Open 83 - Polygamist Mafia (Game over!) before 628

[armlx]

BTW, Shy Guy, when the person first suggests the idea then backs someone who agrees with them, how is that buddying?

[Adel]

@SpyreX: I've reached a conclusion: Shy Guy and FL are town.

Why?

1. I have a basic town read on both of them. Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.
2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.
3. By partnering up with them (if possible) and working together we should figure out who is scum with 2 out of 3 odds in our favor.

~~~

@Shy Guy: your basic set of objection against me seem pretty logical to me. I admit that my actions, from one perspective, do seem scummy. I consider that an unfortunate consequence of what appeared to be the best course for me to take.

regarding the mass tell until day 2 thing: keep in mind that the games was filled with newbies, and I've played this set up before. I wrote this set up. I've been scum in a Deep South game with daytalking. I've been in a 100% day-talking game. I've played in games with really unorganized scum. I really expected that in a game full of inexperienced players, the scum stood a good chance of not communicating well, or getting replaced by a player who didn't pay attention, and getting confused and making the wrong move, only to be exposed by a day 2 massclaim. The information would all be there, but it would become hard for the scum to keep their relationships straight, especially under systematic questioning and being prompted to make lists, and being responsible for their own vote. I believed that the scum should be given every chance to make a mistake. Simplifying the setup early does help the town understand more immediately who has a claimed relationship with whom, but it also keeps things safer for the scum. The information will eventually be there for the town either way, and the relationships between players is impossible to really begin to evaluate until you have a lynch on the books anyways. The day 1 lynch would (and should) always come down to who the single scummiest player is. In short, I think there is no negative trade-off from claiming day 2 rather than day 1. The accuracy of the day 1 lynch will not be effected, and the chances of the scum making a critical mistake are slightly increased.

Gimbo had a disruptive playstyle that pretty impossible to deal with in a game. He wrecks the signal:noise ratio, like Korlash. Fuck him, he deserved to die.

Two days is a short period of time, but it felt much much longer than that to me at the time. I don't know why that is.

Another reason why I listed CH:CF as "cleared": I thought they would be too easy to mislynch if they were innocent, and they could use some defending.

[armlx]

Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.

Explain more please?

2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.

Why?

[Adel]

Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.

Explain more please?

I know of at least 7 of my games that Shy Guy has read. Shy Guy and I know each other from before this game. He probably should've been in an invitational this year.

2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.

Why?

Shy Guy is good, and I don't have anything against him that could hang him, and I doubt that if he is scum I'll ever be able to build a case against him in this game that will stick.

[eldarad]

Vote Count

Skruffs (2) -

Harvey Pew, Adel

ZeekLTK (1) -

SpyreX

Adel (1) -

ZeekLTK

Shy Guy (1) -

Nameless

Not voting (5) -

Firestarter, Shy Guy, Skruffs, forbiddanlight, armix

With 10 alive, it takes 6 to lynch

Still looking for a replacement for ZeekLTK...

[Nameless]

@SpyreX: I've reached a conclusion: Shy Guy and FL are town.

Why?

1. I have a basic town read on both of them. Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.
2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.
3. By partnering up with them (if possible) and working together we should figure out who is scum with 2 out of 3 odds in our favor.

Number one is remarkably undescriptive, and that you haven't been lynched reflects on the whole town/mafia (you included) rather than one individual not yet succeeded in convincing the town to lynch you. Two has nothing to do with whether Shy Guy is scum or not (unless wishing hard enough will retroactively make it so) and three assumes Shy Guy is town to begin with.

That's kind of a really bad conclusion.

[Shy Guy]

On meta: I realize Shy Guy, but the similarities seems so shocking to me its obvious.

(shrug)

That's not what he did here -- he diverted attention to anyone else besides himself, quite blatantly.

I'm not seeing that.

The part where he said "if you think me and Chelseafan are scummy, and Gimbo is also scummy, don't lynch me, just lynch Gimbo" (paraphrasing).

Seeing as how absolutely no one, not even my partner, has bought into it, I don't see how this case "looks genuine", and since I still strongly believe in the tells I found on chenhsi, I don't see how it has no basis.

You tried to use a fair understanding of mafia logic to construct it, which is evident. You obviously intended it to look that way.

Wait, a post ago you were saying that intent doesn't matter/we can only analyze actions. Now you are saying I used mafia logic to construct it... or that rather, I tried to make it look that way. Are we trying to figure out my motives, or not?

I'm not sure if "looks genuine" is the right phrase for what I am trying to say, but it gets the general point across.

I'm confused/the point isn't getting across. If it looks genuine, why is it suspicious?

Belief != truth btw.

Again though, if I believed it was true, I was trying my best to find scum.

She reasoned brilliantly that Chelseafan town would prove Gimbo town, and lynched Gimbo anyways.

Have you ever been in that scenario? Where you are trying to explain why someone is town, no one is listening, and the person is such an idiot regardless you aren't even sure their behavior is anything better then null tells?

I think so, in the first game I played on here. It was a rather complicated mini game hosted by Mr. Stoofer. I thought one player was town and kept my save-them vote on them until the end. I was wrong, but I got lynched anyway so it didn't matter. Why do my experiences matter here?

