Mini 642: Bodyguard 7: (Game Over)

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Bandwagon!

Vote TDC.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Bridgesandbaloons has the right of it. This was true even in the California setup, where I worked out a similar "cop should claim day 2" thing. And then was NKed before I had a chance to reveal it. Having the bodyguard is just cake on top of that.

That said, I'm indifferent to you explaining your reasoning.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

So do you think scum will figure it all by themselves or that they won't? The only reason to withhold is because it pretty much tells scum what to do day 2.

I tend to assume that the other players in the game are basically competent, so yeah, they can probably figure it out. But I also don't think its necessary to talk about it now, as it doesn't really affect what we're doing now.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

If you think that, then me revealing my reasonings would be the most pro-town thing. Why then, did you say you didn't care either way?

Because, assuming that other people, especially once presented with the idea, could figure it out, they wouldn't need it explained to them. Not that it would be a bad idea. Hence my indifference.

This is where I disagree. It's better than random voting in my opinion.
It absolutely affects what we're doing now. Sure, of course I don't want to discuss day 2 for that long. I'm guessing we'll be done talking about it after page 2. However, seeing people's reactions to the idea is very informative.

Ah, well, I suppose considering it as an alternative to random voting, it is preferable. I hadn't really been thinking about it like that.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Then explain it. I do not think indifferent means what you think it means.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The first entry on my dictionary wiki for indifferent says "having no particular interest or sympathy; unconcerned" this is what I thought it means.

Are you saying you are changing your vote to yes?
I think you are, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Honestly, your behavior baffles me. No, I wasn't changing my vote to yes. You managed to quote the definition of indifferent (not that I really thought you didn't know what it meant), but you're still acting as if I was voting no the whole time, and only now have come around to the idea, when in reality I still don't particularly care whether you do or not.

I mean, I could see it if you were trying to rally people around to it being a good idea, but

you

voted no. So, and perhaps I need to rephrase this:

Why do you care so much that I come down on one side of the issue or another, when I, in fact, am (still) indifferent?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Because staying in the middle of an issue this early on in the game makes no sense. If you think that scum would already know, then me revealing info would help the town unless you think that CML is mafia.

I'm not "staying in the middle."

I don't think its an issue.

I also doubt CML is any more likely to be scum because he miscalculated what conditions it would take to automatically win. To what end would he be "misleading the town" by warning that its not an automatic win if the cop investigates the bodyguard? What behavior is that likely to shift to the scum's advantage?

I'm starting to feel like BAB has been calling so much attention to whether he's going to reveal the "big secret" just so he could find a "slip" to jump on. I certainly felt like I was being attacked for not caring whether he elaborated on his reasoning, and now he's jumping on CML on pretty weak reasoning.

So

Vote: BridgesandBaloons.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

If everyone doesn't feel like it'll be an auto-win, then the bodyguard and cop might not claim Day 2. This is the exact thing I was afraid of. In the cases I described it helps if both (or if only one is alive) of them claims on Day 2. I need to make sure that everyone understands or believes this.

I don't think anyone's spoken out against it. At worst, we have cml debating whether its an automatic win, not whether or not its a good idea.

And why are you saying "big secret?"

Because that's what you're acting like you have.

What about my reasons for CML or weak? Are there any other better reasons than that at this moment? And saying me doesn't make any sense because if there are no other better reasons than CML or I, then you can't attack me for voting CML because then I'd be voting for the strongest reasons I could be.

There's a big difference between pressuring early day 1 and saying "I can only assume you're scum." That's sort of strong language for a vote you're now trying to back away from.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

It's the best lead I have. You should know that someone saying "I can only assume you're scum" on page 2 means something drastically different then saying it on page 15.

I don't feel like you did much Page 2 couching.

I don't see how you came to think that from my posts. I don't feel that at all.
Also, please explain to me how this comment about being a "big secret" is relevant to scum-hunting, if it is. Even if I was dancing around sticking my tounge out and saying I have a big secret, would that be scummy?

Its relevant when you spend more time caring about how people react to whether or not you ought to completely explain yourself than about whether or not there should be claims day 2.

Also, you completely ignored most of my questions.

me wrote:

Explain to me how looking for slip-ups of scum is not scum-hunting.
[. . . ]
What about my reasons for CML or weak? Are there any other better reasons than that at this moment?

See above, where I wrote: "I also doubt CML is any more likely to be scum because he miscalculated what conditions it would take to automatically win. To what end would he be "misleading the town" by warning that its not an automatic win if the cop investigates the bodyguard? What behavior is that likely to shift to the scum's advantage? "

The better reason is you manufacturing "controversy" in place of scumhunting.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Also, are there any other bigger leads other than CML or I right now? Because if there aren't, then you can't criticize me for using weak reasons.

