Mini 703 - A Roccisi Autumn - Over

[TDC]

Vote Count

Brain of Wombat (3): tubby216, Rage, chuckrock
Darkdude (3): Ectomancer, ThAdmiral, Korts
Rage (1): Brain of Wombat

Not voting (3): IH, Lionheart, darkdude

[IH]

So still haven't caught up. ETA, tomorrow.

[ThAdmiral]

haven't been able to get through some of the big posts in the last page. Will read later and then give comments.

[Rage]

1) This question is aimed at Ectomancer and Korts. Why did you discuss the possibility of a vig-kill if neither of you wanted to set up a claim or out the killer? What did both of you wish to achieve by talking about it?

- I agree with darkdude that discussion of the possible vig-kill makes sense if it leads to something of the Town's interest (possibly a claim or outing the killer, if it made the most sense to believe it was scum) and although the opinions heard are noteworthy, they aren't going to be discussed by everyone, and therefore there isn't an easy way of finding out if the killer (again, if it exists) is scum or town aligned, let alone who it is.

2) I don't think darkdude was asked or requesting for someone to breadcrumb, and I do believe that the act of asking for someone to breadcrumb is anti-town because it defeats the purpose of doing it in the first place. Breadcrumbing, as I understand it, is hinting at something before you plan on releasing it all or "playing all your cards at once". If someone, who has admitted not to have what he is asking someone to breadcrumb,

3)

Darkdude

, how can you be 90% sure that an investigation result exists in the game? How does Ectomancer saying he's 99% sure you are wrong influence your thinking of the possibility of an investigation result?

4)

Ectomancer

, how can you be 99% sure that an investigation result does not exist in the game? How does darkdude saying he's 90% sure you are wrong, in a rebuttal to you saying you are 99% sure, influence your thinking?

- I personally think that it's more plausible if the investigation result doesn't exist, and not just because Ectomancer is 9% more sure than darkdude. I don't believe either of their percentages because it doesn't make much sense to me for either to believe in something so hard without being 100% sure, unless one is hiding something, and the fact that both have come out and said opposing thoughts about this confuses me.

I thought that darkdude might have been hiding the investigation himself for reasons already stated, and this post, right after Ectomancer's 99% post:

My guess (99%) is that there is no investigation result. Puta made no effort to play this game or any other that I know of. You can meta that. So, no, I dont think DarkDude or anyone else has a result to reveal (not a real one anyhow)

I'm 90% sure there is a result. Puta is a bad player in terms of getting his points across and working for town during the day, but he is not inactive. I do not think he would skip his Night 0 action.

However, my theory has been denied by darkdude.

Therefore, I don't see any pro-town reason for bringing up discussion about breadcrumbing, because no matter what the outcome (to do it or to not to) everyone is going to be on the look out for something. And, I think that defeats the purpose of breadcrumbing entirely, and do not approve of breadcrumbing discussion in-game. I find myself agreeing with the following quote.

Also, a couple of other things:

I'm also going to do a reread of all of Puta's posts to see if he left any hints/clues as to who he investigated and it's result.

No use. He was amnesiac cop. Which reminds me...

It seems like we should have someone here with his Night 0 result, unless it was Macavity. Needless to say, if it is scum, the person should come out immediately. But what is optimal move if result is town? I was just about to write "don't say anything unless that player is about to be lynched", but then remembered that this information may get lost if the player dies before saying it... so maybe breadcrumb first, and then reveal it when player number in the game lowers to have a large enough impact?

Unfortunately, there's two problems with this. One, now that you suggested breadcrumbing, it won't work most likely, due to multiple factors (scum breadcrumbing, scum searching for other breadcrumbs etc.). Two, we don't know when the player with the investigation result dies, because their revealed role wouldn't devulge that information. Thus it would be a pretty safe claim for scum to claim the investigation results. I'd treat such a breadcrumb/result with extreme scepticism.

5) Shouldn't we have more than half of the Town's input on the case on darkdude and my case on Brain of Wombat soon?

@

Chuckrock

, I'm waiting for your response to post #313.
@

Tubby216

, has anything changed how strong you think your vote on Brain of Wombat is, and what is your opinion of the case on Darkdude now? You said that Brain of Wombat seems scummier than darkdude, why is that?
@

Lionhart

, are you here?

IH needs to catch up, Brain of Wombat needs to respond and Lionhart is unaccounted for. I guess we'll just have to wait and see if anything perks their interests.

