Night Watch Open 95 - Game Over before 703

[camn]

Camn im confused, who do you think is scummiest?

Now understand this.. I think EVERYONE is scum.
But my scummiest? these. Though I by no means am calling for their lynch at this time.

Xtoxm. - for saying "I don't like this wagon". I see scum say that all. the. time. To me.... attacking the wagon seems weird. Why not defend the person? Or attack the people ON the wagon? It always reeks of trying to look town. I know, "too townie" is not a scumtell.. but still.
ortolan - as discussed.
Panda Stomper - I also know that Lurking is a null-tell.. but I am pretty firmly in the Nuke-All-Lurkers camp. I know it's wrong, but it feels so good.

Now your turn, fatchic! Who, and why?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

BrraaAAAiinssSsss BrRRraaaAAIINNSSssss

[icemanE]

Specifically that the one you chose hasn't been valid in any games I have played. Others in that list also are irrelevant now. The list was made in 2004 and players have adapted over the course of the last 4 years.

You're correct there - as a general trend, scum have probably become more aware of what not to do over the years based at least in part on what the wiki says - they can see what they're not expected to do. However, from my experience, scum do tend to slip nicely and easily onto a wagon while it's forming more often than they start their own wagons. Is this to say that every time someone joins a wagon third or fourth, they're automatically scum? No. In fact, it's not even scummy much of the time. However, when two players join a wagon third and fourth and provide no substantive reasons for doing so... that IS scummy.

I was seeing if your response would match my assumption of what your response would be. It did.

Might I ask where this assumption came from? PS - I've only seen a player successfully pull off a move like this once - it was vollkan in a game that's currently ongoing, so I can't get too into the details, but he self-voted to draw attention to himself - I pressed him incredibly hard for it, and he claimed that was his whole reason for self-voting, to get people to press him. I wound up being lynched for it - I was a townie. Granted, there were many other reasons I was lynched - my flavor was misleading in that game - but what I'm saying is, challenging someone for self-voting OR for voting without reason is NOT something only scum do, so your experiment (and vollkan's) are flawed in nature.

You are playing by the textbook, so I figured I would do something else which is mentioned on the page and I don't agree with. Now I need to decide (as afatchic kind of pointed out) if you are an eager townie assuming the wiki tells are true and thinking you are on to something, or scum using an appeal to authority to plant seeds of suspicion. If I decide you are probably townie, then I can look at how other people responded to our interactions.

I think if you read a few of my games you'll quickly realize that I'm anything but a textbook player. Check out high school mafia or Meatworldish mafia if you feel like you need proof of that. I only reference and quote the wiki when I see something that makes me think "Oh yeah, that's in the wiki", or when it just makes more sense to quote it than not.

@ Fat - Yeah, buddying up is definitely common scum. If that's what YOU think is happening here, I'm assuming your view is also that bio is the scum and you're the townie. Is that the case, or are you simply saying it happens?

TCS - his reasoning in post 192 are pretty weak. It looks like pretty lazy justification for what he's done over the course of the game.

Another lazy player (at the moment, anyways): camn, with her list of "I think everyone is scum". 200 makes better sense of it, but the post where she copied and pasted everyone's name into her scummiest list just seems like a very lazy way to get out of actually doing any scumhunting. It's not until she's challenged that she actually reasons it out.

At the moment I'm going to

unvote

as I feel that fat has played well and brought up good points - that, and I still can't see anything anti-town or pro-scum about the hypo plan. I'm going to switch over to

vote: bio

for that nonsense scheme he cooked up.

[StrangerCoug]

Camn im confused, who do you think is scummiest?

Now understand this.. I think EVERYONE is scum.

Awfully paranoid thinking, but given that nobody's cleared...

I also know that Lurking is a null-tell.. but I am pretty firmly in the Nuke-All-Lurkers camp. I know it's wrong, but it feels so good.

If you know it's wrong, then why do you do it?

Minor FoS: camn

[bionicchop2]

Specifically that the one you chose hasn't been valid in any games I have played. Others in that list also are irrelevant now. The list was made in 2004 and players have adapted over the course of the last 4 years.

