Newbie 982 - Shadows of Death, Game Over!

[AurorusVox]

@Aurorus

I'd just like to hear your quick opinion about 2 people:
(without going into details, since we're close to deadline, and we're not the ones in spotlight)

(1)
Your situation with 2003 went like this:
...AV: I'll unvote you when you start scumhunting. I find you suspicious.
...2k3: Okay. Hunt. Hunt. Hunt.
...AV: Yay, cool. You scumhunted. I'll unvote. But I'll keep an eye on you.
I can understand your unvote because you've promised, but why is he not a lynch candidate for you anymore?
And are you satisfied with the quality of his scumhunting?

(2)
Some people stated their concerns with Michel. You didn't. Is he all that peachy, or does something seem off with him to you?

Ha, not sure if this is too much detail, but here goes;

(1) I initially had suspicions of a scumteam between Valk and 2k3, and would have lynched either one of them. Since replacing in, seth has been far scummier than 2k3 and so in the event that there isn't a seth-2k3 scumteam, I'd be more comfortable with a seth lynch. If he flips scum, this will also give me information on 2k3. Part of me would rather see 2k3's play tomorrow as well, because his play has improved over the course of the day (i.e. he's been trying to scumhunt as the day progressed).

As for the quality; his scumhunting has been marred with inconsistencies, which is why I'm still suspicious of him. Basically, I'm still wary of him, and I definitely wouldn't say I thought he was town, but I think there are better lynches today.


(2) Well, peoples' concerns with Michel's play is interesting, and I can see good points on both sides of the arguments. At the moment I've got a neutralish read on him, (though I saw something in his last post (his defence of inconsistency) that seemed scummy); I'll do a detailed ISO on him to cement my read (I'll do this during the night phase when there'll be nothing new to take into account) and so I'm not really interested in lynching him today.

A question back at you; do you think that it's in the town's best interests to try to build a new bandwagon on anyone other than seth or theperson at this late stage in the game?

---

Ninja-edit: Michel, in your last post, you've defended inconsistency. Can you explain what situations you have in mind when inconsistencies are okay? There's a difference between people changing their minds about things, and people not sticking to what they said they would do; if someone said "Lynch all liars" but then didn't lynch a liar, or if they voted for someone for doing something that they themselves have done, would you not find that suspicious?

[omnino]

-So you agree that he did a fair amount of passive-agreeing?

Where are you getting that from?

A la...

Regarding reading Zauper's ISO: I read his ISO to check the argument that Zauper agreed with others more then usual. I paid particular attention to the sections of his ISO that were relevant for that argument, and skimmed over the rest.

4 posts of 15 are blatant passive agreement in Zauper's ISO. So if you read them you read the 30%-odd of his posts that were nothing but agreeing. Would you not say that 30% of someone's post total is an awful lot to surrender to simply nodding your head?

[Guybrush]

A question back at you; do you think that it's in the town's best interests to try to build a new bandwagon on anyone other than seth or theperson at this late stage in the game?

It is not.

[AurorusVox]

A question back at you; do you think that it's in the town's best interests to try to build a new bandwagon on anyone other than seth or theperson at this late stage in the game?

It is not.

Good. When you said to seth "so maybe there's your chance", and with those questions asking about other lynch candidates, I wasn't sure if you were considering starting a new wagon (which would have set off major alarm bells).

Omnino, if it came down to it, would you actually hammer on one of the two current lynch candidates? It kinda looks like you're saying that you'll put your vote on Michel to avoid having to hammer anyone. I know you said you'd vote for someone to avoid a no lynch, but you're not really trying to determine which of the two you feel is a better lynch.

Akira; do you think that Zauper/theperson and Valk/Seth could be scumbuddies?

[theperson]

Hmm. Sorry, I forgot to unvote...

I guess it's not really necessary to unvote now, because I don't want to hammer seth right now and there's not much pressure on 2k3. He is my #2, so I don't see anything wrong with it being there at this point.

First, my reasoning for seth being scum. His posting style is really annoying, which makes them hard to read. He also has some bad reasoning, such as:

- Post 162 was towny
* Your thinking was similar to mine

Fits with his "I'm town" thing but even so it's bad reasoning. Just because someone thinks like you doesn't mean they're the same role as you...

Also I want to point out, I'm not a very aggresive person by nature. You can look through my other games, I don't really get mad at other players much. I'm just saying this because seth was saying zauper's townie posts were "overshadowed by his lack of aggressiveness" but that's not really fair because that's just personality things sometimes.

