Lynch All Lurkers Mafia! GAME OVER

[Xylthixlm]

Holy 70 pages Batman. I'll try to catch up asap.

Read the last 10 pages first and give your impression

[image]

So, many of the votes on me are poorly justified or unjustified. Orto attempts to justify his vote mostly by misrepresenting my posts. Elvis does not justify her vote. rofl does not justify his vote. Steph does not justify his vote. When asked about his suspicions, Xyl says he finds my attack on rofl scummy, but only because of "gut". Later he lays a vote when the wagon gets rolling.

I get the horrible and almost certainly paranoid feeling that these five are the scum... Guys, please justify your votes. Why do you believe I am scum?

[Nuwen]

That was a terrible analogy. Of course everyone thinks math sucks. Heathens. I find it unusual that Xyl is in the crowd of booers; he's usually keen on mathematical principles behind ingame actions.

I should have just taken five minutes to draw a picture:



Get it now?

Extending the red zone of policy lynches to include white space = attempting to policy lynch based on a lurking time without a definite scum/town divide = very good excuse to explain away mislynches.

[Xylthixlm]

Nuwen: If scum are more likely to get to 72 hours, and they have to go through 48 hours before they get to 72 hours, wouldn't that make scum more likely to get to 48 hours? Or are you imagining some bizarre countereffect where townies lurk extra much until they reach 48 hours but stop before 72?

[Nuwen]

Nuwen: If scum are more likely to get to 72 hours, and they have to go through 48 hours before they get to 72 hours, wouldn't that make scum more likely to get to 48 hours? Or are you imagining some bizarre countereffect where townies lurk extra much until they reach 48 hours but stop before 72?

Um, yes, actually. In this game there's a pro-town incentive to stop lurking and make a post of

any

kind before hitting that mark - the town has made it clear that anyone lurking past 72 hours will be policy lynched. A town player that chooses to remain inactive for more than 72 hours effectively lynches a confirmed player: him/herself.

I'm running out of bad analogies, but opting to lynch at a point

earlier

than 72 hours is like intentionally aiming for the edge of a dart board instead of the center.

I want to hear what the two masons, Kinetic, Emp, Steph, and Orto have to say about what I've posted ad Elvis. If this game bears any semblance to a normally balanced theme, there are going to be somewhere between three and five-ish scum attempting to undermine what otherwise appears sound (to me, at least).

Taking a look at Image's wagon now.

[Stephoscope]

As I said on page 1...

I think anyone who lurks for 72 hours should be lynched, no questions asked.

I think we should start raising hell / casting votes if someone's even gone for 48 hours.

72 hours is the mod's threshold. It doesn't need to be our own. We should have insisted on more frequent participation to make it absolutely clear that lurking is forbidden and will result in a lynch every single time before the player gets anywhere near 72 hours.

[Stephoscope]

Elvis does not justify her vote. rofl does not justify his vote. Steph does not justify his vote.

I already kinda justified mine. I'm pretty convinced rofl and elvis are town, and will follow them unless something else inspires me, which hasn't happened. If you're lynched and flip town, Xyl's totally next. (and if I'm nightkilled, remember that town)

[Nuwen]

There's a big difference between "raising hell" at the 48 hour mark (good town play) and "we should probably

lynch

anyone that lurks past 48 hours." Proposing a

lynch

at an arbitrary mark without clear-cut divide between town and scum behavior is a

bad

policy lynch.

Elvis does not justify her vote. rofl does not justify his vote. Steph does not justify his vote.

I already kinda justified mine.

I'm pretty convinced rofl and elvis are town, and will follow them unless something else inspires me, which hasn't happened. If you're lynched and flip town,

Xyl's totally next. (and if I'm nightkilled, remember that town)

Guh. Do not like. Rofl and Elvis aren't confirmed in any way. It's dangerous to give unconfirmed players the power of one more vote, especially if the town is close to being outnumbered - it's entirely possible that there are six scum in this game (five alive). With seven votes needed to lynch, that grants scum the dangerous ability to construct wagons on their own. Even if we assume a lower number of scum (4 total, 3 alive), adding an extra vote to that mix still allows scum to control more than half the votes on a wagon.

