Mini 749 - Antarctic Mafia [Game Over]

[Nuwen]

Honestly, this post made your percentage go up.

Why? What in 371 is more likely to be said by scum than town?

Which percent would you like explained? I am much too lazy to actually go through each one and explain it.

All of them. If you're too lazy to explain how and why you're playing this game, request a replacement.

Playing just to "elicit reactions" or "boost discussion" is another RVS scum tell. It's exponentially more scummy to use either as an explanation for behavior on day 2.

What type of reactions were you looking for/expecting?

Yes. I saw him. I saw him with my own eyes.

Light-kun - 3 (DraketheFake, Fishythefish, JereIC)
hohum - 1 (Light-kun)

Not Voting - 7 (Jazzmyn, HowardRoark, Nuwen, hohum)

9 alive, 5 to lynch.

Replacing na85..

Light-kun is L-2, two votes away from a lynch

-Mod

(Vote Count accurate as of Post 378)

[hohum]

just prodded. SOrry about that. Will reread and get a post up shortly.
00

[Fishythefish]

Sorry, in my last post I didn't explain myself:

I have a problem with L-k's last post in that it twice uses the line "I did it to get reactions";

Was meant to be accompanied by... which is a claim I always find very suspect. It can be used by the mafia to justify any behaviour, and so when it's not obviously true, like here, it is scummy.

[JereIC]

Light's 372 is pure BS.

<Snip>

Honestly, this post made your percentage go up.

This is badgering, trying to make somebody who has made a good point doubt their own arguments because you claim it's crap and scummy. (Sort of like this.)

Looking over Amished:
He never mentioned me except in regards of my percents. So, up until my percents were posted, I was wholly ignored. I elevated (read "lied") to see his reaction. He was concerned about them which kept his percent at the heightened level with zero threat. (eg, like Fish, I would watch him without really pursuing him until he screwed up.)

As Fishy said, intentional provocation is a convenient defense for scum. Additionally, your story doesn't make sense because Nuwen and freeko hadn't said anything about you until you posted your percentages, but their percentages are fairly low. Finally, you ignore the fact that

Amished was a townie

, perhaps indicating that reacting to your percentages isn't a great scumtell?

Next:

Vote hohum

After Fish's last post and Jazz giving her view on the freakout and Zeenon's play, I can almost see the faint outline of Fish+Zeenon, but far more likely: Zeenon=mafia.

Also, when I say arbitrary, I mean arbitrary. It isn't random in the sense that their exists a reason that is personal or the vote is seemingly random. I planned on demonstrating my case alter and I typed arbitrary to see how people would react. Didn't get much from it though. Oh well.

Another paragraph of badgering and "intentional provocation" claim, with a touch of trying to shift suspicion. I'm just not buying it.

Vote: Light-kun

[Light-kun]

I'm the vigilante. I wanted reactions so I could shot people based off of them and is also why I've been very cryptic. I also backed off of Danny solely because I could shoot him last night, which I did. Hope this helps.

[Fishythefish]

Analysis of L-k's claim:
- Obviously, L-k killed DDD. The risk of a vig counterclaim would be too big.
- I doubt that L-k is scum. DDD would have been a really strange kill.
- He could be SK.
- His claim stacks up; his provocative play and withdrawal on DDD fit with vig.
All in all, I believe the claim, and the scenario where L-k is a SK isn't so bad.

unvote

[DraketheFake]

My first guess is serial killer, third guess vig, and beyond that;

I have no idea why we have a second death.

Hm... under the assumption of a 3 person mafia team and 1 serial killer, we might be in a bit of trouble tomorrow. With a vig, we could instruct their actions. And if we're lucky, assuming sk, the sk might listen as to, at least, appear to be vigilante. This could be useful for the time being if nothing else.

Other than that, I can't think of a reason for the kill. Except for some bizzare (though allowed) role like...naive doctor or something.

...

I disagree Howard. It tells us that there is a second killing role out their. So, we can keep our minds open to the possibility that a serial killer is roaming, which means watching for someone who seems particularly scummy but isn't connected to anyone else.

...

...

Interesting theory, but we should still be wary of possible serial killer.

...

...

...

I'm the vigilante.

So then your entire day-strategy was founded on confusing the town by engaging them in a flurry of speculative posts about a second death that

you knew the cause of

? I understand the distancing attempt to a degree, but to continually correct another player about the possibility of a SK when

you know that you're the vig

is just... well, in the best light, it's just not very good play.

I see no reason to unvote at the moment, since you're not in any imminent danger, and I'd like some time to think about this.

[Fishythefish]

Interesting point. However, for me vig makes more sense for L-k's play at the beginning of the day than SK. SK wouldn't want to draw attention to the possibility of that role, particularly when they are very likely going to want to claim vig at some point. As a vig, the play can be explained by a rather overdone distancing attempt. As I said before, I don't think mafia makes sense for DDD's kill.