Why do you disagree with me on my analysis of the mass claim situation?

Because it is so obviously a good idea to do it, and MafiaSSK brought up a link to another game where they did it and town won.

He is trying to push away from a him-Skruffs pairing with whatever reasoning possible, no matter if it is good or bad, like the "scum wouldn't pair two newbies together" reasoning.

Where did anyone say that?

Um, maybe it was Skruffs who said this but one of you said that C+C was implausible because both of them were new.

He also is trying to keep saying that I am scummy even though from my perspective I have refuted to a very reasonable benchmark his arguments.

I'm interested how you can say this, despite your own counter argument of your belief in the case mattering.

Belief is another thing. Either you can be convinced my case is good, or that at least I believed it was. I think I've argued pretty persuasively that I believed it was good, and I don't see how you've argued against that except to say that we can't analyze motives...

[Shy Guy]

BTW, Shy Guy, when the person first suggests the idea then backs someone who agrees with them, how is that buddying?

I was under the impression that Spryex had been pushing a case on Zeel/me since before you replaced in...

[Shy Guy]

limited on time, 3 mins, but try to respond to this post at least.

@SpyreX: I've reached a conclusion: Shy Guy and FL are town.

Interesting. Correct, but... unexpected.

Why?

1. I have a basic town read on both of them.

Why? Don't you later say in this or your next post you found me scummy?

Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.

Well first off, I don't meta, so I don't see how that is relevant. However, you made me think: if I was scum and wanted to randomly lynch someone in this game, I'd have tried to lynch you, I'd have not brought up chenhsi at all. I'd have simply beat you over and over and over the head with your actions near the end of day 1. I think I'd have been fairly successful, especially if in this hypothetical Zeel was not my scum buddy, since he bought in really easily..

2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.

Why? Skruffs/armlx and Nameless/Fire seem like they easily could be convinced to lynch me.

3. By partnering up with them (if possible) and working together we should figure out who is scum with 2 out of 3 odds in our favor.

Hm. I need to think on if I think you are town. I am leaning yes, if for no other reason taht, I think you are wrong, and that if you wanted to mislynch

me

you could have easily done so with Nameless and armlx circling.

@Shy Guy: your basic set of objection against me seem pretty logical to me. I admit that my actions, from one perspective, do seem scummy. I consider that an unfortunate consequence of what appeared to be the best course for me to take.

regarding the mass tell until day 2 thing: keep in mind that the games was filled with newbies, and I've played this set up before. I wrote this set up. I've been scum in a Deep South game with daytalking. I've been in a 100% day-talking game. I've played in games with really unorganized scum. I really expected that in a game full of inexperienced players, the scum stood a good chance of not communicating well, or getting replaced by a player who didn't pay attention, and getting confused and making the wrong move, only to be exposed by a day 2 massclaim. The information would all be there, but it would become hard for the scum to keep their relationships straight, especially under systematic questioning and being prompted to make lists, and being responsible for their own vote. I believed that the scum should be given every chance to make a mistake. Simplifying the setup early does help the town understand more immediately who has a claimed relationship with whom, but it also keeps things safer for the scum. The information will eventually be there for the town either way, and the relationships between players is impossible to really begin to evaluate until you have a lynch on the books anyways. The day 1 lynch would (and should) always come down to who the single scummiest player is. In short, I think there is no negative trade-off from claiming day 2 rather than day 1. The accuracy of the day 1 lynch will not be effected, and the chances of the scum making a critical mistake are slightly increased.

Gimbo had a disruptive playstyle that pretty impossible to deal with in a game. He wrecks the signal:noise ratio, like Korlash. Fuck him, he deserved to die.

Two days is a short period of time, but it felt much much longer than that to me at the time. I don't know why that is.

Another reason why I listed CH:CF as "cleared": I thought they would be too easy to mislynch if they were innocent, and they could use some defending.

gtg respond to this bit and subsequent later.

must say unsurprising that armlx (in a reasonable sounding way) and nameless (in a pretty disappointed sounding scummy ish way) both immediately question your conclusion.

I imagine they are the scum (likive been saying) and that they will try and make you choose between me/z and them. If thathappens dont give up like you gave up on chelseafan. assuming I am confident enough you are town to give you that decision . need to think this over.

later.

[Shy Guy]

@Shy Guy: your basic set of objection against me seem pretty logical to me. I admit that my actions, from one perspective, do seem scummy. I consider that an unfortunate consequence of what appeared to be the best course for me to take.

This is fair enough as far as it goes. Best course for you to take could be best course for town Adel or best course for scum Adel.

regarding the mass tell until day 2 thing: keep in mind that the games was filled with newbies, and I've played this set up before. I wrote this set up. I've been scum in a Deep South game with daytalking. I've been in a 100% day-talking game. I've played in games with really unorganized scum. I really expected that in a game full of inexperienced players, the scum stood a good chance of not communicating well, or getting replaced by a player who didn't pay attention, and getting confused and making the wrong move, only to be exposed by a day 2 massclaim.

