Open 120 - Rebels in the Palace - Game Over! before 756

[TonyMontana]

I'm not really following Trumpet's numbers. But they work.. It's just like in poker. Our odds of hitting a guard/king in the next two random lynches are 1-((5/8)*(4/7)) = 65%. By the same math, odds of us hitting a guard/king in the first 4 lynches were 1 - ((8/12)*(7/11)*(6/10)*(5/9)) = 86%

And given we barely pulled it through with 86% you wanna go ahead with the 65%, then?

[zwetschenwasser]

Corvuus, it's just something that bothers me. It looks like you're directing the king/guard to act a certain way to defend your master, by your capitalizing of words and other verbiage. Tony, it doesn't help to criticize something we already did.

[veerus]

I'm not really following Trumpet's numbers. But they work.. It's just like in poker. Our odds of hitting a guard/king in the next two random lynches are 1-((5/8)*(4/7)) = 65%. By the same math, odds of us hitting a guard/king in the first 4 lynches were 1 - ((8/12)*(7/11)*(6/10)*(5/9)) = 86%

And given we barely pulled it through with 86% you wanna go ahead with the 65%, then?

Barely? 86% pretty much expected we'd get 1 guard. 65% is not quite the slam dunk, but since we started playing the numbers, it kind of makes sense to finish the same way. Odds are still on our side it seems.

[sekinj]

Vote Count 12

(# of votes against) Voted Player - by Voter(s)

(2) TonyMontana - by Corvuus, Qanqan

(0) Corvuus
(1) Empking - by veerus
(1) veerus - by Empking
(0) ortolan
(1) Qanqan - by ortolan
(0) Trumpet of Doom
(1) zwetschenwasser - by Trumpet of Doom

Five (5) votes to Lynch.

Mod Notes:
- Deadline has been set for 3/25/09 @ 12:00 PM CST

[TonyMontana]

Barely? 86% pretty much expected we'd get 1 guard. 65% is not quite the slam dunk, but since we started playing the numbers, it kind of makes sense to finish the same way. Odds are still on our side it seems.

Sure, and if we land those 65% with a guard kill, we're down to 60%. Cap two more and it's 50/50. Did I hear "game-breaking" uttered? [face_palm]

[TonyMontana]

2 random lynches prob:

Kill king (win): 25%
Kill rebels (lose): 36%
Kill 1 guard: 32%
Kill 2 guards: 4%

Percent lost due to dropping out of high school: 3% (attribute to pro town outcomes)

[TonyMontana]

Vote: zwet

For trying to hard to look innocent, and trying to hard to look active.

[zwetschenwasser]

I'm not trying hard to look active, I AM active. Seriously, I was just nominated for the title "Cricket with Restless Leg Syndrome"

[Corvuus]

oro:
Answering for another player I consider defending another player. TM can go after Q himself and make his defense and posts on his own. If he FAILS to do so, then that is information/read. Why? Because if he doesn't defend against Q but just goes after Zwet instead of trying to defend himself at all then that is scummy to me, and hey, wow, look at that, It is EXACTLY what he is doing. Ignoring Q, and going after Zwet. Why? Oh, maybe because YOU are defending him. And he is moving on to talk about lynch probability but NOT Q at all. Why? etc. etc.

So yes, I find it suspicious of both of you.

--------------

2. Blatantly saying things which shouldn't be said unless you are advising scum.

What are these?

Oro: It is obvious. Read your post again and think about it. To say more is just giving out info.

--------------------

3. apparently this is all based on your belief that scum couldn't have verified each other, and thus there is no buddying to worry about and you think the fact that you blatantly buddy must somehow mean that you are rebel and so is TM since guard/king wouldn't be so obvious??