[HowardRoark]

I believe that both hohum

ZEEnon

and Jazzmyn

pacman281292

have to make some effort to clear themselves of their predecessors' ways.

This is a misplaced burden of proof.

I'm not expecting them to answer for their predecessor's play. However, I will also not give them a clean slate.

Analysis of L-k's claim:
- Obviously, L-k killed DDD. The risk of a vig counterclaim would be too big.
- I doubt that L-k is scum. DDD would have been a really strange kill.
- He could be SK.
- His claim stacks up; his provocative play and withdrawal on DDD fit with vig.
All in all, I believe the claim, and the scenario where L-k is a SK isn't so bad.

unvote

I don't like this claim and response

at all

. Call me crazy, but it all just feels wrong to me.

The Claim: Why come out at this point? You're taking some heat . . . we all probably will at some point in time. Why now?

The Response: This is too easily (in my mind) accepted. Also, it is too well explained.

The Problem: I can't see a scum team taking this kind of a chance, especially with this evidence for an easy linkage, during D2.

I agree with Fishythefish that a SK would probably not come out with a claim like this and that the kill doesn't fit a scum nor SK pattern.

[DraketheFake]

It makes plenty of sense for the SK trying to play Vig, though.

But like I said, I'm not sold either way.

[Fishythefish]

The Response: This is too easily (in my mind) accepted. Also, it is too well explained.

The Problem: I can't see a scum team taking this kind of a chance, especially with this evidence for an easy linkage, during D2.

I agree with Fishythefish that a SK would probably not come out with a claim like this and that the kill doesn't fit a scum nor SK pattern.

So in essence, you think my acceptance of his claim is too well thought out, but agree with this thinking. In my response post you don't like, what is there you actually disagree with? What do you think L-k's role is?

Why claim then is a good question.

[HowardRoark]

I agree with the

parts

of your response that I noted. As far as your acceptance of it, I see that you could
1) be part of a scum team trying to pull a gambit (least likely)
2) honestly accept it at face value (naive)
3) be scum setting up a "I told you so" (not sure)

I just don't know whether to believe the claim or not. He could be the Vig, he could be a SK (although I think bringing yourself into the spotlight like this would be quite detrimental to your win condition), he could be scum, he could be vanilla attempting to draw a NK. There are a lot of possible scenarios.

[Fishythefish]

I agree with the

parts

of your response that I noted. As far as your acceptance of it, I see that you could
1) be part of a scum team trying to pull a gambit (least likely)
2) honestly accept it at face value (naive)
3) be scum setting up a "I told you so" (not sure)

I just don't know whether to believe the claim or not. He could be the Vig, he could be a SK (although I think bringing yourself into the spotlight like this would be quite detrimental to your win condition), he could be scum, he could be vanilla attempting to draw a NK. There are a lot of possible scenarios.

I have to say I hadn't thought of 3) as a possible motive for anything. Since when is being right a towntell? I never said I took his claim at face value. On analysis, I think that it's likely to be true, as the other scenarios are unlikely for various reasons, and that the second most likely scenario (SK) doesn't need immediate attention. Him being a vanilla seems very unrealistic- think how he'll look when the real vig counterclaims the DDD kill. I don't think DDD was a scum kill (oh, and another reason for this is the manner of death- as someone noted, red circle = gunshot = man with a gun = SK or vig, probably. Particularly since, in the flavour, "Predators about....a..a...a mafia", suggests that the mangled carcass is the scum kill, and DDD the vig/SK kill.)

[Light-kun]

I'm at L-4, and you question why I would reveal my role?

Also: It would be better to have me shoot myself Tomorrow night:

9-1=8-2=6-1=5-2(me)=3
D2* N2* D3 * N3 *D4

And if I don't kill myself n3 (I will) it will leave a prisoner's dilemma (as not killing myself=me=sk) in which town is likely to win as SK WILL kill who they think is mafia and mafia is forced to kill SK.

If you want me to kill myself tonight, I can. I think that it is better to use today's lynch finding mafia and not wasting our time attacking me. Then again, I know my alignment, so I might be the only one seeing this as a waste of time.

[Nuwen]

This is an easily testable claim. Today, we're going to pick two lynch targets. One will be vigged. We can lynch LK prior to entering LYLO if everyone is still concerned about him still being an SK. An SK that plays along with the town will find his win condition very hard to meet in the endgame; either way, town gains an extra kill. If he doesn't vig our consensus targets, we kill him the next day. I don't want to use today's lynch to test his claim - if LK really is a vig, he'll probably be nightkilled in the upcoming day or two.

[Fishythefish]

I'm at L-4, and you question why I would reveal my role?

I think you mean L-2? That's what you reached.

This is an easily testable claim. Today, we're going to pick two lynch targets. One will be vigged. We can lynch LK prior to entering LYLO if everyone is still concerned about him still being an SK. An SK that plays along with the town will find his win condition very hard to meet in the endgame; either way, town gains an extra kill. If he doesn't vig our consensus targets, we kill him the next day. I don't want to use today's lynch to test his claim - if LK really is a vig, he'll probably be nightkilled in the upcoming day or two.