I think that even with all new players the scum are somewhat unlikely to make such a mistake. Town, on the other hand, I think would very likely lynch wrong day 1 if they only got a claim near hammer. Informed townies are townies that lynch scum.

The information would all be there, but it would become hard for the scum to keep their relationships straight, especially under systematic questioning and being prompted to make lists, and being responsible for their own vote. I believed that the scum should be given every chance to make a mistake.

By doing so, you tried to give town every chance to make a mistake as well; townies might lynch a REALLY scummy player with an OK partner instead of two VERY but not quite REALLY scummy players, because they didn't know they were on the same team until day 2. Maybe they are scum maybe they aren't but it is best to make the best lynch possible day 1, and that involves mass claiming.

Simplifying the setup early does help the town understand more immediately who has a claimed relationship with whom, but it also keeps things safer for the scum. The information will eventually be there for the town either way, and the relationships between players is impossible to really begin to evaluate until you have a lynch on the books anyways.

I disagree here.

The day 1 lynch would (and should) always come down to who the single scummiest player is.

Um why? Why not scummiest aggregate pair??

In short, I think there is no negative trade-off from claiming day 2 rather than day 1. The accuracy of the day 1 lynch will not be effected, and the chances of the scum making a critical mistake are slightly increased.

I strongly disagree that the accuracy is not effected, and agree that chances of scum making the type of mistake you are suggesting are increased only very slightly. In addition, before mass claim, lovers might act suspicious of each other to hide that they are lovers. Then when they claim, there is this apparent contradiction, and we are all bollocksed up. If everyone has claimed, however, and the scum forget who they have claimed with and act suspicious of them, we have them for sure.

Making the scum commit to one parnter early on, then ceasing mentioning the partners thing might be the best idea possible.

Gimbo had a disruptive playstyle that pretty impossible to deal with in a game.

Any player can be dealt with. Tell them to do what you want, and if they don't ignore them. Especially in 6 player nightless, which is almost this setup, it is better to deal with a foolish townie than lynch them.

He wrecks the signal:noise ratio, like Korlash. Fuck him, he deserved to die.

Townies deserve to live. You saw that you could clear him.

Two days is a short period of time, but it felt much much longer than that to me at the time. I don't know why that is.

You've said.

Another reason why I listed CH:CF as "cleared": I thought they would be too easy to mislynch if they were innocent, and they could use some defending.

Interesting... scummiest player, ergo defend them?

[armlx]

Shy Guy is good, and I don't have anything against him that could hang him, and I doubt that if he is scum I'll ever be able to build a case against him in this game that will stick.

I disagree with this being reasoning to just give up on assuming they aren't scum.

The part where he said "if you think me and Chelseafan are scummy, and Gimbo is also scummy, don't lynch me, just lynch Gimbo" (paraphrasing).

While that is a slight overstatement of his post, I've got nothing to counter that point.

Wait, a post ago you were saying that intent doesn't matter/we can only analyze actions. Now you are saying I used mafia logic to construct it... or that rather, I tried to make it look that way. Are we trying to figure out my motives, or not?

I'm simply saying that if your case was clearly completely devoid at attempts at logic, the fact that it is bad logic could possibly be dismissed.

I'm confused/the point isn't getting across. If it looks genuine, why is it suspicious?

Looks superficially logical is a better descriptor here. Does it make sense now?

Again though, if I believed it was true, I was trying my best to find scum.

But again, belief is impossible to prove.

I think so, in the first game I played on here. It was a rather complicated mini game hosted by Mr. Stoofer. I thought one player was town and kept my save-them vote on them until the end. I was wrong, but I got lynched anyway so it didn't matter. Why do my experiences matter here?

I'm simply trying to see if you understood the scenario, or just had no experience. Trying to defend someone who is only scummy outside of the case of their own stupidity is one of the most frustrating things in mafia.

Because it is so obviously a good idea to do it, and MafiaSSK brought up a link to another game where they did it and town won.

Sure, but there was so much resistance to it early D1 that something must have been going on.

Um, maybe it was Skruffs who said this but one of you said that C+C was implausible because both of them were new.

It was Skruffs, take it up with him. I don't believe that is necessarily true at all.

Belief is another thing. Either you can be convinced my case is good, or that at least I believed it was. I think I've argued pretty persuasively that I believed it was good, and I don't see how you've argued against that except to say that we can't analyze motives...

My point here was that you are calling me out on a case you feel was poor without considering if I believed it was true, despite wanting me to the same to you. And you say I had double standards.

I was under the impression that Spryex had been pushing a case on Zeel/me since before you replaced in...

So your accusation of buddying goes back to me replacing in and running it from the first reread?

[Adel]

That's kind of a really bad conclusion.

unvote, vote:Nameless

[Harvey Pew]

....Shy Guy is good, and I don't have anything against him that could hang him, and I doubt that if he is scum I'll ever be able to build a case against him in this game that will stick.

That's kind of a really bad conclusion.

I don't know about

bad

but it

is

a little doomy. We should just accept our fate?

[forbiddanlight]

I don't know about bad but it is a little doomy. We should just accept our fate?

