Mini 876 - Tree Stump II [Day None] (Abandoned)

[The Fonz]

Hi guys. I suggest anyone who hasn't read the original Tree Stump do so. Myself and Quag were in it.

The really smurfing important thing here is that no-one get into a pissy little townfight and then stump out of pique to 'show them.'

Vote: Empking

for voting someone for voting someone on V/LA, when the V/LA was announced in the post after the vote.

[The Fonz]

I read tree stump 1. Kinda dull. Bunch of VIs who got stumped. I dunno if it was really required reading.

I think it's useful, in a kinda 'what not to do' way. Also to see how the mechanics affect things. Also, how Jdodge and Scotmany spent their whole time as stumps howling for my stumping because i pressed for theirs.

I was gonna vote Chinaman for an entirely pointless post, but then flipping the page I see he has three already, and has posted some kinda rebuttal.

Wow, 3 votes already! I did good!

First off, to the 3 of you who voted for me, please answer...

A: Did you know that the first quote is from a Monty Python skit/song

and

B: Do you disagree with the statement I made about p25 as in do you think it IS perfectly balanced for trees and lumberjacks?

a) Presumably, since the PMs reference the lumberjack song, and the stumping formulation mirrors it, they did. More to the point: Why do you feel the need to make a completely irrelevant post?

b) This game is effectively halfway between a vanilla 9:3 and a nightless 9:3. Vanilla 9:3 is obviously hugely scum-favouring. Nightless 9:3, town needs three scum lynches, scum need 6, 7, or 8, mislynches- Depending on the number of scum who die. That's balanced, probably a little town-favouring.

Here, the total number of scum town need to lynch is the same, the number of town the scum need to get killed is the same as the nightless one, minus one for every dead scum because they get a nightkill. That's six mislynches, however many scum die.

Town wins if it lynches correctly more than one-third of the time- ie, have a ratio better than one dead scum for every two dead town. The scum proportion is 25%. Assuming random lynches, the town usually loses. The town has no power roles. So, no, the setup is actually scum-favouring.

Set against that is the possibility that the stumps help the town. Well, last time, they didn't until Glork replaced in. SensFan has changed the rules for this one to disallow replacement of flaked stumps and allow continuous scumtalk, both of which are advantageous to the scum (ie, he's taken a scum-favouring setup and made it more scum-favouring. Ack, I love a challenge).

c) Can you explain why a town player would want to bitch about a game being unfair to the scum?

[The Fonz]

Er.... OF COURSE the correct strategy for town players is to stump when lynch is otherwise inevitable. How on earth can you get anything else from that post? That's the underlying assumption behind the whole thing!

Therefore, the scum will only get to kill up to twice, when one of their number is lynched. However, that the scum do get to kill immediately after one of their own is lynched is an advantage compared to actual nightless mafia. Hence, as I say the scum need six town lynches and the town need three scum lynches.

[The Fonz]

Mmmkay. Yeah, that's not easy.

Basically, it comes down to a tradeoff of lynches vs power roles. The town can't ever confirm anyone- that helps the scum a ton. However, the town gets twice as many 'lynches' to play with as in a normal 9-3. Doubling the length of the day game makes it much harder for scum to avoid connecting themselves to one another, which will hopefully make the town able to lynch with better than random odds. Two town VIs imploding, for instance, doesn't put you straight into lylo.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled edition of 'What the hell is Chinaman trying to pull here?'

[The Fonz]

The Fonz p31: Really? You are pointing at me for irrelevant posts in RVS? Are you serious? If so, why did you decide to pick up on my irrelevant post vs. anyone else's? To answer your question, it's RVS and I was having fun with it.

Because it doesn't do anything to move the game on. I could post the dead parrot sketch: How would it help us to get into real discussion?

As for the last part, please point out where I was "bitching" about the balance. I think this is a little extreme and a bit of a stretch. It also paints me in a more negative light than what really occurred. .

Again, why does town have reason to complain that a game is unfair to the lumberjacks? Either you're doing nothing of substance, or you're deliberately implying you might be scum in order to get people to jump on you. Neither is good.

Four votes on Chinaman already? Bound to be scum jumping on this by now.

Unvote, Vote: Cybele

how about a proposal....you stump yourself and if you aren't scum I'll stump myself (unless you believe that both of us are town)

This is exactly what SilverPhoenix (or was it Korlash?) and Scotmany started doing in TS1. Please don't act like a VI.

shanba, do you really think what TMJ said was scummy as opposed to anti-town? That looks more like a VI move than a scum move. What kind of scum would offer to go 1 for 1 with a vanilla townie?

WIFOM.

Also, antitown = scummy, since town has no incentive to deliberately hurt the town.

Can people please stop using 'there's nothing better to go on right now' as an excuse to vote someone? It's not legitimate, and it's not an excuse. Don't pretend like it is.