My problem with picking two lynch targets is it is very good for the mafia if they have a roleblocker- they roleblock if and only if LK is hitting one of them. If LK is a SK, he will surely be shooting for scum at this stage (even if we lynch scum that looks like the right move for him)? For this reason, I'd be tempted to let him choose his target. Note that if LK is really a SK, he'll still probably be nightkilled in the upcoming day or two, as the scum can't tell between the two, and don't like SK's anyway.
Overall, I think if we ask any doctors out there not to protect LK, the risk he poses to the town is minimal, and we should let him act alone for now.

[Nuwen]

If LK is a SK, he will surely be shooting for scum at this stage (even if we lynch scum that looks like the right move for him)?

If he's blocked, we can opt to lynch his target on the next day. Controlling LK's kills will force him to behave as town-aligned, SK or not. We can also ask that he hold his kill, which is a common vig tactic on days 2 and 3. If a kill occurs anyway, it'll be obvious that the vig claim was false. Either way, we neuter his possible anti-town behavior.

There is absolutely no reason for LK to shoot himself.

Scum will be paying very close attention to whomever LK expresses suspicion about - if he ever makes a strong case against a mafia member,

that's

what I'll expect a night kill. Until then, expect scum to maneuver our second kill onto town (this is why submitting a no-kill

can

be very strong vig play).

[Nuwen]

p.s.,

FoS

in Fishy's direction. It's very anti-town to suggest that a kill ability not be handed over to the control of consensus. The only reasons to support sovereign kills from LK:

1. Second scum team pair, attempting to free themselves from town-dictated kills.

2. Absolute trust in LK's judgment.

The former is plausible, the latter is naive.

[Fishythefish]

p.s.,

FoS

in Fishy's direction. It's very anti-town to suggest that a kill ability not be handed over to the control of consensus. The only reasons to support sovereign kills from LK:

1. Second scum team pair, attempting to free themselves from town-dictated kills.

2. Absolute trust in LK's judgment.

The former is plausible, the latter is naive.

3. As I've already stated; to keep the scum in the dark.
I haven't run across this situation before. Perhaps it accepted wisdom, but I don't think it's clear that it is anti-town not to hand over a known kill ability; yes, maybe the town will choose better targets than L-k alone, but we have the disadvantage of having to declare our intentions. I don't have to have absolute trust in L-k; as long as he has the same motives as us, he can make slightly worse decisions than the town as a whole, and the result is still better.
In what situation do you think the town's interests and L-k's interests will not be aligned tonight?

[JereIC]

Unvote

I can live with L-K's vig claim, especially because there's good ways to test it. Nuwen's plan makes the most sense given what we know, although we should reserve the option to not vig tonight (I'd bet there will be two good suspects by the end of the day and our optimal play will be to kill both, but having the option is always good).

[Nuwen]

p.s.,

FoS

in Fishy's direction. It's very anti-town to suggest that a kill ability not be handed over to the control of consensus. The only reasons to support sovereign kills from LK:

1. Second scum team pair, attempting to free themselves from town-dictated kills.

2. Absolute trust in LK's judgment.

The former is plausible, the latter is naive.

3. As I've already stated; to keep the scum in the dark.
I haven't run across this situation before. Perhaps it accepted wisdom, but I don't think it's clear that it is anti-town not to hand over a known kill ability; yes, maybe the town will choose better targets than L-k alone, but we have the disadvantage of having to declare our intentions. I don't have to have absolute trust in L-k; as long as he has the same motives as us, he can make slightly worse decisions than the town as a whole, and the result is still better.
In what situation do you think the town's interests and L-k's interests will not be aligned tonight?

The point of controlling his kills isn't to pick "better" targets - it's to ensure that his play is completely conducted by the town, while also giving us a chance to observe scummy attempts to have him vig town. We have no way to ensure that his motives are pro-town without injecting our own motives into his kill choices. LK's personal kill choices will be incorporated into whatever consensus we reach.

[Fishythefish]

Sure. And in a situation where he was credibly going to kill out of motives other than scumhunting, of course we should pick the kill/no kill. But while his interests coincide with the town (as seems almost certain here, for tonight at least), why is it necessary?

[Nuwen]

Insurance, basically. His interests may align with the town's, which is lovely. In the event they don't, we'll be steering his kills (or lack of kills) with the threat of a lynch.

[Fishythefish]

Yes, I understand that. I just think the likelihood of his interests not aligning with ours tonight is so slight that we would do better to let him kill independently. However, if others are worried that he might not want to kill scum tonight, then of course we should pick the kill.

[DraketheFake]

Alright.

Unvote

for now.

We should either pick the kill or not kill at all. Fishy, why on earth would you want him acting independently?