Mini 1051: Utopia Mafia - Game Over

[Fishythefish]

vote: VP Baltar

[Fishythefish]

Until and unless we have good reason to think otherwise, we should be trying to lynch scum. The fact that lynching town has a compensation reduces how important that is, but doesn't eliminate it. So while a random or policy lynch is less bad than it normally would be, it's still not a good plan.

[Fishythefish]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Exe
I feel he's buddying to me by trying to reinforce the "wrong, but not scummy" attitude that I displayed in my reply to him. I also feel he's using the reaction of Kast and myself as a way of discrediting VPB's attack, which isn't a valid argument.

[Fishythefish]

Well, it's not my problem if you've started buddying quite early. But here, you have a reason to besides winning my long term support - you were trying to reinforce a "wrong, but not scummy" PoV on your first post, in me and in others.

You didn't directly link my post and Kast's to VPB's in the post I disliked. The post, however, reads like that is where you are going. Also, you explicitly make the connection in your next post, saying you considered Kast's post thoughtful "in comparison to VPB's". Which means you

are

using the measured response of Kast as an argument against VPB.

[Fishythefish]

@Exe:
I think you meant this link in your original post. It's obviously somewhat subjective, but I think the way it's phrased juxtaposes the reasonableness of two people with the easy stance of VPB. I think you were certainly making this contrast in your next post - and that Flameaxe had not mentioned anything to do with it (as he says). Making the link isn't that incriminating - it's an unfair argument, but it kind of makes sense as rhetoric. What's worse is your reaction - you are denying a comparison I think you were making. So I think you're lying.

@Kast: it's really not that important how good Kast's point about VPB's vote was. What I dislike is his use of our posts to bolster that point, and now the way he's denying it.

[Fishythefish]

Exe: obviously, denying what never happened isn't a scumtell - but that's not what I'm accusing you of. Here, I think you are denying something that

did

happen - first you made a post that juxtaposes the comments of Kast and myself with those of VPB, and then you made that comparison explicit. Obviously, you disagree with that interpretation, but that doesn't justify sweeping statements like my argument is "illogical" and "doesn't hold".

Re: Exe's original plan. Here, I'm totally with Shanba. In the early game, I'm always happy to vote on anything that I think is a scumtell, but of all the antitown plans suggested by people, I've never seen a single one that came from scum genuinely trying to manipulate the town. They come from town who genuinely think they have a good plan, and from scum who want to look that way.

[Fishythefish]

On the second post, you made a comparison between VPB and Kast, which wasn't actually relevant to what you were saying. Why did you do that?

On the first post, it's the way it's written. The phrasing "Fishy's response... VPB, your response..." feels to me like a deliberate contrast.

In both these posts, I think you are placing the two arguments alongside each other to a large degree, in order to make the more favourable interpretations of your plan act as an argument against VPB.

[Fishythefish]

It's an invalid argument - the fact that Kast and I disagree with VPB does not make his arguments worse, and to say they do is a way of not arguing his case on merit. Invalid arguments of this kind are probably a minor scumtell - in the same sort of way that strawmanning an argument is. Obviously, what's much more interesting here is that you deny you were thinking what I suggested - because that means that if my interpretation is right you are lying about what you were trying to do.

In your comment on Kast, the comparison with VPB really doesn't serve to make anything clearer - unless it was saying that in your first post you were making a comparison to VPB. I still don't understand what it's doing there.

[Fishythefish]

I realise that. It was a response to your hypothetical question. But I think this was the idea behind your comparisons - to make VP's arguments look worse by comparing them to the other posts on the same subject, and saying how reasonable they were.

I'm going to shut up for a while now.

[Fishythefish]

I’m putting accusations on and questions to Exe in one place. This list is primarily to organise my thoughts - feel free to skip it.
1. VPB's original problem with the bad plan.
2. My problem with your comparison (as I perceive it), and your later denial. Argument about whether or not what I see in your posts is actually there.
3. Erg0 asks Exe if he was reaction fishing. Exe says:

The latter is the only way to play Mafia. Most of what I do is a search for reactions, as reactions is how scum are caught. Ask Kast why Ythill vigged me and how well it turned out.
The plan itself has only a slight chance of working, that much is obvious. I was hoping to see how others would analyze it though. It proved effective, if I do say so. Plus, it got us into discussion. I am content.

4. Shanba thinks most bad plans are in good faith.
5. VPB (45) says his issue with bad plans is that they help the scum. Also supports my idea, says Exe is trying to wiggle out with semantics.
6. JD sees a contradiction between Exe's "suggestion of lynching quickly" and not voting (note - Exe actually only suggested a policy lynch, not a quicklynch). Criticises Exe for not voting - unclear whether he thinks this is scummy. Ditto Kast.
7. Also calls Exe's statement of looking for reactions being the only way to play the game BS.
8. VPB asks Exe what reactions his reaction fishing has achieved.
9. VPB asks Exe if he thinks VPB is scummy.
10. Flameaxe does not believe that Exe was doing something for reactions.
11. Flameaxe can't see why my argument "does not hold", and wants Exe to explain (repeatedly). Agrees with at least part of what I said.
12. Shanba asks Exe why he didn't just admit his early game case was reaction fishing straight away, and notes that my case is bullshit.
13. Flameaxe dislikes Exe's reason for voting VPB - namely that he thinks it will result in an unhelpful OMGUS from VPB, and won't help his read. Later this is clarified somewhat - he interprets this as Exe being worried about VPB's reaction, and contrasts this to Exe's willingness to propose a bad plan.
14. Flameaxe says that Exe's first post does not feel like reaction fishing. Isn't going to pay attention to meta.
15. Flameaxe thinks that Exe's argument on VPB is WIFOM, and also just wrong.
16. Exe has made a point on Flameaxe only repeating arguments of others. Flameaxe asks why this is a scumtell, asks for proof, and (I think) cites post 62, where he is saying there is original content on Exe.
17. Flameaxe asks what he had to gain by ignoring a post of Exe's.
18. Flameaxe calls Exe's "when I flip town" an AtE.

