Mini 810: Infection! Mini - Game over!

[Xylthixlm]

Day 1 Vote Count

fallen angel -

2

(Kise, populartajo)

no lynch

-

1

(veerus)
veerus -

1

(Rally Vincent)
Kise -

1

(fallen angel)
Mokina -

1

(Kelly Chen)
Kelly Chen -

1

(charter)

Not voting: malthusis, Shotty to the Body, Battle Mage, Mokina, Kid Know Nothing
With 12 alive it will take 7 to lynch.

[Battle Mage]

nailing kelly chen-scum on Day 1 would be so awesome.

Reading Mokina now.

BM

[Battle Mage]

To be fair

there's some merit

Neutral wording.

Haha, thats dumb. How many games have you played here?

BM

Instead of antagonizing, maybe you could show him why that vote wasn't warranted. Shotty - to give an example, a town protective role might fakeclaim bulletproof. Nonprotective protowns don't need to know who their doctor is, and scum are less likely to waste their time trying to shoot a NK-immune target with no other powers. In a closed or semi-open setup, a doc can get away with doing this and benefit the town overall.

These instances are rare, and protowns

generally

shouldn't fakeclaim. In this particular game, the only case I can think of would be a genuine scientist claiming test subject. There are no set quotas for each role (preventing a two-protown counterclaim situation), and it might just work as a nightkill deterrent. Test subjects are very clearly at the bottom of the infection priority list.

What's with the attempt to teach? Nice as it is, we're playing to find scum, and you don't seem to be considering whether Shotty is scummy here-merely assuming he is a bad player.

I think a No-Lynch might be worth a punt.

Unvote, Vote: NL

BM

Not worth it. The daygame makes it or breaks it for us (fallen angel knows what's up - read his post).

Again, no attempt is made to assess my affiliation.

I know you like short posts, but do you

still

think NL is a good idea, or are you finally convinced? If this endorsement is a silly ploy to make me unvote you, it is both transparent and amusing.

Strong response to my rash comment, but not inherently protown. Rather, it seems very gloaty, and not genuinely suspicious.

Later attacks Kid, who seems quite likely town to me.

BM

[populartajo]

Really, why isnt fallen angel not even near to be lynched yet?

[populartajo]

@Tajo - What is it about veerus that you believe is town-like? I'm having an opposing reading of him.

Its about the motivation.

First, scum are less likely to bring polemic ideas to the game. It gathers unnecessary attention.

Second, if you deeply analyse veerus proposition, you can see a protown motivation in his idea. Yeah, there are fatal flaws as some have already explained but reread that post assuming veerus is town.

Upon re-reading the infected role, do the scum

have

to infect someone at night? How do the previous theories hold up if the scum just let the town lynch each other without bothering to infect anyone?

I think it makes more sense to vote no-lynch and let the security guard & scientist roles shoot it out with the scum at night.

This way we don't risk accidentally lynching those roles and we don't force them to claim and out themselves either.

When you consider the fact that there are test subjects in the mix who may or may not be infected, I must say I like our chances.

unvote; vote: no lynch

There you go, the motivation at bold.

[Mokina]

@Tajo - What is it about veerus that you believe is town-like? I'm having an opposing reading of him.

Its about the motivation. First, scum are less likely to bring polemic ideas to the game. It gathers unnecessary attention. Second, if you deeply analyse veerus proposition, you can see a protown motivation in his idea. Yeah, there are fatal flaws as some have already explained but reread that post assuming veerus is town.

:goodposting:

I agree that veerus may well have all protown interest at heart here. Even as popular opinion and an observation of flaws turned most of the town against a NL, he continued to take up a controversial (polemic?) position of pointing out its merits. One could argue WIFOM, but it seems like too foolish a scum strategy to be enacted by a reasoning player like veerus. If someone else had put the idea forward and veerus had supported it with no comment whatsoever ...

that's

the kind of sketchiness I would vote for.

BM's support of the plan felt opportunistic, latching on to an ultimately antitown proposal, then discarding it when it became clear it wasn't going to fly. He still acts antitown in general, but I understand that's part and parcel, given meta. Has anyone else played with him enough to know the difference between BM-as-usual and BM-scum?