Setting up lynches with the expectation that someone will flip town is also quite anti-town. If you think someone is going to flip green, don't bloody vote for him or her. The only protown reason to ever say "if x is town we'll lynch y" is when dealing with a binary claim-counterclaim. Why does Xyl's alignment hinge on Image's?

The only vote on Image with an ounce of case behind it is Ort's:

we're gonna need to policy lynch Mastin soon unless he posts

everyone else has posted today

I agree with rofl that image's case against him is blatantly opportunistic

That being said I don't think the case against her is as strong as rofl is playing it up to be.

As I've said earlier, I long stopped caring about my win condition and just want to prove them wrong, and hope the town loses. I'm sure that sentence is worth 1.5 votes on average. But I just don't care. I'm fighting really hard against the urge to self-vote at this point, and that sentence is probably worth another 1 vote, firm.

However, this post is in and of itself a pretty compelling argument.

Vote: DGB

.

This looks like classic scum trying (badly) to look better out of a mislynch. It's got the classic ingredient of expressing hesitance about a town wagon before the fact with no good reason.

It's extra scummy this time because he actually votes her for her own words subsequently. How can a case "not be as strong as rofl is playing it up to be" yet still be worthy of your vote?

I had a look at back and 1457 and 1465 are also very scummy.

1465 is more casting aspersions on people post-wagon. 1457 is complete WIFOM over the scum's choice of night-kill.

Unvote
Vote: image

And even then...

If I'm remembering the sequence of events correctly, Rofl's case against DGB was the

cause

of her giving up posts. I don't find it scummy that Image disagreed with the initial case against her (which I need to reread again more closely, I have a feeling she was on to something in that DGB-like way) and then chose to place a vote on her after she surrendered and went kamikaze.

Combined with the unexplained vote from Tajo + claim request, the whole wagon looks like a fishing expedition.

[Nuwen]

I'd also like Steph to start pulling teeth in the mason QT. Extract any stances you can from MafiaSSK. Get his opinion on other players. Find out the

exact

terms of his post restriction. His contribution to scumhunting has been zero. If his post restriction is real, then I'm sure the QT exists to avatar things he would post normally. Get creative within any boundaries Yos has laid out.

The mason play in this game has been abysmal. Private daytalk, even between unconfirmed masons, is a hella strong town tool and needs to be used.

I did a little MD stalking on Yos' mason theory:

You're a mason if you're told you are a mason. That usually includes day talking. What else it means is generally a matter of speculation, which is as it should be.

Which makes me rest a little easier about the idea of MafiaSSK being a scum mason; lack of town confirmation doesn't imply opposite alignments. I wouldn't expect any less from Yos (<3).

Small note: at the college I attend, there's a long-standing tradition known as Flunk Day. In short, it's a school-sponsored day of drunken carnival games and debauchery. The exact date is always unknown, however I have a strong suspicion that it'll be tomorrow, which means I'll probably be very drunk and very hungover for the next 36ish hours.

[Stephoscope]

I'd also like Steph to start pulling teeth in the mason QT. Extract any stances you can from MafiaSSK. Get his opinion on other players. Find out the

exact

terms of his post restriction. His contribution to scumhunting has been zero. If his post restriction is real, then I'm sure the QT exists to avatar things he would post normally. Get creative within any boundaries Yos has laid out.

His "post restriction" is complete BS and I really have no desire to work with him. I can't tell if he's scum or just a bored townie, but he couldn't possibly be acting more anti-town, whether in this thread or out of it.

[Mastin]

End page 21.

Elvis's lack of actual cases in votes is concerning.

Xyl switching opinions constantly on players (Pop is scum! Pop is town! No, wait, Pop is scum! On second thought... SSK is scum, no, town, no, scum, wait, nevermind; town. This is what I am seeing from Xyl on the matter) is rather bothersome. Inconsistency is a scum tell...

