Mini #1007 (Game Over)

[Zachrulez]

Hi.

Hasn't been a whole lot posted since I last checked in.

btw, lynch Good and Honest. (If anyone's actually interested in the points against her...)

[Kid Know Nothing]

Kid Know Nothing, that's just my writing style. I don't post often because I prefer to have more to comment on; I also love writing and sometimes it's diffucult to stop... By the way, I actually think your writing style is somewhat similar to mine - you don't post that often, either, and you have made a couple long posts (which I definitely enjoyed reading)... Also, if a thought of mine becomes less clear, just ask for a clarification.

You could still post more than you do, especially since there are 17 pages to read back on and see if there is something you've missed. I get that you like to write longer posts that have your thoughts summed up neatly, but points do get lost in the block of text. If anything, I'd at least ask you to bold your questions or list them at the end for a little bit of clarity. Oh. And I feel really dumb about asking this, but I can't use he/she unless I know what gender you are. And constantly putting G&H and avoiding 'they' is just slightly annoying.

I don't find your playstyle to be totally detrimental to the town, but I will add that with the fact that you won't vote unless absolutely necessary, you do lose one of the more beneficial tools any townie has in hunting, that being pressure. Someone won't feel obligated to answer you or even really acknowledge you if they know you aren't willing to vote them and the constant chasing for answers will kill time in the long run. I'll understand if you're firm in your beliefs, but it's something to consider.

Hoopla; Do you find G&H's play style scummy? What is your opinion of the refusal to claim? Do you intend to rely on statistics to formulate your opinions for the game?

Also, I don't think that G&H's intention is to win, in fact I would think that "...while in the other game I survived and I think I contributed to a certain extent to the town's win," is G&H taking pride in contributing to a winning game. Can you also explain what you meant by G&H being forced to sit in the middle of telling the truth and lying? I can understand if that were true for play-style breaking questions, but I fail to see how G&H couldn't tell the truth on other occasions. If G&H produces valid points to catch scum and actively scum hunts, why should you ignore G&H?

And really Zach? That's all you're going to say?

Yes. I want you to post your points against her. Go.

[Zachrulez]

Done that already.

Anyway 2 things bother me about Good and Honest right now.

1. The refusal to claim at the end of the mass protective claim when she could have easily protested earlier. Why wait until everyone else has claimed to take that kind of stand? Don't like it at all.

2. Other than that toward the end of the day, there wasn't a peep of contribution from her. That looks pretty calculated to me on reflection.

Vote: Good and Honest

As I have said, I intend to always be honest when playing a game of Mafia.

So, in general, I won't reveal what my role in a particular game is. In our current game, I was only supposed to say whether I'm a "Doctor" (or something similar) or not - but that still has something to do with my role. I have to say it - I don't plan to NEVER reveal my role. In fact, I can think of special situations when I'll do it. This is also my answer to Hoopla's question at the end of Day 1 - that will really depend on the situation.

If you take the bolded as an honest assessment of the kind of player you are, there is a clear scum motivation for you to refuse to claim.

[Zachrulez]

After hearing from my dad this weekend, we won't be taking a trip to Iowa until Friday, so I will be available for a little bit midweek.

[Hoopla]

Hoopla; Do you find G&H's play style scummy? What is your opinion of the refusal to claim? Do you intend to rely on statistics to formulate your opinions for the game?

Also, I don't think that G&H's intention is to win, in fact I would think that "...while in the other game I survived and I think I contributed to a certain extent to the town's win," is G&H taking pride in contributing to a winning game. Can you also explain what you meant by G&H being forced to sit in the middle of telling the truth and lying? I can understand if that were true for play-style breaking questions, but I fail to see how G&H couldn't tell the truth on other occasions. If G&H produces valid points to catch scum and actively scum hunts, why should you ignore G&H?

His playstyle isn't scummy because I believe he'd do it as either alignment. It is very anti-town and damaging, and I am not usually an advocate for policy lynches, but this is one of the few times where I feel it would be apt.