I'm biased since I know Shy Guy's alignment. The good news is he is town so getting things to stick on him would be pointless anyway. Of course, I'm the only one who can honestly say that, so I guess it doesn't help much. What I'm curious about is why Adel is so sure based on those 3 facts.

[eldarad]

Prodding Firestarter.

[SpyreX]

I'm not sold on Shy Guy being town, but they -could- definitely be town;however, I still haven't seen any reason why Zeek isn't scum.

So, if we accept Shy Guy is town, we're not getting Zeek from everything I've seen - Which, really, leaves us with a scum group of 4 which I frankly dont buy: Arm/Scruff/Nameless/Firestarter.

[Firestarter]

Apologies for not being present lately, Ive had alot of work in RL to contend with, will hope to get back on track in 48 hours.

[Shy Guy]

Shy Guy is good, and I don't have anything against him that could hang him, and I doubt that if he is scum I'll ever be able to build a case against him in this game that will stick.

I disagree with this being reasoning to just give up on assuming they aren't scum.

Me too :S.

Adel

, I'd greatly appreciate it if you could respond to my reply.

The part where he said "if you think me and Chelseafan are scummy, and Gimbo is also scummy, don't lynch me, just lynch Gimbo" (paraphrasing).

While that is a slight overstatement of his post, I've got nothing to counter that point.

That's reasonable.

Wait, a post ago you were saying that intent doesn't matter/we can only analyze actions. Now you are saying I used mafia logic to construct it... or that rather, I tried to make it look that way. Are we trying to figure out my motives, or not?

I'm simply saying that if your case was clearly completely devoid at attempts at logic, the fact that it is bad logic could possibly be dismissed.

If it was devoid of all attempts, then its lacking could be dismissed? Why?

I'm confused/the point isn't getting across. If it looks genuine, why is it suspicious?

Looks superficially logical is a better descriptor here. Does it make sense now?

Oh okay. I still don't think you've demonstrated that it isn't logical, but I see what you mean.

Again though, if I believed it was true, I was trying my best to find scum.

But again, belief is impossible to prove.

Nothing is possible to prove with absolute certainty. I don't see why belief is any more difficult to prove than other things.

I think so, in the first game I played on here. It was a rather complicated mini game hosted by Mr. Stoofer. I thought one player was town and kept my save-them vote on them until the end. I was wrong, but I got lynched anyway so it didn't matter. Why do my experiences matter here?

I'm simply trying to see if you understood the scenario, or just had no experience. Trying to defend someone who is only scummy outside of the case of their own stupidity is one of the most frustrating things in mafia.

It was frustrating, but I didn't just give up because it was frustrating.

Because it is so obviously a good idea to do it, and MafiaSSK brought up a link to another game where they did it and town won.

Sure, but there was so much resistance to it early D1 that something must have been going on.

Yeah. I'm still trying to think through what Adel said her reasons were. I'd like her to reply so I can evaluate better.

Um, maybe it was Skruffs who said this but one of you said that C+C was implausible because both of them were new.

It was Skruffs, take it up with him. I don't believe that is necessarily true at all.

Skruffs?

Belief is another thing. Either you can be convinced my case is good, or that at least I believed it was. I think I've argued pretty persuasively that I believed it was good, and I don't see how you've argued against that except to say that we can't analyze motives...

My point here was that you are calling me out on a case you feel was poor without considering if I believed it was true, despite wanting me to the same to you. And you say I had double standards.

Well I think the case was good. But I don't think I've proven that quite as well as I've proven I believed it was good. But you seem to think I've proven neither.

I was under the impression that Spryex had been pushing a case on Zeel/me since before you replaced in...

So your accusation of buddying goes back to me replacing in and running it from the first reread?

No just, the way he brought it up, and then you immediately said "yeah I like Spryex's ideas" (paraphrasing) struck me the wrong way.

I'm not sold on Shy Guy being town, but they -could- definitely be town;however, I still haven't seen any reason why Zeek isn't scum.

So, if we accept Shy Guy is town, we're not getting Zeek from everything I've seen - Which, really, leaves us with a scum group of 4 which I frankly dont buy: Arm/Scruff/Nameless/Firestarter.

Hm. Assuming I were town, which pair do you find more likely a partner for Zeek?

[Adel]

@Shy Guy: your basic set of objection against me seem pretty logical to me. I admit that my actions, from one perspective, do seem scummy. I consider that an unfortunate consequence of what appeared to be the best course for me to take.

This is fair enough as far as it goes. Best course for you to take could be best course for town Adel or best course for scum Adel.

resolved.

regarding the mass tell until day 2 thing: keep in mind that the games was filled with newbies, and I've played this set up before. I wrote this set up. I've been scum in a Deep South game with daytalking. I've been in a 100% day-talking game. I've played in games with really unorganized scum. I really expected that in a game full of inexperienced players, the scum stood a good chance of not communicating well, or getting replaced by a player who didn't pay attention, and getting confused and making the wrong move, only to be exposed by a day 2 massclaim.

I think that even with all new players the scum are somewhat unlikely to make such a mistake. Town, on the other hand,

I think would very likely lynch wrong day 1 if they only got a claim near hammer.