Besides, we do have something better to go on. Shanba's estranged voting is an early scumtell.

Do you think that Shanba's estranged voting would be worth a vote on day 5?

Why is that relevant? It isn't day 5.

Does anyone else see what I see?

Yes.

[The Fonz]

Four votes on Chinaman already? Bound to be scum jumping on this by now.

Unvote, Vote: Cybele

I agree that Cybele need to be more active

unvote

vote :Cybele

Why do you 'agree' with something I didn't say? 'Needs to be more active' has NOTHING to do with why I voted Cybele.

I don't read the entire TS1. And I don't know that SP or Korlash did it before. One thing I know that a scum will not accept the proposal while a town "might" accept it if he believe that I'm scum. the way chinaman "run" and avoiding my question make me think that he is scum.

That is a Grade A pile of steaming faeces, because any town with half a brain will not accept it because of the real possibility you are not scum but simply an idiot. Then again, town with half a brain wouldn't propose it.

Besides, we do have something better to go on. Shanba's estranged voting is an early scumtell.

Do you think that Shanba's estranged voting would be worth a vote on day 5?

That's a terrible way to gauge whether or not I believe it. It's probably not worth a vote on day 5.

Uh-huh. Something has to be a pretty damn huge scumtell to be worth a vote on day five on its own. That something isn't a huge scumtell doesn't mean it's not a scumtell.

[The Fonz]

Aha! Scot, having been on the receiving end last time, could you please explain to Tjoe why the whole 'I'll stump if you stump' thing is dumb?

[The Fonz]

No, you're quite right, I did it without explanation deliberately.

Saying 'there is at least one scum out of these four,' not saying which is most likely, not differentiating between when and why people joined the wagon, and not moving your own random vote is all mouth and no trousers, trying-to-look-like-scumhunting, scattergun aspersion casting. It does nothing to help the town, just points at several players and goes 'Hey, these guys are scummy! Someone make a wagon for me!'

[The Fonz]

That's BS.

I'd agree that there's talk over unimportant details- but that's how things get started, you know this. You pick on minor things, and conversation builds up, then bigger things develop. I think you're completely wrong that there's no scumhunting, and in any case, if there weren't, wouldn't you try to provide it if you're town? Physician, heal thyself!

[The Fonz]

If lots of people do lots of antitown things, the town loses. The only effective sanction town has to stop people being antitown is the threat of lynch.

[The Fonz]

No, THAT's bullshit. Things that are antitown, by definition, hurt the town's chances of winning the game. If town people do scum-favouring things, scum players will be able to get away with advancing their win condition more blatantly. The only way you can stop people doing antitown things is to threaten them with lynch if they don't stop doing them.

Your analogy is bollocks, because throwing a fastball on a 2-2 count is a valid strategy for getting the batter out. It might not be the best choice, but the pitcher is still trying to get the hitter out and not give him the base. Town players acting antitown is the equivalent of intentionally walking the pitcher with the bases loaded.

[The Fonz]

Depends on the bad habit in question. Lurkers, for instance, will often start to give opinions etc if the alternative is their own death. If the bad habit in question is, say, MoS always random voting upon replacing into the game regardless of gamestate, then it's less tractable, though the problem can be solved by appealing to consistency yourself- ie, "BUT I

ALWAYS

vote selfvoters, so it's not indicative of alignment!"

[The Fonz]

You see, I'm not sure there, Scot. He's going out of his way to draw attention to himself by making a point of how little he's contributing. I'm really can't see any pro-WC motivation for that from either side. He probably is just bored. Problem is, that doesn't help the town, because players can't just be allowed to slide by not saying anything.

[The Fonz]

It doesn't to me.

[The Fonz]

No, I'm trying to start an argument with Fonz because he's being dumb, and I want him to stop being dumb.

Nope. You're being dumb. Mafia is a game of trying to work out who's scum and who's town. And the best way to start from that is thinking 'Who benefits more from that?' Clearly, someone who does something that makes a scum win more likely is more likely scum, assuming everyone is playing to their win con.

In fact, look on down and you make a similar argument:

It's much more likely this is an effort by you to look more towniesh as I don't see any town motives in your actions so far.

In other words, 4 isn't a valid defense, because leading to a lynch isn't the ultimate goal of a scum-motivated player. Looking like a townsperson is.

Scum have twin motives. Look town and lynch town. They have to pursue both to win.

Quag:

Are you saying that by admitting that he doesn't think the behaviour is scummy, he renders his own vote useless?

[The Fonz]

I'm not 'helping' him. I'm trying to clarify what he's saying. Because I first read it as 'you are attacking someone over something not scummy, and that's scummy.' I'm now wondering if it could be 'You're 'pressuring' over something whilst admitting it not scummy, therefore rendering it pointless.'