Um, yes. Yes, I can. I think this thing that you are calling a scumtell is in fact a null-tell, and as such, I don't support the wagon. Not only that, I think you intentionally generated this thing you are calling a scumtell, which is why I'm voting for you.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I'm pretty clearly

implying

this, but I'll spell it out: I don't think you're actually looking for slips. If you are, you're doing a poor job of it. I think you're faking it.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

You are accusing me of manufacturing fake scum-tells in order to attack townies for weak reasonings? Is that right?

Yes. And I think the whole "should I reveal my reasoning" thing was an extension of that. Also, for scum, appearing to be scumhunting has benefits beyond just trying to get town players lynched. It makes you look pro-town, as well.

At the same time he is, however, clearly antagonizing you, which I can't see as "careful".

You'd think so.

And how did attacking CML show that Slaine is lurking?

I was thinking the same thing.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The question whether you should reveal or not does not seem to be such a question, either answer is acceptable and no answer will be proven wrong during the course of the game.

Exactly. Which makes me wonder why bab is making such an issue of something that shouldn't really be an issue.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I'm just thinking that it might (just might) be worth it to ask a random person to claim today.

Um. . . a

random

person? What would that possibly be worth? Shouldn't we ask, say, the scummiest person around to claim? Like whoever we wagon?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The reason I made the math small is because I don't want people to accuse me as looking like I'm helping the town.

The logic of this is dizzying.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

a) You show what made you feel that way.
or
b) It is too townie.

Its not too townie. The

actual

pro-town benefits of what bab provided are far, far smaller than the amount of time bab spent talking about this strategy.

That's not acting too townie, that's putting a lot of effort into appearing pro-town without actually providing the town with much.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Of course it's not true for every game. I just think this is correct strategy, and thus is probably how most townies and powerroles will play.

Um. . . no. Pro-town powerroles ought to attempt to hunt scum like everyone else. Having noncontributing powerroles is an excellent way to get powerroles outed.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

[quote="jonathantan86"[ 1) I think that the scum's best plan is to have at least one member (maybe the other can avoid controversy) actively engage in conversation to weed out powerroles, probing if necessary, even if it means risking a scum-tell. (The numbers are in an earlier post.) Do you agree with me?
2) Supposing I'm right (even if you think I'm not), who fits the profile above the most? [/quote]

I disagree. Wholeheartedly. So much. Its in scum's best interest to not be predictable.

But, to humor the point:

I feel that alabaska, me, and bab, have all been relatively noisy, and cml, jt, slaine, and tdc have been relatively quiet.

(These estimations were made with no research whatsoever).

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

b) If I were scum, I could easily post the work I did pre-game anyway, and hoped that WIFOM would make me unlynchable.

I subscribe to this view. Its all the. . . pageantry you added to it. Like you really wanted people to see how much work you had done. That's why I'm saying you're putting work into

appearing

pro-town.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

That game I was a townie. I wasn't trying to apear pro-town. It was just a by product of me being proud of the work I did. This game is the same case.

If you had posted an excellent, detailed, attack on someone else, that would have been great. Posting that you had a great idea and then going on about whether or not you should reveal your reasoning, that's not really pro-town.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Secondly, that's just wrong. I always put myself in the center of discussion regardless of whether I'm scum or not. What you're saying here is complete WIFOM. What were you trying to accomplish by saying this?

I agree. That makes just as little sense as "powerroles should stay quiet." If people's role were truly predictable by

noise level

, mafia would be a very simple thing.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

So the scum might force conversation in such a way that power roles are caught between a rock and a hard place--either join in, draw attention to him/herself and risk being lynched, or retreat and risk being seen as a non-contributing power role (by the scum, since they know that the person isn't scum).

What? For that to really happen the way you're describing it, scum would have to already know who has the powerroles, in order to know who to force into conversation.

Seriously. Please DO NOT SAY WHO YOU THINK IS TOWN. If Jonathan is scum you just told scum that they can safely fake-claim with him.

Safely fake-claim. . . what? Noob? Do you

really

see jt as a nk magnet?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I think this is another example of BaB taking a minor issue and blowing it out of proportion to make him appear like the keeper of the pro-town flame.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

TSPN allways looks scummy to me.

Ironically, I don't think I've ever been scum in a game with you.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The game is almost a month old. And you are the best I've seen.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I do lean towards that as well, but what do you think of killa seven? He/she has not really been contributing, and some people think it is good to generally lunch lurkers.

That's sort of what k7 does, lurk and not contribute. But anyway, jonathan, I'd love to hear more about what "some people" think? Do you think lynching lurkers is pro-town? If so, why? And why do you think bab is the best candidate for lynch?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I agree with you here, but I don't think it's the kinda thing we oughta be discussing in-thread.