My take on these matters:
2, 5, 11 – I don’t want to overstate how convincing I think my “comparison” argument is. The dodgy link in the argument is obviously the leap from “Exe talked about these things together” to “Exe was trying to contrast them to undermine one of them”. The main reason to make that leap is that there’s not much reason in one of Exe’s posts that VPB appears, and this explains it. I think that Exe has explained exactly what he meant by my argument not holding – he identified this step as being the weak one, and said that I hadn’t demonstrated it at all. He provided another explanation for VPB’s presence in that second post (though I find it somewhat unlikely). I don’t understand what Flameaxe’s problem with this approach is. I don’t see VPB’s point that Exe was trying to wiggle out by semantics at all.

1, 4, 5 – on the original plan. I totally agree with Shanba’s take on this. VPB’s 45 ends up saying nothing except “bad plans are bad for town, so they are scummy”.

3, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14 – reaction fishing. I think proposing plans you haven’t thought through much, or even know are bad, is a perfectly plausible thing to do very early in the game. I don’t see any particular reason to think Exe is lying here – it’s not like he was coming under much pressure for the plan. I also feel his words have been twisted somewhat; I read the original response (quoted above) as implying his original plan wasn’t a deliberately bad one just to generate discussion – rather, he’d just set a low threshold for “good plan” in order to get things going. I’m struggling to express why I find this fairly different to the typical claim “oh, I just did it for reactions” – I think it’s for pretty much the same reason that I usually like votes to have a decent case behind them, but in the early game I’m happy to vote based of any scumtell at all.
I disagree with Flameaxe’s total dismissal of meta – when a player says “that’s my playstyle”, particularly on rather specific and verifiable matters like this, in my experience it’s always true.

12 is Shanba’s question – why did Exe not reveal he was just reaction fishing earlier – like when he accepted that his plan was wrong? AFAIC, this hasn’t been answered.

6, 9 13 – stance on VPB/lack of vote. I don’t think not voting is scummy, though it’s probably usually antitown. But here, Exe’s stance is weird. The line from Exe at one point (60) seemed to be “I think VPB is scummy. But his reaction to being voted, as town or scum, will be OMGUS. So I’m not voting him.”. This seems a rather unnatural thing to think – I really can’t imagine holding back from voting for someone because of their reaction. OTOH, I think the contrast with his being willing to propose a bad plan to get reactions doesn’t really work – Exe’s line seems to be that he didn’t vote VPB because he thought the reaction would be unhelpful, not because he was worried about being criticised. I’m also unconvinced by JD’s saying this conflicts with Exe’s wanting a quicklynch. Mostly because Exe wasn’t favouring a quicklynch at all. There’s no conflict between advocating a policy lynch and not always having a vote up.

15 – While the WIFOM side of this is certainly unconvincing I’m inclined to agree with Flameaxe somewhat. Exe’s reason for suddenly finding VPB town does seem a bit simplistic to me – it relies on a model of scumplay that doesn’t reflect reality.

16 – Flameaxe’s questions about Exe’s saying he only parrots others’ arguments. AFAIC, hasn’t been addressed.

17 – Flameaxe’s question: what did FA have to gain by ignoring a post of Exe’s? Exe seems to reply “wasting our time again”, which I don’t understand. What am I missing here, Exe?

18 – It’s not an AtE to say you are town if it’s relevant in your point. Here, Exe was making a point which relies on Exe being town (and FA being scum, and knowing that).

So. I think there are a few questions around that I’d like Exe to answer (or show me where he has if I’ve missed it) – see numbers 12, 16, 17.

Aside from the comparison thing, I struggle to understand Exe’s reasoning for not voting VPB, and I do find his sudden town read on VPB a little hard to stomach. But there also seem to be an awful lot of bad reasons for suspecting Exe floating around.

[Fishythefish]

Sorry about the muddled format of this, it's late and this post has rather got away from me.

Fishy should remember this similar discussion from another game I won't name for a few days.

I don't, but I'll go refresh my memory some time.

Exe's responses to the unresolved questions in my last post are fine. His defence has been pretty reasonable, and I only find him mildly scummy atm.

VP - I'm not comfortable with VP's posts about his early vote. Mostly this bit:

When I voted you, I was well aware that people would say, "oh come on VP, that's such crap logic," but I don't really care because I'm town and even if I did get lynched my cold dead hand would certainly be pointing to some scum somewhere. I'll get you from beyond the graaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaave!

I don't feel this squares very well with his earlier post on the matter (45) - in that, I got the impression that VP very much thought his vote was legitimate, and that doesn't tie in very well with thinking people would call it crap logic. I also just don't see what this passage is doing in his post at all, except to say "I don't care how I look! Isn't that townie of me?".
As I've mentioned before, I think VPB's way of agreeing with my comparison argument was wrong. I feel Exe's defence to that argument was completely fairly argued, and an accusation of using "semantics" to get away from it isn't fair.

I don't see VPB's throwaway comment about Exe as setting up getting credit after a bus - that just doesn't fit into my picture of what scum actually do.

@VP: in addition to any comments you have on the above, who do you think is scum atm?