[The Fonz]

No, I'm trying to start an argument with Fonz because he's being dumb, and I want him to stop being dumb.

Nope. You're being dumb. Mafia is a game of trying to work out who's scum and who's town. And the best way to start from that is thinking 'Who benefits more from that?' Clearly, someone who does something that makes a scum win more likely is more likely scum, assuming everyone is playing to their win con.

That's correct logic... however you don't practice what you preach, which is what makes you dumb. You're advocating mafia as essentially a mathematical formula when it's far from that, and your ways of determining scumtells is much different than it should be. At least, judging by your previous vote.

And this is why you're dumb. You're repeatedly attributing to me a position there is simply no evidence of me holding. I don't think mafia is a 'mathematical formula' at all, and I have never said anything of the kind.

If you'd like to explain why my Cybele vote fits any of those accusations you're making, feel free. Or, you might want to actually answer my question about your case on Shanba.

[The Fonz]

proof, Fonz:

No, THAT's bullshit. Things that are antitown, by definition, hurt the town's chances of winning the game. If town people do scum-favouring things, scum players will be able to get away with advancing their win condition more blatantly. The only way you can stop people doing antitown things is to threaten them with lynch if they don't stop doing them.

Your analogy is bollocks, because throwing a fastball on a 2-2 count is a valid strategy for getting the batter out. It might not be the best choice, but the pitcher is still trying to get the hitter out and not give him the base. Town players acting antitown is the equivalent of intentionally walking the pitcher with the bases loaded.

Again, that is no evidence that I am somehow treating mafia as a mathematical formula. Scum want to stop town winning; town want to help that end. Therefore, anyone doing something that makes a scum win more likely, and a town win less (ie, antitown) is more likely to be acting from a scum motive than a town motive, and is hence more likely scum than someone who hadn't taken the antitown action.

[The Fonz]

What's happened to Cybele? He appears to have vanished.

[The Fonz]

@Sanjay: Why do you think Shanba voted you?

[The Fonz]

We have a serious lurking problem, especially since i haven't seen that much scummy among the actives. Cybele i noticed posted elsewhere on the site at least thirty times since he last posted here. He is either deliberately uberlurking, or has flaked- which is pretty low if he's still posting on the site regularly.

@Sud0: Do you have any unironic opinions?

[The Fonz]

read: Cybele has, and is intentionally lurking.

[The Fonz]

I'm pretty much done with that, and am concentrating on pressuring lurkers. Quag isn't here. Not sure about Shanba, but i don't think that's going to be a productive attitude.

[The Fonz]

saberwolf must be pretty pissed that despite all the effort he is putting into being the most anti-town player, half the town is outdoing him.

Personally, I could easily be persuaded to lynch saberwolf now, just to be rid of his anti-townieness.

Given the way the game is going, who do you expect to persuade you?

I am far from convinced that saying provocative-sounding things and asking people to discuss them is actually antitown/scummy.

@ Everyone- if SW is town, what is his motive here? If he is scum?

[The Fonz]

SW, I completely disagree with your read on TMH. He seems earnest, and trying to do the best he can for the town. Empking just looks to be posting just enough to not get prodded, and jumping on wagons with fairly shoddy backing. I haven't seen any particular reason to think him town yet.

My feeling on shanba/Quag is that both Quag's vote, and the Shanba vote that provoked it, are defensible town actions. In other words, I can see why people could interpret pressuring for the sake of pressuring as either pro or antitown, depending on the way they look at mafia.

Your take on Lynch All Lurkers is flawed, since lynch all lurkers doesn't mean lynch those who've flaked. The point is that skating by, posting just enough to avoid prod, is antitown/scummy (it objectively doesn't help the town, and even you don't agree with me on antitown = scummy, empirically scum lurk more). We're not more likely to lynch than stump unless he has

completely disappeared.

I also think that there's likely at least one scum in the three long-gones. Sudo would be my best guess for middle-running scum.

[The Fonz]

@Quag: perhaps because it doesn't require me or anyone else to behave the same way every time?

[The Fonz]

OK, like I said... I'm too lazy to read saberwolf's big post. Maybe later.

With that said, he's all but guaranteed town.

I don't follow your logic....I lurk, post one-liners, and then all of a sudden post a giant wall of text, and without even bothering to read it, all of a sudden you announce that I'm most likely town?

Without wanting to put words into his mouth, I think Quagmire's thought process here is fairly transparent.

[The Fonz]

Hmm.... the 'blank slate' thing is dodgy, but i'm not particularly seeing scum in kirby.

Gonna have a think about whether to change my vote to sanjay or sudo now cybele's been replaced.

[The Fonz]

I said "Wow, don't help him any, Fonzie." because he asked kind of a leading question.

His question "Are you saying that by admitting that he doesn't think the behaviour is scummy, he renders his own vote useless?" was leading because, while it is a great point, there was really no evidence of that kind of thinking in Quagmire's post.