You're correct there - as a general trend, scum have probably become more aware of what not to do over the years based at least in part on what the wiki says - they can see what they're not expected to do. However, from my experience, scum do tend to slip nicely and easily onto a wagon while it's forming more often than they start their own wagons. Is this to say that every time someone joins a wagon third or fourth, they're automatically scum? No. In fact, it's not even scummy much of the time. However, when two players join a wagon third and fourth and provide no substantive reasons for doing so... that IS scummy.

So, in the same breathe you admit the tell is not reliable, yet hold firm that in this case it is? That is kind of a relativist fallacy there. You think I slipped when I voted in the 4th spot? What advantage did I gain by jumping in the 4th spot?

I was seeing if your response would match my assumption of what your response would be. It did.

Might I ask where this assumption came from?

Since you were pulling directly from unreliable tells, I assumed you would try to say my vote was OMGUS (even though you never even voted for me).

PS - I've only seen a player successfully pull off a move like this once - it was vollkan in a game that's currently ongoing, so I can't get too into the details, but he self-voted to draw attention to himself - I pressed him incredibly hard for it, and he claimed that was his whole reason for self-voting, to get people to press him. I wound up being lynched for it - I was a townie. Granted, there were many other reasons I was lynched - my flavor was misleading in that game - but what I'm saying is, challenging someone for self-voting OR for voting without reason is NOT something only scum do, so your experiment (and vollkan's) are flawed in nature.

You contradict yourself. You say it was successful, but it was also flawed. I don't see how it was 'successful' if it lead to a lynch of a town player and I also don't see how you can relate self-voting to bandwagoning.

You are playing by the textbook, so I figured I would do something else which is mentioned on the page and I don't agree with. Now I need to decide (as afatchic kind of pointed out) if you are an eager townie assuming the wiki tells are true and thinking you are on to something, or scum using an appeal to authority to plant seeds of suspicion. If I decide you are probably townie, then I can look at how other people responded to our interactions.

I think if you read a few of my games you'll quickly realize that I'm anything but a textbook player. Check out high school mafia or Meatworldish mafia if you feel like you need proof of that. I only reference and quote the wiki when I see something that makes me think "Oh yeah, that's in the wiki", or when it just makes more sense to quote it than not.

I didn't say you were a textbook player, but you are playing by the textbook in this game. You are using information which is not reliable and applying it to justify a FoS/vote.

@ Fat - Yeah, buddying up is definitely common scum. If that's what YOU think is happening here, I'm assuming your view is also that bio is the scum and you're the townie. Is that the case, or are you simply saying it happens?

I 'buddied up' to the idea. I couldn't care less whose name was attached to it. The idea was good. Both scum and town can agree to a pro-town idea.

TCS - his reasoning in post 192 are pretty weak. It looks like pretty lazy justification for what he's done over the course of the game.

Please identify what I have done 'over the course of the game' so I can respond to it.

At the moment I'm going to

unvote

as I feel that fat has played well and brought up good points - that, and I still can't see anything anti-town or pro-scum about the hypo plan. I'm going to switch over to

vote: bio

for that nonsense scheme he cooked up.

Remember when you added OMGUS to your short list of scummy actions I did? This is where pot meets kettle and admits to him that OMGUS is just a red herring. Since all of your few reasons listed why I am scum are null tells, your vote is left with only my vote preceding it and no valid reason associated.

[Xtoxm]

Not liking Ice's case. Think it does look a bit scum motivated.

Still like my vote though, it's not random. To clarify, It is not in place for the reasons I origally stated.

[icemanE]

So, in the same breathe you admit the tell is not reliable, yet hold firm that in this case it is? That is kind of a relativist fallacy there.

No, that's inaccurate.

You think I slipped when I voted in the 4th spot? What advantage did I gain by jumping in the 4th spot?

An easily joined wagon. You didn't start it, so you didn't need a case - you didn't second it, so you didn't have to explain why you agree or disagree - and you didn't finish it. You're a face in the crowd, which is awfully nice for scum.

Since you were pulling directly from unreliable tells, I assumed you would try to say my vote was OMGUS (even though you never even voted for me).

Wait - so your master plan for catching scum was based on someone calling you out for what appeared to be an OMGUS vote? Wow, that's foolproof!

You contradict yourself. You say it was successful, but it was also flawed. I don't see how it was 'successful' if it lead to a lynch of a town player and I also don't see how you can relate self-voting to bandwagoning.

