Mini 1064 - Charlie's Town (Game Over!)

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

/confirm

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Vote: RichardGHP

Die, scum, die!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Why isn't RichardGHP dead yet?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Unvote, vote: massflowinevian

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

We are feeling that Richard is very likely scum.

How serious is this statement?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I don't buy it.

Unvote, vote: Casus Belli

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

@CES - don't buy what?

I don't buy that you ascribe such a high likelihood to Richard being scum so early and based on so little.

You then switched votes to masf (for no documented reasoning), putting all the wagons at 4 votes; but at the time it seems like while the masf wagon is picking up some steam the Shotty wagon looks like it has the most momentum and at the time the Richard wagon was still mostly RVS bandwagoning. Why did you switch votes?

The massflowwagon seemed the most promising at the time based on a fairly shallow reading of the thread.

Was there a reason you thought we might not be serious when you quoted us in 109?

There are plenty of people on the site that routinely overstate their suspicions - who, in fact, tend to accuse you of weaselwording if you don't overstate your own suspicions.

I getting suspicious of CES, three votes and half a reason (and I'm being generous to give him that much) between them. Its scummy.

I believe that's above average for me on page 6 in the reasons department - and about par in the votes department.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

His role PM is in the lynch scene, substrike, so we know Richard didn't have an investigation on SpyreX. That breadcrumb comment is very confusing - I certainly don't see any.

FoS: Nachomamma and SpyreX

Vote: Casus Belli

who just looks worse now that Richard has flipped town.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Your newbie game is in the same state as this game (Day 2 without a Night 0). Elaborate or die.

P.S. FakeGod's #166 is :badposting:

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Stranger mistakes have been made.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

We could do that or we could just try to lynch whoever we think is most likely to be scum (i.e. Casus Belli).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Needless to say, today is going to be man up day and you (meaning everyone) better decide right here and now if I'm scum. Because this sure isn't gonna be something I'm gonna let teehee along IF I dont get lynched today.

I don't care - I think it's a scum tell (albeit a weak one) and I don't plan on ignoring in the future if you don't get lynched today. I don't see how the town would benefit from having a statute of limitations on certain actions.

How exactly do we look worse now Richard has flipped?

I thought the certainty you expressed in "We are feeling that Richard is very likely scum." was unreasonably high given the circumstances. The 2 most plausible explanations are "you're scum and making it up" and "you happen to really have such a strong suspicion" (I asked the question to eliminate "her words don't accurately reflect her thoughts"). In the latter case, considering you're both experienced quality players (a judgment based admittedly on but a few observations in the case of xvart) which should include being able to accurately assess your own suspicions, I would expect RichardGHP to be scum with a high likelihood (and that isn't true in the "you're scum"-scenario.) The claim now follows from a simple application of Bayes' Theorem (it should also be intuitively obvious.)

Townies get it wrong all the time, that's nothing new.

Well, you obviously thought more highly of your suspicion. Don't downplay it now.

And do you think we were the mastermind behind his lynch wagon, and if so, can you provide examples of why we are the scum on his wagon compared to the others?

No, I do not.

You seemed intent on focusing in on us yesterday for our push on Richard and looking back now it looks like you knew he was going to flip town.

It was more of a case of me not posting that much but spotting one thing I found significant.

We noted your chainsaw like defense yesterday,

Isn't the idea of a chainsaw defense to defend your partner while keeping your distance?

combine that with the weak FOS's for the hammer gang you are looking very much like self righteous scum.

Sorry I don't have three votes; will work harder in the future to obtain more votes.

P.S. Is "Casus Belli" singular or plural?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Reckamonic seemed to show an even stronger belief that RichardGHP, don't you think?

No, I don't. Furthermore, I see them as more likely to make the type of mistake that would see this type of behaviour coming from a townie.

I too don't understand how Casus Belli looks worse now that Richard flipped cop.

Well, I've posted an explanation. So you're going to have to go into more detail than that if you want to go this route.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

We aren't downplaying anything. You said we were scummier based on Richard's flip, which isn't a definitive scumtell since, as we said, it happens.

You totally are downplaying things. Don't pretend your suspicion was run-of-the-mill.

Instead, the only real case you made on us yesterday only became true after Richard flipped, which is fairly prophetic.