Kast is completely right in everything he has said on bussing (disclaimer: I haven't actually read the utility functions spoiler, but I'm guessing it's the right explanation of his correct earlier statements). Also, it was worth saying.

"Do scum bus early?" is a question people might well have different opinions on, and I don't think that discussion says much about anyone's alignments.

I give neutral sounding information and opinions regardless of alignment? Not sure I've heard that one before.

@DDD: can you please expand on what you meant by Shanba's iffy sub-reasons? Which "very safe" position of his are you referring to?

Flameaxe's 62 finally cuts to the heart of the matter - why should we actually believe Exe when he says that he was just looking for reactions? He didn't explicitly state this until I threw him the proverbial life preserver by asking him the question. I never like it when the result of someone's grand experiment is "everyone is town except the guy who made the best case against me".

This sounds like he really isn't liking Exe's play. But there's no real questioning or pressure here, no vote, and in his next post Exe doesn't get a mention. I find it really odd that you'd make a point like this and then not do anything about it, including not commenting on any of the other thinking going around on Exe. How scummy do you find Exe? How convincing do you find the various arguments against him?

[Fishythefish]

Yeah, I'm up for that.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Erg0
I'm not really believing that response from Erg0. The issue here is very specific - a post from Erg0 which clearly implies he has serious doubts about Exe's "doing it for reactions" reason for his original plan. If Exe is making that up, it's a lie, and he's likely scum. It's not an issue which can be dismissed as "noobs gonna noob", and it's not really something where your gut and brain have much reason to conflict - it's a simple judgement call about how likely someone is to have done something.

He's also posting decent amounts of game-related stuff without ever commenting on anyone's alignment.

[Fishythefish]

2, 5, 11 – I don’t want to overstate how convincing I think my “comparison” argument is. The dodgy link in the argument is obviously the leap from “Exe talked about these things together” to “Exe was trying to contrast them to undermine one of them”. The main reason to make that leap is that there’s not much reason in one of Exe’s posts that VPB appears, and this explains it. I think that Exe has explained exactly what he meant by my argument not holding – he identified this step as being the weak one, and said that I hadn’t demonstrated it at all. He provided another explanation for VPB’s presence in that second post (though I find it somewhat unlikely).

You seem to be stepping back from your original position on Exe here; you step back even further in #113. Is that because you believe that Exe's explanations are sufficient? Or that the argument has been overtaken by events?
What in particular convinced you that Exe's explanation was genuine?

Exe's explanation is certainly possible, but doesn't seem massively likely, so I view this as a point against him. My "step back" in this post came simply because I'd never given my full views on the strength of my own argument before - if anything I wanted to give the impression I found it more damning than I really did, because I felt the pressure I was applying was useful. I don't think my position changed between 93 and 113 - my comments on Exe in 113 are merely an acknowledgement of him answering my questions from 93, and an overall summary of where my read on him is atm.

[Fishythefish]

I accept that you weren't stepping back "more" between #93 and #113, rather making the step back more explicit.
To clarify then, your opinion is that Exe probably *was* trying to draw a comparison between your/Kast's reaction and Baltar's, you just don't think it is that big a deal either way. Is that a correct summary of your position?

No. My opinion is that there's a reasonable chance Exe was trying to draw a comparison between my/Kast's reaction and Baltar's. If he was, he's scum (for denying that comparison, rather than for making it). If not, it's null.

if anything I wanted to give the impression I found it more damning than I really did, because I felt the pressure I was applying was useful.

Is this something you typically do? Do you find this to be a useful tool for the town in outting scum early?

I try to go after someone quite hard towards the beginning of a game. If I can find a really good reason for going after them, great. If not, I'm happy to plump for a mediocre reason, and push it harder than it would deserve later in the game (though I'm almost certain I've never pushed something I don't find a scumtell). I have to admit that I haven't analysed the outcomes of this approach - I'm really still relying on what I believe should happen. I think people will react more to cases on them that look serious, and that other people will tend to comment on them more. It's a fairly obvious idea, really - early cases are almost bound to be weak, because there's not much information around. But admitting they are weak just tells the wagonee not to worry.

[Fishythefish]

@ani: could you please say what Exe has said that makes no sense, and which bits he has gone back on?

@mod

: did Domino pick up his prod? Either way, when can we get a replacement for him?

On it. Standby

[Fishythefish]

@Erg0: why are you voting Exe?

[Fishythefish]

Not really. I was asking about you seeming to both believe in your case, and think that other people were going to disagree with you. Normally I'd expect someone with something they believed to be a legitimate scumtell to expect support from other players. (Your explanation was that it was a pattern in your early game town play, which makes sense to me.)

[Fishythefish]

I'm not really believing that response from Erg0. The issue here is very specific - a post from Erg0 which clearly implies he has serious doubts about Exe's "doing it for reactions" reason for his original plan.

If Exe is making that up, it's a lie, and he's likely scum.

It's not an issue which can be dismissed as "noobs gonna noob", and it's not really something where your gut and brain have much reason to conflict - it's a simple judgement call about how likely someone is to have done something.

Firstly, posting without naming anyone as scummy doesn't necessarily mean that the player is scum trying to avoid taking a stand. More often it simply indicates careful play (regardless of affiliation). Secondly, why does Erg0 get singled out for the bolded section, but others (Eldarad in particular) also not following through on that same line of thought but not getting mentioned for it?

This actually extends to the rest of the case against Erg0...or rather this seems to be all there is to the case. I'm not sure if it's supposed to fall under the same claim that he pushes hard for a suspect regardless of the strength of the case, but it doesn't really fit with the level of thought and reasoning he has put into the rest of his posts.

Maybe this needs explaining better.