He

succeeded

in his aim, which was to get me lynched. I didn't relate self-voting and bandwagoning - I said the two of you set up the same trap. You both did something to appear scummy and then called people out for mentioning it.

I didn't say you were a textbook player, but you are playing by the textbook in this game. You are using information which is not reliable and applying it to justify a FoS/vote.

Typically when people say you're doing things by the textbook, they mean you're doing precisely the right thing as ordered.

Please identify what I have done 'over the course of the game' so I can respond to it.

That was addressed to TCS, hence the paragraph begins with: TCS -.

I 'buddied up' to the idea. I couldn't care less whose name was attached to it. The idea was good. Both scum and town can agree to a pro-town idea.

That was addressed to fat, hence the paragraph beings with: @Fat.

Remember when you added OMGUS to your short list of scummy actions I did? This is where pot meets kettle and admits to him that OMGUS is just a red herring. Since all of your few reasons listed why I am scum are null tells, your vote is left with only my vote preceding it and no valid reason associated.

First off, when I originally voted fat, I had a whole paragraph about why I was doing it, and it ended with this:

So, with that in mind, I'm going to unvote - vote: afatchic and FoS: bio while I do a readthrough (and perhaps a PBPA, if I find it necessary) on the two of them.

If I could have just voted for both of you, I would have. As it were, if you read the paragraph you'll realize I said no more about fat than I did about you - my reasons for both of you were exactly the same, and as such my vote and FoS were interchangeable.

And what I said weren't nulltells. Your plan is just stupid, if nothing else, it yields at very best a nulltell, which is "you accused me of being scummy for doing something easily interpretable as scummy. You must be scum".

Come on bio, get some sense.

[ortolan]

Camn im confused, who do you think is scummiest?

Now understand this.. I think EVERYONE is scum.
But my scummiest? these. Though I by no means am calling for their lynch at this time.

Xtoxm. - for saying "I don't like this wagon". I see scum say that all. the. time. To me.... attacking the wagon seems weird. Why not defend the person? Or attack the people ON the wagon? It always reeks of trying to look town. I know, "too townie" is not a scumtell.. but still.
ortolan - as discussed.
Panda Stomper - I also know that Lurking is a null-tell.. but I am pretty firmly in the Nuke-All-Lurkers camp. I know it's wrong, but it feels so good.

Now your turn, fatchic! Who, and why?

camn, would you mind explaining how this relates to your previously posted list (195)?

I've only seen a player successfully pull off a move like this once - it was vollkan in a game that's currently ongoing, so I can't get too into the details, but he self-voted to draw attention to himself

He just did that in a game of mine also, lol

I would normally have thought the ploy of getting on the bandwagon and then saying it was a trap was kind of a really dodgy post-hoc justification but it seems relatively well argued in this instance.

I still can't see anything anti-town or pro-scum about the hypo plan.

I think it's on the whole pro-town. The only bad possibility that can come from it is that scum see enough people who said they hid behind them on previous nights (i.e. lying) and then can work out who the hider is to get a double kill. I would hope the watcher would be involved if that occurred however.

Not liking Ice's case. Think it does look a bit scum motivated.

Still like my vote though, it's not random. To clarify, It is not in place for the reasons I origally stated.

Fine, I'll see where this goes.

Vote: Crazy

[camn]

camn, would you mind explaining how this relates to your previously posted list (195)?

I think everyone is scum right now. EVERYONE. that is how I play.
BUT... throwing out your top 3 is a good way to get conversation going. You should try it, too.

If you know it's wrong, then why do you do it?

It's because I hate lurkers more than I hate my own life. They wreck the game. I think in a Meta-sense it is totally worth it to lynch a few townie-lurkers in order to discourage lurking in general.
In TWO of my recent games the scum have lurked their way to victory because we have gotten SOFT!
RRR! Now I am all worked up!

VOTE PANDA STOMPER!!!

dieLurkersdie!!

[bionicchop2]

So, in the same breathe you admit the tell is not reliable, yet hold firm that in this case it is? That is kind of a relativist fallacy there.

No, that's inaccurate.

