Mini 804 - The Resistance - Mod Abandoned

[Fishythefish]

/confirm

[Fishythefish]

It's a pathetic chance we manage to get no scum on the plans. I want to get a number of scum other than one on the plans, so I'd advocate giving plans to scummy people. I do not want a set of plans.

[Fishythefish]

OK. First set of plans doesn't seem that important tbh. I'll role dice between the other 8 players, ordered in the order the mod gave.

Albert B. Rampage
Crazy
Knight of Cydonia
forbiddanlight
ortolan
veerus
PsychoSniper
NabakovNabakov

Original Roll String: 1d8

1 8-Sided Dice: (4) = 4

Between the remaining 7:

Original Roll String: 1d7

1 7-Sided Dice: (3) = 3

Between the remaining 6:

Original Roll String: 1d6

1 6-Sided Dice: (3) = 3

[Fishythefish]

Thats ABR, NabNab and Crazy.

Proposal: Albert B. Rampage, NabakovNabakov and Crazy receive plans

[Fishythefish]

The reasons why I want a quick day:

Even if I had a pretty decent guess at the alignment at a couple of players, I would still want pretty much random plans. Given this, I see no real reason to extend matters. There is no death; there is no discussion today that cannot be had tomorrow. We may as well get a bit of information before starting the discussion.
Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

[Fishythefish]

Do you mean in thread or by PM? This is important.

Thread.

[Fishythefish]

I think Fishy is a Spy

It's a pathetic chance we manage to get no scum on the plans. I want to get a number of scum other than one on the plans, so I'd advocate giving plans to scummy people. I do not want a set of plans.

It's true that if you choose randomly you don't have a particularly good chance of getting 3 Rebels:

5/9 * 5/9 * 5/9 = 17.2%

Actually, 5/9*4/8*3/7=11.9%. And ok, suppose you thought you could raise this, double it even. Then what are your chances that you are just a little bit wrong? One spy on the plans is a terrible outcome. I don't believe there is a method which is substantially better than randomness for not getting exactly one spy today.

Furthermore, do you know whether the "chance" odds increase substantially on subsequent days anyway? If we play it like a game of chance we're more than likely going to lose.

By choosing randomly you not only confine yourself to these odds, but you also deny us the opportunity to form opinions about your motivations in selecting the players you did.

I’m not proposing chance planning every day. Today, I see no reason to discuss anything, since I can’t see that there could be a decent strategy to choose the planners. By being demonstrably random, I remove the worry that I am picking an advantageous set for the scum.

I do not want a set of plans.

What is your rationale for excluding yourself? (Please no-one else answer for him).

Covered this. The wrong number of spies on the plans is one. Excluding myself reduces that possibility (to be precise, from 47.6% to 42.9%)

We may as well get a bit of information before starting the discussion.

The information comes at a price though. It's exactly the same as random lynching day one, complete with no reactions to the day one lynch to judge people on, as Naba said.

No. It’s completely different. Reactions to today’s decision are going to be stilted hugely by the fact that there is no sound logic to make it in any particular way- in fact, it’s hard to see how they could be more informative than the reactions we are getting right now. If we had talked a while, I would have ended up making a random or arbitrary decision (certainly, I would have refused to go for a protown set of planners). Conversely, simple thoughts about scumminess, unrelated to planning, can wait until tomorrow, so we don’t lose anything there either. Also, it will be hugely easier than in a normal game for scum to guide the decision when it’s being taken three times- and just once would be very damaging. And we are not losing a player by randoming today.

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Daytalk in the thread is the only way for scum to communicate, and there's nothing concrete for town to discuss until we see the results of the first porposal, so short day benefits town today.

Is the 48hr time limit mandatory? Or can it end prematurely?

So does this mean the less talk from town (just for Day 1), the better?

You're kidding right? If any rebels have the attitude "we must make the day as quick and random as possible because scum might day-talk and we might not be able to catch them" we may as well give up now. It's no different to any normal mafia game in this regard.

Yeah, this was a bit of an afterthought. I’m certainly not advocating this in general. I think it is a little different, as daytalk hints are so powerful in this game.