Question: do you think I expected Richard to be lynched at the time I attacked you?

So was Richard's wagon a town failure or was it orchestrated by scum?

I don't know. And I also don't think this is a useful question to ask.

Chainsaw defense is when you defend someone by attacking his/her attacker. Like you did here and here. You provided no actual comments on the Richard case at all. Why not?

I know what Chainsaw defense is, but my understanding was that the purpose of it was to indirectly defend your partner (in the wiki article Tar says it's only valid if the chainsaw defendee has flipped scum). I'm not sure how I would benefit from chainsaw defending Richard.

Singular works.

I know it works. But which one did you have in mind when making it?

Really? Please explain the difference between these two quotes and why one is town behavior and the other isn't.

Sure. The second statement is much stronger simply because it is serious. The first one I would translate loosely as "I find Richard suspicious because of this post". The statements are wholly incomparable in terms of my case against you.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

What are you talking about here? Show us how we are down playing this.

-->"Townies get it wrong all the time, that's nothing new."<--

Looks like you are befitting quite well right now. It has enabled you to place a weak vote on us in an attempt to pass it off as legitimate suspicion.

So I benefitted from attacking you in a chainsaw defense in that it enabled me to attack you? This strikes me a lot of hullabaloo about nothing.

The fact is you didn't and still haven't said why the case on Richard was bad.

That's because I don't particularly think it's bad; I find it unconvincing and I think it's stretching a bit.

You explanation around why our post was different from Recks is weak and we don't fully understand how you could possibly hold the belief they are different seriously.

What part do you disagree with? The meaning I ascribe to your post or to his?

P.S. FakeGod is looking good as a #2 suspect.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

At the time it felt like a chainsaw and we called it as so. But Richard flipped town so he wasn't attacking us to defend his buddy. But he could have easily been scum who knew Richard would flip town. This stood out by the fact he avoided the case and attacked us for a townie lynch when he had no basis to suspect us over say Reckamonic.

So you admit it's not a chainsaw? You only started calling it that today.

CES, do you ever plan to hunt for our alleged scumbuddies; or is your incorrect and unsubstantiated read enough for you to sit on our wagon all day?

It totally is substantiated - I even did sample calculations. But if you must know, I am of course looking for other scum. There may not be many outward signs of that, but that's just my mostly-gut-based playstyle.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Great. We are waiting with baited breath for your game breaking reads that you are keeping to yourself for now for some unknown reason. It was always our impression that providing more information was town behavior and withholding information was scum behavior. You certainly aren't doing much to advance your reads; surely you agree with someone else in this game with some of your hidden reads? Surely you could be helping the town lynch our alleged scum buddies with your hidden reads?

I share the only important thing in that regard here. While I'm linking the post anyway, why don't you answer the question I pose to you at the end.

I find the case against Shotty very "meh".

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

The only thing relevant that we see in your linked post is when you say "P.S. FakeGod is looking good as a #2 suspect." So like we said, if that is the teaser for your other hidden scum reads, we are waiting with baited breath; which begs the question why don't you switch your vote to FakeGod? Your one vote wonder wagon on us isn't going anywhere and you are not actively trying to get others to join our wagon, so why don't you switch over to your "good #2 suspect" and advance your alleged town aligned win condition?

My other scum reads? I only have 2 at this time. As to changing my vote, I've considered it and although I agree that a vote on FakeGod is more likely to contribute to a lynch, I feel keeping my vote on you sends a message to you and the town which I feel is more important at this time.

We posted our suspicion in post 104 at 1:32pm. Reckamonic posted their response in post 115 at 8:10pm (both on the same day, so less than seven hours apart). Richard did not post at all during this time period. Now you don't believe our explained justification for Richard being likely scum but you believe Reckamonic's definitive claim of Richard being scum is solid because of their feelings on claiming the end of RVS? Somehow in the course of seven hours it became acceptable to claim definitively that Richard was scum with a less thought out and less justified reason?

Why are you ignoring my earlier explanation? Your entire argument is based on a naive, literal reading of Reckamonic's post which I consider to be wholly unjustified. Not to mention that I hold Reckamonic to lower standards in this regard anyway.

I find the lack of a mention of actual points brought up against Shotty very concerning.