I'm not saying scum haven't verified one another, ironically at this point I'm feeling increasingly strongly that the king knows who one of his guards (at least) is. That doesn't mean no-one else has picked up on it, though. What I object to is your position in 342 that "WELL YOU DONT' KNOW, they might have found some AMAZINGLY CLEVER way of cross-confirming each other while the townies are oblivious to it." Again I ask you to describe any way this could actually be done in practice e.g.; or in fact I will go you one better. Do you think random voting the king would be a good way to subtly telegraph your role as a guard? Do you think breadcrumbing something strange about the king would be a good way to subtly telegraph your role as a guard? If not how do you suggest, they are going to do so with no risk of being caught?

Oro: If you think you know who a guard is then say it. Otherwise, your post is quite stupid since you said to 'me' before to prove that they have not confirmed/know each other at all and now you say that you think they have so who is it and what was said. The rest, I don't know how much to say since I didn't say that they did a AMAZINGLY CLEVER WAY of confirming each other but that it could be REALLY stupid but obvious to them and not to us. If they did RVS vote the king, then that is really stupid. If it is a breadcrumb that is strange, then it is findable upon re-read and will end up being really stupid. So what is your read and your suggestion?


-------------------------

i.e. you and TM's actions are suspicious, yet your 'defense' is that it is so BLATANT and 'stupid' for scum to do that it is not suspicious at all.

How are

my

actions suspicious? We've already seen yourself and Qanqan's justification for TM's actions being suspicious. I think it's poor, but you don't need to go there again. Just tell me why

I'm

scummy.

Oro: I did. Heck, you ignoring it is scummy in itself but maybe that is just how you play. If you don't find yourself defending/buddying with TM suspicious at all, then what do you think is scummy?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I couldn't careless if we lynch Zwet today, but I find it INCREDIBLY ironic that a defense for Zwet is as simple as "posting nonsense 1 liners, blah blah, joke, blah, crap" is so BLATANTLY scummy that he can't possible be scum since scum wouldn't do that.

and yet, the argument for TM and yourself Oro is pretty much exactly the same, yet it is ok when you and TM do it?

I don't understand what you are arguing here. TonyMontana is attacking zwet. You are saying you find zwet scummy. Yet you find TM scummy also???? And someone in all of this is apparently defending zwet- it's not me though. Who are you talking about?

Oro: Since this will answer your other points as well. I will tell you my meta or what I think and I mentioned this in my previous post.

First off, several players say I am 'most townie'. I DO find this suspicious. Either they think so, or they are guards just 'saying so' to buddy me or get my voting to be along with them or to mislynch me upon their flip.

How do I determine this? I decided to be AGGRESSIVE and EXTREME and see what people say about me then. I go after different players ( i will come to everyone in due time) to get a reaction out of them *AND* for the players who said "Corvuus is so townie", I will get a read off of them when they think I've gone 'less townie', etc.. I don't trust them or you 100% at all for 'saying i am most townie' and I actually trust you (oro) least since

1. You said you thought I was most townie in your post #15
2. Q said someone else (EMPKing) and you said you thought me instead in your post #16.

I could have just said "yay, i am most townie, i will just sit back and watch people die and hope that town gets it right". Instead, I interpret that my best optimum play is to USE this to my advantage in getting reads/info out of people and I can also test reads on people who said "corv is most townie", especially if they are guards and I do something that they don't like. Just because I don't explicitly mention you (since i would say your post would make you my biggest supporter back then oro) doesn't mean I didn't see what was going on, didn't like it and what I think about it.

I don't believe any of you who 'voted me most townie' mean you will stick with me 100% all the way through, but scum may not know that and heck if scum are in it and I go after a guard, then they will change their reaction and response as well. Whether you agree with me or not, "if corvuus is most townie, and he votes someone, then others vote with him, etc. etc", I can get reactions out of those who didn't 'pick me' and of those 'who did pick me'. I get information and reads and all I have to do is go after someone extremely and see how people respond.