6) @

Korts

I agree with Ecto here on darkdude. darkdude has shown scum motivation in his inquiries, and Rage jumped to his defense with a dissection of the "likeliest" possibilities, and going into a contradiction in his expressed stance on a particular point. In the event of darkdude turning scum, Rage deserves considerable pressure.

First, I deserve pressure either way. If he flips Town I should be pressured for defending him, as you say, and if he flips Scum I should be pressured for 'standing up for him'. I know the risk I took putting my opinion out there, and if anything I should be pressured now before darkdude is lynched to eliminate some bias. That's assuming he will be lynched today and no other information comes up in between.

Secondly, I don't think I've jumped up to darkdude's aid. In the following quote Ectomancer, who started this, expressed that I should switch my vote to his case, which at its roots is an invitation to get involved with the case.

Your case is weak next to mine Rage. Vote Darkdude. He is scum. He attempts to blatantly manipulate the conversation to only include the part he finds relevant. Tries to portray the gun inventor discussion as revealing player intentions, yet asks for a breadcrumb from the recipient of the cop investigation.

Also, defending implies that I'm trying to protect him from being lynched. I am not trying to defend him, I'm trying to sort out the discrepancies I think I see in and against the case. I'm not doing a very good job, but at least I'm willing to let others to correct me.

I have prodded him three posts ago.
I also had a vote count two posts before you requested it.

You really should start reading my posts

I feel so silly. The vote count should've been obvious, and I misread who you were prodding, thinking it was Tarballs.

[tubby216]

@

Tubby216

, has anything changed how strong you think your vote on Brain of Wombat is, and what is your opinion of the case on Darkdude now? You said that Brain of Wombat seems scummier than darkdude, why is that?.

thats easy

1) the case on BoW is based off of BoW's gameplay and his actions where as the case on Darkdude is based off of his flawed game theory,
2) when pressured or a wagon started on BoW he goes AWOL and doesn't respond, i don't remeber seeing any v/la statements so to me its safe to assume he feels trapt and is staying away till the heat dies down and another wagon can be started,

so yah there is my two responses to your question

but it is possible they are scum togehter and both you and ecto are right? i mean darkdude could be trying to draw atrtention away from BoW and onto himself because he is secure in his defense were as BoW being noobish may not have the same saving skills,,, does that make sense??

[Ectomancer]

1) This question is aimed at Ectomancer and Korts. Why did you discuss the possibility of a vig-kill if neither of you wanted to set up a claim or out the killer? What did both of you wish to achieve by talking about it?

Did you know that with a possibility of 2 guns out there (whoever has them), plus a scum kill at night, that if we lynch town today, both guns are used on town (not far fetched if 1 or 2 guns went to scum), and then scum does their kill on town, we lose in end game tomorrow? That's assuming 3 scum in a 12 player game.
I think it's a topic that needs to be discussed, with possiblities put into people's heads so that even if we dont know where the snake is, we might know what it could look like before it gets a chance to bite us.

4)

Ectomancer

, how can you be 99% sure that an investigation result does not exist in the game? How does darkdude saying he's 90% sure you are wrong, in a rebuttal to you saying you are 99% sure, influence your thinking?

That's my read on Puta after being in 2 games with him. It's my opinion that all he wanted was to disrupt the game, and wouldnt have bothered with something like sending in investigations or anything to do with actually playing the game. Puta was a troll.
That 1% means that Im not Omniscient.
I think DarkDude is scum, so that 90% rebuttal didnt mean anything to me.

Your case is weak next to mine Rage. Vote Darkdude. He is scum. He attempts to blatantly manipulate the conversation to only include the part he finds relevant. Tries to portray the gun inventor discussion as revealing player intentions, yet asks for a breadcrumb from the recipient of the cop investigation.

Also, defending implies that I'm trying to protect him from being lynched. I am not trying to defend him, I'm trying to sort out the discrepancies I think I see in and against the case. I'm not doing a very good job, but at least I'm willing to let others to correct me.

I didnt say anything about you trying to protect DarkDude from being lynched. I'm telling you that my scumpenis is bigger than your scumpenis, so come join my wagon. If you wanted to criticize me for this statement, it would be that this could be seen as a proxy defense of BoW.

[Ectomancer]

jacked up the quote tags

[Rage]

@

Ectomancer

, for that last part in your post I only quoted you. The text under it was addressed to Korts.

[Ectomancer]

Oh ok. Well, mine is still bigger

[tubby216]

Oh ok. Well, mine is still bigger

methinks there is a pissing contest starting lolz

oh i seriously lol'd the scum penis bit

[darkdude]

Darkdude, how can you be 90% sure that an investigation result exists in the game? How does Ectomancer saying he's 99% sure you are wrong influence your thinking of the possibility of an investigation result?