Informed townies are townies that lynch scum.

I disagree.

The information would all be there, but it would become hard for the scum to keep their relationships straight, especially under systematic questioning and being prompted to make lists, and being responsible for their own vote. I believed that the scum should be given every chance to make a mistake.

By doing so, you tried to give town every chance to make a mistake as well; townies might lynch a REALLY scummy player with an OK partner instead of two VERY but not quite REALLY scummy players, because they didn't know they were on the same team until day 2. Maybe they are scum maybe they aren't but it is best to make the best lynch possible day 1, and that involves mass claiming.

with claims only comming late in each wagon day 1 we would be more likely to have a number of strong wagon to look back on day 1. By massclaiming the rest of day one was far less dynamic, leaving us with far less to look at and get information from.

Simplifying the setup early does help the town understand more immediately who has a claimed relationship with whom, but it also keeps things safer for the scum. The information will eventually be there for the town either way, and the relationships between players is impossible to really begin to evaluate until you have a lynch on the books anyways.

I disagree here.

resolved.

The day 1 lynch would (and should) always come down to who the single scummiest player is.

Um why? Why not scummiest aggregate pair??

that approach could also work, once we had two or three strong wagons. Late in a day 1 with no massclaim we could look back at the day and have a conversation about which pair to lynch and why.

In short, I think there is no negative trade-off from claiming day 2 rather than day 1. The accuracy of the day 1 lynch will not be effected, and the chances of the scum making a critical mistake are slightly increased.

I strongly disagree that the accuracy is not effected, and agree that chances of scum making the type of mistake you are suggesting are increased only very slightly. In addition, before mass claim,

lovers might act suspicious of each other to hide that they are lovers.

Then when they claim, there is this apparent contradiction, and we are all bollocksed up.

If everyone has claimed, however, and the scum forget who they have claimed with and act suspicious of them, we have them for sure.

Making the scum commit to one parnter early on, then ceasing mentioning the partners thing might be the best idea possible.

Why would lovers pretend that they were not lovers?

I really don't buy that scum could accidently distance themselves from a partner after a claim.

Gimbo had a disruptive playstyle that pretty impossible to deal with in a game.

Any player can be dealt with. Tell them to do what you want, and if they don't ignore them. Especially in 6 player nightless, which is almost this setup, it is better to deal with a foolish townie than lynch them.

There are players with disruptive playstyles that make it very very hard to keep a productive conversation moving. dcorbe was that way in the first polygamist game, and gimbo was that way in this game.

When it was all said and done, I didn't like or chances of having a productive day 2 if Gimbo was still alive and spamming up the thread. had I known he was going to get banned, I would had more patience for him, or if I thought he was likely to be replaced.

He wrecks the signal:noise ratio, like Korlash. Fuck him, he deserved to die.

Townies deserve to live. You saw that you could clear him.

No really. I convinced myself that by not lynching Gimbo, if Chlseafan was revealed to be town, then Gimbo or I would be the day 2 mislynch leads to a scum win.

Two days is a short period of time, but it felt much much longer than that to me at the time. I don't know why that is.

You've said.

???

Another reason why I listed CH:CF as "cleared": I thought they would be too easy to mislynch if they were innocent, and they could use some defending.

Interesting... scummiest player, ergo defend them?

[/quote]
not scummiest, "least able to defend themselves".

[SpyreX]

@Shy Guy,

IF you are town, and I was to look for a parnter for Zeek, it'd be Nameless/Firestarter. FS and Zeek had some serious parroting going on early day 2, especially in regards to Adel. Maybe if I'm feelin better I'll go see if I can hunt it down though.

[Adel]

this is bringing to light how much of a back seat nameless and firestarter have taken during this day.

[Shy Guy]

Adel, I'd like to hear your thoughts about the first half of my post 783

I think that even with all new players the scum are somewhat unlikely to make such a mistake. Town, on the other hand,

I think would very likely lynch wrong day 1 if they only got a claim near hammer.

Informed townies are townies that lynch scum.

I disagree.

Why?

The information would all be there, but it would become hard for the scum to keep their relationships straight, especially under systematic questioning and being prompted to make lists, and being responsible for their own vote. I believed that the scum should be given every chance to make a mistake.

By doing so, you tried to give town every chance to make a mistake as well; townies might lynch a REALLY scummy player with an OK partner instead of two VERY but not quite REALLY scummy players, because they didn't know they were on the same team until day 2. Maybe they are scum maybe they aren't but it is best to make the best lynch possible day 1, and that involves mass claiming.

with claims only comming late in each wagon day 1 we would be more likely to have a number of strong wagon to look back on day 1. By massclaiming the rest of day one was far less dynamic, leaving us with far less to look at and get information from.

I think there is a point of highly diminishing returns for more information. It is easier to think about 6 pairs of players than 12 individuals. Maybe I am thinking about this all wrong.

The day 1 lynch would (and should) always come down to who the single scummiest player is.

Um why? Why not scummiest aggregate pair??

