

As I'm sure you can tell from my response, I don't agree that SP is 100% scummy. Do you have any responses to the things I said?

[Arvetis]

Chance that persons A + B are town together = chance(A)*chance(B) = 20/21 (I believe thats correct).

Sorry to drag out the math thing, but you need to work on your fraction multiplications. 5/7 * 4/6 does not equal 20/21. It's 10/21. Perhaps it would be easier if you converted it to fractions. 5/7 is about 0.71. 4/6 is 0.6 repeating. Those two multiplied together (and therefore the chance that both lurkers are town) is about .47. It's therefore slightly more likely that one of them is scum than that they are both town, which means, based on the numbers alone, his statement was reasonable, and not "based on lies."

Of course, you're right that the game isn't just numbers, but I'm pretty sure that's how he meant the statement to be taken - we have two random players who weren't posting, and the chances were decent that one of them, at least, is scum. Your assertion that this argument is incredibly scummy doesn't hold up at all.

[Arvetis]

Oman - I think he's saying that you don't need to paraphrase, since we're allowed to quote role PMs, but perhaps you paraphrased because your didn't actually have a town PM, but a scum PM, and didn't realize you could quote the town PM from the original post. It's a bit of a stretch, I think.

[Arvetis]

I'll admit it is a bit far fetched, but not fanciful, if an idea comes into my head I'm gonna post it up here, it can really do no harm to share my musings.

No, I'm not saying you shouldn't have said it. But it can't do harm for me to say I think it's unlikely, either.

Time to put your balls where my mouth is, SP!

Cue dim lights and bad 70s music!

[Arvetis]

Arrgh, I'm sorry guys, life just got REALLY sucky for a few days. I'm here. Give me 'till after work so I can give the thread a proper read and respond.

[Arvetis]

OK Sir T is at lynch-1 right?

We have a quick-lynch situation, if Sir T picks up another can it be assumed that the voter is scum?

Arrrrgh, why did you say this? Now nobody's going to want to hammer anybody. Listen, hammering a townie is a risk that any other townie can fall into. It's not an insta-scumtell except in certain circumstances, like if the person is contradicting their previous statements in order to hammer, or doesn't provide any reason, or something like that. Now I'm worried that A. everyone's going to be scared to hammer, and B. if a town does get lynched, we're just going to bandwagon whoever hammered. Honestly, I often find earlier votes scummier, depending on the circumstances.

The point is, that playing like this and winning as scum is impossible. Especially in a newbie game, which has a 50% chance of having a cop. Who do you think the cop is going to investigate tonight? Me (if I survive that is). This is suicidal play if I am scum, and tbh I have sense not to do that.

STOP, I'm choking on wine!

Honestly, Sir T strikes me as more of a poor town player than scum. I'm not going to try to put up a strong defense of him, though, because he could still very well be scum - "sucky town" is great cover for scum, and I don't buy it that experienced scum players never play the way he's playing. That kind of argument is why we invented the term WIFOM. HOWEVER, as I said, considering his record and the general feel I'm getting from him, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he does turn out to be just a poor town player.

One significant thing I'm noticing: notice how much suspicion JDodge is throwing around. Lots of his replies are "AHA! Look at this probably-innocuous thing that nobody else thought was scummy! SCUMTELL!" And he can't seem to keep the brunt of his suspicion on one player. My vote is still on him, and he's still striking me as scummy. I realize that the deadline is in a matter of hours, though, and I may need to change my vote. I think lynching someone who's kinda-scummy but possibly town would serve town better than a no-lynch at this point. That's what happens if we get to the deadline with only three votes, right?

Again, I'm REALLY bothered by Caliban's "anyone who hammers is scum, right?" Not because I think it's scummy, but because I think it's poor play. I can't figure out a situation in which scum would want to say that, except a Caliban-Sir T scumpair and he's desperately trying to stop us from lynching him, but that seems unlikely. That scumpair hasn't been on my radar, and if we do lynch after he says that and Sir T turns out to be scum, it makes him look really suspicious. I'll be watching the thread all night.

[Arvetis]

Deadline is four hours away if I'm doing my math right. Is anyone else here active? I feel like the onus is on me to hammer, and that's not very fair.

[Arvetis]

EBWOP: I mean it's not fair if I have to do it without any further discussion, not that it's not fair that I have to hammer. I'm fine with hammering if I'm convinced someone is scum.

[Arvetis]

He had three votes in the vote count in post 206. JDodge unvoted him, and you voted him. That puts him at three. It takes four to lynch, so my vote would be hammer, right?

[Arvetis]

Ah, OK. Confused me. Looks like we're gonna have a no-lynch unless someone else logs on, then. Sucks for town.

[Arvetis]

Well, I have to go to bed. Having little other option, I think I'm going to have to

unvote, vote: Sir Tornado

. Only matters if someone else logs on and decides to hammer, which seems unlikely at this point.

Having said that I don't think he's the scummiest, I realize that's a strange move, and if he's lynched and turns out to be town, it's unfortunate for both him and me. Although I still think JDodge's behavior is the scummiest of everyone here, I don't seem to be able to convince anyone of that. My reasoning here is that it's better for the town to lynch someone with a higher-than-average chance of being scum than take a no-lynch - even a mislynch, while unfortunate, gives us some information. Maybe it's a dumb move, but I feel ok about it.

Every time I play a game, the first day is like this - agonizing. Rather than obsessing over it, I'm just going to move on and hope for the best. Some information is better than going to Day 2 without a clue, so here's hoping someone hops on and finishes this.

[Arvetis]

Huh, guess I got confused about the deadline. Oh well, my position stands. Just gives us a little more chance of getting something done.