Addition: Not to mention a vote will do nothing. It certainly won't provide pressure alone, and no one else finds you scummy. See Physics mafia -

voting is only useful if it provides pressure or gets a lynch.

This has been pretty well covered, I suspect, but I disagree strongly with the bolded statement. What catches my eye here is that the guy who was perfectly prepared to propose an unpopular plan isn't prepared to make un unpopular vote.

Flameaxe's 62 finally cuts to the heart of the matter - why should we actually believe Exe when he says that he was just looking for reactions? He didn't explicitly state this until I threw him the proverbial life preserver by asking him the question. I never like it when the result of someone's grand experiment is "everyone is town except the guy who made the best case against me".

Here, I read Erg0 as disbelieving Exe about reactions. This is a very simple matter; if Exe is lying about reactions he's scum, and if he's not he could be anything (this is true independent of Erg0, but relevant for him because of what follows).

A while after this post, I attacked Erg0, because I thought that a strong stance like this should be followed up on, and his next two posts didn't do that and didn't do anything else to speak of (the latter being relevant because if he'd been busy going after someone else, forgetting about Exe would be more understandable). He then posted this:

In a nutshell: my gut is telling me it's scummy, but my brain is telling me it's null. Exe's action is the kind of thing that I'd usually brush off on "noobs gonna noob" grounds, but there's still something about it that bugs me. Let's split the difference and

FoS: Exe

until I can medicate my inner schizophrenic... with knowledge.

Now, I just don't see how any of this makes any sense. The issue that Erg0 had with Exe was clear and transparent; he thought he was making up an explanation for something after the fact. All that matters here is how plausible he finds Exe's explanation. I simply don't see how there's room for your gut and brain to disagree on that one simple judgement, and I don't see how "noobs gonna noob" is in any way relevant to the situation - Exe being a noob does not explain what Erg0 disliked about his play at all. It feels like he just wants to throw lots of things that sound like opinions at me because I don't like his stance.

I really think that between not following up his opinion and this smokescreen, Erg0's play on Exe at that point was the scummiest thing that's happened so far.

[Fishythefish]

We could policy lynch him! *rimshot*

I'll elaborate further on this later with my reread

, but

unvote, vote: animorpherv1

due to it being the decision that minimizes our potential losses, and for having some of the highest potential gains later on.

Waiting on the italicised. Minimising potential losses and maximising potential games is true, but in the way I understand it is just fancy language for a policy lynch - it would be true of an inactive, useless player in any game.

@mod:

can we get a prod on ani please? It doesn't say in your rules - how many prods do you get before getting replaced?

[Fishythefish]

Actually wait. Minimising potential losses is true; I don't understand the "highest potential gains" bit at all.

[Fishythefish]

I agree that it looks like Erg0 didn't think Exe was genuinely posting for reactions. However, I don't think he made the same progression from "Exe is lying about his reason" to "Exe lying means Exe is scum". Rather, it seems like he made the connection "Exe lying means Exe is a noob (could be scum or town)", ie. lying does not necessarily mean the player is scum.

Interesting. Before I comment,

@Erg0: is Kast right here? I.E. that you think that Exe was lying about doing something to get reactions, but that means he is a noob rather than that he is scum?

I need to have a good think about Kast vs. Shanba. I should get that done tomorrow.

[Fishythefish]

@Erg0: ok. I really read your original post as being very skeptical about Exe's claim. Could you explain what your gut and brain were disagreeing about in the second post I quoted?

Re: Kast vs. Shanba. I'm finding it pretty meh at the moment. AFAIC, Shanba is attacking Kast for lack of solid suspicions. It's true that Kast doesn't have any solid suspicions, but in this case I'm very much not seeing it as a scumtell; he's been open about not finding anyone massively scummy, and he's been producing useful content. Kast is attacking Shanba in turn for this case. I don't see how that case is particularly scummy.

[Fishythefish]

A general access note: Fridays and Saturdays I don't tend to have much time. I'll be able to respond to urgent things, probably, but won't have time to think or read. Expect some content from me tomorrow.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy - What do you make of the Kast/JD exchange? Pick a winner.

Kast. I dislike JD's not-really-game-theory. He's pulling out phrases like "minimising losses", "maximising gains", "playing a zero-sum game" and "increasing chances of winning" to try to justify one simple statement: we should be lynching players who don't contribute much. That's

all

it adds up to; JD is simply saying that, regardless of alignment, the better, more active players will be more useful later on. Now, if you can't get a scumread on anyone, that's the right play. But trying to claim it's not a policy lynch is just not true. I also agree with Kast that JD's "don't pull the 'you're better than this' " line was hypocritical. I think this didn't make it into Kast's quotes on the matter:

I'm saying that you people need to start playing up to your capabilities, because I am very disappointed in

all

of you except BBM. He's playing much better than his norm.

Definitely sounds like he's basing this on the specific players in the game.

Rereading everything to do with Shanba; I really don't find anything to say he's scum.

I'd still like an Erg0 wagon. His response to my main point against him relies on the claim that this quote isn't intended to convey disbelief of Exe:

Addition: Not to mention a vote will do nothing. It certainly won't provide pressure alone, and no one else finds you scummy. See Physics mafia -

voting is only useful if it provides pressure or gets a lynch.

This has been pretty well covered, I suspect, but I disagree strongly with the bolded statement. What catches my eye here is that the guy who was perfectly prepared to propose an unpopular plan isn't prepared to make un unpopular vote.