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Attempting to incite paranoia about the scum day-talking or communicating via code is a tactic I've seen previously used by scum in a nightless game:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... c&&start=0

See Corvuus' 368

It basically amounts to just blindly declaring "well scum might find a totally secret way of communicating which we won't be able to spot and somehow the benefits for them will severely outweigh the risk of being caught; so we'd better just do everything randomly and without discussion." This ignores the fact, of course, that random lynches/ plan distribution is always the worst possible manner of playing. I ask you how you propose the scum are going to be able to day-talk while keeping it totally invisible to us, having not had the chance to co-ordinate themselves at any point prior to the game. It's exactly the same thing I asked Corvuus (who was scum) in that game, and received no satisfactory reply (because he was scum).

The problem with this game is that one tiny hint about intent to sabotage or not sabotage, perhaps in the form of thoughts about scum tactics, could do a huge amount of damage. We must all look out for these, and treat them as enormously scummy. Anything that could be construed as a hint is very dangerous, and townies should be careful not to make them. In the game you reference, there was no way in which the scum could make an enormous gain with minimal communication. Your appeal to history is totally unjustified.

[Fishythefish]

I don't believe there is a method which is substantially better than randomness for not getting exactly one spy today.

Ok, but how is using a non-random method

worse

than random for not getting exactly one spy? Plus, using a non-random method gives us more information for subsequent days.

I believe it will be worse because the scum have to guide just one of three decisions. The information factor will be severely reduced by the fact that there is no rhyme or reason to the decisions being taken.

Can you define in definite terms what comprises "an advantageous set for the scum"?

Exactly one scum is advantageous. Beyond that, I imagine 2 scum is rather better than three or none.

Actually, I just did the maths, and they look bad for Fish:

If you randomly select players, the odds of only one player being a spy are 4/9 * 5/8 * 4/7 = 15.87%

If you exclude yourself and are a rebel, the odds of only one player being a spy are 4/8 * 4/7 * 3/6 = 14.2857%

If you exclude yourself and are a spy, the odds of only player being a spy are 3/8 * 5/7 * 4/6 = 17.857%

So basically, if you actually are a rebel, by excluding yourself you make it 1.3 percentage points less likely that we will have a scenario where only one Spy has the plans. This is hardly a worthwhile difference in exchange for getting no information out of your choices.

However, if you are a Spy, you're actually making it 2 percentage points

more

likely that we will have a situation where we have only one Spy on the plans. Basically, your maths doesn't check out, at all. And having the "worst" outcome (it is not clear how much "worse" it is either than the alternatives) very, very moderately more likely to occur is worth getting absolutely no information out of day one how exactly? Your maths don't check out at all as I've looked at them. Plus your "worst case scenario" only has about a 15% chance of happening

anyway

.

I'm afraid your maths is dodgy again. You need to multiply all your numbers by three. Explanation follows in a largely irrelevant maths post.

This is partly true, but "anything that could be construed as a hint" is not very dangerous, it has to actually

be

a hint to be dangerous, for obvious reasons.

Far from true- I want to be able to treat potential hints as scumtells, so I don't want townies accidentally dropping them.

Please name a conceivable way in this game scum could attempt to co-ordinate with minimal risk this game. No, it is not scummy to ask for this (as was again suggested in that previous game). I do not believe there is one.

Any reference to potential scum night tactics would be the most obvious example.

[Fishythefish]

EBWOP:
Actually, I don't have time for the maths post right now. I'm sure someone else will back me up, otherwise I'll explain. To convince yourself; work out the probabilities of 0,1,2,3 scum in that way- they won't add up to 1.

[Fishythefish]

The thing is, setup discussion works just as well tomorrow. I think that, without information, we are unlikely to be able to make a better than random selection. There are four scum. They have three decisions to guide- it's not going to be difficult for them to make one of them go the right way, and that's probably all it will take, to push us from two scum to 1 or 0 to 2.

If discussion of the decision is not going to get us a better than random result (today), it is a hugely artificial thing, and isn't going to produce good information. If someone can convince me that we are likely going to get a better result by discussion, I'll vote no for the proposal.

[Fishythefish]

On reflection, I've changed my mind. I'm not sure randomness is the way to go.
I think the following is worth considering:
Split the town up into three blocks of three, taken at random. Assign the plans to one of them, based on discussion- probably go for the block which we guess has the most scum in it, but anyway the aim should surely be to avoid just one scum on the plans.
The good thing about this method is it negates micro manipulation from the scum. It would take a lot more skill to get us to choose the wrong set of three players than to get us to get just one player wrong.
The random odds are unaffected (as, clearly, each set of three players is still equally likely to get the plans).