Has it occurred to you that on the off chance that I'm town, its possible that I actually DO think zauper is scum?

This doesn't seem to fit...He's always saying how he's town and here he says "on the off chance I'm town"...Why would he be avoiding saying "I'm town" here and not everywhere else...?

Then he's saying the stuff with how he might as well self vote if people are going to vote him because of Valk, but in the process of saying stuff like that, he's been thought of as more scummy. Seth, it would have been much better to just try to act townie (as I would almost certainly been lynched if you had played completely pro-town since replacing in, then you have another day to defend yourself).

And when I say I can agree with your reasoning, I mean that I can see how you would suspect me based upon my own actions,

Again, me agreeing with the rest of the town and presenting my logic is hardly a scumtell.

What makes it a scumtell when zauper does it, then?

Sorry more coming later, I have to go now though.

[seth]

You think I'm scum but you don't want to hammer me?

[omnino]

AV - to clear up I would hammer either of the two suspects Preferably theperson based on Zaupers previous play if I had to picky a favoured lynch.

[MichelSableheart]

Ninja-edit: Michel, in your last post, you've defended inconsistency. Can you explain what situations you have in mind when inconsistencies are okay? There's a difference between people changing their minds about things, and people not sticking to what they said they would do; if someone said "Lynch all liars" but then didn't lynch a liar, or if they voted for someone for doing something that they themselves have done, would you not find that suspicious?

As with all things in mafia, the main point to look at is motivation. In both cases you mentioned, the player should be questioned.

Why did they believe that all liars should be lynched? Why didn't they want to lynch this particular liar? If they give an explanation that is believable to come from a pro-town player, the inconsistency isn't scummy. On the other hand, if from the questioning I believe they said "lynch all liars" not because they believed it but in order to appease the town, or if I believe that they don't want to lynch this particular liar because he's their scumbuddy, that definately is a reason to be suspicious of them.

Same goes for voting someone for something you yourself have done. What is your pro-town explanation for originally doing it? And why doesn't that explanation apply for the player you're voting?

---

@Omnino 376: Appearantly, I wasn't clear. In your comments on ISO #8, you 'asked' why I couldn't respond to Aurorus' accusation against zauper when I claimed I read his ISO in my ISO #7. My response was that the read of his ISO in ISO #7 was particulary to check the accusations of zauper more then usual. My conclusions on reading that ISO can be found in post #156. I believe that the conclusion of "I'm not at all convinced by the argument that Zauper is agreeing with others more then would be natural." is completely different from "So you agree that he did a fair amount of passive-agreeing?".

[Akira]

Akira; do you think that Zauper/theperson and Valk/Seth could be scumbuddies?

No, I personally don't consider that a very good possibility.

In the Valk & zauper period, I found this in zauper's posts:

Has anyone seen Valk lately? Seems that Valk is being quiet.

Something a scum (newbie in his case) would never do to his buddy. He makes town start concentrating in him more often, which isn't good.

Valk hasn't paid much attention to zauper, writing only this regarding him.

(...) it seemed odd for Zauper to start a discussion with no one.

Again, very minor accusations. I don't strongly believe these were faked between scumbuddies.

In the seth & theperson period, the idea is even weaker. seth acts towards theperson in the same way he acts with everyone else and even votes for him. While theperson provides some good reasons to suspect seth. Let's face it: they're newbies, and voting for your own scumbuddy is a tactic which I believe only experienced scums would use, if their buddy doesn't have many votes, whereas theperson was L-2.

In conclusion, even though I have given the impression to believe that they could be potential scumbuddies, I actually don't consider it at all.

@everyone: I might be inactive for the rest of today and most of tomorrow. Just an overnight stay at a friend's house.

V/LA - 1/2 days

[omnino]

@Michel.

Would you not say that 30% of someone's post total is an awful lot to surrender to simply nodding your head?

[AurorusVox]

I believe I'll keep my vote on theperson (1), but if one vote is missing to lynch seth, I'd change my vote (2). I personally don't like the idea of letting scum act first.

Do you think that seth is scum?

I believe so (3), because I don't think a townie would insist so much on the "I'm town" thing after hearing people say that it's useless and counter-productive. I'll wait for theperson's response and decide what to do with my vote.

In conclusion, even though I have given the impression to believe that they could be potential scumbuddies, I actually don't consider it at all (4).