Why?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

There's not much to say in terms of explanation. I just find the arguments put forward unconvincing to the point that they induce apathy. It's the kind of thing I wouldn't normally comment on, but with, as you point out, a lynch quite possibly coming up shortly, I felt I should get my opinion out there.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Would you?

I totally would.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

You keeping your vote on us is not delivering the message you seem intent on conveying

Well, you're not the audience, so I don't know why you think you can judge that.

Your earlier explanation basically says you did not take Reckamonic's post as serious and you justified it as not worthy of a literal reading (yet you never asked them if they were serious) and they voted in the same post with no other commentary. Why didn't you ask if their justification was serious? You did not think it was and decided to not question their subsequent vote? We didn't vote in our post and you didn't believe we were serious about how likely Richard we thought Richard was scum at the time. Doesn't a vote imply some degree of seriousness at that stage in the game?

Of course I didn't ask them if they were serious. I've encountered that type of post plenty of times; why would I suddenly suspect it to signify a greater degree of seriousness? I didn't see anything out of the ordinary.

Re: votes, I think we can agree that a page 5 vote does not indicate an above average level of suspicion. And I believe I didn't notice your non-voting, but I don't remember it exactly. In any case, I hardly think it's relevant.

And do you think votes should be justified?

Depends on the circumstances.

You are scum; you are not advancing whatever your scum agenda is by parking your vote on us; so we'll just let you sit in your corner with your vote on us until we can garner some more support to lynch you.

Then you'll like this:

Unvote, vote: FakeGod

If Day 2 comes down to FakeGod vs. Shotty, then I know where I like my vote.

You've got some whacked out measurement tool for suspicion levels that seems to be based on nothing in game and we don't feel like trying to decode it anymore.

Well, why don't we test how "whacked out" my interpretation of reckamonic's post is?

Reckamonic, did you intend to express an above average level of expression with this post?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Mod

, I switched my vote to FakeGod.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I don't find the switch suspicious at all although I disagree with the whole "not lynching people who are getting replaced"-thing.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I just ISOed jmurph and q21. I'm not liking jmurph but I disagree with you regarding the nightkill, Llama. Q21's suspicion of jmurph strikes me as not nearly strong enough to justify a kill and I would personally guess his death was the result of more long term thinking (and a glance at the player list seems to support that.)

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

*yawns*

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I see no reason not to

vote: Casus Belli

.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Now that I think about it, mass claim sounds good. The town can ill afford to mislynch at this point yet at the same scum are still forced to make claims that allow for long term survival. (+ info from no-kill last night.)

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Personally, I'm rather confused by the whole wanting to claim early thing, but we'll deal with that after the mass claim.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Was not expecting that.

VT, Llama next (which means SpyreX finishes and then we can get to the bottom of all of this).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

SpyreX still needs to claim.

And, jmurph, if mas flips town, then CB lied -> CB is scum.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I've thought about it and CB's claim just doesn't make sense as a sacrificial play.

Unvote

Before we lynch mas though, I want to give Nacho a chance to share his N1 action since with the amount of claimed power, there's good odds on either reckamonic being fake-claiming scum or scum having a roleblocker. In either case you'd die Nacho along with the information you have.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

EBWOP: In either you'd die, Nacho, along with the information you have.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Good point. Disregard all of that then.

Vote: mass

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Outing the save? Reckamonic already claimed to have forgotten to send their action in.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

So you missed the part where he claimed to have hidden behind llama?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Obvious vote is obvious. No ifs and buts about it.

Vote: Casus Belli

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Sub's play has consistently given me town vibes and he made some weird mistakes which I don't think are faked, whereas I have pretty much no read on SpyreX and a slight scum read on jmurph.

So yeah.

Vote: jmurph

Let's string him up.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

My plan was just "we all vote for jmurph", but I'm fine with yours too.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Vote: SpyreX

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Victoire!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

What was supposed to be the obvious breadcrumb by the bye, Richard?

Personally, I thought the set-up would've been balanced with one mafia roleblocker and I don't mind that we never benefitted from having 2.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

We killed you first (we could've blocked you and killed llama that night) for that very reason.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Reasonably solid play + having nothing better to go on + someone suggested you first.