Mini 611 - Troy, Meet Helen (Game Over)

[farside22]

/confirm

[farside22]

Vote: BB

One day I will forgive the chaos you caused in weather mafia. Today is not the day.

[farside22]

Still not random voting, although putting one in for Charter

is

tempting. [= There's a 1/16 chance that Hadhfang would get mafia both games, assuming the number of mafia hasn't changed for this game. That's 6.25% chance he's mafia. Just sayin'.

Farside and Lord Gurgi have already matched the input from Near last game, so that's a good sign.

I didn't read the last game except the last 2 pages. What did Near do?

[farside22]

I'm just going to throw it out there that in a 12 player game, there are usually either 3 scum or 3 scum and 1 SK, depending on how powerful the town is.

As a result I am going to

Unvote: ShadowGirl, Vote: Charter

for not only triple posting, but flipping between ideas between posts, also we can't be sure how many anti-town we've got, so it's probably best to play it conservative and assume we have 4.

Also:

Mod: Can you clarify about a rule:

6. Deadlines may be implemented if I feel that discussion is lagging. At deadline, the person with the most votes will be lynched. In the case of a tie, the person who was voted for first is lynched.

Does this make the determining vote the last vote placed against a person, or the first vote placed against them?

This seems like a big leap voting someone for not being sure about anti-town. Yes typically 3 scum is the norm. If charter is talking to just bring things up it is better then laying low.

unvote:
vote: LG

Bringing up the idea there could be a SK first is bad, mmky

[farside22]

The person who first brings up a SK is more likely to be the SK supposedly.

It's a possible, though very weak, tell in this direction, yes. Also setup speculation is considered scummy in general because it's appearing to be helpful for the town, but actually not, because you're not really helping find scum based on it.

It's all fairly weak tells - I'm not ready to join farside in voting LG over it at this point - but I don't think going after farside for attacking a could weak tells this early in the game is a great idea, either.

It's not much of a tell in general, but whether what he is doing is a town or scum action it is a talking point. On general idea's though. Most people don't talk SK till N1 has been done and they know what they are up to. Speculating about a SK is useless, hence my problem with LG

[farside22]

I don't think it's any good to try speculate about SK until N1. Figuring out how many scum there are is a bit more productive, as it has sparked conversation.

Anyway, I would think that there's either three scum or two scum and a SK. We've seen from what last game that the roles can get pretty interesting.

How can you say it's not good to speculate and then speculate?

[farside22]

I don't think it's any good to try speculate about SK until N1. Figuring out how many scum there are is a bit more productive, as it has sparked conversation.

Anyway, I would think that there's either three scum or two scum and a SK. We've seen from what last game that the roles can get pretty interesting.

How can you say it's not good to speculate and then speculate?

My wording didn't come out right. 'Not good' in the sense that for the moment it doesn't help us much.

That doesn't answer my question. It is like Fosing people for FOSing. Your comment is contradictory to your post.

[farside22]

After looking at that flash, I'm pretty convinced SK is the only likely 3rd party role in this game. At the same time, I agree that there's no point guessing at it when it's very nearly confirmed if there are 2 night kills by D2. I don't see why this would make me rethink that comment though. Clarify Walnut?

There could be cult leaders or survivers though, that's not above possibility. Tbh, speculation on 3rd party roles offers us no help at all, until someone makes a hint at their role if they are pro-town. Having said that Lord Guri's post was that there are likely to be either 3 scum or 3 scum and a SK, it was Charter that brought up the speculation about it.

Vote:Charter

Not entirely true. Riot started the % chance people could get same role. Charter gave % change and speculated on set up (which 12 player is 3 scum typically). Why is specualating about how many scum scummy?

[farside22]

Farside, I would ask you why bringing up the SK is bad. On much the same grounds as a matter of fact.

SK is more pointless discussion as there is no reason to suspect a SK till D2 is upon us to see if there is one kill or two. Scum are an obvious equation.

[farside22]

Going back and doing a little rereading, and look what I find.

Hmmm, My thoughts so far are that the SK thing is a bit of a wierd thing to do, but I can't really see anything in Charter's assumption thing really, if i'm honest.