I'll explain it simply. In mafia, you need to lie if you get a mafia role PM. By claiming to always be honest and upholding that, that would make you scum in any game where you couldn't fully tell the truth. It's for this reason, G&H can't fully tell the truth without sacrificing his scum-game. That's why he doesn't answer questions with definitive meanings, doesn't vote, doesn't list his suspects and doesn't roleclaim - because he can't truthfully answer any of these questions as scum.

[Hoopla]

Do you intend to rely on statistics to formulate your opinions for the game?

I play mafia in the exact same way as you or most people - it is very theory driven. I just use data to launch or pad those theories. I've found it helps explain why something is and isn't a tell, and it debunks a decent amount of common wisdom which only helps to make you more accurate.

[gonnano]

I think the best way to approach the G&H playstyle is to ask the right questions. For example, instead of asking "Who do you think is scum?", the question should be "Who would you choose to vote for if you had to right now?". Information can still be gained this way without compromising the honest playstyle.

I don't like policy lynches and would not participate in one. However, I don't see any reason that G&H shouldn't answer correctly worded questions and would most likely regard a continued refusal to do so as extremely scummy.

[redtail896]

Hey everybody. Sorry for the absence, but I'm back now with a whole raft of thoughts.

Regarding G&H: I refer Zach again to the points I used above in my objection to his vote (btw: in response to your statement directed at that post, G&H might not participate in the claim because s/he disagrees with it or it's against her policy; again, not anti-town, but not scummy). No, I'm not in favor of lynching G&H, even as a policy lynch. I agree that the lack of vote and the refusal to give reads is damaging to town, but in simplest terms I don't think G&H is scum. If somebody puts together a case on G&H that doesn't reduce to "policy lynch," I'd be happy to listen. Until then, I think there are bigger fish to fry.

Regarding Zach: You rode on my arguments for the Almaster vote, your shotty vote never made much sense to me, and your Elleran vote was to prevent a mislynch. And you know my thoughts on your G&H vote. Mafia players can easily throw accusations around that they're pretty sure are true and be misremembering something. Yet, I'm not voting for you. To the people voting Zach: why should I vote for him.

@Kid Know Nothing: Are you voting for G&H for policy reasons?

Regarding Hoopla: For the record, shotty's revelation that he protected you destroyed my pet conspiracy theory that you actually

were

a PGO fake-unclaiming to kill a scum (yeah, I know, it's a dumb theory, but it gave me a good laugh). I am intrigued in your willingness to policy lynch G&H though; I also ask whether you think G&H is actually scum. Do you think it's even possible to accurately read G&H in these circumstances? Also, I'd like to focus on this paragraph of yours:

Almaster's alignment is absolutely crucial in the production of future bandwagon analysis. I've linked several players to him, and though I know my data is sound, the theorems I extrapolate from this data feel very solid too. There is no way there were three scum on that Day 1 wagon if Almaster is town, and that means we can effectively use the Day 1 lynch wagon as a divider for two pools. A pool for those on the wagon and a pool for those off the wagon, which makes process of elimination style cases increasingly more accurate if we can limit the possibilities.

I like your theories, but I reach slightly different conclusions. I'm less sure than you are that Almaster is town, but if we agree for a second on that premise, then your odds greatly improve if we look

off

the Elleran bandwagon at KKN and CA (full disclosure: this is basically me advocating that you not examine me, as I was on that bandwagon and am obviously not listed in green). If I was you, I'd be more inclined to investigate KKN and CA and figure out which is more likely to be scum.

[Hoopla]

Redtail, I feel like there

has

to be scum on the Day 1 wagon, and although I'm favouring one over two, I feel like I have decent enough town reads on you and gonanno.

End of Day 1 Vote Count

7 -

Elleran

- gonnano, redtail896,

AlmasterGM

,

AGar, drmyshottyizsik

, Zachrulez,

Hoopla

2 -

AlmasterGM - Kid Know Nothing, ConfidAnon (L-5)

1 -

Hoopla

- Elleran (L-6)

Not Voting - Good and Honest, Vel-Rahn Koon

I feel like the only realistic candidates for scum on the wagon are Zach and Almaster and to a far lesser degree, you. My suspicion of Zach is very much a process of elimination, and the only point Almaster had against him was this;

Whoa, I didn't even realize that I had 3 votes already.