In subsequent rounds, I definitely think we should try to get as many pro-town people as possible, but here, I don't think it matters that much, because whatever happens, we benefit. Fishy might be right that the least ideal situation is exactly one spy in the group; I don't know about that,

and I don't think it's necessarily true that that spy will always sabotage.

*shrug*

You want to see how scum could daytalk? Here's the first example. A comment which, coming from someone to whom the plans are being distributed, could imply he plans not to sabotage them tonight.

[Fishythefish]

Just to get this on the record, are you calling him out as a townie slipping up or as scum who probably shouldn't (should?) get the plans?

If scum, certainly shouldn't, having declared intention.
I think that this comment could be daytalking, or it could be a slip. I really don't know. I think this sort of comment should be very deliberately and carefully not made in a way which could give any indication as to your own intentions.

[Fishythefish]

Y

ou want to see how scum could daytalk? Here's the first example.

A

comment which, coming from someone to whom the plans are being distributed, could imply he plans not to sabotage them tonight.

I don't understand what you're getting at here. Do you

think

that was a breadcrumb or are you just citing it as a possible example? Because I can find fake breadcrumbs anywhere. Look how I bolded the first letters of your sentences? Are you saying "YA, I'm going to sabotage my plan tonight."

There is a clear difference between highlighting arbitrary letters and discussing what scum may or may not do at night.

[Fishythefish]

But my post had a clear meaning... I was discussing that scum might not always sabotage if there was only one of them. If I'm scum and I'm the only scum that received a plan, then why would I need to breadcrumb my action.

That part of your post was not really relevant to the game, expressed no opinion, and talked about the possibility of a spy not sabotaging tonight. Whether or not it was intentional, this is far too close to a breadcrumb. I'm not trusting the scum to be stupid enough not to make the link between not sabotaging with one scum and not sabotaging with multiple scum.

[Fishythefish]

Because I don't see it making a difference. I like the idea of having some facts to base on our scumhunting, and I don't know what the optimal amount of town/scum to have in the plan is.

Then surely that is something to discuss. There have been opinions put forward on the matter. I think that, for a start, it is beyond doubt that scum would want exactly one team member on a proposal- in that case they can make the decision about sabotage unhindered by worries about teammates. This is the scenario to avoid.
PychoSniper's suggestion of keeping my proposal doesn't smell right to me. He wanted to keep it for very bad reasons- he implies that it would be fine to have a proposal with one scummier player on it, which is the worse of all possible worlds. I wouldn't be surprised if he were scum with exactly one of ABR, NabNab and Crazy- and since two of these players voted in favour of the plans, this would fit quite well with either of them.
A summary of reactions to my proposal:
ABR: happy with it throughout. Clear from 19 will vote yes.
Crazy: happy with it throughout. Clear from 25 will vote yes.
Pyscho: Clear yes vote throughout- from 27.
forbiddanlight: Happy in 24. Changes mind in 60.
Fishy: Proposes it. Changes mind in 54- from here, clearly voting no.
NabNab: Negative but possible fence sitting in 22. Clear from 51 will vote no.
veerus: Firmly on the fence in 37. A "no" from 70.
KoC: Clear no vote from first post, 47.
ortolan: Clear no vote from 29 onwards. (Incidentally, maths is still slightly wrong, in a way which reflects well on me- if I was a spy, random method would be advantageous to me.)

Some of these "clears" are not perhaps not completely so, but most opinions on this were fairly firmly held. Until my change of heart, in 54, there were 5 people intending to vote yes, 3 to vote no (including Nab), and one thoroughly on the fence- so it looked to be going through. After this, it was far less certain, at 4 apiece and one on the fence, and post 60 from forbiddanlight was the death knell of the proposal.

It would be very good to have lots or no scum on the proposal today. The proposal yesterday was either good or bad for the scum, and so they are more than averagely likely to have voted together. For this reason, I would be strongly in favour of having the proposal drawn from one of two pools;
No Pool: KoC, ortolan, NabNab, veerus, me
Yes Pool: ABR, Crazy, Pyscho, forbiddanlight, veerus, me
veerus's actions are coherent with the proposal being either good or bad for him, so he goes in both pools. Same goes for me. But I don't want any plans.