I've chosen TM for this. You can argue whether I should have gone after someone else, but frankly, it didn't matter. He happened to say something and it was after I was 'said to be townie' and I decided to choose this path (I realized I would be almost impossible to lynch since I wouldn't self-vote). If you think I am town (as you stated) and you aren't scum and have NO info on TM's alignment, then why not wagon him for information/reads? Instead, your action defends him and he ignores it. Why? He has nothing further to say about Q or me but goes after Zwet? Why? He has nothing to say about Q (while you do) and still goes after Zwet. WHY?

I have no problem with seeing Zwet and TM as scummy and as buddies, and heck, for all I know TM may be King, Zwet and You (oro) are his guards and you are busing a guard to verify the King and playing it out that way.

Your play is scummy and you didn't answer or respond about it at all.

----------

If you didn't get it from my above points/post, as a Rebel, i play a solo-hand. I could have chosen to say that the ones who said I am town are 'suspicious' but I chose my way to do things and test things out and I am fine with it since hey, look at that, my 'biggest supporter' of me being town now finds me scummy, what a great reversal. I won't worry about you flipping guard and me getting mislynched based on that.

I gave a reason for why I thought Trumpet was townie. You can disagree with me, i couldn't careless. My reason was more detailed than yours or Q's so I find it scummy that you say "it is interesting" when your case is worse. Hypocrite much?

Q said he has pro-town vibe from me, and as I said above and before, I will get responses/reactions out of him as the game progresses. I see him as neutral since his play isn't horribly scummy to me but he also named me most townie and I don't know why yet (genuine or manipulation) so as I said, neutral.

But hey, if we want reads on mine, TM and Q's alignment, then maybe we can go ahead and lynch you Oro and find out .

Corvuus
P.S. you didn't answer any of my points in your post. please try.

[Corvuus]

Corvuus, it's just something that bothers me. It looks like you're directing the king/guard to act a certain way to defend your master, by your capitalizing of words and other verbiage. Tony, it doesn't help to criticize something we already did.

I'm keeping my vote on TM until TM and Oro answer my latest post in a decent way but then I will be voting you Zwet for this response and

FoS

for now. Lynching TM first, Zwet second (like Veerus said) is fine with me.

If it isn't obvious, saying "to defend your master", etc. you accuse me of being guard.

What did I say that bothered you, what was directed by 'capitalizing of words and other verbiage'. Otherwise, your post is a bunch of crap.

---------------------------------------------

Veerus, do you have comments on the person you replaced or points brought up against your player slot? I don't think you said anything about it.

Thanks,

Corvuus

[veerus]

There isn't really much to say. #14 was barely active and hohum zeroed in on a single player with what seemed to be an out-of-game agenda. Was there something specific you wanted me to look at?

[Qanqan]

Oh, also, I didn't ignore any of your previous questions that I'm aware of. Which are you talking about?

Beginning of 356.

Tony's rolls weren't for random lynching and he never said they were. They were to determine who the king was. Again, it only really makes sense as satire.

He never said they weren't, and that's how they looked to me. There is more than one way to read people, you know.

You need to be specific here. Rather than just saying "I do believe you are spouting logical fallacies holes in your arguments" and "I assure you, this isn't OMGUS" you need to provide some justification as to why these statements are true.

I pointed out the fallicies as I was going along, with justification. You constalntly put in your interperetations of how I had supposedly interpereted the situation and tried to pass them off as mine, in the hopes I would attack them.

sorry, "I do believe you are spouting logical fallacies

and have

holes in your arguments".

Wow, that's a little hypocritical. You can't tell me I need to back my claims that you are using logical fallicies (which I had done to a reasonable extent) and then make the claims yourself with no justification (and no, 'it was humour' is not a valid excuse).

[zwetschenwasser]

I don't like how corvuus is spending an inordinate amount of time speculating on possible scum signals.

[ortolan]

I agree that TonyMontana is under obligation to explain his actions re: zwet now, he has pretty much acknowledged that the reason he voted zwet was one entirely consistent with zwet's meta.

2. Blatantly saying things which shouldn't be said unless you are advising scum.

What are these?