Tajo's claim seemed a bit early and a tad bit unnecessary, but DGB (a now-confirmed pro-town player) at the very (who else does?) least believed the claim.
At the current stage of the game, those are the players (who are still alive) that seemed most active to me. Did I miss anything?

[MafiaSSK]

akes indicate that he's town.

[/quote]

@

MafiaSSK

: You're ent

i

rely unable to

c

h

an

nel your reads/opinions on players via your QT? Can we provide

y

ou with an a-z sp

e

ctrum time

s

a hundred to get a post containing real content? Troll tried this and it wasn't taken advantage of.

I understand your PR to limit 1) How you respond to questions directed at you (white text additions to pre-written script) and 2) Imperative to respond to all questions.

Narrowing down the specifications of post restrictions is the best way to test them. MafiaSSK has responded posts that neither address him nor contain a mention of his name:



-[/quote]

[MafiaSSK]

akes indicate that he's town.

@

MafiaSSK

: You're ent

i

rely unable to

c

h

an

nel your reads/opinions on players via your QT? Can we provide

y

ou with an a-z sp

e

ctrum time

s

a hundred to get a post containing real content? Troll tried this and it wasn't taken advantage of.

I understand your PR to limit 1) How you respond to questions directed at you (white text additions to pre-written script) and 2) Imperative to respond to all questions.

Narrowing down the specifications of post restrictions is the best way to test them. MafiaSSK has responded posts that neither address him nor contain a mention of his name:



-

[MafiaSSK]

EBWOp EBWOp

@

MafiaSSK

: You're ent

i

rely unable to

c

h

an

nel your reads/opinions on players via your QT? Can we provide

y

ou with an a-z sp

e

ctrum time

s

a hundred to get a post containing real content? Troll tried this and it wasn't taken advantage of.

I understand your PR to limit 1) How you respond to questions directed at you (white text additions to pre-written script) and 2) Imperative to respond to all questions.

Narrowing down the specifications of post restrictions is the best way to test them. MafiaSSK has responded posts that neither address him nor contain a mention of his name:



-

[elvis_knits]

Nuwen, you never answered this:

quick qs -
nuwen, what do you make of zwet's early dig at elvis over her rules related posts?

[elvis_knits]

Also, Nuwen, your theory that lynching lurkers at the 48 hours mark is more likely to hit town is still not correct.

If everyone knows we intend to lynch lurkers at 48 hours, town would know to avoid that.

I dislike all of your strategy/math analysis. It is very easy to adapt stats to fit your needs, especially when you're not using numbers or any kind of provable quantity. You're relying on some imaginary "statistical intuition." As a math person, you should know that is a load of crapola.

You're ignoring most of the game, and most of the players to hit on one thing that I said that actually should tell you that I am town. You're actually ignoring logic to make graphs and analogies to try to prove that I am scum. You are not making sense. It reminds me a lot of the other game, where you were scum pushing the idea that "lynching claimed power roles is statistically more likely to hit scum, so let's lynch all power roles."

Nice try.

unvote; vote Nuwen

[populartajo]

I think Nuwen makes bad analogies but I dont think she is scum. I get an overal protwon feeling and some good logic coming from her contribution.

People who replace in with a burst of analysis tend to have that effect. It's not much of a tell.

I agree but I also cant trust my read on Nuwen cause she really tricked me in WIH.

I just get a good intention feeling coming from her post (asking for Steph bothering SSK in the daytalk is a good example of this).

@Nuwen, who is scum, neutral, town?

[populartajo]

Its kinda awesome how Elvis and me got to different conclusions in almost the same time.

[elvis_knits]

Its kinda awesome how Elvis and me got to different conclusions in almost the same time.

What do you think of her kraplogic? For a maths person it is surprisingly fail.

[populartajo]

Its kinda awesome how Elvis and me got to different conclusions in almost the same time.

What do you think of her kraplogic? For a maths person it is surprisingly fail.

I am not a math person so basically I got bored when I tried understanding what she said.

Mafia is not math, its analysis of intentions and I just get a warm feeling when I read her posts. Even if they are wrong, she is at leastr trying. Even if she is wrong, that doesnt mean she is scum, IMO.