Well, when people are making determinations of alignment or role based on fallacies like that, it does sort of have to be discussed.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The string of letters? No, sorry. I think he's scummy, am considering changing my vote. . . but I don't know what you're trying to say.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Moar like, can killa seven point you to a past game where he

hasn't

been lynched, amirite?

However, he's just being himself, and I don't see any particular reason to lynch him.

I'd find bab's push on jt more scummy if I didn't mostly agree with it.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I suspect that he's an alt with the specific aim of building up an I-always-lurk meta that will win him every game he enters as scum. I might be wrong though, which is why I'm asking whether he was ever lynched (and if so, I could look into why he was lynched). I've looked through a few of his past games and he was either nightkilled or survived in all of them.

I've wondered the same thing, but offhand, I've seen him lynched in mafias 75 and 76. Once as town, once as scum.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

That quote is not by alabaska j.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Hey, I'm back. PAX was awesome.

I really don't favor a k7 lynch. I still like bab for all the reasons I've mentioned before and I'd prefer jt over k7, because some of what k7 makes sense, and k7 is just playing like himself.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Why not? You don't think lurking is scummy?

No. Do you? If so, why?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Its time for a discussion of the difference between scummy and anti-town. Killa's play is consistently anti-town, in the sense that it does not help the town. This is bad, and in larger games I more or less pursue a "lynch-k7-all-the-time" meta. But a seven-player game, we can't really afford to be lynching wrong.

Now, if killa's play was

scummy

(that is, more likely that he is scum), I'd be going after him. But since this is his play scum or town, his play isn't scummy.

And to extend this to lurking in general, while lurkings is anti-town and people shouldn't engage in it, people do, town or scum, and so lurking is, at best, a very weak indicator of scumminess.

You were saying earlier how you would expect power roles to always lay low, and now lurking is scummy because

only

scum have reason to lurk. . . I think you need to start seeing the game in a few more shades of gray.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Right now k7 is at a point where he should post much more in order for the rest of us to attempt to determine if he is scum or not, but he isn't...that outweighs any concern of a powerrole "outing" himself, if k7 is a power role.

You miss my point. Let's say k7

doesn't

post more (which is likely). What kind of conclusions are you going to draw about his alignment?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

TSPN: It's true that some townies lurk, but we have repeatedly asked k7 to post more but he doesn't. Not to sidetrack but...what do you think of k7's quote above?

I think he's behaving

like he always does

. Have you read another game he's been in yet? I'm starting to think you're tunneling on k7 because there's heat on you and you think he's an easy lynch.

Unvote, vote jonathantan86.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I'm aware from our past game that you wouldn't lynch k7 on the basis of non-contribution.
How is jon's k7 vote less opportunistic than k7's jon vote?

I suppose the difference is mostly in that I find jon suspicious. Speaking of jon:

As someone said (forgot who), metas aren't always a good way to determine scumness or townness.

Considering k7's meta, (PS: Have you read a game of his yet?) do you or do you not think it is a valid application? If not,

why not?

I did not notice any "heat" on me...my only votes (at that time) were BaB (who at the end said his vote was more of pressure, correct me if I'm wrong) and killa seven (who voted me for very weak reasons, in my opinion). And besides, you could be tunneling on me because k7 is your scum partner too.

I'd define being the second largest wagon as heat. And regarding me "tunneling" on you, I'm not sure that word means what you think it means. If anything, I spent most of the day tunneling on bab, only now distracted by you.

I'm most suspicious of TSPN and k7 at that moment, although CML's claim request does raise some suspicion.

Why? Your suspicion of k7 is documented, although your refusal to actually engage his meta is off-putting, but why me? OMGUS, or do you have something better? And considering that asking for claims at L-1 with a willing hammer is more or less par for the course, why is CML's request suspicious?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I was under the impression that your main reason for voting jon was his k7-vote. What else is there? BAB's case?

I didn't like the way that he keeps saying he thinks powerroles would stay quiet, because its really only in scum's interest to figure out who powerroles are. I didn't necessarily find a pressure vote on k7 bad (although its a waste of time), but at L-1, that's not pressure any more, that's an attempt to lynch, and he's not moving his vote, nor really saying why he wants to lynch k7.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The statement that TSPN quoted was by TDC and not me, by the way.

Er, yes. Anyway, to sum up your long point, lynching people for meta-game reasons is a poor way to win this one, and an excellent hiding refuge of scum.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

So, let me get this straight: you have suspects, they may or may not be the person you were voting for, but you'll let us know at a time which is most convenient for you?