Oro: It is obvious. Read your post again and think about it. To say more is just giving out info.

No, it isn't, otherwise I wouldn't have asked. Attempting to suggest my actions are scummy then pulling back to "WELL IT'S OBVIOUS WHY" + "I don't want to help scum by making it explicit!!!" and refusing to justify yourself is unhelpful at best and pretty much outright scummy.

Oro: If you think you know who a guard is then say it. Otherwise, your post is quite stupid since you said to 'me' before to prove that they have not confirmed/know each other at all and now you say that you think they have so who is it and what was said.

No I didn't. I was mocking your suggestion that scum can have found a way of confirming themselves without alerting us to the fact. I do not believe it is possible for them to have done this and don't think it would be wise for them to attempt to do so either.

The rest, I don't know how much to say since I didn't say that they did a AMAZINGLY CLEVER WAY of confirming each other but that it could be REALLY stupid but obvious to them and not to us. If they did RVS vote the king, then that is really stupid. If it is a breadcrumb that is strange, then it is findable upon re-read and will end up being really stupid. So what is your read and your suggestion?

I have been very clear in saying I do not believe guards have confirmed one another. You originally suggested those defending guards were scummy, I asked for evidence of this because the guards/king don't know who the other guards are. You responded that you didn't know how they might have done it but are happy to assume the guards do know one another. I think this is stupid. I also think it's scummy you are so hesitant to discuss methods the guards could use to confirm one another when if we publicly acknowledge we're aware of them firstly we prevent scum using them out of fear and secondly we gain a chance to locate any attempts to breadcrumb one's guardiness which have already been made.

Oro: I did. Heck, you ignoring it is scummy in itself but maybe that is just how you play. If you don't find yourself defending/buddying with TM suspicious at all, then what do you think is scummy?

So your whole case is that I am defending/buddying with TM? Then, as I asked you to, tell me why I wasn't scummy to say I found you townie as I did. And tell me why Qanqan isn't scummy for

his

blatant buddying up to you.

Also, if indeed I am defending TM, I want you to look at TM's post for which he is being attacked very carefully:

result: zwetschenwasser

zwet is not king.
Because what are the odds of not catching the king in 7 dice rolls? -.-

Now, is he saying here that he wanted these players lynched in the order he rolled as Qanqan suggested? What's your interpretation? Also, if he did intend those as random lynches, he clearly didn't fix them, so the dice could have landed on anyone. What is his motivation, if he is scum, for using genuinely random rolling if this ploy was supposed to automatically benefit his faction i.e. scum?

How do I determine this? I decided to be AGGRESSIVE and EXTREME and see what people say about me then. I go after different players ( i will come to everyone in due time) to get a reaction out of them *AND* for the players who said "Corvuus is so townie", I will get a read off of them when they think I've gone 'less townie', etc.. I don't trust them or you 100% at all for 'saying i am most townie' and I actually trust you (oro) least since

1. You said you thought I was most townie in your post #15
2. Q said someone else (EMPKing) and you said you thought me instead in your post #16.

I could have just said "yay, i am most townie, i will just sit back and watch people die and hope that town gets it right". Instead, I interpret that my best optimum play is to USE this to my advantage in getting reads/info out of people and I can also test reads on people who said "corv is most townie", especially if they are guards and I do something that they don't like. Just because I don't explicitly mention you (since i would say your post would make you my biggest supporter back then oro) doesn't mean I didn't see what was going on, didn't like it and what I think about it.

I'm afraid it is plain for all to see that when I said I found you most townie you laid absolutely no suspicion at my feet. It was only after I started to attack you that you got all defensive. Now you are very obviously backtracking and saying "haha, it was a plan all along, I had it in the back of my mind that you were scum but I was just testing you until I had a good opportunity! (incidentially this opportunity arises as soon as you realise I am not on your side as you had previously thought)

2. Q said someone else (EMPKing) and you said you thought me instead in your post #16.

Which post are you talking about? All I see is 307 from Qanqan where he says:

I am feeling some pro-town vibe from Corvuus, like everyone else is I'm guessing.