Ooooh, scared?

MAKE IT 4.

Unvote. Vote: Elleran.

Also,

FoS Zach

for tunneling on me like its his job.

Seriously, the only thing he has done the whole game is say, "lynch VI shotty" and "AGM is scum" while consistently trying to justify himself as little as humanly possible.

This was an awfully weak vote on Elleran. What worried me most was that he and Elleran were both on 3 votes at the time, and it was this vote that tilted the D1 wagon toward Elleran. As I said though, there were a lot more reasons to believe Almaster is town, and that is multiple people putting votes on him after Elleran became an easy D1 wagon to support.

It is quite clear to me that

one

of Almaster or Zach is scum. It is much likelier to be Zach, but Zach town would incriminate Almaster quite a bit. I'm pretty confident I have got it right first time with my reads. I'll eat my hat if zero or both of them are scum, though.

[redtail896]

(EBWOP: I forgot to include VRK in my previous post, although I intentionally left out G&H)

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that there are 3 scum on the Elleran wagon. AGar is confirmed town, and I'm okay with assuming that shotty is town. That leaves you, me, gonnano, Zach, and Almaster. You're assuming that almaster is town, so we'll take him off. That leaves either you or me as scum, which I think neither of us is comfortable with (and that leaves aside gonnano, which you have a town read on). What I'm trying to get at, and I think you'll agree, is that 3 scum on the Elleran wagon is unlikely.

So, who isn't on the Elleran wagon? Elleran, obviously, is easily eliminated. G&H is a whole separate argument (although probably shouldn't be ignored in voting analysis). So we have VRK, KKN, and CA. I see where you're going (you think you have a higher chance of hitting scum if we go after Zach), but even if you leave off Zach, under your construction 2 of these 3 are likely scum.

Also, what is your case on Zach beyond the vote analysis?

[AlmasterGM]

His playstyle isn't scummy because I believe he'd do it as either alignment. It is very anti-town and damaging, and I am not usually an advocate for policy lynches, but this is one of the few times where I feel it would be apt.

It's apt because if he actually would do it either way, then there is absolutely no way to determine whether he is town or scum. And seeing as he doesn't help town, lynching him is a good move.

And I don't even buy that he'd do it "either way." I think his play is pretty straight out scummy in this game. The end.

Also, what is your case on Zach beyond the vote analysis?

His day 1 play? Read it - it's pretty bad.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

I've gotten my prod. Sorry guys I had no time this weekend to post, and I tried to get to something today and it didn't happen. I know we're on 2-week days - I'm going to get

something

useful by tomorrow.

[Kid Know Nothing]

Quick post, sorry for the brevity. I'm going to sleep soon after this.

Hoopla; I see your points and ultimately think it's a difference of opinion. I personally see a challenge in the play style which would could be the way that G&H enjoys the game. I agree with the quote you used earlier, I just don't think it's so all-encompassing. That doesn't make your point any more valid.

Redtail; Not so much. The vote as it is stands for the absolute inability for me to get a positive read on G&H. Partly because of the stance of role-claiming. Partly because of the lack of posting. When G&H posts, it's full of information. However, whether or not all of the information is important is to debate. The vote is in between pressure and the confusing read I have on G&H.

Zach; G&H has commented on the reason he did not claim. Your response to that? Is there anything besides the refusal to claim and the potential lurking that makes you think G&H is scum? How do you feel about the current wagon against you and the fact that you are being considered as a prime candidate for scum? Who are your top three suspects and why?

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

G&H, what's your previous mafia experience before this game (aside from your Newbie game)? I have a line of thought but I need this answered first.

[Good and Honest]

Well, no one asked but I guess it'll do no harm if I post links to my other games. The link to my first game is in my post #70.