Then later in 66

There could be cult leaders or survivers though, that's not above possibility. Tbh, speculation on 3rd party roles offers us no help at all, until someone makes a hint at their role if they are pro-town. Having said that Lord Guri's post was that there are likely to be either 3 scum or 3 scum and a SK, it was Charter that brought up the speculation about it.

Vote:Charter

I will be interested in seeing who the next person to vote for Had is (assuming someone does.

Yes that is quiet a contradiction there. It's weird. This is all WIFOM and what not, but is Hadhfang the type of player to make a jump and try and make a blah case a normal thing? I know meta is over rated by some and I like to take apart a player first especially with only 3 pages before lynching them.
Hadhfang can you explain the above post and why you note Charters comments and then bring them up again?

[farside22]

Don't lynch him today and if he lives through the night lynch him tomorrow. Of course the mafia could always not NK him, but I see that as much more unlikely than him actually being mafia (if he lives). Saying this, there's no point in lynching him today, as there are probably two others, so I'll go ahead and

Things like this bother me. It's like telling the scum hey if you don't kill this guy we will do it for you tomorrow. Also see setting up lynch's = bad.

FOS: Charter

Also can be misconstude to make had looking scummy tomorrow if he is alive. I don't know whether to believe hadh myself and his claim is really early, but leaving this out there like that just is scummy.

[farside22]

@ Batt, to me if you give a

reason

from someone's post for your vote, then the vote is not

random

. I voiced this in post 48. From the flow of things there, it looked like you made an opinion, Mac questioned it, then you quickly withdrew it and threw the blame to the vote being "random".

we should lynch somoene else and see what happens. Come D2 if Had is still alive he can tell us who he investigated and the result. Then we can decide on whether or not to lynch him or somoene else.

I agree, but what I would like to know, from anyone at all, is after Had reports how do we decide if that clears him or not?

Well with Charter's statement did was exactly this: Now it will be WIFOM. If Had is NK, If Had is scum, If, if, if. It's really too soon to say any of that and I think talking about it gives the scum ideas (if Had isn't scum) what to do about the situation. The worse part about Had's claim is he doesn't know if he is sane or not.

[farside22]

And if we are letting Had live on the reasoning that he has claimed and could prove himself, why would we vote for BB who

also

claimed?

I wouldn't call what BB said a "claim" a kick ass role could mean anything.

[farside22]

Well with Charter's statement did was exactly this: Now it will be WIFOM. If Had is NK, If Had is scum, If, if, if. It's really too soon to say any of that and I think talking about it gives the scum ideas (if Had isn't scum) what to do about the situation. The worse part about Had's claim is he doesn't know if he is sane or not.

Yes, it was all my fault. No one else possibly thought that, or was going to think that tomorrow. If I hadn't said anything, scum couldn't have thought of that and would still be in the dark.

I think you trying to pin this on me is scummy. What does everyone else think?

You brought it up. Why? Do you really think the scum will be thinking in those terms?
You could have said lets not lynch Had and discuss finding tomorrow if he is alive like CFriot did. Instead you are saying "hey scum guess what I think Had is scummy and if you keep him alive I will lynch him tomorrow even though I don't know if he is scum or not, but him being alive is scummy." Yeah that is real smart.

[farside22]

Will be on V/LA from June 28 and back on July 1st

[farside22]

@LG, Had claimed with 4 votes on him, but he thought he had 5. Quick claim without much of an explaination is scummy, is Had a newbie?

[farside22]

Hi I'm back and read what I missed.

@ Mac: I'm not sure whether had is scum. Currently, I think that he is being too complacent for someone who has just claimed, but I'll probably have to wait and see. You seem to be quite eager to believe his role claim.

I didn't see this at all. Mac just says that lynching a claimed cop D1 isn't the best thing at the moment. Also I agree that seeing what Had comes up with during D2 (if around) is a way to get a feel of his claim.
As for BB he is acting funny in a few games I'm in with him. It looks like he may be leaving MS shortly so I think he (a) may need to be replaced and (b) insane as in being weird in RL. Either untill BB is replaced or talks further without being weird can I back a BB lynch at the moment.
I would like to hear from charter who has yet to explain his setting up lynches comment.

unvote:
vote: charter

[farside22]

I think it's a scummy thing to do and I'm calling you out on it. It doesn't matter who it's directed to. Netlava is still free to answer it, I haven't given my opinion on the matter. I hesitate to say 'loaded question' but your question is very WIFOM with the what do you think should happen tomorrow.

