Mini #764: Notre Dame Mafia, Game Over

[zwetschenwasser]

Wow. A lot of reading. You guys really need to post less often. I've said this before in this thread, but if you want to people who are less active to post more, you all have to post less. Counterintuitive, I know.

A couple things left over from yesterday and from today. I don't understand why people are going after DGB. I'm sure a lot of you have played with her before, and her aggressive style isn't anything unusual. Plus, I find it really hard to believe she would have defended Budja so vehemently, even towards the end of the day if she knew he was going to flip scum. Maybe that's WIFOM.

Here's a point against zwet that no one has really brought up. The reason I felt like I had to drop the hammer is that zwet disappeared the day of the deadline. He generally posts at least 5-6 times a day, and had not posted at all in the 36 hours or so before deadline. In fact, I don't think he ever really gave an opinion on Budja on Day 1. This seems like a good way to avoid hammering your scumbuddy.

Vote: zwet

Silly goose. I was at school before the creep was hammered.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
-If you picked CTD as your target at the beginning of the night, why were you surprised?

The reason I asked you to clarify timing on that is because you had not done so before and your post reads ambiguously on the timing with an implication that some events happened between picking your target and claiming your target that changed your opinion about CTD.

-To clarify then, your primary reason for claiming is that you said you would claim after your plague target died. Your next reason is that you thought it was interesting that CTD was killed.

I want to note that your primary reason doesn't exactly fit with what you promised. You promised to claim your plague kill. This was clearly not your plague kill (unless you have magically fast acting plagues). It may have been your plague target. The reasoning behind claiming a plague kill, does apply equally to this case (although that does not necessarily make it a scummy thing).

Your secondary reason does not explain why you would want to claim your plague target.

-Do you still adhere to your belief that one player on Budja's lynch must be scum bussing Budja? How does CTD's death affect this?

@Rishi-
It's been mentioned, but you completely avoided commenting on Ort or Kinetic.

There haven't been that many posts; 6-7 pages in 5 days? The majority are discussion about Ort.

If that's the first of more posts to come, then fine. If not, consider making it that.

@DGB-
Please provide more content to your votes than simply the vote itself. As it is, your voting is just as irresponsible and anti-town as Zwet. I am assuming that your vote implies agreement with everything that Rishi posted.

Do you think Zwet is likely to kill townies with his plagues regardless of his affiliation?

He has threatened to plague you. Is this affecting your desire to lynch him?

@Ort-
It's hard to believe you can't understand the problem with PLAYER A proposing that everyone lynch PLAYER B if PLAYER A flips town. PLAYER A could genuinely believe that PLAYER B is scum, but he could still be mistaken. Other players can't tell if PLAYER A is actually a townie until after the lynch; until then it is a mistake to assume that the offer to be lynched indicates sincerity on the PLAYER A's part.

If we lynch DGB today and DGB flips TOWN, do you think it would be fair to lynch you in retaliation?

How about if Ace, Charter, or Kast is lynched and flips town; would it be reasonable to lynch you after that (one of the three of us has to be a townie)?

I think you are a reasonable/rational player; it is hard to reconcile your interactions with DGB and my opinion of you as a player.

Also, if we lynch you and you flip scum; are we supposed to assume that DGB is a townie?

@Looker-
I want to hear more from you.

[charter]

For the record, I'm not going to participate in any "lynch me, then lynch this person" deals. All too often it winds up with two townies.

[DrippingGoofball]

@DGB-
Please provide more content to your votes than simply the vote itself. As it is, your voting is just as irresponsible and anti-town as Zwet. I am assuming that your vote implies agreement with everything that Rishi posted.

Indeed, there was nothing to add to the case, and I have already expressed concerns yesterday.

Do you think Zwet is likely to kill townies with his plagues regardless of his affiliation?

Absolutely. But his selection of the cards is pretty damning.

He has threatened to plague you. Is this affecting your desire to lynch him?

That's how I know that he is likely to kill townies with his plagues, but mind you, I may or may not have a self-protective card so the matter may or may not be academic.

[zwetschenwasser]

It's been established already that I was forced to pick a rat card.

[Kast]

I think you are a reasonable/rational player; it is hard to reconcile your interactions with DGB and my opinion of you as a player.

Hmm, this sounds like there are multiple interactions that I can't reconcile. That is a mistake. There is one interaction that I can't reconcile, and it is the desire to lynch-trade Ort-for-DGB. My impression of Ort is that he is a smart enough and rational enough player to realize that other players should not commit themselves to that course of action.