Flameaxe's 62 finally cuts to the heart of the matter - why should we actually believe Exe when he says that he was just looking for reactions? He didn't explicitly state this until I threw him the proverbial life preserver by asking him the question. I never like it when the result of someone's grand experiment is "everyone is town except the guy who made the best case against me".

and I struggle to believe that. In his follow up to this, he now says his brain said Exe was noobishly reaction getting, and his gut disagreed. But reaction guessing here is not obviously "noobish", and I don't understand how in this situation the brain has anything to go on except how likely he finds Exe's explanation; which is what gut is. It reads much more like a stock reaction to try to get away from his case, rather than what he was really thinking.

He's also done very little so far. Others seem to disagree, but for me this is a scumtell. Erg0 reads just like a player trying to get through without attracting attention; he's been making little jabs at Exe, but it doesn't read in any way like he actually cares about getting a wagon on him. He's not been commenting on other cases and wagons, and I really think he's been doing nothing to help the town.
@JD: when I last said this, you objected on the basis that Kast was doing the same thing. Well, a) I don't think that's true, and b) that's not relevant to the scumminess of Erg0.
@Kast: this is emphatically not a suspicion of Erg0 for "not having a top suspect". I suspect Erg0 because he posts a lot without doing any of the things that I think a townie does.

Oh, and this:

@Erg0: why are you voting Exe?

His blustery deflection of my questions makes me think that I've touched a nerve. The reasoning for his vote is weak and post hoc, but he's trying to cover it with shouty false confidence.

This is pure rhetoric. It sounds much more like something that's been crafted as a voting reason than what's really going on in Erg0's head. It just fits together too well. If I were to sum up my reasons for voting someone in two sentences, they'd just never sound like that.

[Fishythefish]

@Flameaxe: who do you think is scum? There seems to be a disconnect between you saying that cases should be stronger after 11 pages and having pretty much nothing of your own to offer other than that other people's cases suck.

I urge you not to give up on this day. If you don't think we've found the right lynch after 11 pages, that's a really good reason to keep looking. Your last post is completely wrong. In this game, we haven't seen an overwhelmingly good case, and I think everyone knows that. In those circumstances, people will almost certainly be very willing to change their minds.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishy-
...Are you willing to lynch any out of {Shanba, Kast, Exe}?

I'd much rather not. None of those actually look like scum to me. Naturally, I will vote for whichever I prefer if it comes down to these three, but things can change quickly. In particular, we could get off our asses and lynch Erg0. If VP and Exe were to support it, then Erg0 would be the joint vote leader. I really think Erg0 is a good lynch; I see nothing in his posts that would come from a townie, and a few things that would come from scum.

[Fishythefish]

I'd like to hear any thoughts you have on anything. If people respond to your replacement cases like that, it is they who are wrong, not you.

However, since we are near deadline it might be wise to focus on those people who are relatively likely to be lynched. Right now, I'd say that could be any of Kast, Shanba, Exe and Erg0.

[Fishythefish]

Two Kasts on that votecount.

[Fishythefish]

As ever, I'll have poor access this weekend. I'll be able to post, but not do any serious thought.

[Fishythefish]

Activity, thinking, vote for Shanba or Exe coming in ~10 hours.

[Fishythefish]

unvote, vote: Shanba

I think Shanba is more likely scum than Exe. The whole claiming process has had minimal effect on this opinion, and any effect it has had I do not intend to declare. Since the early game, I've gradually found Exe more and more likely town. I have no read on Shanba to speak of.

[Fishythefish]

@Flameaxe: why, if you can claim it? On what scale of dick would Oman have to be (ie, is this seriously unlikely)?

If I am going to act on that information, I need some idea of your confidence in it.

[Fishythefish]

However, the link to a supposed breadcrumb that supports Exe's claim in #379 doesn't impress me AT ALL.

Predictions based off this line, in descending order of confidence:
1. eldarad is scum.
2. Exe is town.
3. Shanba is scum.
I have never seen a more BS excuse to decide between two lynches. It is totally alien to me that someone would find it scummy to refer to a breadcrumb without in any way asking what the breadcrumb was about. The message of this sentence is "breadcrumbs are scumtells" and that is so unbelievably untrue that I don't believe anyone would type it in earnest.

We should lynch this scumbag tomorrow.

[Fishythefish]

@mod and others

An access note: I fly to the USA for a couple of weeks on Wednesday morning. My access times and levels will change. I don't know how. I hope and think I'll be able to carry on playing this game, and if not I'll try to inform you ASAP. I'll certainly be able to submit any actions I may or may not have in the upcoming night (this sentence in no way constitutes a claim of anything, and is being posted in any other games I may or may not be playing).

[Fishythefish]

Following possible V/LA - my access should be fine.

I really feel that late day action was scum fuelled. Exe didn't seem like a natural lynch. There was a whole lot of bullshit flying around after he claimed. I'm torn between just voting Shanba - his being scum is the obvious reason for the Exe push - and going for eldarad, who I feel played the scummiest part in proceedings.

vote: eldarad

A note on Shanba's claim - if people with no hints in their role PMs about power start getting powers, it becomes pretty likely that Shanba is lying, and either
a) Noone ever got hints in their PMs
or b) Scum did, but town all got the stock first post PM.
On the other hand, if someone claims a hint about powers, Shanba's claim gains a lot of credibility.
So when looking at how your powers change, or what other people claim, always bear in mind how that affects the likelihood of what Shanba claims.

[Fishythefish]

@Erg0: actually, you are totally right. In the excitement of yesterday's late game, you were pretty well driven out of my mind. I still think you are scummy, but I have nothing really new to add on that front atm.

@RF: is your role the stock townie PM?

[Fishythefish]

I am more inclined to believe shanba's claim than Exe's, to the point that I'm willing to hammer Exe.