Because like I said, this was night start, so everyone who signed up and not away should have been motivated enough not to miss a night action. Puta may not be productive, but he's certainly not inactive. Unless he really wanted to disrupt games, he would have sent in his first night action.

I have no idea about Puta's meta though. I don't know about his other games, didn't search for them (since TDC did not want us to refer to ongoing games), and have no idea who Gimbo is (the name which Korts said Puta was a smurf of).

Judging from what I have seen myself, he didn't just roll over and die, and played at least with enough effort to make it seem certain that given the chance, he would have submitted a night action.

[ThAdmiral]

hey i'm back everyone.

My position before I continue is that there's much more to be learned from a Brain of Wombat lynch than a Darkdude lynch.

ugh, information lynches.

By the way I've reread the darkdude case, and I've gone off it.
It's the question mark. I believe darkdude when he says he was truly asking whether that was the best course of action (for the record it clearly wasn't). So

unvote

.
As much as I wanted to believe we had "caught" scum, I don't think we have. He may turn out to be scum, but I don't think the argument on him now is valid.

[TDC]

Prodding chuckrock.
Giving Brain of Wombat/Lionheart one more day to pick up his prod/role.

[Ectomancer]

By the way I've reread the darkdude case, and I've gone off it. It's the question mark. I believe darkdude when he says he was truly asking whether that was the best course of action (for the record it clearly wasn't). So

unvote

.
As much as I wanted to believe we had "caught" scum, I don't think we have. He may turn out to be scum, but I don't think the argument on him now is valid.

You know that is only the half of it. In ordinary circumstances you might give him the benefit of the doubt if we were only looking at that paragraph. The problem arises when he is encouraging discussion on one topic, and then flat out asking "Why are we even talking about it?" on a parallel topic. ie Dead power roles and what that mean for us.
Well, why is he asking for someone with information to breadcrumb, thus exposing themselves, and then telling them to hold that information until later? (oh sorry, it was a 'suggestion', oh, I mean a 'suggestion to town for their input')

This isn't a single sentence or paragraph. This is methodical encouragement of dicussion in one area, coupled with an anti-town suggestion, followed by the discouragement of discussion in the same topical area (night results) for no apparent reason other than Darkdude doesnt see why we should talk about it?

What the hell? Giving Darkdude the benefit of a double standard? Give him a pass on discouraging conversation because he didn't see the point in talking about it, but then give him another pass for an anti-town suggestion because he was trying to encourage conversation? You don't see the hypocrisy in doing that?

[darkdude]

The problem arises when he is encouraging discussion on one topic, and then flat out asking "Why are we even talking about it?" on a parallel topic.

Those two actions of mine were unrelated. They each had their own independent reasons, if you read my posts properly.

It would only be scummy if my reasoning for one or both actions doesn't make sense. If it makes sense to discourage vig discussion AND discuss what to do with the investigation result, then it is not scummy.

So what makes you stay on my case? From what I have read you do not think discussing vig is that useful either (IIRC it was denied when I assumed you did). Do you really think that we should not discuss what the person with the investigation result should do?

For example, if Rage was indeed correct and I had an investigation, right now I would be unable to make the optimal move because I don't know what to do. I don't see how anyone could be okay with that. This is a clear opportunity to increase our chances of winning, in contrast to the unpromising vig discussion.

Now, if there's no more problems on why I asked this, can we get back to the real question? What should one do if one has the investigation result now? Wait or reveal sometime today?

[chuckrock]

Well, I got the old your not posting. The thing is I haven't been convinced on BOW. More so, his absence fortifies my suspicions.


Keeping things the same.

[TDC]

Searching replacements for Brain of Wombat and Lionheart.

[darkdude]

Oh noez. Is this game gonna die?

[Lionheart]

Sorry Hope I didn't miss anything was a little busy Wanted to get this in before lurking became an issue

[TDC]

Adel replaces Brain of Wombat.
Lionheart has the benefit of the doubt for now.
Prodding Korts.

[Korts]

Sorry about that. Had some other stuff going. I still stand by my opinion that darkdude is the lynch.

[ThAdmiral]

good replace with adel.

[Adel]

hello everyone.

unvote

it will take me at least 7 days to get a good handle on this game.

Please don't let the game stall while people wait for me to post.

thanks.

[darkdude]

Lionheart has the benefit of the doubt for now.

Does that mean he responded to a prod or something?

Welcome, Adel.

[Adel]

a quick question: who thought that Puta Puta might be Gimbo before he was lynched?