On the contrary. I found Quag's post kinda hard to parse, but after I thought about it for a while, thay was far and away my best guess at to what he was actually saying. (I'd be interested in knowing how you paraphrased it). I asked whether I was correct in this reading, because I didn't want to make assumptions about Quag's mindset based on something he didn't actually mean.

I guess I just don't see any problem with asking someone if the way you interpreted what they said is actually what they meant.

I think describing Mr. Jester's post as 'flat out lying' is rather stretching the point.

In other news,

Vote: Sudo_Nym

[The Fonz]

*Fonz : which post made you vote Sudo?

Why would you assume it's a single post?

[The Fonz]

I thought Mr.Jester's silly opinions were too ridiculous to be believed. So in saying he believes them he's lying.

Hmmm. I've had this opinion on so many occasions, and i'm usually wrong. The depth of human stupidity is fairly startling.

Side note: WHERE IS EVERYONE?

[The Fonz]

Hi! Thank you for the vote Tjoe, It is much appreciated. Anywho, cases based souly on lurking are ridiculous.

No, no they're not. The point of lurking is to deliberately deprive the town of the opportunity to build a case based on anything else.

A lot of people have been inactive or apathetic about this game, but he has been pushing wrong causes

This vote stinks to high heaven. Surely the former is actually far more scummy than the latter? 'Pushing wrong causes?' You mean 'trying to scumhunt?' Also, why are Tjoe's cases wrong? And how is that different to your attacking Quagmire based on not reading what he said?

@Mod:

Sudo hasn't posted in nearly two weeks.

My problem with this game is, it seems like every time anyone comes under suspicion, they disappear, and then the replacement doesn't get caught up even though there's barely anything with which to catch up.

[The Fonz]

Misreading someone's post isn't a scumtell.

Especially not when the player doing it is not a native English speaker. I'd hazard the guess that Tjoe does not understand the connotation of 'all but' given the choice of "confirmed town" to quote. I mean, deliberate misrepresentation is always a dangerous tactic for scum- I don't think i've ever used it. When using it, people tend to be sneaky about it. There's absolutely no guile about Tjoe that i've seen. He doesn't strike me as consciously playing on his noobness either.

Kirby would be an acceptable deadline lynch/stump, incidentally, though i'm not moving off sudo just yet.

[The Fonz]

And discode is now into his seventh day without posting.

Is Kairyuu being replaced? He said last tuesday he would post the following day, then go V/LA from the 29th till the 14th december. He didn't post the following day, or at any point before V/LA, and considering he replaced a lurker, well, not replacing him would mean getting nothing from that role all day one.

So that's a third of the game not playing, and Quag STILL apparently doesn't know Shanba was replaced two weeks ago, and all the players are talking about is how other players aren't posting...

I'm really getting to hate this game.

[The Fonz]

He felt like he was coasting early. I didn't really see any conscious effort to move the game on. He voted Quagmire for an 'unexplained vote' which he should know damn well is not a scumtell, then said 'We have to agree to disagree.' But when he said that, he still left his vote on Quag.

A quote like this:

Personally, I could easily be persuaded to lynch saberwolf now, just to be rid of his anti-townieness.

seems scummy. Not, look, I think we might need to do this... but 'I can be persuaded,' ie I'm not going to put my neck out for a saber wagon, but if y'all want to go ahead and wagon him, i'm happy to give it a push.

His analysis, in general, seems very shallow and on-the-surface. I don't see any genuine attempt to figure out people's motivations. For instance, he said 'Quagmire is just trying to start an argument with Fonz.' Fine. Why would a townie do that? Why would scum? Is Quagmire the kind of person who would disagree with me regardless of alignment? He doesn't even seem to be thinking about these questions.

Then he starts lurking.

[The Fonz]

Btw, the above was the case on Sudo Kirby asked for, if you hadn't figured it out.

Kairyuu needs to get posting, like nao.

What is the point of making this statement about a player who has declared V/LA for another two weeks from now?

Empking posts very short posts; have to read up on his meta, to see if he's that way all the time.

Well, yes, it is. But more to the point- what relevence does this have to anything?

[The Fonz]

Can we please have a vote count? Haven't had one in two weeks.

[The Fonz]

With the exception of a couple players, it seems like everyone

has

flaked, including Sens.

Agreed that Sudo should stump nao. We can use a stump; we can't use a dead tree.

Sadly, this. Though if mod were actually here, we could ask about the replacement situ and deadline.

[The Fonz]

Who is actually playing? Sanjay, saber, myself, yoshi and scot?

I think abandoning then resubmitting the setup with a new cast might be better than trying to wade through 15 pages of half the game saying 'Half the game is lurking' and the other half saying 'sorry I've been really busy.'