Here is my second game (where the mafiosi killed me on Night 1):

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=14441

And here is my third game (with drmyshottyizsik; I survived):

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=14637

Hoopla, I don't know where to start. If one plays soccer with only one's left foot or plays chess without using the queen... and if that's the only way one enjoys playing these games, what's the problem? It might become a problem if one wants to play these games professionally... But we're not professionals. No one is paying us for playing Mafia.

I really like playing table tennis. In school I played it a lot with my friends. I'm not sure of the correct terms but some of my friends noted that I was neved adding "spin" to the ball, I was always using "straight" shots. But that was the way I enjoyed playing. I didn't want to add "spin" to the ball. You might say that I was "sacrificing a necessary facet of the game". But none of my friends refused to play with me just because of that and I actually think many of our games were quite interesting.

Also, in our school yard you could often see students playing badminton or volleyball just by passing the feather/ball to one another. This way no one won or lost and you could say that was a "pointless exercise" - but the students still enjoyed it.

I don't understand why you think that if one is a mafioso, one HAS TO lie. Can't one just not take into consideration one's role and make honest observations based on what one reads in the thread (and probably what one has read in past games of the other players)?

Regarding your example of posting in Russian - I think players on this forum are supposed to write in English... Anyway, for me the question is this - if someone's playstyle is considered problematic, would that person enjoy the game playing in another (less problematic) way? If so, great. If not, why deny that person the right to enjoy the game? As I said, I wouldn't enjoy this game if I had to change my playstyle.

Also, it saddens me that, in spite of my explanations why you should continue to answer my questions, you state you're going to ignore me. After you have criticized me for supposedly not being helpful, don't you agree that you won't be helpful for the other players if you don't answer my questions and don't interact with me?

If that remains the case, I'm asking everyone: if you want to know the answer of some question I've asked Hoopla, repeat my question. Hopefully Hoopla will answer you...

AlmasterGM, you once again didn't address my comments/interrogating of you. About your question - I won't post anything in large, bold letters. You must have noticed that I have talked about some things I have found noteworthy about you, Hoopla, Zachrulez, (to a certain extent) ConfidAnon... But even if I haven't found something really remarkable about someone, that doesn't mean they're not a mafioso. I'm usually paying big attention to the interactions between the players - unfortunately, in our current game some players haven't really interacted with some other players. Of course, one of the reasons is the nature of Mini Normal games - it's more difficult for 12 players to interact with everyone than for 9 players (as is the case in Newbie games)... Although, sometimes lack of interactions is interesting in itself - something I hinted at about Zachrulez and ConfidAnon and then on Day 2 they immediately began to interact with each other...

Kid Know Nothing, I'll comment on this thought of yours: "with the fact that you won't vote unless absolutely necessary, you do lose one of the more beneficial tools any townie has in hunting, that being pressure. Someone won't feel obligated to answer you or even really acknowledge you if they know you aren't willing to vote them". To me it seems absurd that a player would answer a question only if they feel I'll otherwise vote them. We are all supposed to interact with each other and so we should generally answer each other's questions. In fact, if someone constantly neglects my questions/comments towards them, wouldn't that seem suspicious?

gonnano, a question you haven't addressed yet:

"When I asked you about the quick succession of votes for Elleran on page 10, you said: "Hoopla had been trying to get that wagon going for a long time already. After I joined in started to take off. My thoughts are that the scum were trying to see if they could get by with ignoring Elleran's scummy behavior, then when it looked like they might not get away with it they started showing more support for his bandwagon". Did you write that from the standpoint that Elleran was a mafioso?"

Also, what you have quoted from my post #393 is only a part of the explanation. The other part is the next paragraph:

"It might also be a question of principles - I want to reveal my role when the stimulus comes from the inside (i.e., when I decide that I'm willing to do it in a special situation) and not from the outside (i.e., when someone asks me about my role or there is a mass claim)"

By the way, I completely agree with you about asking the "right questions". I'm always open to questions, I just can't promise I'll answer all of them.

redtail896, on Day 1 you interrogated AlmasterGM quite a lot; now you have listed some notable things about Zachrulez's behaviour. In this context, what do you think of Hoopla's suggestion that EXACTLY ONE of them is a mafioso?