>_< Wowow

1) You think theperson is scum*
2) You would lynch seth if we were going to have a lynchless day
3) You think seth is scum
4) You don't think theperson and seth can be scum together

*I assume this because you decide to keep your vote for him at this late stage in the game

- if (4) is true, (1) and (3) can't both be true
- if (4) is true, either you're keeping your vote on someone you think is a townie (1), or you'd change your vote to lynch someone you think is a townie (2)


I can see a scenario where this might make sense, but it'd be a dangerous game to play a couple days before the deadline, especially if you're going V/LA. Can you explain this discrepancy (without going into specifics that might ruin the plan) and I'll see if it matches up to what I suspect you're trying to do?

---

Michel - is the above the good kind of inconsistency or the bad kind?

[Akira]

Thanks for reminding me about the deadline, I totally forgot it's in 2 days.

Anyway, there isn't any plan behind it. Yes, I suspect both theperson

and

seth, but I don't suspect them together. I simply have to make up my mind and choose between the two. If seth is lynched and he is scum, then I won't suspect theperson anymore and vice versa.
Considering that to get theperson lynched, 2k3 would have to revote him (which I don't see him doing), omnino would have to vote him (good possibility), and I would have to vote him, it's not much of a good idea.

My case on theperson has been significantly toned down by seth's arrival, but I decided to keep my vote for a bit. But now I guess there isn't any need for that anymore.

seth has done little to no scumhunting, and his vote has made me start to agree with Michel that theperson is looking like an easy mislynch for the scums.
If theperson was scum, he would have almost definitely voted after providing those good reasons to suspect seth.

So I'll

unvote

and VOTE: seth.

[AurorusVox]

Oh -- I thought maybe it was a pressure/lynch vote combination spread between the two, to try to give you a solid scumread on one of them. Maybe I got a little overexcited.

So that's the hammer. I was concerned that we might fail to get a lynch but it looks like we're good, even with a few days to spare!

[theperson]

Sorry about not finishing my post yesterday. I had a pretty busy day. However I'm getting back from vacation tonight, so I should be able to spend more time on this game now. I was a bit surprised at the hammer vote, but it seemed obvious seth didn't want to respond to my arguments. I posted arguments against him and all he had to say was:

You think I'm scum but you don't want to hammer me?

Which should have an obvious answer. Although analyzing his posts doesn't have much meaning right now, not until we find out his role.

So in conclusion I don't really see anything wrong with the hammer vote, because I don't think the rest of our time was going to be put to very good use anyway, and this way we don't risk the no lynch.

[seth]

[Haylen]

Vote Count

2K3: Zauper
theperson: 2k3, seth
seth: Michel, Guybrush, AVox, ooBAZZoo, Akira

Not Voting: omnino

Deadline is Sunday 1st August 9pm GMT+1. With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.

You lynch seth Day One, he was a Vanilla Townie

It is now Night One, mafia may talk in their QT now (after I unlock it). Deadline for any and all night actions is Monday 2nd August, 9pm GMT+1

[Haylen]

You wake up to find MichelSableHeart completely deaded.

MichelSableHeart was Night Killed Night One, he was a Vanilla Townie.

It is now Day Two, with 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch. Deadline is Tuesday 24th August 9pm GMT+1 time.

[Guybrush]

Holy crap, now there's a surprising night choice.
And I don't know what to say about seth. Other than it seems that he learned NOTHING from this (#389).
But I guess I did overthink it.
I'll do a reread with this new information.

[omnino]

Bugger.

I'll need to re-evaluate my reads now; was clearly not on the right trak with Sableheart. Only positive from the results is that whatever power role this town has is still out there doing it's thing .

[AurorusVox]

I'll need to re-evaluate my reads now; was clearly not on the right trak with Sableheart. Only positive from the results is that whatever power role

(Vox's edit: note the lack of plural)

this town has is still out there doing it's thing .

Am I reading too much into you being so sure that there's

one

power role? Only way to know that is for there to be a double-goon scumteam. Early slip here?

---

What are people's opinions on theorising about the NK choices made by the mafia? Productive for town? Helpful to scum? I like to try to do it in my head, but applying it practically to a game, i.e. to actually talk about it out loud, can bring up a lot of WIFOM fears and confusion :\

I will say that I agree that Michel

was

a surprising choice. When I re-read the thread yesterday I was seeing a few decent arguments against him, and was going to make him my one of my first targets of interrogation after discussing the mislynch (my main sticking point was his (ironically) inconsistent attitude to inconsistencies.)