@ABR: what constitutes a good outcome for a proposal? Why do you think those three players will fulfil this?

[Fishythefish]

I'm far more interested about those to rejected it, all of them. Do you object to this random assignment because you already have the specific "candidates" you want in mind? Or is it just because you object to any particular person getting the plan.

Neither, really. I thought the proposal had sparked a lot of interesting debate (a welcome if not an intended outcome), and that we had enough information to make decisions which would be better than random and would inform us for later days.

[Fishythefish]

Actually afaik my maths are correct as of my latest revision. This isn't a criticism of you though. I would probably support a me - Fish - Naba as the first three to get three town on the plans at first at present.

I'm not sure that the whole "people who post the most content are most likely town" thing works well in a setup like this. In a normal mafia game, scum just have to survive, really. Here they have to prove their worth, and putting through 3 people that are trying their hardest to look pro-town doesn't seem right.

Yeah, this is WIFOM, but that's what I live on. It just seems that scum would try harder to get on the plans than town. And seeing how both you and Fishy were

not

on the plan and were fighting against the plan... well, you can see what I'm saying. I'd be surprised if both of you were town, really.

Your first point appears to be that content is a scumtell. I completely disagree. If you think we are trying hard to look protown, in a false way, point out why. Otherwise you are just randomly slinging mud at people.

Your second point is that scum want to be on the plans, and therefore that ort and I are more likely scum.
1) At this stage in the game, it isn't at all clear that scum would want to be on the plans.
2) You've said yourself that you have no idea what kind of decision is good for the town- and hence for the scum- at the moment.
3) You appear to have randomly selected two of the six players who voted no.
4) I've repeatedly said I don't want the plans. I excluded myself from my random numbers.

Your position is completely incoherent.

[Fishythefish]

P.S. Not in any way intended to say I agree with ort's idea. Haven't really thought about it.

[Fishythefish]

Anyone can talk theory and look pro-town. It's hard for scum to post content in the ways of scum-hunting, but talking theory is not hard... and thus doesn't need to be rewarded by having plans given.

Firstly, this setup is a complete unknown. Theory is extremely important, and if we don't understand the theory I can't see us winning. Secondly, you were saying that people who had posted a lot of theory were more likely to be scum- not just that it was a nulltell. Both the players you named have contributed more than the average to scumhunting discussions (or certainly done more than several other players), so the accusation that we are covering for lack of scumhunting is false.

Your second point is that scum want to be on the plans, and therefore that ort and I are more likely scum.
1) At this stage in the game, it isn't at all clear that scum would want to be on the plans.
2) You've said yourself that you have no idea what kind of decision is good for the town- and hence for the scum- at the moment.
3) You appear to have randomly selected two of the six players who voted no.
4) I've repeatedly said I don't want the plans. I excluded myself from my random numbers.

Okay, if you don't believe ort's plan, then I'll take you out of the picture and focus on ort, then.

1. He believes that we should try to get plans of all town. Scum at least want

one

of their people on the plans, most likely, so they'd try to look pro-town.
2. Yeah, well that's me... and I'm not really going with the grain here.
3. It's because ort picked you two on the plan, and Nab. Nab didn't matter to me because he was on the plan to begin with.
4. But you changed your mind.

I'm not saying ort is obvscum, but I don't agree with his philosophy. I'd much prefer ABR's proposal.

OK. Well, I agree that a decent scum tactic is nominating two townie looking town players, and a townie looking scum. Picking

two

townie looking scum would be completely nonsensical- in fact ort's plan clearly distances him from the two players on it.
I never changed my mind about not wanting plans.

Currently, I would be extremely opposed to any set of players involving someone who was definitely in favour of my proposal and someone who was definitely against it. I don't feel that many players have acted overwhelmingly scummily, and I think our chances of just guessing three townies are very low. I would reject any "townie" ticket that doesn't involve me out of hand- I just don't feel confident about enough people, and the chances of ending up with just one scum are too high. I like:
veerus-Pyscho-forbiddanlight; coherent as a scumteam in favour of a 1-scum proposal from me yesterday.
I'd like people making proposals to explain the logic behind them. I really think it's too early in the game to go for three townies on a ticket.

[Fishythefish]

Btw I'm NOT aiming to group 3 spies together at this point, because Nabakov and FL have flapped their mouths far too much so its likely they have breadcrumbed their potential action already.