Also, when discussing the votes from Day 1, you mention that Hoopla considers gonnano an innocent townsperson. What about you? Do you have any thoughts on gonnano you'd like to share?

Vel-Rahn Koon, now I see your question. Apart from my three Newbie games here, I have only played several games once in real life. I talk about my real-life games of Mafia in my Newbie games here (in one of them I do that in an extremely detailed way) so, if you're interested, you can check them. If you're scared by my big posts there, feel free to ask me specific questions about my real-life games.

[AlmasterGM]

AlmasterGM, you once again didn't address my comments/interrogating of you. About your question - I won't post anything in large, bold letters

You won't answer my question but I'm supposed to answer yours?

GUESS WHAT? NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

[gonnano]

gonnano, a question you haven't addressed yet:

What if I refuse to answer your question on the grounds that my stimulus for answering isn't coming from the inside?

[AlmasterGM]

LOL HAI GUYZ IM

GOOD AND HONEST

ALMASTERGM AND I HAVE A VERY UNIQUE PLAYSTYLE.

IT'S CALLED I DON'T READ POSTS BY OR ANSWER QUESTIONS ASKED BY A PLAYER NAMED GOOD AND HONEST.

AND ITS NOT SCUMMY CAUSE IT'S MY SELF-DECLARED META. LOL IM SO PROTOWNNNNNN.

HATERS GONNA HATE, DONT LYNCH ME PL0X.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

I don't understand why you think that if one is a mafioso, one HAS TO lie. Can't one just not take into consideration one's role and make honest observations based on what one reads in the thread (and probably what one has read in past games of the other players)?

The Mafia HAS TO lie because of the nature of the game. Unlike face-to-face Mafia, we can't look at your facial expressions to see if you're trying to feed us a line of bull. The ONLY thing we have is what you say. Therefore, the online version of this game relies almost exclusively on ANALYSIS, or lack thereof. Mafia can say all they want, but what is normally lacking is good analysis of other players and what they've said and how they feel about the other players. The other players quickly pick up on this lack of analysis (look at what's happening to you right now), however. It is therefore imperative that the Mafia give that analysis so that they can

appear

Town to everyone else. However, the Mafia MUST, to some degree, falsify every bit of analysis they give. They KNOW that whomever they're focused on, that person is 100% guaranteed to be Town (barring bussing, etc. of course). Finding those tidbits is the hallmark of a good scumhunter. The only other options open to the Mafia are to keep quiet (lurk), or give out information disguised as analysis (often called IIOA, or Information Instead Of Analysis). This is the entire reason that days on this site are as long as they are. You need "analysis" from EVERY player so that you can look at it in light of later information and deduce the likelihood of someone being scum.

The vast majority of your Day 1 posts are VERY light on analysis. There are a few points here and there, but by and large you avoid taking a strong stance on anyone at all. In addition, you're the ONLY player who didn't cast a single vote. By contrast, look at redtail. Most people here would probably call him Town because of the amount of analysis he gives on the other players in the game. He states what he thinks of people's SPECIFIC play and why he feels that makes them scum or not. And if he is Town,

he's probably being HONEST

.

So, if you want to avoid being lynched, how about you give us your HONEST opinion of the top 3 most likeliest people to be Mafia, and WHY. If you're Town, you can't be anything BUT honest, because all you know for sure is your own role and no one elses'. If you give us your thoughts on who is mafia and why, then that IS being honest. Of course you're going to be wrong in your reads at times - even the best players get it wrong. But that doesn't stop them from helping their side. I think you're confusing "honest" with "being detrimental to the town by confusing others with your opinion". You can't be "dishonest" when you give us your analysis as Town, because your analysis is nothing but opinion. As scum, you must (to some degree) be dishonest with your opinion, because that's the only way you can cause a mislynch.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

EBWOP: "

trying not to be

detrimental to the town by confusing others with your opinion"

[redtail896]

Yeah, I see what Almaster is saying about Zach's D1 play. And I really don't like his G&H vote (although that can be explained away by policy differences). I'll need to think about that some more.

