Mini 911 - Mike's Pizzeria Mafia (Game Over)

[Thor665]

Thor's logic about lynching claimed vanilla townies is essentially right. The bottom line is that scum will not NK Seven, so, if we want him gone, we need to lynch him at some point. He's a good policy lynch, from that perspective.

But this here is what displeases me with the situation. You're now setting up a lynch of someone else (though I will admit no displeasure in seeing it be SeerPenguin) but you're already laying the groundwork for the eventual policy lynch of Seven for Day 2+ It doesn't seem to help our situation going into Day 2 with people who think Seven is a good policy lynch. If he's a policy lynch on Day 2 then let's bloody well lynch him now so we can focus on better scumhunting then and not give Scum a potential townie lynch in addition to having knowledge of Seven as a policy lynch for Day 2+

[evilsnail]

Fair observation, though I think there's more to be said. I don't see how you can say today that you don't want to lynch Seven and then say tomorrow that we should lynch him because it's good policy. The point I was trying to make, and perhaps I should have been clearer about this, is that the logic you outlined applies basically to any vanilla townie. As such, although the argumentation is solid, it is only valid if we are actually uncomfortable with keeping Seven around. You can't go lynching townies just for being townies.

Hopes that's clearer. I definitely didn't mean to imply that we need to lynch Seven at some point and that it doesn't matter when. If we're going to lynch Seven as a matter of policy, we should lynch him asap. Otherwise, you just risk keeping him around for too long.

[Thor665]

Fair observation, though I think there's more to be said. I don't see how you can say today that you don't want to lynch Seven and then say tomorrow that we should lynch him because it's good policy.

I'm not saying that - I'm saying that you are saying that. Specifically here;

The bottom line is that scum will not NK Seven, so, if we want him gone, we need to lynch him at some point. He's a good policy lynch, from that perspective.

I definitely didn't mean to imply that we need to lynch Seven at some point and that it doesn't matter when. If we're going to lynch Seven as a matter of policy, we should lynch him asap. Otherwise, you just risk keeping him around for too long.

So you agree that scum will not night kill Seven?
You agree that if Seven is to die it has to be by lynch?
You agree that if we are to lynch Seven then it needs to be done asap?
...and you vote SeerPenguin.

What that translates to me as from your stated position is that Seven is not scum and you have no concern of him being scum. What am I missing?

[Cuetlachtli]

Seven is the best lynch. He has claimed vanilla (or at least hasn't contested ppl calling him a vanilla). Generally, ppl consider him scummy. And finally, he has possible connections with 2-3 other players. Because of his possible connections with ppl and his vanilla claim, a Seven lynch could provide us with a lot of information without outing any Power Roles. If Seven does flip scum, then SP, Parama, and Dana are all likely scum partners. If Seven flips town, Thor and myself should get looked at closely for pushing so hard for a Seven lynch. Basically its a win-win for the town because there has been so much discussion about Seven's alignment. I am pretty sure that everyone has taken a position on what side they think Seven is on. Therefore, a Seven lynch should provide us with some clues on who is scum or not since we can judge who was being sincere in their comments about Seven on Day 1.

[PJ.]

Lynching Seven right now is terrible and honestly, lynching him tomorrow would be similarly terrible. Thor(and everyone else) has been ignoring is that Seven could be lying to protect his PR. Everyone knows that if you claim a PR you're gonna get blasted, so there is a good incentive for PRs to claim vanilla D1 as well. There are easily 3 other lynchs that are better right now.

Danakills seems to be flailing and since he saw Seven use Player By Player Analysis to get him out of a major hole, has tried to do the same with way less pressure on him. He has pretty much telegraphed his move of using player by player to be considered no longer scummy. This guy is definently scum.

DeathRowKitty, seems to be directing traffic here. "Oh nonono guys, seven and Penguin arn't scum, it's parama lets get parama. Ignore the fact that I've been pushing the other two then entire game and got a lynch out of one of them" I wouldn't put it past DRK to be Distancing with SeerPenguin.