Well, reading the flavor references Oman provided, there are light and dark elves in the game. Shanba's claim is believable enough, but it'd also be easy enough to fake at this point if you're a dark elf and not have the risk of being countered. Plus established protocal says lynch the 'nilla.

There are elves and dark elves in Utopia, but one isn't good and the other evil, as the concepts don't exist.
Elf Mystic is the classic mage race/personality combo, so whilst I agree that it's an easy claim to make if you're searching for a believable fakeclaim, I don't think the possibility of Shanba being a Dark Elf as opposed to a normal Elf is enough to cast doubt on the claim.

JD has already commented on everything I want to talk about regarding Exe's claim in #382. I agree with it all except that I don't regard the Thief/Rogue typo to be damning in and of itself.
However, the link to a supposed breadcrumb that supports Exe's claim in #379 doesn't impress me AT ALL.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Exe

As I mentioned above, the breadcrumb sentence was distinguishing my opinion from JD's, that I had otherwise sheeped wholesale from #382 (apart from dismissing the typo scumslip). It certainly was not the only reason I used to decide between the two lynches.

Having re-read in that context, has your opinion on the hammer post changed? If not, why not?
That said, Exe's reference to such a ridiculous breadcrumb to support his claim detracted from the plausibility of his claim. And while I wouldn't - and didn't - say that "breadcrumbs are scumtells" it did harm the plausibility of his claim, and that is why I voted the way I did.

Looking at 382, it's not a compelling argument. Exe's reference to being a "probable cop" was

clearly

got from reading about Utopia, not from his PM. As you say, forgetting your role name isn't a scumtell (why go back and change it?).

I really think there's nothing there that makes Exe scum. And your additional reasoning on why Exe was scum is very, very weak - 46 is certainly a plausible breadcrumb that Exe's role is in the Age 47 changes. So. I think you sheeped a bad case, and decided that you needed to change it to make it look original. The point you added was extremely weak. That makes me think your post was just an excuse to hammer.

So. I'd like you to explain what it was in 382 you agreed with, exactly. And I'd like you to explain what it was about Exe's breadcrumb that made it "ridiculous". I'm not at all happy with the general reasoning on Exe at the end of the day, and I think your hammer post was the worst example of it.

@Ray: I think an eldarad vote is more useful right now. There's a lot more in my thoughts on him that can be answered, whereas on Shanba it's really a case of other people's actions look geared towards saving him. So eldarad's responses are more likely to change my read one way or the other.

[Fishythefish]

Wait wait wait. JD's arguments might be even worse.
JD's arguments on Exe's claim ends up being (correct me if I'm wrong, JD - I find the arguments somewhat confusing)
1. Exe's claim that he had a different PM from Shanba was a lie.
2. Sabotage -> scum.
3. People with the PM in the first post are townies. Therefore, they are vanilla. Therefore, Exe is lying about possibly becoming a cop.
4. When fakeclaiming, Exe could have read his fakeclaim material and seen "thief", and forgotten it wasn't a real possibility.
This is an enormous pile of BS. Shanba and Exe were obviously claiming different roles. Exe obviously thought that he might become a PR later because that is the natural thing to think in this game with the PM from the first post. Sabotage -> scum is just ridiculous - there's zero reason why sabotage couldn't be a vig. The "townies" point just doesn't mean anything - in this game, we are using the word "townie" (if we use it at all) to mean "person with PM from first post", not "person who can never get a power", so arguing that Exe is lying for this reason in craplogic.

Point 4 is actually more reasonable. If you were producing a fakeclaim from that material, Halfling/thief would be a plausible slipup. But there is still nothing in JD's posts which made it unlikely that Exe had just slipped up. But none of the rest of it matches in any way with anything in the thread. I regret that I wasn't active enough in the late day yesterday to read and argue this more fully - I feel really silly about that.

Other people on Exe - eldarad I've discussed. RF was sheeping JD. Flameaxe had some reason to believe Shanba. All in all, I think the right place to be is actually a

unvote, vote: Shanba

The amount of crap going around on Exe was epic. It's probably not all scum crap, and I don't know for sure which bits were, but some of it must have come from scum. This heavily points to Shanbascum.

[Fishythefish]

I did some more careful reading of JD's reasoning late yesterday than I'd done so far. I absolutely think that a terrible wagon that looks geared to save Shanba is a good reason for thinking Shanbascum. Suppose for the moment that you agree that JD and eldarad's votes for Exe were really, really awful. Then why were they made? Either as honest townie mistakes, or as scum as ways to get Exe lynched. If

either

of them is the latter, that points strongly to Shanba as scum - why would scum stick their neck out and construct a BS argument in order to divert the lynch from one townie to another?

I was thinking that Shanba's wagon was based on poor reasoning, and that eldarad's vote on it was just completely awful. But looking more carefully, JD's vote (or at least his reasoning on the claim) was also completely awful - it doesn't look like an honest mistake at all. Your sheeping that reasoning was also pretty awful. And the more people who went after Exe in what look like dishonest ways, the more likely Shanba is to be scum.

So, I think Shanba is very likely to be scum with one of eldarad/JD (or both, I suppose). I'm looking forward to responses from both of eldarad and JD, but my vote is going on the most certain scumbag of the three.

[Fishythefish]

Interesting claim.

It seems that some players (including some with specific information in their PMs) looked at the OP, and assumed that players with that PM were vanilla townies. Other players looked at it, and assumed that players with that PM were vanilla townies

at least for now

. The former thought Exe's claim didn't make sense, and the latter thought it absolutely did. I still very much think that you were wrong, JD - from the game description, it was reasonable to assume that players with the PM in the OP could get powers. People with powers knew that was just a VT role PM, but it wasn't at all clear to the other players. The extra information you had told you that Exe was

wrong

, but it didn't tell you that he was lying or that what he was saying made no sense. He was only ever saying what he had inferred from his PM, without knowing it was a townie PM. But you having this information does make your stance quite a bit more plausible.