Please identify how it is inaccurate. Somebody has to be in the 3rd and 4th spot. If previously it had been scum a large number of times and players adapt as they become aware of the wiki, then gradually the number of scum in those spots would reduce. I think 4 years is enough for that change to be significant. Now, the fact I knew exactly where to find the tell you mentioned without you linking the wiki and which section it is would imply I have a fairly decent knowledge of the wiki contents.

You think I slipped when I voted in the 4th spot? What advantage did I gain by jumping in the 4th spot?

An easily joined wagon. You didn't start it, so you didn't need a case - you didn't second it, so you didn't have to explain why you agree or disagree - and you didn't finish it. You're a face in the crowd, which is awfully nice for scum.

So if a townie was lynched and I was in the 2nd spot without a reason to vote, it would be ok? I also can't really be a face in the crowd unless the wagon is completed behind me culminating in a lynch. As it stood, I was just dangling off the end of a wagon as plain as day.

Since you were pulling directly from unreliable tells, I assumed you would try to say my vote was OMGUS (even though you never even voted for me).

Wait - so your master plan for catching scum was based on someone calling you out for what appeared to be an OMGUS vote? Wow, that's foolproof!

I don't have a master plan. I was looking for a good starting point. It started with your initial reaction and continues with our discussion. I am sure mockery of others (you seem to include a nice jab at me in every post) is a less effective form of scum hunting than whatever method I choose.

You contradict yourself. You say it was successful, but it was also flawed. I don't see how it was 'successful' if it lead to a lynch of a town player and I also don't see how you can relate self-voting to bandwagoning.

He succeeded in his aim, which was to get me lynched. I didn't relate self-voting and bandwagoning - I said the two of you set up the same trap. You both did something to appear scummy and then called people out for mentioning it.

If his aim was to get a townie lynched, then he is scum. If his aim was to find someone suspicious and you acted suspicious, then it is more a case of you being unsuccessful at being town.

I didn't say you were a textbook player, but you are playing by the textbook in this game. You are using information which is not reliable and applying it to justify a FoS/vote.

Typically when people say you're doing things by the textbook, they mean you're doing precisely the right thing as ordered.

Yes. In this game you are/were. Other games don't matter. Your general play across the site may not be textbook, but that is where you were pulling your scum tells from in this game.

I 'buddied up' to the idea. I couldn't care less whose name was attached to it. The idea was good. Both scum and town can agree to a pro-town idea.

That was addressed to fat, hence the paragraph beings with: @Fat.

I misread the TCS one, but this one was about me - even if directed to somebody else.

First off, when I originally voted fat, I had a whole paragraph about why I was doing it, and it ended with this:

So, with that in mind, I'm going to unvote - vote: afatchic and FoS: bio while I do a readthrough (and perhaps a PBPA, if I find it necessary) on the two of them.

If I could have just voted for both of you, I would have. As it were, if you read the paragraph you'll realize I said no more about fat than I did about you - my reasons for both of you were exactly the same, and as such my vote and FoS were interchangeable.

And my vote on you originated in post 76 which had my initial reasons for voting you. Those reasons do not go away because I unvoted for a short period of time. All I am doing is showing you the 'OMGUS' tag you chose to put on me is inaccurate and misleading.

And what I said weren't nulltells.

If both scum and town are equally likely to do something, then it is by definition a null tell. You have accused me of 2 things - voting 4th and OMGUS. For every 1 time you see scum do this (proven scum, not me who you just accuse of being scum) I will find multiple town players who have done the same.

Your plan is just stupid, if nothing else, it yields at very best a nulltell, which is "you accused me of being scummy for doing something easily interpretable as scummy. You must be scum".

Replace 'easily interpretable' with 'easily frameable' and you might be close. The real information comes once we get this deep into the conversation and you can find no additional reasons for your vote (and preceding FOS) outside of the antiquated scum tell you started with.

Come on bio, get some sense.

How does me having sense play into this (or do you just choose to try and shift my perceived abilities into the negative range so people will dismiss my arguments - seems to be common in your posts)? If you think I have no sense and you are town, then I have to be town making poor choices. If I was scum and you were town, I would be knowingly trying to get a town player lynched and be perfectly sensible in doing such.

[bionicchop2]

Lurker comment (as you can see from my sig, I have an opinion on them).