SeerPenguin is much more scummy than Seven as we have all already discussed.

DRK seems to be the guy in charge so I'm gonna

Unvote, Vote: DeathRowKitty

[Idiotking]

Seven is the best lynch. He has claimed vanilla (or at least hasn't contested ppl calling him a vanilla). Generally, ppl consider him scummy. And finally, he has possible connections with 2-3 other players.

None of these are the reasons we should be lynching him. If we're going to lynch him it should be because he did something scummy. Public opinion is never a good reason to kill someone.

[evilsnail]

I'm not saying that - I'm saying that you are saying that.

I realise that, I was clarifying my opinion, not saying that that is what you think.

The bottom line is that scum will not NK Seven, so, if we want him gone, we need to lynch him at some point. He's a good policy lynch, from that perspective.

I think you may be misinterpreting this. I'm just establishing the logic here. What I'm trying to say is:

if we want him gone

, because we need to lynch Seven at some point, he would be a good policy lynch

today

.

Now, as I've stated, I'm just not really getting the case against Seven, so I don't see a convincing reason for wanting him gone. So, I really prefer going after someone who I actually think is scummy.

[Thor665]

Lynching Seven right now is terrible and honestly, lynching him tomorrow would be similarly terrible. Thor(and everyone else) has been ignoring is that Seven could be lying to protect his PR. Everyone knows that if you claim a PR you're gonna get blasted, so there is a good incentive for PRs to claim vanilla D1 as well. There are easily 3 other lynchs that are better right now.

I'm generally against the concept of a PR roleclaiming vanilla but I suppose this could be true depending on how much he thought a hammer likely. That is, however, a terrible reason not to vote for someone. He is just as (or more, depending) likely a scum as a PR and is certainly more likely vanilla then PR. All this does is show us we should provide an additional roleclaim possibility for him - that's all.

None of these are the reasons we should be lynching him. If we're going to lynch him it should be because he did something scummy. Public opinion is never a good reason to kill someone.

I will note that it's not as if he got to his roleclaim situation based on random chance. He did scummy things and people voted for him - and I don't like that you're trying to act that the only reason he's on the block is policy influenced. Now, at the current moment I have been quite open and honest about the only reason he's still on the block *for me* is policy based and have repeatedly tried to get people to discuss that issue with me.

The most I've gotten is a few veiled 'meh, not a good idea' type comments.

I'm going to assume I am not hearing more on this issue because there are deeper and active aspects of the game that could be affected by a deeper conversation into this particular voting strategy (or that you all really suck at explanations )

With that said - I am of the opinion that Seven is not the currently scummiest player, and that my policy lynch concept - though apparently not totally disagreed with - is also not totally agreed with. Seems to me like a reasonable policy then, but with the caveat I am capable of ignoring it if the target seems less then fully scummy. With that as a concept I will now adjust my vote.

Unvote: Seven
Vote: SeerPenguin

- for reasons previously stated

The bottom line is that scum will not NK Seven, so, if we want him gone, we need to lynch him at some point. He's a good policy lynch, from that perspective.

I think you may be misinterpreting this. I'm just establishing the logic here. What I'm trying to say is: if we want him gone, because we need to lynch Seven at some point, he would be a good policy lynch today.

I do not think I am misrepresenting this. I will admit by you going back and adding some words it potentially clarifies what you had originally meant. I am suspicious though if that is what you meant right at the time of typing. I will take it into consideration though.

Also, you have not addressed my specific question to you - I will restate it;

So you agree that scum will not night kill Seven?
You agree that if Seven is to die it has to be by lynch?
-edited out on the presumption the above stated clarification is true-
...and you vote [edit]DeathRowKitty[/edit].

So you still accept that at this point the only way Seven goes is via lynch and never NK.
Why do you think it's a good idea to lynch someone else and send out to the scum someone you have openly said will never be nightkilled?