Rally Vincent

- Veerus did try to back it up for a while, and even the compromise of the deadline seems as if he's just a protown with tunnel vision about his own clever plan. Didn't seem vote-worthy.

[malthusis]

@Tajo - What is it about veerus that you believe is town-like? I'm having an opposing reading of him.

Its about the motivation.

First, scum are less likely to bring polemic ideas to the game. It gathers unnecessary attention.

Second, if you deeply analyse veerus proposition, you can see a protown motivation in his idea. Yeah, there are fatal flaws as some have already explained but reread that post assuming veerus is town.

Upon re-reading the infected role, do the scum

have

to infect someone at night? How do the previous theories hold up if the scum just let the town lynch each other without bothering to infect anyone?

I think it makes more sense to vote no-lynch and let the security guard & scientist roles shoot it out with the scum at night.

This way we don't risk accidentally lynching those roles and we don't force them to claim and out themselves either.

When you consider the fact that there are test subjects in the mix who may or may not be infected, I must say I like our chances.

unvote; vote: no lynch

There you go, the motivation at bold.

I find that "Scum don't want unnecessary attention" scumtell is not one to rely on because in the games I've played, there is usually one scum who tries to be a main pillar of the town to make sure they don't get lynched.
(A great example of this in a game I was in is in Mini 779, where Imaginality stayed off everyone's scumdar's and if the game had gone into endgame, he would have convincingly fooled the town). Also, when does saying a suggestion that is a good for the town make you exceptionally pro-town?

[Kise]

No lynching is a hard idea for me to accept due to the fact the Infected pass on their disease to another, then die. So that means that if someone, like Shotty, who I get a heavy town-vibe from, got infected during the night, I'd still be confident in him despite the fact he turned into a scumbag.

Letting others get infected during Night 1 will really confuse things going into Day 2.

[charter]

Kise, who are the two people you find most suspicious currently and why?

[Kise]

I can only list two? That's no fun.

I get a weird vibe from Tajo.. obviously, he hasn't said anything scummy, but the things he says just make my gut feel funny. I'm curious to know more about how he came to the conclusion of who is prob-town & prob-scum.

As for my 2nd suspect... I don't have anything to make a strong case on anyone, so as far as everyone else goes, you all are somewhere in the middle.

Bermuda Triangle.

[charter]

I could go for a Kise lynch too.

[Kise]

Go for it then.

Unvote; Vote: charter

Ha! I dare you to be OMGUSy.

[Battle Mage]

BM's support of the plan felt opportunistic, latching on to an ultimately antitown proposal, then discarding it when it became clear it wasn't going to fly. He still acts antitown in general, but I understand that's part and parcel, given meta. Has anyone else played with him enough to know the difference between BM-as-usual and BM-scum?

BM scum cares. BM scum lurks.

Pleas elaborate on what you mean by "acts antitown in general".

Vote: Mokina

Didnt do this earlier, but the reaction seals it for me.

BM

[charter]

Go for it then.

Unvote; Vote: charter

Ha! I dare you to be OMGUSy.

Just curious, but is there any reason/s behind this vote, or is it just for the hell of it?

From my experience, BM scum lurks hardcore.

[Kise]

Sorry... I missed the RVS and had to get that out of my system.

So, care to explain what it is about Post 229 that makes me suspicious?

[malthusis]

Sorry... I missed the RVS and had to get that out of my system.

So, care to explain what it is about Post 229 that makes me suspicious?

I see no Post 229

[Kise]

209***

[Battle Mage]

Go for it then.

Unvote; Vote: charter

Ha! I dare you to be OMGUSy.

Just curious, but is there any reason/s behind this vote, or is it just for the hell of it?

From my experience, BM scum lurks hardcore.

This is true, but anyone exploiting this meta will be shot.

BM

[Kelly Chen]

Yeah, about not posting... I have decided to now post every single day, starting with at least one more post today. I think that's the only way I can stop dreading checking in to see what I've missed.