@Good and Honest: I hear what you're saying, especially about the table tennis. I've know people that have or have tried out very wacky ping-pong strategies, and it can certainly be fun. But I think your analogy falls apart when we talk about soccer. Soccer is a team game, and it's unfair to your team to intentionally handicap oneself (without their okay). By only playing with your left foot, your team starts at an inherent disadvantage.

All we do on this website is play pick-up soccer. But you've decided that you're only willing to play soccer with one foot. You have the right to make that decision, but your teammates have a right to be angry (and possibly kick you out of the team) for playing with only your left foot. It disadvantages the team, and the team didn't really understand beforehand what they were getting into. That's why we believe that you're being anti-town.

Now, right now, I'm not so far as willing to lynch you for it, but others clearly are. If you could explain your current reads, who you think is scummy, who you think is towny, and possibly even vote, it would go a long way to relieving our concerns. This is an olive branch. Please accept it.

[drmyshottyizsik]

O hai Zach.

Posting on the site?

Why not come by and say hi?

It's called lurking and not posting so that no more of his scummy posts will be used against him

[Kid Know Nothing]

Massive post inbound.

---

LOL HAI GUYZ IM

GOOD AND HONEST

ALMASTERGM AND I HAVE A VERY UNIQUE PLAYSTYLE.

IT'S CALLED I DON'T READ POSTS BY OR ANSWER QUESTIONS ASKED BY A PLAYER NAMED GOOD AND HONEST.

AND ITS NOT SCUMMY CAUSE IT'S MY SELF-DECLARED META. LOL IM SO PROTOWNNNNNN.

HATERS GONNA HATE, DONT LYNCH ME PL0X.

I'M GOING TO POST IN ALL CAPS WHILE CONTRIBUTING NOTHING TO THE CONVERSATION BUT RUDE OBSERVATIONS. EL OH EL OH EL.

Seriously Almaster, this is why I don't like you as town. G&H has not sat there and said "Look at me, I'm pro-town." Rather, he's been defending his play style as not being scummy. This post was completely unnecessary.

----
This conversation about G&H's play style is taking a lot away in regards to hunting. For now, can we accept what is given and save the conversation for out of game? I mean, we could sit here all day and speak at length about what is town and what isn't. We could create analogies to accompany our thoughts. Or we could get down to it, especially since suggestions to G&H's play style have been given, and get back to where we were about a page and a half ago, which is hunting.


Gonnaro, if you find the fact that G&H is scum because he wouldn't claim for that reason, why would you use it, even jokingly?

If you have nothing to hide, you could answer the question safely. There is a difference between telling someone their play style is detrimental and mocking them because of it. There should be no harm in you answering that question.

Same to you Almaster. You have a vote, don't you? Use that to express your feelings over G&H's unwillingness to answer you. Same to you Hoopla.

If you are going to criticize a player because you think they aren't going to be helpful, why would you limit how helpful they could be? How many of you have any experience with this play style? It's unfair to judge someone and decide unequivocally that they are not going to help because of the way they play the game. Not answering questions essentially "cuts off that left foot" that G&H is playing with. It limits anything G&H can do and it forces this conversation to go around in a circle.

So I will plead to the town; Unless you plan to vote G&H because you find them scummy, unless your conversation is motivated for scum hunting, please drop the play style discussion. It is eating away precious time.

-------
It's also amusing that while Shotty's actions are also not Pro-town, no one goes about explaining why. Even if Shotty is an unconfirmed PR and possibly town, why does that mean his lack of help to the town is any less important than G&H? G&H does post with questions and suspicions, if you read into the questions, how do Shotty's parroting and "X is Scum" posts compare?

Shotty, suspects and why. I want you to read the thread over again, find things you think are suspect and suspicious. In your own words, please.

I protected hoopla

Why?
------

If G&H doesn't place a vote on someone in his first post, I'll probably push for his lynch. Seriously, how can you go an entire day without voting ANYONE?

He gives inane commentry on dated events that aren't relevant

- if anyone else gave such little content for D1, they'd be speedlynched D2, but we seem to be giving him a meta out, because he claims it to be a style. It isn't a style - he isn't contributing, and he is very hard to read without voting or giving direct, definitive statements.