I was actually wondering if you were going to say I was defending him. You didn't quite, but you still didn't answer my questions to you.

I read this as follows:

Hey pot this is kettle.
What is up kettle.
Well I think I know what is up, but you did exactly as I did so what is up with that.
Really? (long pause)
Umm Kettle you think anyone will notice I did this first.
(no answer)

[farside22]

Farside? Are you drunk or just crazy? Regardless you're right.

It's charter hypocrisy that just gets to me and the fact that he is just playing like he didn't commint the same act galls my intelligence.

[farside22]

Why is no one paying attention to this:

For now,

strong FoS on Hadhfang

, waiting for the rest of the town's opinion on how to go about testing this claim. Battousai I'm also waiting for you to come in and clear your name.

Don't lynch him today and if he lives through the night lynch him tomorrow. Of course the mafia could always not NK him, but I see that as much more unlikely than him actually being mafia (if he lives). Saying this, there's no point in lynching him today, as there are probably two others, so I'll go ahead and

unvote had

However Had, you would do well to explain the discrepancies in your posting as pointed out by several of us.

A good place to start

vote blackberry

because I didn't get a super kickass role.

Now the hypocritical moment:

CF Riot's post 71:

I'd also like to add that I'm eating the most delicious apple right now. So good.

I saw it as a doc breadcrumb, with apple being the trigger word, except for the fact that it makes no sense for a doc to breadcrumb whatsoever. From my (limited) experience as mafia, I have been tempted to drop fake breadcrumbs, before realizing that doc breadcrumbs make no sense.

What if he really was a doc and it was a real breadcrumb? Then if the scum wasn't observant you just outed a town power role. What do you think should happen if CF is found dead tomorrow as the doc?

Why are you asking other people what they think should happen if Riot is found dead tomorrow and is doc? Why don't you say what you think will happen? What good can you hope to gain from this question? I ask these because you seem unwilling to drop the Riot being doc thing, even after he explicitly said he wasn't dropping hints at his role.

If someone can explain why this is okay I will let it go.

[farside22]

@Macavenger: charter is talking about lining up lynches, but the hypocritical part is he is talking about whether Had is still alive, then calls out another player who did exactly as he did.

[farside22]

What do you think of his claim?

In regards to BB I take most of what he says with a big grain of salt. He was in a couple of games that are currently taking place and asked to be replaced. I just think he is being silly. (He's being silly everyone I look).

[farside22]

Camn, how do you feel about the post where he said I was attacking him when I was defending him?

However, I'm getting a really off feeling from that post. Not enough for anything concrete, but I'm keeping my eyes open.

I thought Netlava was talking mostly about that post where you said you would wait till he responded to the attack. Then when he responds mostly to you saying that you vote him. I thought your action was odd too. Why say oh that is a good point then say the person needs to respond or will get your vote. I'm seen many a scum do that tactic so I don't think Netlava pointing the finger at you for doing that is OMGUS.

[farside22]

This is the post we are talking about?

Hmm, I really want Netlava to defend himself first. He might be continuing on a suspicion from the last game. (I have suspicions about a number of players doing this) Did he hound you last game?

I think just for that, you get the honor of being on the second spot on my scum list. It appears that you've already made up your mind, and your attempt to cast off the suspicion as a personal vendetta is an indirect way of protecting CF Riot. Furthermore, last game doesn't have anything to do with this game. If you check the last game, you'll notice that I did change opinions on CF Riot, which means that I do try to keep an open mind.

Looking back through the thread, I also noticed that you never actually answered the question what are your reasons for bringing up the possibility of SK. Also, the way you've voted is suspicious. You voted Charter for one particular issue way back while ignoring the wealth of new info. Instead, you've been affirming your suspicions with comments such as:

My vote has been on him for a while because he keeps doing it.

without actually pushing his bandwagon.

Before that post by LG he never had a real problem with netlava. Like I said I've seen many a scum bounce using someone else's idea to place a vote. That is the only reason I find LG's comment odd. He didn't add really anything to what was being discussed, but states he wants netlava to defend himself. As for CFRiot OMGUS I will agree that netlava was in deed OMGUS, but not with LG. I think when you have someone just saying yeah what he said you tend to attack them thinking them scum for not adding anything.