To clarify, if we lynch Ort and Ort flips town, I know that I will be more suspicious of DGB. It does NOT mean I will auto-lynch DGB. If the evidence points to DGB as scum over any other player, then I will push for DGB's lynch. If the evidence points somewhere else, then I will go there.

Hope that clears things.

@DGB-
I wasn't asking you to clarify if you had an Apothecary; good that you didn't clarify. I also want to clarify that my question to DGB was not meant to imply anything about the cards that I passed to her (I guess people other than myself and DGB may try to second guess this...have fun =P).

I don't think it is a good idea to try to lynch Zwet unless we actually believe he is scum.

I wouldn't put any stock in any targets that Zwet claims. If he is scum, he will be targetting townies. If he is a townie, his targets will probably be close to random.

There were very few apothecaries claimed in the first draft. Everyone who did not draw an apothecary yet, has a 50% chance to draw it in Draft #2. I assume that most players who see an apothecary who have not seen one yet, will choose to draw it in Draft #2.

This gives us a 50% or better for players who have not drawn apothecaries yet to draw them. Out of the players who did draw apothecaries in Draft #1; I still think it is likely that most townies would prioritize Apothecaries highly and scum probably did not do so. I think it is likely that townies picked apoths and scum probably passed them.

I am comfortable with those odds.

[Kast]

@DGB-
For my edification, please include at least a comment referring to your previous opinion with your future votes.

It doesn't do the town any favors if we let you put out a vote ambiguously.

[AceMarksman]

I think it is likely that townies picked apoths and scum probably passed them.

Zwet passed me an apoth...

[Kast]

@Ace-
Yes. He claims to have defensive drafted a plague in preference. Kinetic did the same. I think that both are reasonable choices (I would have done the same in their position).

Budja passed an apothecary in favor of a mimic. I don't think that is a very pro-town move (perhaps if he had claimed an apothecary as his pick#1, it would have made sense since the mimic is more versatile).

[DrippingGoofball]

@DGB-
For my edification, please include at least a comment referring to your previous opinion with your future votes.

As much as I'd looove to edify you, I don't understand the question...

[Kast]

It's actually a request not a question.

Instead of posting:

VOTE: Player XYZ

Please try to include at least a short comment with your vote:

I agree with what Player ABC just said.

VOTE: Player XYZ

or

Player XYZ has not changed anything since my previous opinion.

VOTE: Player XYZ

And even better, post a reason(s) with the vote:

I agree with what Player ABC just said because:
-Reason 1
-Reason 2
...
-Reason N

VOTE: Player XYZ

And if you don't understand what edify means...you are welcome to edify me anytime

[DrippingGoofball]

And if you don't understand what edify means...you are welcome to edify me anytime

I know what edify means!

I didn't post a reason for the zwet vote because I agreed with the post above. But I will in the future.

[petroleumjelly]

Day Two: Vote Count #4

3 ortolan (AceMarksma, zwetschenwasser, Kast)
3 zwetschenwasser (Kinetic, Rishi, DrippingGoofball)

1 DrippingGoofball (ortolan)
1 Kinetic (ac1983fan)

With

10

alive, it takes

6

to lynch, and

4

to lynch at deadline. Deadline is May 9, 9:59 pm CDT.

Not Voting – 2 – charter, Looker

[Kinetic]

-If you picked CTD as your target at the beginning of the night, why were you surprised?

Umm... Really? I was surprised he was Night Killed. What else would I have been surprised about?

The reason I asked you to clarify timing on that is because you had not done so before and your post reads ambiguously on the timing with an implication that some events happened between picking your target and claiming your target that changed your opinion about CTD.

Between me choosing CTD as my plague target and me claiming him as my plague target CTD was Night Killed and revealed as town. I would have to point to that point when my opinion changed about him.

-To clarify then, your primary reason for claiming is that you said you would claim after your plague target died. Your next reason is that you thought it was interesting that CTD was killed.

I want to note that your primary reason doesn't exactly fit with what you promised. You promised to claim your plague kill. This was clearly not your plague kill (unless you have magically fast acting plagues). It may have been your plague target. The reasoning behind claiming a plague kill, does apply equally to this case (although that does not necessarily make it a scummy thing).

I claimed I'd reveal my plague target after they were killed. Initially I was confused on when plagues would kill players and I stated I'd announce it Day 4. Claiming my plague target today or tomorrow would have made precious little difference to the point where I don't see how it is an issue.

Either way, we both agree that I would have claimed it tomorrow. Claiming it today isn't as big of a deal as you are making it out to be.