I assume you think Nuwen is more likely scum thatn image?

[elvis_knits]

Tajo, you don't need to be a maths person so see that she's not making sense.

I don't know if she's more likely scum than image. But she's scum, and she needed my vote.

I think it's really scummy to try to "unconfirm" people. When you're scum, it sucks to have people confirmed town, so you search for ways to argue that they're unconfirmed. That's what she's doing, and using the crappiest logic to do so.

[Empking]

As I said on page 1...

I think anyone who lurks for 72 hours should be lynched, no questions asked.

I think we should start raising hell / casting votes if someone's even gone for 48 hours.

72 hours is the mod's threshold. It doesn't need to be our own. We should have insisted on more frequent participation to make it absolutely clear that lurking is forbidden and will result in a lynch every single time before the player gets anywhere near 72 hours.

Do you normally lynch people who go 48 hours without posting?

[Stephoscope]

Of course not, but anyone playing this particular game should understand the need for frequent posting.

[populartajo]

Tajo, you don't need to be a maths person so see that she's not making sense.

I don't know if she's more likely scum than image. But she's scum, and she needed my vote.

I think it's really scummy to try to "unconfirm" people. When you're scum, it sucks to have people confirmed town, so you search for ways to argue that they're unconfirmed. That's what she's doing, and using the crappiest logic to do so.

Elvis, Im missing something here.

Why are you confirmed town?

[ortolan]

hmm, BMQ opposed zwet wagon in 170, accuses DGB of setting a "simplistic trap" on zwet-scum in 176 without elaborating. 584 is far more townie. 598 continues to be townie. 608 not bad. 612 I like his gentle attempt to reason with the half-retarded mason pair.

I conclude his attitude to zwet's wagon was not scummy.

838 good attack on masons.

Troll makes good point in 957 that BMQ refuses to actively vote anyone.

1059 defends two innocents (Malyss, DGB).

1064 attacks two innocents (Xtoxm, Malyss). I don't think this post is all that scummy though.

1377 was decent again.

I'm inclined to think BMQ/Nuwen is probably town.

Elvis again makes a subtle attempt to employ a "misunderstanding" of mechanics to grant window to possible lurking buddies. This ambiguity is more understandable and less contrived.

What are you referring to here?

I thought Nuwen's strongest point again elvis_knits was the mountainous thing. I myself once readied to vote a lurker past the 48-hour mark (before rofl hammered Malyss). Perhaps this was technically an incorrect move, but I don't think in itself it was scummy.

That said I'm unsure of elvis_knits' response (this post, 1790, was why I started re-reading BMQ in the first place):

Also, Nuwen, your theory that lynching lurkers at the 48 hours mark is more likely to hit town is still not correct.

If everyone knows we intend to lynch lurkers at 48 hours, town would know to avoid that.

I dislike all of your strategy/math analysis. It is very easy to adapt stats to fit your needs, especially when you're not using numbers or any kind of provable quantity. You're relying on some imaginary "statistical intuition." As a math person, you should know that is a load of crapola.

You're ignoring most of the game, and most of the players to hit on one thing that

I said that actually should tell you that I am town. You're actually ignoring logic to make graphs and analogies to try to prove that I am scum. You are not making sense. It reminds me a lot of the other game, where you were scum pushing the idea that "lynching claimed power roles is statistically more likely to hit scum, so let's lynch all power roles."

Nice try.

unvote; vote Nuwen

The bold part is where it starts to get waffly and scummy. I think elvis might be relying on us making the assumption that because Nuwen misused stats to her own scummy ends in WIH2, she is doing the same here.

In conclusion, however, I am honestly wondering why (and kicking myself as a result) we haven't lynched MafiaSSK yet. I'm pretty sure he has already shown his PR is fake but insists on being...extremely scummy.

I'm not trying to avoid discussing the image wagon- I will answer for my actions in voting him. He asked me to re-read his case on rofl and I got side-tracked and haven't had time to do so yet.

I will

Unvote

for the time being for the speed with which his wagon has garnered votes, and consider him in isolation next.