Moreover, unless there's some serious WIFOM going on, theperson has become more townie in my opinion due to the NK. Though the problem with WIFOM is that it always bites you when you least suspect it. What do other people make of this?

---

Regarding Seth, if he had flipped scum, I'd have gone after 2k3 with more vigour. He hasn't, but that doesn't mean 2k3 is off my hook.

Now, for the mislynch itself, 3 people were off the lynch, despite having declared suspicions of the player (theperson and 2k3 were the most vocal, Omnino would have hammered him only if needed). I think that avoiding hammering is more of a scumtell than actually hammering when it comes to a mislynch. Scum would know in advance that its a mislynch and therefore have a reason to avoid being on the wagon; townies would be convinced that their top suspect is scum and be happy to hammer them.


- Omnino is a tough one because he didn't seem convinced that seth was the best lynch, but that means that if he had hammered he would have not had to take responsibility for the mislynch ("I only hammered to avoid no lynch").
- 2k3's preference for the Valk/Seth lynch was all over the place during the latter half of D1 - but he never voted for him. He suggested lynching him for inactivity, then said it was a throwaway comment to get conversation going, then he said he didn't want to lynch him, then he said he did want to...
- theperson also didn't hammer despite having suspicions. With the NK, though, I'm trying to figure out if he was a cautious townie or a cautious scum, and am leaning to the former.

I do think that at least one of the scum is in that trio.

[AurorusVox]

EBWOP: Though I didn't post questions per'se, I'd still like opinions on my thoughts from you three people (Omnino, 2k3, theperson) \o/

Also,

Mod: I'm going to be V/LA for the horrendous period 9th-16th August; is it okay to be gone for an entire week?

[2003041]

Wow, that was a surprising NK.
@AV: On the post where I took my vote off of zauper/theperson, I was going to vote seth, BUT because about three people made a post including an L-1 vote for seth, so I changed it to an FOS. I honestly wanted to give seth a chance to answer the questions and I would not have had any problems putting the hammer down either.
As to your question, any theorising is best left in your head. Look what happened with me when I posted ideas. I quickly became the top of some peoples list and now I'm under very tight radar. I've never seen talking about the NK after it happens except for the usual 'I'm shocked' type comments.

@Omnino: So, wait, how do you know the setup when Hayl didn't actually say what setup we were using? This just seems way too suspicious.

[Guybrush]

@AV
I notice it (I'm not blind), but I try to ignore it.
Both regarding speaking out loud, and arguing in my head.
Too many WIFOM problems.

[omnino]

Am I reading too much into you being so sure that there's one power role? Only way to know that is for there to be a double-goon scumteam. Early slip here?

Suppose it could look like tha, actually. More likely it's the fact I forgot more than one power role can happen in these newb games .

What are people's opinions on theorising about the NK choices made by the mafia? Productive for town? Helpful to scum?

Leaves me without my top suspect, to be honest. Not entirely happy about it. One plus point [as I mentioned] is that Scum never hit a power role, any townie death is helpful to scum as it draws them closer to victory. So...

Plus:-
Power role

intact.
Higher chance of hitting scum on Lynch 2.

Minus:-
Closer to defeat.
Takes many people back to square one in terms of investigation.
Loss of an analytical player.

- Omnino is a tough one because he didn't seem convinced that seth was the best lynch, but that means that if he had hammered he would have not had to take responsibility for the mislynch ("I only hammered to avoid no lynch").

A fair point about the Lynch issue. You could say that with that excuse available, I would've been foolish not to hammer and get myself on the BW [as scum].

- 2k3's preference for the Valk/Seth lynch was all over the place during the latter half of D1 - but he never voted for him. He suggested lynching him for inactivity, then said it was a throwaway comment to get conversation going, then he said he didn't want to lynch him, then he said he did want to...

Looks fairly typical behavior for uncertain town, when put down like that. 2k3 comes off as the kind of player I'd be expecting that from; but we could never be certain about that.

- theperson also didn't hammer despite having suspicions. With the NK, though, I'm trying to figure out if he was a cautious townie or a cautious scum, and am leaning to the former.

If you're looking to pick a scum candidate out of us three, I'd pick theperson. 2k3 comes off as more confused, but being suspiscious and unwilling to lynch is IMO worthy of closer attention than 2k3's confusion.

[omnino]

@Omnino: So, wait, how do you know the setup when Hayl didn't actually say what setup we were using? This just seems way too suspicious.

Put simply, I don't.