Let's get 3 rebels in on the plan.

This is paranoia. They haven't got a daytalking code, and it's as easy for the town to spot potential daytalking as other scum. What you are suggesting stops all discussion, and prevents us from following the optimal tactic- grouping together players who are likely to be scum together.

I think the best tactic for selecting the recipients is taking three players who voted the same way yesterday, and don't look particularly good.

[Fishythefish]

The way to win, is to have two scum sabotage at the same time in a group of three.

And yet you favour a proposal with yourself on it, and are supportive of going for a townie ticket. This makes no sense.

[Fishythefish]

If you think they have breadcrumbed, show us. Breadcrumbs must be there for all to see. They are an intolerably risky tactic for the scum.
Logic + Scumhunting > Logic

[Fishythefish]

If the answer to that question were yes, this game would be virtually unwinnable for the town. It must be no.

If we're going for a townie ticket, there is no reason for FL to exclude herself. Opposed as I am to a townie ticket, I could stomach something like FL/me/ort or FL/me/NabNab. I would still favour a scummy ticket- perhaps Crazy/Pyscho/veerus is the best, as people who were all in favour of my proposal yesterday (or fence sat until it was too late), and hence are correlated, and individually don't look all that good.

[Fishythefish]

And I'm really liking ABR now... I didn't consider that multiple sabotages was the best option for town, but he's absolutely right.

This point has been brought up multiple times by multiple players. Why is this particular instance particularly townish?

[Fishythefish]

Why the heck is FL on a "townie ticket?!" If she nominates herself and two other people on the basis of getting 3 townies, I will definitely not accept.

I see no reason to suppose FL is a spy. The sole argument against her seems to be asking a question with an obvious answer. To which my immediate reaction is a resounding "so what?". I don't see any coherent scummy motivation, and really don't see what all the fuss is about. As the current proposer, it would be only natural to see her on any townie ticket, and I wouldn't have a problem with that.

[Fishythefish]

guided proposal

My aim today is to minimise the risk of having a ticket with precisely one scum on it. This outcome lets that scum choose exactly the outcome of the night. I believe that by picking 3 scummy players for the ticket, we can reduce the odds below random.
Randomising the plans also removes the important element of who accepts and rejects them- useful information for later.

To be totally clear on my take on the scummy ticket idea:
- 1 scum on the plans is bad.
- Any other number is much, much better.
- If we pick a scum ticket, we can get a read wrong and still avoid 1 scum.
- If we pick a townie ticket, we can't.
The best of all possible worlds is multiple sabotages. But even if the scum choose not to sabotage for fear of this, that's good.

[Fishythefish]

hm, i didn't realize that... I'm still for a

random proposal

however. If we hand-pick people we will likely WIFOM ourselves to death and be forced to doubt all of our reads based on the results, especially if they are not what we expected. If we randomize the plans, we can evaluate the results in hindsight without a preconceived notion of who will do what.

This is a very odd post. You appear to be saying that we should evaluate night 1 independent of day 1. That's just throwing away information. I fail to see how there could be more WIFOM if we pick people.

[Fishythefish]

Post 168 is largely true.

Here is how I reconcile events with my gut:
1. The proposal had one scum on it. It had exactly one scum on it- either Crazy or ABR. Pyscho is scum. veerus, who held back on committing himself until it was obvious the proposal was hopeless, is scum. The fourth? Perhaps FL saw which way the wind was blowing and decided randomness looked bad after all. Perhaps the fourth scum just voted no.

2. If the proposal had two scum on it, they are likely to be ABR and NabNab. ABR supported randomness before the proposal was even made, which forced his hand a little. In this case, Crazy and Pyscho both look pretty good, which goes against the gut. One of them may have misunderstood the situation (IIRC, Crazy repeatedly said he didn't know what was good for scum), or just have been doing the equivalent of bussing. I don't much like this answer though- it makes Crazy and Pyscho probably innocent AND NabNab probably guilty.

3. If the proposal had no scum on it. Looks ok. My read on Crazy isn't the strongest, so I could go with this. Makes Pyscho look good- but not that good. I can see "no they've picked a townie ticket" as a possible scum reaction.

I think the model is useful- it shows that multiple scum on the ticket yesterday fit badly. The question that should be asked is "how much does the model need to break to fit in with my scenario?". I don't think it needs to stretch very far to accommodate the scummy players in the "proposal was good for scum" scenario.