So if I don't post every day, lynch me, TIA.

See you later this evening.

[Kelly Chen]

Ok, Shotty asked a few questions, including about Mokina. Let me whip through that for now.

My overall feeling from my read was that despite posting a lot, she mostly talks strategy. When I ignore all that and just look at actions that might find scum, I don't like it. I don't know how I'd characterize it overall, and that's why I asked for any thoughts on this point.

I haven't done a lot either, I'm a hypocrite, yes I know.

Post 14
charter (I am pretty sure it was) said his suspects were Kid and Shotty. Shotty asks why, he's more suspicious of lurkers (than himself, ahaha), fine. Mokina agrees that she wants reasons and defends Shotty in a way that strikes me as unnatural. She says

QFT. I'd like to hear why. Shotty at least is willing to think aloud and plan the best course of action - at this stage, that's all the protown you can hope for.

I kind of understand this, but I can't quite get past the fact that she's not just asking for rationale, she's apparently denying that there's anything that could be scummy about him. Or else that you shouldn't vote for people who are talking? I guess that would be more charitable

then this:

There are definitely some active lurkers out there that seem content to have the town go blind into this, and they are making me worried.

It could just be me but this seems like a really unnatural way to say this.

post 15

...for lurking.

Thanks for pointing it out. To tell the truth, we're way past the random voting stage and I don't see nearly enough analysis. Scumvibes from the lurkers - and Battle Mage in particular should speak up.

Unvote

,

Vote: Battle Mage

"Thanks for pointing it out"? More weird buddying here or what?

I haven't been clear on whether this vote was really warranted (relative to other players), or if it just aimed to add pressure, which would be odd since there seems to be particular beef with BM here.

16

Good call.

17

(fallen angel knows what's up - read his post)

><

Dislike the FOS on Veerus in post 18, and the reiteration in 20

Is a policy of no-lynching if we cut it close to the deadline really a decent back-up plan? I am somewhat concerned about this proposition - from my understanding, it's general agreement that this would improve the chances of the scum and that we should play the day game as much as possible. The case against Battle Mage is primarily due to his lurk tendency, but he was also a supporter of your proposed policy ... which is still looking like an antitown push, if not outright scummy.

I would suggest that guards avoid using their nightkill at all, until we at least have some day suspicions to go on. Having one or two uninformed, infection-prone security duke it out with two or three informed scum has bad odds written all over it. Even if the guards don't die fast, we'd be handing the infected a victory - the security guards have the special antitown power of killing otherwise NK-immune test subjects in a heartbeat. By extension, this plan's looking more and more like a scumtell.

Did Mokina really believe this? To me it looks like she's keeping the door open to a veerus vote, others willing.

21: explains the BM vote, I guess. "I voted for you because you were a lurker who I know can make serious posts. I could just as easily have voted for Kid Know Nothing, but feh."

I'm not sure this is consistent with post 15. To be fair, maybe it isn't supposed to be.

post 22

So you were unwilling to apply pressure to me because of... "feh?"

If you are going after one player, why not go after someone else who has done the same thing as well?

Good point! At the time of the vote, I had no preference between the missing people, but now I do.

Unvote, Vote: Kid Know Nothing

At least Battle Mage is doing some legit posting now.

I almost thought Kid Know Nothing had some kind of limited access, but this looks like a clear-cut case of active lurking. I mean, Kid doesn't say a word for pages and pages. As soon as a suspicion post mentions him by name, however, he manages a knee-jerk reply in less than an hour's time. If this isn't scummy, it's antitown.

I don't want to think too hard about how much I agree or disagree with this vote for these reasons. But it bothers me that Mokina seems to want to be very clear about why she votes. She even explains that if it's not scummy, it at least hurts the town. To my mind scum might like to do this because it prevents difficult questions (and possibly votes) if you don't leave room for any.

For instance, if I just vote someone without saying anything, or I say something that isn't the whole story or could be misconstrued, there's a greater risk that someone won't buy it, may vote me, may drill me on it, may reject my answers as being contrived only now that I've been called on it. I think that especially scum want to avoid this situation because it means more attention if nothing else.