[Fishythefish]

@VP: a few people have now claimed to have different PMs from the opening post. I think that it is now likely that they are not all lying, and that really is the VT post - potential PRs got other PMs. Which makes Shanba's claim much more believable.

[Fishythefish]

Mod:

Can you confirm whether or not the people with the townie PM in the rules post can change their roles or not? This is important to my point.

That role PM is not slated to attain powers, no.

LET IT BE KNOWN THAT I WAS FUCKING RIGHT.

That misses the point. You went after Exe based on you being right

and it being implausible that Exe would hold another opinion

. All you knew was that Exe was wrong about becoming a cop - the leap to him being scum is a very poor one, because his interpretation was a sensible one.

@VP: I'm wavering on JD (trying hard to understand the end of yesterday), and he wouldn't be in my town list atm. DDD and Kast I think are probtown. I like your scumlist, with the exception of RF, who I don't have much of a read on.

[Fishythefish]

I'm going to go ahead and

unvote

, actually. I think I need to do a serious reread - people keep saying things - particularly about the end of yesterday - which make me think I don't know this game well enough.

[Fishythefish]

Nothing really new here; just getting my thoughts in order.

So. VPB's main point comes down to this: do we believe that in this game we could have
1) VTs, as in the opening post - these will never gain powers (or possibly almost certainly never gain powers)
2) PRs, such as JD claims to be - these already have powers (though they can lose or change them)
3) People how are explicitly told that they might get powers - such as Shanba claims to be.
I think the answer is "yes". If you're going to have a game where powers change, it's perfectly natural to have players who are going to get powers later. If the OP is a plain vanilla role, it's perfectly natural to tell people that they might get powers, and what powers. I think the claimed roles of Exe, JD and Shanba could perfectly well coexist.

A massive part of me wants to lynch the lurker. Can lurking

please

suddenly be a scumtell that actually works?

@mod:

can you prod a2rudeboy please?

So. Let's have a quick look at eldarad.
eldarad doesn't do much. Asks a lot of questions, but not a lot looks alignment related. Argues with Kast about bussing. Agrees with some points on Exe, but can't ascribe scum motivation to them so finds them null. Quite a lot of words; no content. In his second to last post of day 1, we have this:

The shanbawagon doesn't feel like a counterwagon to save Kastscum. But I'm not seeing how the case on shanba adds up.

And then the hammer, which I've already discussed. It was awful.

So. I know that yesterday wasn't the easiest day to get your reads together, but this is really not the play of someone trying to find scum, or even of someone trying to decide between wagons. There's no pressure on anyone, and not the slightest indication that eldarad is interested in lynching the right person. He spent plenty of time on the game, but it was all just getting by. This, together with the really crappy hammer, makes me think that eldarad is likely scum here. Just read him in iso; this is a not a player trying to lynch scum.

The Exe wagon still makes me think Shanba is scum; while my feelings about the late day have weakened a bit with some of what JD has been saying, I still think the wagon as a whole had a really weak basis for a lynch wagon. This would make sense only if one or more of eldarad, JD and RF is also scum. Which is very possible.

I don't really see anyone else I want to lynch atm, pending a2 actually playing the game. I really don't see the case on Kast.

VOTE: Eldarad

[Fishythefish]

@Erg0: that doesn't make so much sense because the wagon on Shanba is the only reason I think he's scum. It makes just as much sense to the lynch the worst wagoner, and if he flips scum Shanba probably is too. My vote on Shanba late yesterday was in a very specific position; two wagons to choose between near deadline. I certainly don't find him hugely scummy.

[Fishythefish]

I really feel that late day action was scum fuelled. Exe didn't seem like a natural lynch. There was a whole lot of bullshit flying around after he claimed. I'm torn between just voting Shanba - his being scum is the obvious reason for the Exe push - and going for eldarad, who I feel played the scummiest part in proceedings.

vote: eldarad

@Fishy: This post reads to me as though you're tying the scumminess of eldarad's vote to your belief that Exe's wagon was driven by scum in order to save Shanba. Are you saying that's not your mindset?

Not at all - that's definitely my mindset. eldarad's vote is scummy independent of Shanba, but it becomes worse because of the likely scum motivation for it. There's clearly a link between Shanba and the poor Exe votes, of which eldarad is the best example.

Reactions to Kast:
1) I think assuming scum would have had any knowledge of the VT vanillaness is probably wrong. Even if scum had PRs, potential PRs and goons, they wouldn't know what mix the town had.
2) I don't think that the expected difference in scariness between Shanbascum and your average scumbag is a significant factor here. Scum are probably only marginally more likely to save PRs than other scum, and the average scum PR isn't that scary anyway. I don't see enough to make me lynch on anything other than "most likely scum".

[Fishythefish]

@Erg0: more likely than average, less likely than if Shanba is scum.

[Fishythefish]

I would also like to note that if it is A, then that makes me a likely candidate for scum, and I feel I am already a likely candidate for any vigs that might exist (who would probably get their power on our next mislynch to start steering the numbers our way). In that case, I would like for you guys to push forward on a DDD lynch. He's done absolutely nothing, and at least Kast is trying. A Ray lynch would be good, too.

If a vig shoots you he is a total muppet.

@Fishy and Ray - would you support a Shanba lynch today?