The bottom line is that scum will not NK Seven

[evilsnail]

Maybe I'm stubbornly misunderstanding you here, but I thought I answered, or at least tried to answer, that question in the last paragraph of my previous post.

[Thor665]

You have answered why you do not go after Seven (you wish to go after those who are more scummy). You have not addressed why with your stated concept that Seven will not be nightkilled you wish to send him into Night 1 which will only aid scum in their target selection.

[evilsnail]

Note, btw, that I didn't say that Seven will never be NKed. I mean, there are plenty of reasons why scum could consider NKing a claimed vanilla townie in the long run. In addition, it should be read in context. That sentence is supposed to fall under the caveat of "if we want him gone," i.e. if Seven continues to be a real suspect.

[Idiotking]

None of these are the reasons we should be lynching him. If we're going to lynch him it should be because he did something scummy. Public opinion is never a good reason to kill someone.

I will note that it's not as if he got to his roleclaim situation based on random chance. He did scummy things and people voted for him - and I don't like that you're trying to act that the only reason he's on the block is policy influenced.

Um... when did I say or indicate that at all? Where? Are you forgetting that I see Seven as scummy, and have spelled out my reasons? Where are you drawing this information from?

I simply said that none of the reasons he listed were reasons we should vote for people, public opinion being the worst. "Oh, everybody says this guy's scum, so he must be scum" is terrible, terrible,

terrible

reasoning to vote for someone.

[evilsnail]

You have answered why you do not go after Seven (you wish to go after those who are more scummy). You have not addressed why with your stated concept that Seven will not be nightkilled you wish to send him into Night 1 which will only aid scum in their target selection.

My only point here is that, from the point of view of what is correct play, the amount of suspicion on Seven should be inversely related to scum's willingness to take him out, given his claim. As such, if a significant part of the town has significant doubts about his alignment, lynching is the right play. Surely my own suspicions may deviate from this.

On an unrelated note, I'd quite like to see SeerPenguin address some of the points raised against him.

[Thor665]

Note, btw, that I didn't say that Seven will never be NKed.

You didn't?
"The bottom line is that scum will not NK Seven"
...could you translate this quote from you then? Clearly I am getting it wrong.

None of these are the reasons we should be lynching him. If we're going to lynch him it should be because he did something scummy. Public opinion is never a good reason to kill someone.

I will note that it's not as if he got to his roleclaim situation based on random chance. He did scummy things and people voted for him - and I don't like that you're trying to act that the only reason he's on the block is policy influenced.

Um... when did I say or indicate that at all? Where? Are you forgetting that I see Seven as scummy, and have spelled out my reasons? Where are you drawing this information from?

Ah, I see now - you're calling out Cuex for his comment that "Generally, ppl consider him scummy" instead of just saying he thinks Seven is scummy. That makes a lot of sense.

When I read your post and you said none of the reasons are good I interpreted it as more of a general indictment of the bandwagon as opposed to the specific comments as phrased by Cuex. That's why I attacked over it, because though I do accept Seven is not the most scummy player I really didn't want it suggested he is either not scummy nor that he is only being lynched for the vanilla thing.

Mea culpa.

[Thor665]

the amount of suspicion on Seven should be inversely related to scum's willingness to take him out, given his claim. As such, if a significant part of the town has significant doubts about his alignment, lynching is the right play. Surely my own suspicions may deviate from this.

Cross post due to site lag.

Okay - so what you're saying is scum will not kill Seven...as long as we suspect Seven. That is certainly a generally true statement. Do you not hink the vanilla claim will have any effect on the statistics there?

[evilsnail]

Of course the vanilla claim has an effect on the statistics, but the point is that that is all it does. So, if the suspicion isn't there, it's still not a good lynch. A vanilla claim isn't like a carte blanche for lynching.

Note, btw, that I didn't say that Seven will never be NKed.