He seriously needs to do something special in his next couple of posts.

Um. What? Dated events? In forum mafia, nothing is really dated. Anything that has been posted can, and should, be used for analysis. This just seems very weak. Especially for someone who is using voting patterns from to find scum. Hoopla, can you explain what you meant?

For your vote analysis, I have a few questions to ask as I'm re-reading it.

Firstly, how did you figure the actual odds?

Secondly, I'd like you to explain why Almaster is more likely town then not again. As I read your analysis, you consider the possibility of him being both town and scum but never really explain why he is more likely to be town.

But if Almaster is scum, I seriously do not see why Almaster's wagon would have competed so well, especially when the late push on Elleran was from two townies (one confirmed/one likely)

AGar was not confirmed at the time and Shotty's claim does not make him any less suspect to be scum. I played in a game once where we assumed the claimed Doctor was real. Turns out, we were wrong. I don't trust the "likely town" labels anyone applies. To be honest, you could do without them. By looking for scummy actions, you are by extension weeding out the scum from the town. Giving someone a free pass by saying they are "likely town" only gives them reason to play up to you, as I suspect Shotty did with his "save". Your opinion on this?

My read on Zach, to answer your question for about a page ago;
In isolation, Zach has a lot of one-liners and questions that add absolutely nothing to discussion. For example, isolation post 1

Hi every one, yay for RVS!
VOTE: Hoopla

Hi.

Vote:drmyshottyizsik

I'm not sure I understand the wagon on Hoopla. I can see reason to question whether or not the claim is optimal, but I'm having a hard time seeing how a claim like this would benefit scum. Has scum even historically fake-claimed PGO ever?

While voting Shotty, he offers absolutely nothing for Shotty to answer or respond to. In my eyes, it would have been a pressure vote as I believe it only brought Shotty to two or three votes. And then he goes on to comment on you, asking something that really adds very little to the on-going discussion of your claim.

There is this to consider;

I'm getting a town vibe from Vel.

Illogical does not necessarily equal scummy.

Plus, there's this gem:

I buy it. Not because of the breadcrumb, those are silly. I buy it because I thought Hoopla claiming PGO was illogical and Hoopla usually isn't, so it seemed out of character.

The declarative statement, "The claim was illogical" has 2 problems: first of all, this is a very arguable point, and many would think it was logical. 2nd, why do you know think it was illogical, when earlier you said that you could understand the reasoning behind it.

In short, I agree with AGar.

VOTE: AlmasterGM

Plus this.

I can get behind this wagon.

Vote:AlmasterGM

Again, voting without offering anything himself. Parroting off of the ideas of another player.

Shotty claims scum and we get.

Unvote: Vote: drmyshottyizsik

Die

Again, this vote offers nothing to Shotty. And does anyone playing right now honestly believe that Shotty would be likely to claim scum? I'll admit that Shotty offers almost nothing to the game, but he still understands the basic idea and concept. To me, it's very unlikely that didn't cross Zach's mind. Do you think that's a fair assumption?

Right now though, I think Shotty needs to be lynched. He's claimed scum, and I feel very strongly about lynching scum claims.

More fluffy one-liners calling for a lynch.

I think that Shotty's scum claim makes him much more likely to actually be scum. I don't see it as wasting a lynch.

@Zach: do you still favor lynching shotty?

Yes.

Why?

He's claimed scum. He's lied at least once. (And I think more than once.)

He didn't seem too concerned about being lynched when he claimed scum, which is very inconsistent with the goals of the role of doctor

. His play just says scummy to me in capital letters.

This seems contradictory. Why wouldn't scum be concerned with being lynched? If he wasn't concerned, what does that mean Zach?

Unvote: Vote:AlmasterGM

Dislike Almaster's 227 where he seems to be

pushing on shotty be scum with shaky theories.

I still dislike shotty's scumclaim a lot... but the fact that he later claimed doctor and that claim has not been countered seems to point to shotty town on reflection.