Proposals I like atm:
1. Accepting scum: Pyscho, veerus, Crazy
2. Rejecting scum: drawn from KoC/FL/veerus/ortolan/NabNab (in rough order of preference)
3. Rejecting town: Me, NabNab, ortolan
4. Yesterdays proposal

[Fishythefish]

I would really like to know why ABR thinks FL is scum. He has stated or implied this about 10 times now, and the sole reason given is that discussion hurts the town- apparently this is a reason to suspect FL and NabNab but not, for example, me. Argument by blindly repeating a statement is not something I'm a fan of- it has a tendency to lodge an idea in people's heads.

I don't like the "whoever is mentioned most" idea either- it won't necessarily lead to a group of three people who make sense as a proposal together.

"Guided proposal" doesn't mean democracy. I don't think that having FL make a proposal on her own is a bad way to go- and then we can decide whether we like it or not. Otherwise, I suppose we could have a vote between several viable proposals- but that would be difficult in practise and I don't know where those proposals would come from.

[Fishythefish]

While I don't agree with ABR's frankly psychotic attacks in the main, I do agree that FL's flip-flop on self-nomination is extremely scummy. Therefore, I will

support any proposal that doesn't include FL or ABR.

That's really really dumb.

He's right on this one.
If you believe FL is a spy, you wouldn't accept a proposal she makes just because she's not in it. This is a completely incoherent attitude as a townie, and looks very bad.

[Fishythefish]

I think the scum knowing what we are thinking is a small price to pay for discussion and scumhunting, likely leading to better results.

Your strategy is going to lead to a mixture of suspected and non-suspected players. This is more likely to be a mix of scum and townie (hopefully)- which isn't the sort of ticket we want.

[Fishythefish]

Just because we don't have a consensus on whether we want a ticket comprising three scummy or three townie players doesn't mean that a jumble of some of each is acceptable.
If scum have to put forward their opinions, then it is much harder for them to vote down a plan. The vote is open, and if someone makes a vote which is not in line with their general stances, that looks suspicious. Keeping your feelings private leads to easy post hoc justifications of actions which benefit the scum.
The chances of getting a pure ticket may be pretty small. But a 2-scum ticket is acceptable, and I think the chances of getting at least 2 scum on a ticket are pretty good.

[Fishythefish]

I think FL should put forward a proposal.

Rebel
Me
NabNab
ortolan
FL
Veerus
Pyscho*
Crazy
Spy
I have no read on ABR or KoC. Pyscho I have a read on as scum, but frankly I've no idea why, and he needs rereading.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, I like that. You can't read me, therefore I'm a spy. Charming.

Hmmm? My post doesn't label you a spy. To clarify, when I say I can't read you it means I can't read you. I've no idea what you are.

The rebels, in descending order of confidence:
Me, NabNab, ort, FL. I suppose the fifth would be KoC.

Pyscho fits in with the theory that my proposal was good for scum- he supports it with half-baked ideas:

So yeah, I agree with Fishy. Daytalk in the thread is the only way for scum to communicate, and there's nothing concrete for town to discuss until we see the results of the first porposal, so short day benefits town today.

Daytalk paranoia- daytalk is something to look out for, but as long as we do that it can't happen without immense risks for the scum

Also, wouldn't the logical strategy be to leave the scummier players in the plan to gain more information? If more people are suspicious of Crazy, that's a logical place to start, he should be left in.

At the time, Crazy was being suspected of breadcrumbing. Having a breadcrumbe in the plans is a terrible idea. I don't like the phrasing, "if more people are suspicious of Crazy"- it displays an unwillingness to commit to a position himself. If Pyscho thinks Crazy is suspect, then he should say so- if not, the argument is invalid.

But I still believe it makes more sense to keep some scummier-looking players in the proposal. Unless we have reason to suspect both ABR and NN as well, I see no reason to cahnge the random setup.

This makes no sense- as Psycho had already acknowledged, we don't want a 1-scum proposal. If ABR and NN don't look bad, that was a reason to vote down my proposal.

Good job, you've just told you're fellow scum that "Hey, if you get grouped with Psycho, feel free to sabotage, because we'll just blame it on him!"

This post is a

far

better example of possible scum communication than anything Crazy has posted so far.

Seriously, stop giving scum hints of what to do, intentional or not!