You didn't?
"The bottom line is that scum will not NK Seven"
...could you translate this quote from you then? Clearly I am getting it wrong.

Well, if you look at the quote, the next part of that sentence is "so, if we want him gone, ..." That's an important caveat and, although, looking back, it wasn't what I said, it should apply to the whole train of thought. Obviously, if there's no suspicion on Seven, then he does make a good NK for scum.

So, summarising: I don't support a Seven lynch, because I didn't and don't find him scummy, although the logic behind lynching suspect claimed vanilla players is sound. These are not incompatible beliefs.

[danakillsu]

I got a bad vibe off this. I definitely consider lack of suspicions a possible scum tell. It's page 11. There has to be something more you can say about the game.

Other than my five player-read posts?

Danakills seems to be flailing and since he saw Seven use Player By Player Analysis to get him out of a major hole, has tried to do the same with way less pressure on him. He has pretty much telegraphed his move of using player by player to be considered no longer scummy. This guy is definently scum.

So you disagree with someone who has actually played with me before who is saying that I've given at least a null tell. And also, last I checked, Seven didn't make up the Player by Player Analysis, so he copied off of someone else just as much as I copied off of him. Finally, how could I be scum if Seven isn't? I've said he's town and that he shouldn't be lynched. If I was scum, I would want Seven lynched as much as the next person (assuming Seven is town).

[evilsnail]

Other than my five player-read posts?

Um.. that was after you said you had no suspects. So, I don't see how that's relevant. In addition, you only posted those player-reads after other people called you out on the post I was referring to.

[Dragonfly13]

Votecount #9

SeerPenguin (2) - evilsnail, Thor665
DeathRowKitty (2) - SeerPenguin, Panzerjager
Seven (1) - Cuetlachtli
danakillsu (1) - Idiotking
Idiotking (1) - Lastsurvivor
Parama (1) - DeathRowKitty
Cuetlachtli (1) - Parama


Not Voting (3) - Seven, DiamondCrash, danakillsu


With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

Deadline: 11:00PM U.S. Central Time, Saturday, January 30, 2010

Sorry for the lack of votecountage recently. Deadline is in 80 hours. If there is not a majority by that time, there will be no lynch.

[PJ.]

I'm definently ready to lynch danakillsu. I don't even want a claim.

Unvote, Vote:Dannakills

[SeerPenguin]

I would prefer to be replaced out of this game. I don't have as much time as expected, so I only want one game on my plate at a time. Sorry.

Thanks for speaking up! Sorry you had to replace out. -DF

[Cuetlachtli]

I would prefer to be replaced out of this game. I don't have as much time as expected, so I only want one game on my plate at a time. Sorry.

Can you address some of the recent comments about you being scum before you leave please?

[Lastsurvivor]

@Thor: I generally dislike policy lynches in general. I'd go for it I felt he was suspicious, but I generally don't.

----

Anyway, we have until Saturday for a lynch, and I'm willing to wait as long as possible until we come to a conclusion. I will post more thoughts tomorrow.

[Cuetlachtli]

Seven is the best lynch. He has claimed vanilla (or at least hasn't contested ppl calling him a vanilla). Generally, ppl consider him scummy. And finally, he has possible connections with 2-3 other players.

None of these are the reasons we should be lynching him. If we're going to lynch him it should be because he did something scummy. Public opinion is never a good reason to kill someone.

This post completely ignores the arguments that I have been making all game. Seven has acted scummy and he does have ties with a couple other players in the game. Lynching him will give us a lot of useful information and will be beneficial to our scum hunt tomorrow.

[Cuetlachtli]

@Thor: I generally dislike policy lynches in general.

I'd go for it I felt he was suspicious, but I generally don't.

----

Anyway, we have until Saturday for a lynch, and

I'm willing to wait as long as possible until we come to a conclusion. I will post more thoughts tomorrow.

LS, who are you suspicious of?