He back steps. Actually, he pulls a complete 180. Shotty goes from being absolute scum, even if he isn't that we should lynch him based on a LAL policy, to partially defending him and attacking Almaster for a lot of the same points. Almaster did add some actual content to that discussion however, whether beneficial or not is up to opinion.

Next post, two pages later, is a simple "Oh wow..." and then he promptly asks the same question that CA had asked before his Oh Wow post.

Deadline's about 24 hours from now and I'm not sure what my weekend access is going to be like. Given the deadline rules I'm going to change my vote now as I'm ok with an Elleran lynch at this point and I don't want to risk a no lynch.

Unvote: Vote: Elleran

L-1

Zach comments on Elleran

once

all of day one, and yet he is perfectly content with the lynch.

Better yet, lynch Good and Honest. Seriously, one post through the entirety of day 2?

G&H's one post had more content than all of Zach's combined. In my opinion.

Hi.

Hasn't been a whole lot posted since I last checked in.

btw, lynch Good and Honest. (If anyone's actually interested in the points against her...)

Another call to lynch with weak reasoning.

Plus the fact that you stuck with the vote even after your most specific and powerful point was discredited.

This stands out to me. "Unvote me, your 'major' point is invalid."

I am expecting a post from him today or tomorrow, as he said he would be available sometime in the middle of the week.


So my thoughts? Zach has contributed absolutely nothing to the game besides calls for lynching with little reasoning. Especially in the case of Shotty. G&H is a little more understandable but considering how much attention G&H has gotten today, simply saying something along the lines of "Why haven't we lynched then yet?" doesn't cut it and in fact, seems like a calculated effort to use the general feeling of annoyance of the town toward G&H to push a lynch without having to offer anymore to the actual case than things that have already been brought up by other players.

Zach is more likely than not, scum.

-------

SEVEN

days. Hopefully this will bring everything around back to hunting.

[redtail896]

@Hoopla: Did your protective role statistics include mafia doctors at all? (I can't believe I didn't think of this question yesterday)
@KKN: Okay, you make a fair point. But I think scumhunting is still happening. Also, a question: to what extent do you think your case against Zach (and this applies to everybody else with such a case) can applay to ConfidAnon?

[Hoopla]

Firstly, how did you figure the actual odds?

Secondly, I'd like you to explain why Almaster is more likely town then not again. As I read your analysis, you consider the possibility of him being both town and scum but never really explain why he is more likely to be town.

The actual odds is the likelihood of how many scum would be on the wagon if it was random. This is combinatorics, and sadly beyond my mathematical level. Shanba was the one who worked out these odds for me about a month ago on AIM.

You'll note that random chances vary quite significantly from the dataset I have gathered. This serves to show that scum's influence in wagons is not arbitrary, and if you know the signs of what makes a 0/1 or 2/3 scum driven wagon, then it makes it easier to formulate process of elimination cases.

I've identified Elleran's wagon as one with minimal scum influence. You'll remember, Elleran was on three votes and three more consecutive votes balooned him to L-1. This would normally be the hallmark of scum influence, but Shotty and AGar were the 5th and 6th votes, and are either confirmed town or likely town. What makes me think Almaster is town, is because if he was scum, his wagon wouldn't have competed so well with Elleran's. The Elleran lynch was essentially free to jump on and with VI's like Shotty and G&H lingering around, it would be highly unnecessary and unproductive to bus Almaster on D1 when you have such options.

Could Almaster be scum, and the ones making his wagon compete be townies? Unlikely. Yourself, Zach and ConfidAnon all voted Almaster after Elleran became a viable lynch, which would mean if you're all town battling valiantly to keep Almaster competing, there should have been scum influence on the Elleran wagon, to stop this push, but there wasn't. If Almaster is scum, it's difficult to envisage any of you being scum, because it is an unnecessary play, and not to minimize any of your abilities, I don't think going for the sneaky distancing would be something high on your list, mostly because you couldn't expect anyone to see it in the first place. The thing is though, I don't think all three of you are town, which means Almaster being town instead is a much more intuitive, sensible and probable answer.