From this point of view, we need to keep all of our opinions secret- pretty much as Psycho goes on to say.

His recent ideas are interesting, but in practise don't work. We can't just take a mishmash of whoever people want, with no consensus as to whether we want scum or town- that will just end up as a horrible mixed bag of protown and scummy players. I find the idea of hiding our opinions most antitown- we want to be able to pin scum to their positions. Particularly if people express their thoughts before a proposal, it's going to be harder to justify voting a convenient way for the scum. The flipside, of course, is that if FL is a spy she can craft the proposal to get accepted while still being proscum.

This is not exactly a brilliant case. But all in all, Psycho fits well with the idea that scum were in favour of the random proposal. If he is scum, I would expect exactly one of the people on my ticket to be scum- and conversely, if there is one scum on there Pyscho is a likely candidate.

[Fishythefish]

This is not exactly a brilliant case. But all in all, Psycho fits well with the idea that scum were in favour of the random proposal.

If he is scum, I would expect exactly one of the people on my ticket to be scum- and conversely, if there is one scum on there Pyscho is a likely candidate

.

Can you explain the bolded part to me again? I'm kind of lost here.

I think you being scum is well correlated with yesterday's proposal being good for the scum (ie. a 1-scum proposal).

Seems a bit odd that you're making a case on me for agreeing with you in the beginning. You may have changed your mind on that subject, but I haven't. Yeah, I've been told enough times that it's paranoia in this game, but I still think it's a justified one. And like I said, I was also concerned that letting the scum know too much of what we think will give them hints on how to make their moves. It's not just about scum communicating, but also about how much scum learns (more than us) from

our

(town) communication. And being able to communicate their intentions through this "discussion". A townie may talk about who he suspects because he truly suspects him, but a scum may talk about whom he suspects to hint to his buddies that "hey, good scapegoat here", or something in that vein.

OK. This is a bit of a change of stance from back then- the point that scum may daytalk is very different from the point about picking up information from us.
In this game, there is no way for us to discuss matters, and come to a consensus, without the scum knowing about it. That's got to be an acceptable price to pay to have 5 brains instead of 1.
It doesn't really matter that you were agreeing with me. What I said was wrong- while breadcrumbs are important to look out for, they aren't an argument for short days.

Yes, you're right, I

was

unwilling to commit a stand. At the time I

didn't

really think Crazy was supicious, and even if I

was

suspicious, I'll admit I don't think I would have said so, because.....well, you already know my position on town naming all their suspects by now.

The thing is, you said that having Crazy on the proposal was sensible because people thought him scummy. That's not a reason to have Crazy on the proposal- the reason should be that

you

thought he was scummy.

[Fishythefish]

What you object to in NabNab is only a slight extension of something I have said repeatedly- that it is likely the scum voted predominantly for the option that suited them. You object to this opinion in him, but have no problem with it when I hold it- this seems to be a double standard. What is the difference between our positions that makes his worse than mine?

[Fishythefish]

Fair enough.

[Fishythefish]

I'll be voting in favour of the proposal. I think it's a good shot at a townie ticket.

[Fishythefish]

You think FL is town?

My read on her was pretty neutral, verging on good (based very much off gut).

But if she were scum, consider the merits of the current proposal for her. Putting yourself up against the two townie players who probably have the most support in the town (with yourself being the possible exception) is foolish if you are going to sabotage, and foolish if you aren't. If I were FL-scum, I would certainly not have picked this proposal.

KoC: I don't understand from your post why you favour the proposal. Could you explain please?

[Fishythefish]

Well, actually, considering she's pretty much been written off as scum by quite a few people already I see little reason for her not to get in a sabotage and practically confirm herself as scum. Then we still need to work out who the other three scum are anyway, plus she wouldn't really be demonstrating something we didn't already know.

You have a point. Sending this proposal in is probably neutral rather than good for her scumminess.

I'll still be voting yes- I'm not expecting to get the perfect ticket out of today, and my townie reads numbers 1, 2 and 4 is a pretty good shot.

---

I really don't get where the FL obvscum contingent is coming from. As far as I can see, it's all based on one irrelevant question she asked.

---

I am certainly not accepting this proposal after you just told FL to sabotage and any other scum that might be on the proposal to not.

Totally incoherent. If FL is scum, you can be next to certain she is the only scum on the proposal. Quite simply, why put another on?