that approach could also work, once we had two or three strong wagons. Late in a day 1 with no massclaim we could look back at the day and have a conversation about which pair to lynch and why.

This could work just as well if not better with mass claim as well.

In short, I think there is no negative trade-off from claiming day 2 rather than day 1. The accuracy of the day 1 lynch will not be effected, and the chances of the scum making a critical mistake are slightly increased.

I strongly disagree that the accuracy is not effected, and agree that chances of scum making the type of mistake you are suggesting are increased only very slightly. In addition, before mass claim,

lovers might act suspicious of each other to hide that they are lovers.

Then when they claim, there is this apparent contradiction, and we are all bollocksed up.

If everyone has claimed, however, and the scum forget who they have claimed with and act suspicious of them, we have them for sure.

Making the scum commit to one parnter early on, then ceasing mentioning the partners thing might be the best idea possible.

Why would lovers pretend that they were not lovers?

A player might think "so the scum don't realize who the lover pairs are!"

I wouldn't pretend not to be a lover, but I imagine some might. Inexperience and mistake-making works both ways, Adel.

I really don't buy that scum could accidently distance themselves from a partner after a claim.

Why do you not buy this but do buy that scum could accidentally distance before a claim when they've already planned the claim out?

Gimbo had a disruptive playstyle that pretty impossible to deal with in a game.

Any player can be dealt with. Tell them to do what you want, and if they don't ignore them. Especially in 6 player nightless, which is almost this setup, it is better to deal with a foolish townie than lynch them.

There are players with disruptive playstyles that make it very very hard to keep a productive conversation moving. dcorbe was that way in the first polygamist game, and gimbo was that way in this game.

That's fair. Really though, just tell everyone to ignore the player. It can be surprisingly effective.

When it was all said and done, I didn't like or chances of having a productive day 2 if Gimbo was still alive and spamming up the thread. had I known he was going to get banned, I would had more patience for him, or if I thought he was likely to be replaced.

Fair.

He wrecks the signal:noise ratio, like Korlash. Fuck him, he deserved to die.

Townies deserve to live. You saw that you could clear him.

No really. I convinced myself that by not lynching Gimbo, if Chlseafan was revealed to be town, then Gimbo or I would be the day 2 mislynch leads to a scum win.

Hm. Thinking that no one else would buy in even day 2 actually does make some sense... but they'd have had to buy in to lynch Chelseafan in the first place. Adel, why not bring this up before?

Two days is a short period of time, but it felt much much longer than that to me at the time. I don't know why that is.

You've said.

???

I was just stating how you have said earlier in the thread that time passed more slowly for you.

Another reason why I listed CH:CF as "cleared": I thought they would be too easy to mislynch if they were innocent, and they could use some defending.

Interesting... scummiest player, ergo defend them?

not scummiest, "least able to defend themselves".

Why would they be so easy to mislynch?

@Shy Guy,IF you are town, and I was to look for a parnter for Zeek, it'd be Nameless/Firestarter. FS and Zeek had some serious parroting going on early day 2, especially in regards to Adel. Maybe if I'm feelin better I'll go see if I can hunt it down though.

To be fair, I really need to get around to re-evaluating your case on Zeek. But if you could pursue this I'd like to hear your thoughts.

this is bringing to light how much of a back seat nameless and firestarter have taken during this day.

They have, and this echoes a point I've had in the back of my mind.

I tried to suggest this earlier but didn't push it because it would have looked like OMGUS, and to an extent was OMGUS: one or both of them attacked my case about day one while (as far as I can remember) not doing nearly as much to analyze day one themselves. They do seem like they might be intentionally sitting back.

[Adel]

limited on time, 3 mins, but try to respond to this post at least.

@SpyreX: I've reached a conclusion: Shy Guy and FL are town.

Interesting. Correct, but... unexpected.

Why?

1. I have a basic town read on both of them.

Why? Don't you later say in this or your next post you found me scummy?

I think it was an earlier post. Some of the thinks you've done, especially the review where you only focused on my lover and I, and didn't spend any time on CH/CF really don't sit well with me. You and FL are the lesser of three evils, and therefore the best of what I have to go with.

Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.

Well first off, I don't meta, so I don't see how that is relevant. However, you made me think: if I was scum and wanted to randomly lynch someone in this game, I'd have tried to lynch you, I'd have not brought up chenhsi at all. I'd have simply beat you over and over and over the head with your actions near the end of day 1. I think I'd have been fairly successful, especially if in this hypothetical Zeel was not my scum buddy, since he bought in really easily..

does this part require a response?

2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.

Why? Skruffs/armlx and Nameless/Fire seem like they easily could be convinced to lynch me.

I don't like the odds of both of them being town, and lynching you isn't my goal. Both of them seem more scummy to me than you do.

3. By partnering up with them (if possible) and working together we should figure out who is scum with 2 out of 3 odds in our favor.

Hm. I need to think on if I think you are town. I am leaning yes, if for no other reason taht, I think you are wrong, and that if you wanted to mislynch

me

you could have easily done so with Nameless and armlx circling.

I wasn't looking at the problem from the perspective of who I

can

lynch, I was trying to figure out who I

should

lynch. By eliminating one couple I think I am making progress.

