Mini 515 - The Pine Barrens - Game Over!

[hasdgfas]

Hello Adel and welcome.
As your welcome gift I

unvote

. Since my problem was with Zakarum I'll see what you think about things before I decide what to do with it now.

[Adel]

Thanks for the welcome, could you answer these questions, please?

1. who are the active players who make content-rich posts?
2. who are the lurking players, who post just enough to avoid attention?
3. which players post many words, but little information?

It really will help me.

Thanks.

[Rishi]

Eighth Vote Count - Day 2

mcpaltp – 1 (neko2086)
ThAdmiral – 1 (Bookitty)
Bookitty – 1 (Elias_the_thief)
Boggzie - 1 (mcpaltp)
Adel - 1 (opie)
neko2086 - 1 (TheHermit)

Not voting: Boggzie, ThAdmiral, Adel, hasdgfas

10 alive. 6 votes to lynch.

Deadline: November 20, 11:59pm

Five votes will be enough to lynch at deadline.

Deadline may be extended to December 4 at the request of a majority of the players. Requests so far: 0

[Adel]

I've been looking into voting patterns lately. Currently I throw out all posts from the random stage as noise, and start my analysis from there.

I consider the end of the random stage to be Boggzie's vote for ryan at post 63

here is the game action's I recorded. please check my work: I am especially prone to missing unbolded Fos's.

63 - boggzie votes ryan -4
64 - ryan votes boggzie
68 - mcpaltp votes ryan -3
70 - hasdgfas votes boggzie
72 - opie votes ryan -2
82 - hermit unvotes ryan -3
82 - hermit fos boggzie
85 - bookitty votes ryan -2
86 - elias unvotes ryan -3
87 - spider fos ryan --- _{note that spider did not vote ryan before ryan was moddkilled. spider had every chance to, but didn't. this is an example of what I consider to be a typical townie vote pattern. fos's are not followed by votes. scum, on the other hand, tend to fos a target townie, and then vote later hoping the prior fos will give some rhetorical cover for their vote. scum almost never fos a buddy before voting him. they will, however, point a fos at a buddy (especially a lurking buddy) but will not vote for that buddy until a late bus is needed.}
98 - elias fos bookitty
99 - elias fos mcpaltp
106 - elias votes bookitty
107 - hermit votes bookitty *** _{here hermit, after making an earlier fos at boggzie, votes for bookitty.}
108 - bookitty unvotes ryan -4
109 - Zakarum votes bookitty -4
[quote=votecount 4, post 110]
ryan - 3 (Boggzie, mcpaltp, opie)
Bookitty - 3 (Elias_the_thief, TheHermit, Zakarum)
Boggzie - 2 (ryan, hasdgfas) [/quote]
ryan modkilled at post 146
Spider nk'd
154 - mcpaltp votes TheAdmiral -5
155 - hermit votes mcpaltp -5
156 - zak fos mcpaltp
167 - elias vote bookitty
167 - elias fos boogzie
181 - elias fos hasdgfas & opie ^^^ does elias seem scummy for sending out

that

many fos's?
183 - zak fos hasdgfas & opie ^^^_{zak is an idiot for following elias like that. regardless of role or alignment, following another player like that is an idiotic move. shame on zak. this post alone earns him the title of "village idot" in my mind.}
190 - bookitty fos zak & TA
190 - bookitty vote mcpaltp
218 - opie fos zak
224 - neko vote TA -5 *** _{scum votes buddy for distancing?}
230 bookitty vote TA -4
240 - neko unvotes TA - 5 **** _{scum abandons wagon of buddy before it gets too large?}
243 - neko votes boogzie
245 - hasdgfas votes zak
262 - mcpaltp votes boogzie
266 - neko unvotes boogzie
266 - neko fos mcpaltp
284 - neko vote mcpaltp - _{does regular voting following a fos still count as a scumtell?}
304 - opie votes zak --- _{another vote following an fos. this time opie even points to the earlier fos for cover}
308 - hermit votes neko *** _{possible scum distancing vote.}

[ThAdmiral]

How precisely was anyone to know that Zakarum "hasn't been able to defend himself"? I think most of the arguments against him occurred well before anyone knew he had sought replacement, as he did not ask to be replaced within the thread.

It seemed that the longer zakarum was absent the more people were growing suspicious of him. And while it's true that you and hasdfags had mentioned your suspicions earlier people like opie and the hermit seemed to be just jumping on the overall sentiment, or at least were swayed by it.