---

I expect my activity to change significantly from about next Monday. Probably for the worse, but I should still be able to review and post once a day.

[Fishythefish]

Wait, Fishy, when you pointed out my "breadcrumb," you proceeded to write me off as obvscum. Why is it suddenly okay when Ort does it? And now you're actually going to accept the proposal anyway? Total hypocrisy if you ask me.

Firstly, I've never written you off as obvscum (I'm practically certain)- and I have never been certain that your "breadcrumb" was intentional.
I find it deeply unlikely that FL and NabNab are scum together. Sure, there is always WIFOM, but two scum on the ticket is a big loss for a small gain. Because of this, ortolan's "breadcrumb" is unlikely to be meant as such- ort only needs to communicate with the scum on the wagon if there are 2.
I agree, however, that what ort said should not have been said. In this case, I'm fairly sure it was an alignment-neutral slip, but in general such things are not good. If FL wasn't the proposer, it would be enough to scrap the proposal.

[Fishythefish]

I agree about ort. However, I don't see why my breadcrumb was enough to put me at the very bottom of your scumlist.

You're quite right. Of all my reads, yours is the least well explained. It's not just for the breadcrumb. I'll explain my read on you soonish.

[Fishythefish]

How exactly would FL being the proposer make it more favourable in light of the slip/breadcrumb?

It is extremely unlikely that scum-FL proposed a ticket with herself and another scum on it. Therefore the breadcrumb is irrelevant- it only matters if there are multiple scum on the ticket.

[Fishythefish]

If FL is scum, ortolan's remark is almost irrelevant, as you express.

If not, all ortolan's remark says is "I personally will be blaming FL for sabotage". All this means is that right now, he thinks FL is scummier than NabNab or myself. This isn't binding, and certainly isn't binding for the whole town. Having this expressed before is no different to having a scumlist with FL higher than NN or me.
If we had reached some collective idea that if there is one sabotage, FL is autoscum, that would be a great reason to scrap the proposal. However, ortolan's remark really gives them very little to work with.

[Fishythefish]

My problems with Crazy:

Early on, Crazy wanted to go with random because he didn’t know what was best for the town. This is a terrible reason. If you don’t know what’s best for the town, you discuss it. This feels like a thin disguise for wanting a proposal that suits the scum. This persists after the rejected proposal- but he does eventually agree. Convenient to come around after, rather than before, the proposal was voted on.

Breadcrumb + response: actually, I’m relatively happy with this. I find Crazy’s reaction plausible as a reaction to being called out on a slip. I don’t agree with those who think he was too defensive; it was a pretty big accusation, and overdefensiveness is a crap scumtell. The whole episode is marginally scummy, but not a big deal.

His read on FL. The question she asked me has been blown ridiculously out of proportion. Scum only need to get 1 townie very mistrusted, and we have little chance of a win. It feels like the unexplained suspicions of ABR, if not from scum themselves, are being latched onto by other people. What FL did was not in any way beneficial for the scum, and writing her off as scum on the basis of this is so wrong as to be scummy. To be fair, his read has been somewhat retracted in his summary.

I assure you, even if I'm scum, that was not a breadcrumb.

I don't like this kind of sentence. It just doesn't feel like something a townie would write- why even bother considering that case?

After my reread, I think the breadcrumb is less of an issue than I did before. The same goes for his suspicions of FL; they have become more reasonable of late, and he criticised KoC for jumping on the FL wagon. I don’t like his play in relation to random proposals.

I think KoC looks pretty bad. He’s lurking, he’s voting yes on this proposal without any explanation and in direct contradiction to his previous position- that ABR and FL are scummy, and he’d vote for any proposal not containing them. He hasn’t given reasons for anything much.

[Fishythefish]

And no, Fishy's reason of "FL wouldn't put two scum on the same proposal" isn't good enough.

Of course she might have done. But it would be so disadvantageous for the scum that I view it as unlikely.
Since I know I'm a rebel, and have a fairly protown read on NabNab, this line of argument is obviously much more compelling for me than for you. As well as thinking that FL would be unlikely to put two scum on the proposal, I know one pair isn't the case, and the other seems unlikely.

[Fishythefish]

I was a rebel also, as I suspect a few people had guessed

[Fishythefish]

Yes. I really liked this setup, but felt it was going to be extremely difficult to win for the town.