{snip}

must say unsurprising that armlx (in a reasonable sounding way) and nameless (in a pretty disappointed sounding scummy ish way) both immediately question your conclusion.

I imagine they are the scum (likive been saying) and that they will try and make you

choose between me/z and them

. If thathappens dont give up like you gave up on chelseafan. assuming I am confident enough you are town to give you that decision . need to think this over.

later.

the part in bold is a little disturbing to me.
Zeek/HP still strike me as hella scummy. Are you thinking that they are more townish than the others?

[Shy Guy]

I think it was an earlier post. Some of the thinks you've done, especially the review where you only focused on my lover and I, and didn't spend any time on CH/CF really don't sit well with me. You and FL are the lesser of three evils, and therefore the best of what I have to go with.

Are you clearing us because you think we are town, or because you think we aren't the most scummy? Why do you say we are the lesser of

three

evils?

Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.

Well first off, I don't meta, so I don't see how that is relevant. However, you made me think: if I was scum and wanted to randomly lynch someone in this game, I'd have tried to lynch you, I'd have not brought up chenhsi at all. I'd have simply beat you over and over and over the head with your actions near the end of day 1. I think I'd have been fairly successful, especially if in this hypothetical Zeel was not my scum buddy, since he bought in really easily..

does this part require a response?

I'm interested in what you think of my analysis of what I could have done were I scum, sure. Also of what you could do if you were scum (e.g. lynch me right now).

2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.

Why? Skruffs/armlx and Nameless/Fire seem like they easily could be convinced to lynch me.

I don't like the odds of both of them being town, and lynching you isn't my goal. Both of them seem more scummy to me than you do.

Well, I am having (which game first) chicken or egg problems here... You say you clear me because we are fucked if I am scum, I say that you wouldn't be fucked, and your response is "yeah but I don't want to lynch you".

Why don't you want to lynch me again?

3. By partnering up with them (if possible) and working together we should figure out who is scum with 2 out of 3 odds in our favor.

Hm. I need to think on if I think you are town. I am leaning yes, if for no other reason taht, I think you are wrong, and that if you wanted to mislynch

me

you could have easily done so with Nameless and armlx circling.

I wasn't looking at the problem from the perspective of who I

can

lynch, I was trying to figure out who I

should

lynch. By eliminating one couple I think I am making progress.

Then how does point 2, that you clarified to armlx as meaning you couldn't make a case stick to me, matter? Why is it a reason for clearing me and FL if you are just looking at who we

should

lynch?

{snip}

must say unsurprising that armlx (in a reasonable sounding way) and nameless (in a pretty disappointed sounding scummy ish way) both immediately question your conclusion.

I imagine they are the scum (likive been saying) and that they will try and make you

choose between me/z and them

. If thathappens dont give up like you gave up on chelseafan. assuming I am confident enough you are town to give you that decision . need to think this over.

later.

the part in bold is a little disturbing to me.
Zeek/HP still strike me as hella scummy. Are you thinking that they are more townish than the others?

I've consistently said this since replacing in. You asking this question gives me a "where the heck have you been?" moment. Your own partner is highly suspicious of a Z+me pairing because of my thoughts about Z.

I am not rigid on him, and admittedly I need to re-examine Z, but right now I feel they are pretty townie.

I want to say right now, if the scum are Nameless+Z and we win, amazing job to all the town at reasoning stuff out and being willing to consider things that weren't what we initially thought.

[Adel]

Adel, I'd like to hear your thoughts about the first half of my post 783

I think that even with all new players the scum are somewhat unlikely to make such a mistake. Town, on the other hand,

I think would very likely lynch wrong day 1 if they only got a claim near hammer.

Informed townies are townies that lynch scum.

I disagree.

Why?

I don't think the odds of a day 1 lynch being accurate are decreased by if a claim only comes at the end of the wagon. If the scummy person who was about to be lynched is partnered with a very townish looking person then the wagon will stop, and a new wagon will start, resulting in more wagons day 1. More wagons ='s more to analyse. If you want a better informed town, then you want more wagons. That is why longer days are generally better than shorter days... and yes, I knew that when I hammered Gimbo. I know I should've tried harder to derail his wagon, but the fucker claimed scum, and I was sick of dealing with him, and I was confident enough that he was scum and Chlseafan was his partner that I took that chance.

The information would all be there, but it would become hard for the scum to keep their relationships straight, especially under systematic questioning and being prompted to make lists, and being responsible for their own vote. I believed that the scum should be given every chance to make a mistake.

By doing so, you tried to give town every chance to make a mistake as well; townies might lynch a REALLY scummy player with an OK partner instead of two VERY but not quite REALLY scummy players, because they didn't know they were on the same team until day 2. Maybe they are scum maybe they aren't but it is best to make the best lynch possible day 1, and that involves mass claiming.

with claims only comming late in each wagon day 1 we would be more likely to have a number of strong wagon to look back on day 1. By massclaiming the rest of day one was far less dynamic, leaving us with far less to look at and get information from.