It's easy to grow more suspicious of someone when they don't reply for a long time, but it's unwise to use someone's absence as a further sign of guilt, as people sometimes do have legitimate reasons why they haven't posted. And sometimes a sentiment can build up to a point where the person comes back and attempts to respond to the case against them but by that stage everyone is just hungry for a lynch.

[Bookitty]

Hmmm. I actually agree with you, ThAdmiral. And that was a really pro-town post, in my opinion.

I'm unFOSing you. I don't think scum would have pointed that out.

[Adel]

[neko2086]

Holy crap. Did you create that, or is there a program that does that???

Anywho, welcome, first of all, but down to business, I'd like to know why you seem so inclined to think of me as scum, Adel. It seems like anytime I vote for someone, or even if someone votes for me, you make a comment about how it suggests that I am scum. As far as I can tell, you seem to have randomly picked me, with the exception of a comment for opie and one for elias, for scrutinizing votes.

Also, I don't quite see how you find following an fos with a vote scummy...it just seems logical to me that if you are suspicious of someone, you fos them. If they cannot ease your suspicions and you think they are likely scum, you vote them. Isn't that what this whole game is about?

[Adel]

For Mafia I use Fireworks, Mathematica, and a text editor. I created those graphics myself.

I wouldn't worry too much about those notes. They are just surface-level observations I made while collecting data. The deeper analysis takes much longer. The post where I present my conclusions will include a vote.

[mcpaltp]

:psyduck: Holy crap. Uh, wow. That's a lot of surface analysis right there! With all this data, the economist in me is wanting to plot a regression on posts v. wordiness and see if I can correlate it with substance of posting. I'm a little proud of how much I've managed to post. Whoooooo!

[Adel]

vote: opie

fos: Bookitty

Based on my model of scum voting actions for their respective activity level.

I will not share the algorithm I use, or the data points I rely upon. I have about 70% confidence in opie being scum, and I have about 67% confidence in a Bookitty lynch being accurate. I do not have any significant evidence connecting them as buddies.

[Bookitty]

Adel:

What is your success rate with this algorithm? Could you link us to other games where you've used this method?

[Adel]

active games, so no.

[mcpaltp]

That's one heck of a crazy awesome method, man. What I don't like is how you can hide behind your method and algorithm to make whatever sort of reult you want, slap down a 60%-70% certainty rate, and lean back comfortably with whatever result you get.

Huh. I guess it's just a good way to justify following your gut, which is what this game is about to me, at least. It will provoke me to take another look at Bookity and Opie, though, so I suppose it's good for something.

Great angle. 5 stars. I'll lay this vote on you to indicate that I'm not going to trust all of this (admittedly awesome) specualtion off hand, either. Don't take it personaly or anything though, as I think FoS are a bunch of crap, as they just provide a justificaiton for a later vote, potentially ignoring context. I'm not going to play that game. You know where I stand from where my vote is, and that's that.

##Unvote:Boggzie
##Vote:Adel

I see that you are back, Boggzie. I'll look forward to your further contributions, and my analysis of those contributions soon.

[Boggzie]

um...as you all know I check this from work - and in light of all of Adels analysis (i'm actually printing off the graphs now) I need to read over these.

wow.

just...wow.

[hasdgfas]

No offense Adel, but unless I know what you're trying to point out with those graphs, I still have no reason to trust you.

[opie]

vote: opie
fos: Bookitty

Based on my model of scum voting actions for their respective activity level.

I will not share the algorithm I use, or the data points I rely upon. I have about 70% confidence in opie being scum, and I have about 67% confidence in a Bookitty lynch being accurate. I do not have any significant evidence connecting them as buddies.

Wait. What? You're voting for me because of math? Hold on. I thought you said:

I wouldn't worry too much about those notes. They are just surface-level observations I made while collecting data. The deeper analysis takes much longer. The post where I present my conclusions will include a vote.

A few questions:
Is Post 335 the extent of your deeper analysis and conclusions?
Are you

only

voting and (FOSing) based on scum voting action for my respective activity level?
Could you explain the logic behind this model.
What assumption did you make when you developed this model?
Could you plug every player into your model and post their results?
Why can't you share the algorithm you use or the data points you rely on?
What's your percentage of confidence based on?
Is your vote for me in part based on my FOS and then voting for Zakarum?

I really don't know how to respond to this. I don't know what I'm being accused of other than I'm scum and that Adel is 70% sure.

I would like to comment on some of your notes in Post 328. First you note that Spider Jerusalem FOS ryan but never voted for him even though he had every chance to. You cite this as typical townie behavior, meaning FOS are not followed by votes.