One of jt or bab should be the lynch for today, and if one of them comes up scum, I'd bet heavy on the other one being the buddy.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Seriously, would you respond to the pertinent points on k7's meta? Engage them? Instead of keeping on shouting "k7 is scummy, tsn is scummy for saying 'no, this is how k7 behaves?'"

And the dizzying logic of k7 said the same thing about powerroles that me and bab said, but he's implying that he's a powerrole (doesn't read that way to me), and therefore he must

not

be a powerrole, and is scum. . . does that really make sense to you? Do you truly believe that? I find that hard to believe.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Well, I guess it wasn't obvious to me, because I never quoted said post. In fact it seems you were the only one to ever quote it.

Yeah, bab's post should probably read "anyone who quoted the post and paid the slightest bit of attention," as opposed to the other way around.

I s'pose I'll wait further until CML comments, but my feeling is that this:

Maybe a way to get the heat off of his scumbuddy, jonathan?

Explains what's going on here.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

wow. BaB and jonathan are scum together.

That's what I'm thinking. After all, who was it that pointed out that scum

absolutely

cannot afford a scumlynch today?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Sure,
but after CML explains claiming cop.

This is desperation.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

This doesn't mean they're scum, but I'm sure there's someone here that's really wanting it to look like I'm CML's partner.

Does this sound to anyone else like bab already knows jt is scum? It sounds to me like

you're

trying to set up a mislynch.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

lmao. Read the first sentence. I was assuming for the purpses of the post that Jt's scum.

I saw what you wrote. I also didn't see anyone else writing a "if jt happens to be scum, I'm not his partner, even though I tried to keep him alive" post.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Vote callmeliam.

Now that we know its not true, crumbing "I am cop" is pretty damning.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Also, TSPN, didn't he say yesterday he wasn't cop and trying to attract a nightkill?

That is what he said, and I believed him, because if I were the cop who'd just had my breadcrumb inexplicably revealed by another player, that's what I'd say too. But now we know cml wasn't the cop.

Rather than buy a story about an elaborate plan that relies on scum just happening to quote the key passage, I'm going to go ahead and choose the simpler "scum setting up a fakeclaim" option.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

What changed your mind from believing BAB's case into believing he was scum with jon?
Also when and for how long did you actually believe CML could be the real cop? I never really thought that was likely.

Heh, perhaps I was being too clever for my own good. What I meant was that I thought BAB, by attacking CML, was trying to get heat off his scumbuddy, jonathan.

On CML, usually when I see someone breadcrumb "I am cop," it usually means they're the cop, or they're scum. If you can point me to another example of a vanilla townie crumbing like that, I'll listen, but to me, its a very strange play for a townie to make.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Did it seem that bad? It was bad in the sense that it was easily discovered, but I don't think it was terribly unbelievable. So yes, I bought the cop claim, or at least I bought the lack of claim as being a cop claim. Events have since shifted my perspective.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

That is true. One of me and CML pretty much must be scum. I'll give you a hint: its the guy who said "I'm a cop" in one of his posts and isn't the cop.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/posting. ... &p=1175573

ITT alabaska shows a basic lack of understanding of forum mechanics. I'm not entirely sure what you were even hoping to prove.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Well, CML should still be the lynch for today. We should probably also complete the massclaim. Random start and popcorn?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Well, that's a good point. I'm vanilla. CML would be next.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I found it because BAB found it. I wouldn't have noticed it if he didn't. But the way to find is to just hit the quote button on the appropriate post. Now, I never hit the quote button, I just copy-paste what I want to quote, so I'd never have noticed.

Interesting that you just sort of took BAB's word for it.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I'm leaning toward alabaska, but I'd really like some serious contribution out of k7 before I lay down a vote. Well, and alabaska, but I'm assuming he'll show up.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

So did I, arguing that your lynch was no better than random. Defending someone day 1 doesn't mean you won't find the person scummy later. That's a super-weak argument.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

OK, no one else is saying anything. If K7 doesn't step up and make a case on alabaska that I believe, I'm going to vote for him.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Y'know, killa, if you put this level of effort into your games all the time, you'd be a much better player. But your case has me leaning back toward alabaska, and since he doesn't seem to be around, I'm ready to vote.

Vote: alabaska j.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

TSPN's CML bus was probably based on the fact he thought everyone knew about CML's fakeclaim.

Also why would I kill BaB after pinpointing him as scum day one?

Good luck Killa, ask me some questions if you need to, and make the right choice.

I don't think it was immediately that CML was going to be the day 2 lynch at all. Also, I pinpointed BaB as scum before you did, so why would

I

kill him? Either way, that's pretty obvious WIFOM, but by that logic, I wouldn't have killed him if I was scum.