[farside22]

I agree with Mac here. As an example, if we focus steadily on Netlava I am sure we can get enough votes on to lynch him. After about 20 pages of playing with him I would say that his style is unorthodox enough to make enough people suspicious of him even if he were a vanilla townie. Does this mean that I think Netlava is guilty or innocent? Neither, simply that it would not be a useful test. On the other hand, if we continue to talk about every player, it becomes a case of "Is he the best person to lynch today?", which is quite different.

While I increasingly think it may be justified, as I said earlier (in post #218), it seemed to me a foregone conclusion that if we focused on Netlava it would most likely end in him being lynched.

It's that a foregone conclusion if you do this with any player though?

[farside22]

The problem with Netlava comments and findings is that they are weak for the most part. I think the case on LG was the most strongest, but the Mac case was weak. I'm not sure if Netlava isn't use to pressure, doesn't know how to really scum hunt and come up with a case or is scum himself. The biggest problem I have with Netlava is that almost everyone he is accusing is voting for him.

[farside22]

I will do my best to give this game a good read thru this weekend and get back with my own thoughts.

[farside22]

I will say the only thing I can about this game and I am having trouble keeping up. I'm trying not to get replaced because it not anyone's fault but my own. Every time I try to get to reading this game my mind gets side tracked. I will do my best to read through this Monday when I am board at work.
Thanks for your understanding.

[farside22]

I'm just starting my reread. I'm on page 5 and I'm a bit busy so I just wanted to ask a couple of questioned that crossed my mind on the read. I appologized if they were asked and answered already.
Battousai - Quickly votes farside after she votes Lord Gurgi, but says it was a random vote with a bit of information. Was it because you disagreed with her? Was she too quick to change her vote? Do you think she's scum, or was it a truly random vote?

Charters states:
It IS misleading. If someone wasn't good at statistics and just read over it and didn't think about it, they would assume there's a tiny (~5%) chance that Had is scum again, based on your statement. You failed to mention me in there which makes me think there's a reason for that.
(this makes no sense. Why would it matter that he didn't bring you up, but brings up hadh. Are you thinking about scum distancing from each other this early in the game?)
tinsley state:
Mac - Seeing as everyone had the same chance of drawing a scum role in this game, do you find CF Riot's statistic misleading?
(even though this was not directed at me. I could see this as misleading. I'm curious to know why Mac thought Hadh or even Charter had less chance of being scum then others. Most Mod's just do random even with what happened. There is no reason to not make a person scum again just because of a fubar from another game)
CF state:
I don't joke vote, so voting for him based on that goes against my game morals. The stat wasn't meant to change anyone's minds once real voting started, I just thought of all the people you could random, I wouldn't choose someone who was mafia last game.
"I wouldn't random vote for someone that got Mafia last game because I don't think they'd get it twice in a row."
(why did you bring it up if it was more a joke then anything. Why would you think the Mod wouldn't random the mafia choices?)
Walnut: Post 86 how is it that CF didn't explain himself? Post 92 how the heck did you come to this conclusion?
I will be back later today with more.

[farside22]

Netlava: Ok, I went back and looked at those posts and I see what you are saying. Riot says it is bad to LYNCH BB as IF he has a protown role he should be able to use it. Then later says what BB did was scummy (softclaim). I see it as a very minor issue. I really don't see Riot as contradicting himself too much there as lynching someone and thinking they are scummy are related, but in this circumstance I see them as different.

Farside: If your asking me to answer this question, "Battousai - Quickly votes farside after she votes Lord Gurgi, but says it was a random vote with a bit of information. Was it because you disagreed with her? Was she too quick to change her vote? Do you think she's scum, or was it a truly random vote?"

Then my answer would be because it was a random vote, and the reason I voted Farside over anyone else was because I disagreed with her vote of LG. At the time I really didn't think she was scum.

Have you been in a game were people who talk about SK Day 1 without a reason does not look scummy?

[farside22]

farside22 has requested replacement. I'm looking for someone now.

I'm really sorry you guys. This game has overloaded me.