If you are going to vote one, it should be Crazy since he is at least active on the site. Panda made his last post on the site in this game and only posted 7 times on the site as a whole (6 in this game). He isn't 'lurking', he just obviously is not playing mafia on this site.

[ortolan]

I agree with bionicchop2 in that someone *has* to occupy the third and fourth votes on a bandwagon (assuming there are 4+ votes). I don't think in this case it's sufficient to judge that they're not town specifically (we don't know that TCS is actually town, for one).

[orangepenguin]

I prefer replacing over lal, especially in cases like Panda, where he obviously just left the site..instead of..active lurking.

[camn]

YOu are probably right, bionic.

I don't really have time to check when people's login dates were and such. I just react in fury to any lurking.

I would gladly lynch any lurker...
though orange.. I like replacing... especially, like, NOW.. early in the game.. but late in the game it just sucks.. and all lurkers must die.

unvote

Mod.. can we prod them?

[ortolan]

It's not that late in the game, we could probably still get a replacement for him if needed...

[afatchic]

icemanE- yes i was implying him "buddying up" to me. but i wouldn't try a case on that right now, it seems to early to tell. but there def. a few times where he seems to have just followed me. just something to keep in mind and watch as the game goes on.

Camn that has to be one of the more scummy comments i have seen today about lynching lurkers. that is not how you should approach the situation. only 9 pages in and easy reading, get replacements. if they continue to active lurk ( post exactly every 3 days with no content and one line long) then consider lynching them, but right now worry about the active and let the mod do his job.

HOS CAMN.

sorry in advance for the double post... but more coming.

[ortolan]

I would like to hear from Crazy.

[afatchic]

heres my first PBPA of the game... and OP gets the honors,
1) confirm
2) defends crazy in RV
3)sarcastic random vote.
4) another sarcastic post
5) hider claim...
6) not really sure, guess ill have to go back and read in context.
7)talks about wiki, still added nothing to the game.
8)says he doesn't like TCS coment... so instead of pressuring, he makes a joke about it. i have seen this done a lot by scum.
9)ERWOP
10)uh oh... actually questions, TCS, but thats because TCS says OP is scum.
11) more game strategy.

So all in all, we are nearly ten pages in and Orangepenguin has added no useful content to the game. i even asked him what his thoughts were, and he adds a one liner about not lynching lurkers.

OP who are your top three suspects and why?

UNVOTE VOTE Orangepenguin

[ortolan]

In a quick reread I noticed that they were the two major proponents of the hypoclaim plan. I'm trying to think of a possible scum motivation for suggesting this plan. It is ostensibly protown, from what I can tell. However, they had N1 to discuss how they'd proceed. I will mull it over.

that, and I still can't see anything anti-town or pro-scum about the hypo plan.

What made you modify your opinion of the hypoclaim plan between these two posts?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

fos:camn

for attempting to distract us with lurker-hunting just when we are finally starting to work with some content.

Also,

vote:bionicchip2

, because I think Iceman makes several good points... I especially liked "so your master plan was to catch whoever accused you of OMGUS?"

We must remember that if we consider the current meta to be ahead of the wiki because of common reference to the wiki, it is the duty of town not to do things on the wiki... right?

[Crazy]

Whoops, I forgot about this game... I'm at school right now, so I can't exactly do anything, but later tonight I'll look into this game.

[Crazy]

(And yes, I was prodded.)

[bionicchop2]

Also,

vote:bionicchip2

, because I think Iceman makes several good points... I especially liked "so your master plan was to catch whoever accused you of OMGUS?"

Please identify all 'several' of his good points.

We must remember that if we consider the current meta to be ahead of the wiki because of common reference to the wiki, it is the duty of town not to do things on the wiki... right?

wrong. It is the duty of town to look for scum based on current meta and their understanding of the individuals involved instead of trying to apply universal scum tells. Iceman is modding a game I am playing. He knows my alignment there and can easily get a grasp of how I play.

[StrangerCoug]

FoS: ortolan

for not giving reasons for his vote, and it comes off to me as if it was done out of appeasement.

[camn]

I like replacing... especially, like, NOW.. early in the game.. but late in the game it just sucks..

It was just a moment of fury.. and StrangerCoug provoked me!

Sorry about that. It WAS distracting.