In the next post she unvotes Kid for his "acceptable justification" of not being interested in theory. I guess she can trust him on that. That's odd isn't it? That vote lasted under a day.

The only other thing I want to say is that I have trouble seeing Mokina's stance that BM's NL vote was "opportunistic, latching on to an ultimately antitown proposal, then discarding it when it became clear it wasn't going to fly." I have trouble seeing that vote as anything but thoughtless or silly. Three people had already shot the idea down. I can't see him being so clever as to understand that NL is antitown yet so dense as to think it could get anywhere.

The end. Back tomorrow.

[populartajo]

Sorry, I had a very busy and alcoholic weekend.

Ill post at night

[Rally Vincent]

Upon re-reading the infected role, do the scum

have

to infect someone at night? How do the previous theories hold up if the scum just let the town lynch each other without bothering to infect anyone?

I think it makes more sense to vote no-lynch and let the security guard & scientist roles shoot it out with the scum at night.

This way we don't risk accidentally lynching those roles and we don't force them to claim and out themselves either.

When you consider the fact that there are test subjects in the mix who may or may not be infected, I must say I like our chances.

unvote; vote: no lynch

There you go, the motivation at bold.

At that point, we already we were agreeing that nobody should claim, so the part about not forcing power roles to claim is invalid. In addition, veerus didn't - up to yet - tell us which kind of discussion should have taken place without voting, he didn't start any kind of other discussion, nor taken part in the following. Neither did he unvote his NL nor vote for someone else. He proposed a disadvantagous plan and did nothing to find scum - yet nobody seems to care about that.

[Mokina]

I don't want to think too hard about how much I agree or disagree with this vote for these reasons. But it bothers me that Mokina seems to want to be very clear about why she votes. She even explains that if it's not scummy, it at least hurts the town. To my mind scum might like to do this because it prevents difficult questions (and possibly votes) if you don't leave room for any.

For instance, if I just vote someone without saying anything, or I say something that isn't the whole story or could be misconstrued, there's a greater risk that someone won't buy it, may vote me, may drill me on it, may reject my answers as being contrived only now that I've been called on it. I think that especially scum want to avoid this situation because it means more attention if nothing else.

Pleas elaborate on what you mean by "acts antitown in general".

I disagree. I believe stating one's reasoning opens up far more lines of questioning. There's really no better way to bring people into a dialogue.

If I were to vote for someone silently, with no case, people would grumble. That is all - and for scum, it's

much safer

to lurk and post the occasional vote. After all, an argument based on "unclear voting" falls apart rather quickly ... and for a good reason: quiet votes, however antitown, are a null alignment tell. I hate to pull out strategy here, but if you take out all the supposed reasoning behind the votes, you end up with a pretty scum-favorable game. Nobody slips, so none of the votes are based on anything worthwhile. Eventually we get bored, cave to a scum wagon, and agree on an uninformed lynch.

See Battle Mage for an example of why this is infuriating. The best I can do is vote for people who

don't

explain their votes until they start scumhunting again. It's ridiculously difficult to uncover someone's motivations if they don't talk, and it ended up being BM's occasional surfacing versus Kid Know Nothing's almost absent silence.

[Kelly Chen]

Why did you quote BM there?

If you state your reasoning comprehensively there may be more discussion, but it will probably be on more favorable terms than if you leave things open to (mis)interpretation. To be less abstract, if I imagine you voting for Kid with less of the explanations, I think there's a good chance someone would have tried to call you on whether that vote was sensible or not. On its face it would look like you voted somebody for showing up and asking a reasonable question.

What I'm saying is that you seemed eager to prevent any such misunderstanding, or further questioning. Even after you write out your reasoning you finish with "If this isn't scummy, it's antitown." A good example of what I'm saying: There's now no point in me asking you whether you really think Kid's behavior is scummy, because you've already suggested that you may not think that, and it doesn't matter to your vote anyway. I wonder why you pointed that out?

[populartajo]

Really, why isnt fallen angel not even near to be lynched yet?

I want everyones opinions on this guy.

Kaythxbay.