Yep. Erg0 may not like it, but nevertheless for me there's little to choose between Shanba and eldarad lynches today. I marginally prefer eldarad. I have to say that in the current climate of lots of townies arguing with little scum input (which I'm becoming increasingly convinced is the case), I'm finding it very difficult to get new reads on anyone or anything. My read on JD is going more and more townwards (and is actually pretty nearly independent of Shanba's alignment).

[Fishythefish]

Before I fade into obscurity for today like I'd promised (I'm going to go to the ocean and try to convince the tide to turn back, and then when night falls I'm going to ask the moon to be a bit less full), I'd also like to note the painfully obvious thing that everyone's missing on the Shanba issue - the people who are pushing for and against are demarcated by one very important tidbit that everyone is missing: join date.

With that I'm pretty sure that I've cracked the heart of this town's dysfunction wide open. Go nuts.

Oooh, that's true. But as for "very important", I don't think I've been playing on this site long enough to get my head round that.

[Fishythefish]

Join date snap!

[Fishythefish]

Meh. It's pretty clear which way the wind is blowing, and it doesn't bother me at all.

vote: Shanba

[Fishythefish]

Oops.

unvote, vote: Shanba

[Fishythefish]

I am in favour of that protown block. JD is the only questionable entry, and he's certainly on the town side of neutral. I am also greatly in favour of an eldarad lynch - badly reasoned scum-saving hammers should not go unpunished. However, I should reread the rest of the end of day 1 to get it fresh in my mind.

I got a protown read from RF in his claiming and claiming-the-mod's-response-to-his-question sequence.

I think I'm anti massclaim. I can't see what good it would do us, and right now it looks like we have a vig whose identity is a secret. This is a good thing for a town to have. I'd like to hear some arguments in favour of massclaim, though.

So. From towniest to scummiest:

Fishythefish
VP Baltar
Debonair Danny DiPietro
JDodge
RayFrost
Flameaxe
Erg0
eldarad
Where the hardest decision is the ordering of Flame-RF. Everywhere else I'm happy with the ordering.

@Flameaxe: I was very undecided yesterday between two players. That pretty much explains my whole day 2 (and in particular the hop you find meh). What's wrong with that picture for you?

[Fishythefish]

If you have more information than me, then tbh I'm happy to defer to you. I trust your townness enough to do that, and I trust your skill enough to make the right decision. Here are my thoughts for the decision process:
1) We'll get a clear vig, but he'd claim if wagonned anyway, so this isn't massive.
2) The vig may well die tonight if we massclaim (Flipside: last scum out of 8 players is pretty likely to be able to take a bullet without flinching, so vig isn't that useful. Counterflipside: players who get shot at and don't die should be claimed - they are likely scum, so vig becomes more useful.).
3) Knowing why there was no vig on n1 is unlikely to be massively exciting - likely reason is "I wasn't a vig night 1".
4) As I'm sure you're aware, your information claim makes you a relatively likely kill tonight. Your information could be lost.
If, having taken all that into account, you want a massclaim, I'm happy to have one, in any order resembling my scum-to-town order.

[Fishythefish]

Hmmm. News just in: there is at least one player a claim would significantly affect my read on, either through information specific to my role or otherwise. JD is claimed PR; VPB is claimed PR; RF is claimed VT; FA claimed something at some point (PR, IIRC). VPB has some information. eldarad doesn't want a massclaim. Scum have no shortage of useful kills. Let's massclaim.

I've got some analysis of the game, but I think massclaim first might be a good plan.

[Fishythefish]

@eldarad: your question about my thoughts on your hammer is reasonable, and will be answered. It makes sense to look at it in the context of some other analysis, and I'd like to massclaim first if we're going to. Just assuring you that I have noticed what you said, and intend to reply.

[Fishythefish]

Well, that was at least partly based on my advice. I'm now saying I've got an additional reason to like massclaim, and the number of claims we've already had just registered. That might change his mind.

[Fishythefish]

I won't state my additional reason for massclaim; doing so would take it away.

[Fishythefish]

No massclaim it is then. I'm going to hold back some comments which will probably do no good for now, but might be useful later.

Hmmm. The worst bit of eldarad's hammer for me has always been his reference to the breadcrumb, which I thought was perfectly plausible (I also dislike his QFT of what I see as pretty weak JD arguments). His justification for this I think I read and then forgot about, which was rather remiss of me. He says that the Age 47 changes - which were Exe's breadcrumb - had changes for every race and personality, meaning they were a breadcrumb of

anything

. Well, sort of - but the first two lines are
"The most significant changes for the new age will be in Thievery. Halflings will be returning to Utopia as a strong thief race."
Clearly, a Halfling Rogue (rogue specialises in thieving) breadcrumbing that the changes were relevant is very sensible. Still, that makes me a little more comfortable, I suppose. I still think it's very weak reasoning, but having

some

possible thought process for this conclusion is a lot better than none.

Something I'd forgotten - in the "exciting" period of day 1, with decent wagons galore (Kast, Shanba, and latterly Exe), we (to a large extent me) got a bit of an Erg0 wagon going. The participants were me, VPB and Exe - very likely all town. Where was our scum support, if Erg0 is a townie? I think Erg0 being scum makes a lot of sense here. This is is weakened a bit by exactly how it happened - it was at a time when Shanba wasn't doing that badly, so scum wouldn't necessarily feel they

had

to go after Erg0.

Those two are the lynches I could cope with today. I'm going to
VOTE: eldarad

[Fishythefish]

Oh god. I just hammered. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Hope he's scum.

[Fishythefish]

I enjoyed this game. The town played pretty well, and all the many obvtown players were actually town, which is always nice. Thanks to Oman for modding.