Your secondary reason does not explain why you would want to claim your plague target.

I claimed it. Ok, maybe my reasoning wasn't perfect, but it was my internal reasoning. This isn't a question on your internal reasoning. If you were in the same position maybe you wouldn't have claimed. I did. Great. I get it. You're smarter than me. Can we PLEASE move on?

-Do you still adhere to your belief that one player on Budja's lynch must be scum bussing Budja? How does CTD's death affect this?

I do still think so. CTD's death means he wasn't that person.

[zwetschenwasser]

Who was CTD a threat to? Hm...

[AceMarksman]

CTD was voting budja at the end of the day, if that's what you're asking

[zwetschenwasser]

Who was exceptionally allied with budja?

[DrippingGoofball]

Who was exceptionally allied with budja?

Me. So why are you voting for ortolan?

[DrippingGoofball]

V/LA May 5-13.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
-Surprise-
You picked a player to plague. That player turned out to be a townie. It isn't clear or obvious why that surprised you or why you would need to double check that.

Are you claiming that you were so confident of your plague target choice that it was surprising to see that you were mistaken?
Are you claiming that you forgot who your target was?

I'm not sure what other ways your situation could produce surprise; the whole reason I'm asking is because YOU are the one who said you were surprised.

-Motivation for claiming-
In 876 you did not provide a reason why your decision to claim helps the town. Try to understand, this is not an attack, this is an attempt to clarify and understand.

If you are a townie, I hope you'll cooperate to help the town as a whole understand what you thinking and why you made the decisions that you did. We don't have all the information that you have available to you; what is "obvious" to you is not necessarily "obvious" to everyone else.

Simply saying you did something

because you did it

is NOT providing those reasons or helping the town understand you.

-Claiming plague kills-
There are probably multiple reasons for claiming plague kills, but I think the main one is to reduce confusion and help the town understand what is going on and the next one is to commit yourself to a claimed action and allow the town to evaluate your claimed action.

I think the former is clearly a pro-town reason; it really helps the town to understand where deaths are coming from and to keep people accountable for their actions.

The latter is a lot more selfish; but can be pro-town if the player is a townie, and anti-town if the player is scum.

Your primary reason for claiming (and the one reason you have given which arguably helps town) seems to fit more into the selfish category. If you are a townie, then yes it could help us evaluate your motivations for plaguing (which I'd hope a townie has pro-town motivations).

FYI, you did not say you would claim your plague

target

after it dies. You said you would claim your plague

kill

the day after it happens (except you said Day 4 instead of Day 3).

Right now, I would really like less defensiveness and more explanation to help us determine whether your motivations for (1) targetting CTD, and (2) claiming your night action make sense for a townie.

Tbh, even if your motivations don't fully make sense, I think Ort is more suspicious than you based on his voting history and would prefer lynching Ort. Since you have a large number of players who are actively suspicious of you because of your decision to claim and the content of your claim, I think it is in your best interests to be less defensive and be more helpful in letting other players understand you.

-CTD probable bus?-
What reasoning led you to your decision that CTD was the most likely bus? Timing? Specific posts? Something Budja posted?

You said you thought there was one and only one scum on Budja's wagon. If you still believe that, then we have 6 surviving players who were on Budja's wagon, and 3 players other than yourself who were NOT on Budja's wagon (and thus contain the remaining scum).

Do you have any evidence to strongly help you narrow down 1 out of the 6 players voting for Budja and more than the 1 out of 3 players not voting for Budja? (Btw, I don't subscribe to that belief; I think it is quite probable that at least one scum was on Budja's wagon, and it could easily be 2 scum on his wagon).

[Looker]

Why are people voting for ortolan and zwet when DGB is the scum?

vote DGB

[AceMarksman]

*twitch* really, looker? really? Provide a case, at least.

[Kast]

@Looker-
Does that mean you have finished reading the thread?

Please share thoughts on why you feel DGB is scum.

Please share thoughts on why you feel Ort is either not scum or significantly less suspicious than DGB.

Please share thoughts on why you feel Zwet is either not scum or significantly less suspicious than DGB.

What parts of the reasons posted for suspecting Ort/Zwet do you disagree with and why?

If you do not disagree with any of them, what makes you prefer a DGB lynch over both Ort and Zwet?

[Looker]

...? No one's ever suspected her before. She throws out a little bit of logic to appear town and lets y'all scoot about formulating suspicions of other players. She's free of pressure.

[AceMarksman]

Um, you're wrong. There was a significant wagon on her yesterday.