You are the only person he nominates as town here and also tries to slip this in in qualified form saying "like everyone else is I'm guessing" as though it's so

obvious

you are pro-town. And Qanqan is another marked omission here- he is blatantly buddying up to you- see this post and his bizarre paranoia in 341:

Firstly, what does Corvuus have to do with me?

You still haven't told me what you think about Qanqan, I'm really desperate to know at this point.

Your play is scummy and you didn't answer or respond about it at all.

This is more mud-slinging, like Qanqan's "you are using logical fallacies!!!111 But I won't say what they are."

I gave a reason for why I thought Trumpet was townie. You can disagree with me, i couldn't careless. My reason was more detailed than yours or Q's so I find it scummy that you say "it is interesting" when your case is worse. Hypocrite much?

Saying "I like his meta and it's similar to mine" isn't even a legitimate reason, let alone a detailed one. Be specific.

I'm keeping my vote on TM until TM and Oro answer my latest post in a decent way but then I will be voting you Zwet for this response and

FoS

for now.

Kind of ironic you attacked TM for similar cross-attacking while under fire.

Lynching TM first, Zwet second (like Veerus said) is fine with me.

And you're even unashamedly setting up chain lynches.

[ortolan]

Oh, plus the whole "at this point on Qanqan, I'm...neutral" is yet another way you've blatantly dodged saying something meaningful or accountable.

Oh, also, I didn't ignore any of your previous questions that I'm aware of. Which are you talking about?

Beginning of 356.

Um you just told me to read my own post. Thanks for that. Let's hope you actually had some, any legitimate reason for accusing me of dodging your questions and it wasn't just more mud-slinging, but I'm having my doubts at this point.

He never said they weren't, and that's how they looked to me. There is more than one way to read people, you know.

You are voting him for it if you didn't notice. If you acknowledge your reason is subjective then that's simply poor justification for voting him.

I pointed out the fallicies as I was going along, with justification. You constalntly put in your interperetations of how I had supposedly interpereted the situation and tried to pass them off as mine, in the hopes I would attack them.

Sorry I don't even understand this passage.

sorry, "I do believe you are spouting logical fallacies

and have

holes in your arguments".

Wow, that's a little hypocritical. You can't tell me I need to back my claims that you are using logical fallicies (which I had done to a reasonable extent) and then make the claims yourself with no justification (and no, 'it was humour' is not a valid excuse).

Actually I was just quoting you there, I wasn't saying that (hence the quotation marks)

[ortolan]

^^

by quoting I meant paraphrasing/parodying

I don't like how corvuus is spending an inordinate amount of time speculating on possible scum signals.

Even worse he is speculating on their existence so as to use them in argument but not actually telling us what form they might conceivably take.

Sorry for triple post.

[TonyMontana]

I'm so glad ortolan is here, cause I'm rarely bothered to defend my own jokes. :p

[Empking]

Why aren't people voting Hohum?

because he has been replaced by veerus

[zwetschenwasser]

Nice way to active lurk, Tony and Emp.

[Empking]

There's nothing to say. I think TM is scummy but Veerus is scummier. Then again, now I hink about it TM is Kingier.

Unvote

Vote: TM

[ortolan]

no more votes for TM until Corvuus and Qanqan have replied to my latest post(s) please. If anyone else votes for him and is town I shall not forgive you.

[zwetschenwasser]

That's harsh. On another note, are we in LYLO at the moment?

[TonyMontana]

You will be if you lynch me.

[zwetschenwasser]

Hey, it worked! I got him to make an appeal to emotion.

Unvote; Vote: TonyMontana

This last post clinches it.

[ortolan]

Please don't be moronic and allow Corvuus and Qanqan to answer my questions before anyone else votes, I have more to say.