I think there is a point of highly diminishing returns for more information. It is easier to think about 6 pairs of players than 12 individuals. Maybe I am thinking about this all wrong.

It is easier to think about six sets of relationships than 12, but that simplifying information can come later, on day 2, when it will actually make a difference. Day 1 you can just pursue the scummiest players, and as a byproduct you will generate a lot of information that you can decode later, after the massclaim. With a hectic enough day 1, with multipule wagons, scum will have a chance to get their wires crossed.

The day 1 lynch would (and should) always come down to who the single scummiest player is.

Um why? Why not scummiest aggregate pair??

that approach could also work, once we had two or three strong wagons. Late in a day 1 with no massclaim we could look back at the day and have a conversation about which pair to lynch and why.

This could work just as well if not better with mass claim as well.

when it comes down to choosing between a very late day 1 massclaim and a very early day 2 massclaim, it seems like splitting hairs to me. Chances are that without a massclaim early day 1, a product of multipule wagons would be the outing of all of the pairs anyways. That the exposure of who is a claimed lover with whom comes

after

multipule wagons is the important part. That is where scum can make a mistake.

In short, I think there is no negative trade-off from claiming day 2 rather than day 1. The accuracy of the day 1 lynch will not be effected, and the chances of the scum making a critical mistake are slightly increased.

I strongly disagree that the accuracy is not effected, and agree that chances of scum making the type of mistake you are suggesting are increased only very slightly. In addition, before mass claim,

lovers might act suspicious of each other to hide that they are lovers.

Then when they claim, there is this apparent contradiction, and we are all bollocksed up.

If everyone has claimed, however, and the scum forget who they have claimed with and act suspicious of them, we have them for sure.

Making the scum commit to one parnter early on, then ceasing mentioning the partners thing might be the best idea possible.

Why would lovers pretend that they were not lovers?

A player might think "so the scum don't realize who the lover pairs are!"

I wouldn't pretend not to be a lover, but I imagine some might. Inexperience and mistake-making works both ways, Adel.

actually, I see now that each player should be forced to breadcrumb who they are a lover with an early post, and then all of the breadcrumbs should be exposed either very late on day 1, or immediately on day 2.

I really don't buy that scum could accidently distance themselves from a partner after a claim.

Why do you not buy this but do buy that scum could accidentally distance before a claim when they've already planned the claim out?

because they won't be reminded of who they are partnered with in every post they are mentioned in every time they do a reread. That kind of repetition is how stuff gets very well memorized.

Gimbo had a disruptive playstyle that pretty impossible to deal with in a game.

Any player can be dealt with. Tell them to do what you want, and if they don't ignore them. Especially in 6 player nightless, which is almost this setup, it is better to deal with a foolish townie than lynch them.

There are players with disruptive playstyles that make it very very hard to keep a productive conversation moving. dcorbe was that way in the first polygamist game, and gimbo was that way in this game.

That's fair. Really though, just tell everyone to ignore the player. It can be surprisingly effective.

do you think that would've worked with Gimbo? or the self-voting dcorbe in polygamist 1?

When it was all said and done, I didn't like or chances of having a productive day 2 if Gimbo was still alive and spamming up the thread. had I known he was going to get banned, I would had more patience for him, or if I thought he was likely to be replaced.

Fair.

He wrecks the signal:noise ratio, like Korlash. Fuck him, he deserved to die.

Townies deserve to live. You saw that you could clear him.

No really. I convinced myself that by not lynching Gimbo, if Chlseafan was revealed to be town, then Gimbo or I would be the day 2 mislynch leads to a scum win.

Hm. Thinking that no one else would buy in even day 2 actually does make some sense... but they'd have had to buy in to lynch Chelseafan in the first place. Adel, why not bring this up before?

I have! The way I saw it, all of the work that ti would take to save Gimbo (of all undeserving people) would probably either not save him anyway, or only get him or me lynched day 2, or (more likely) he was scum with Chelseafan anyways and it wouldn't matter which of the two we lynched.

Two days is a short period of time, but it felt much much longer than that to me at the time. I don't know why that is.

You've said.

???

I was just stating how you have said earlier in the thread that time passed more slowly for you.

well I don't know why that is.

Another reason why I listed CH:CF as "cleared": I thought they would be too easy to mislynch if they were innocent, and they could use some defending.

Interesting... scummiest player, ergo defend them?

not scummiest, "least able to defend themselves".

Why would they be so easy to mislynch?

seriously? chenshi has "lynch me" written on his forehead in big red letters. Have you looked though his posts in other games? He gets lynched a lot. Chelseafan didn't strike me as a mafia player with an especially good defensive game.

this is bringing to light how much of a back seat nameless and firestarter have taken during this day.

They have, and this echoes a point I've had in the back of my mind.

I tried to suggest this earlier but didn't push it because it would have looked like OMGUS, and to an extent was OMGUS: one or both of them attacked my case about day one while (as far as I can remember) not doing nearly as much to analyze day one themselves. They do seem like they might be intentionally sitting back.

I can't remember why or when right now, but it occured to me earlier in the game that firestarter was buddying up to me. I didn't want to have to reread this game, damnit.