But you go on later to say that scum will point a FOS at a buddy, but

not vote

for that buddy until a late bus is needed. You are implying then that typical scum behavior is: FOS (for buddys) not followed by votes (unless bus). If you discount our hindsight (i.e. before the end of Day One), couldn't one have used this logic against Spider Jerusalem? Couldn't one argue based on this logic that Spider pointed a FOS ryan (his buddy) and not voted for him? And was unable to bus his buddy because ryan modkilled himself first?

Bookitty, I would not be expecting a vote from Adel. Here's why:
(a) He pointed a FOS at you in Post 335;
(b) Adel claims to be town;
(c) Townie's don't follow a FOS with a vote for the same person.
Therefore, I wouldn't worry about a vote from Adel. For if Adel

were

to vote for you then he would be acting contrary to typical townie behavior and thus likely scum.

[opie]

Oh, and since I forgot. Welcome to the game Adel!

[Adel]

I find the graphs to be a useful reference. Sometimes other townies find them useful as well, usually those townies who have visually & spatially biased intelligence. They are not meant to point anything out. They are part of the data set I look at when I start my analysis.

I just noticed that I didn't answer Bookitty fully with my last post: my success rate with sample mini-normals games where I use the first 3/4's of day one for data, is almost 80%. This game, with the modkilling, and the unusually uniform contribution level, may not fit my model as well as I would like. So I have less confidence than I usually do. There are no completed games where I used my algorithm- I only recently finished it. Mini 458 (see my wiki page) is a game I played in as scum where I did reference models and used graphs. ThAdmiral was a lurking & townie player in that game.

One of my assumptions is that there are 3 members of the mafia, and only a 15% chance of a SK. So the baseline % chance of a specific player being scum is ~39%. I treated all of day 1 and part of day 2 as all being the same day, and I did not take ryan and Spider's revealed alignments in to account in any way. Thankfully, my model did not predict either of them as being scum.

[Bookitty]

I think the graph is really fun to look at, and the summary of events was useful to some extent. But I really don't think it's any substitute for actual analysis of what is said, and who said it, and why. If it were, then computers could play the game, and people wouldn't be necessary.

I thought Zakarum was scummy before Adel arrived, and her latest postings seem very distractive and not very helpful to town, even though they're visually stunning. Basing your vote on wordcount? It seems really counter to the spirit of Mafia, and hopelessly random. If she could have pointed to instances where her theory was proven correct, I might have felt differently, but at this point, it just looks like a lot of razzle-dazzle and distraction, and not really helpful to town, especially considering the (in my opinion, at least) scattershot results she seems to be deriving.

Based on my own impressions being nearly diametrically opposite to Adel's results, and on Zakarum's past play, I will:

unvote; vote Adel

[opie]

With regards to ThAdmiral:

It seemed that the longer zakarum was absent the more people were growing suspicious of him. And while it's true that you and hasdfags had mentioned your suspicions earlier people like opie and the hermit seemed to be just jumping on the overall sentiment, or at least were swayed by it.

I pointed a FOS at Zakarum in Post 218. I think I was the first to really publicly focus on him as a suspect. Further I think I explained the reason for my vote In Post 304. In summary: (a) even though Zakarum defended himself, I was not swayed; and (b) he continued to act in a suspicious manner. Not once did I use his absence as evidence on scum behavior, I based my decision based on the content of his posts. I even explained why I was voting for him even though he appeared to be absent.

On what do you base your claim that I was "jumping on the overall sentiment" or jumping on Zakarum because he hasn't been able to defend himself?

The deadline is/was approaching, I hadn't voted for anyone up 'til then and rather than no vote, I voted for Zakarum who I felt was the most suspicious person at that time, as explained in Post 304.

[Adel]

:
Is Post 335 the extent of your deeper analysis and conclusions?

no, it is the

result

of my deeper analysis

Are you

only

voting and (FOSing) based on scum voting action for my respective activity level?

no, your activity level only determined which model I used to evaluate you

Could you explain the logic behind this model.

The votes on each player act as a sort of a market. Once a player meets a majority of that market's share, he is lynched. The technical analysis used to predict changes in some commodity markets is very similar, mathematically, to a mafia game. This is a simple example of what influenced my design.
The nivel aspect is that the goal is not to predict how large a wagon will get, but which actors use the mafia equivalent of

insider trading

to determine which wagon they will support.

What assumption did you make when you developed this model?

many, many assumptions, which I will not be sharing. The central assumption is that the more assumptions I incorporate, the more robust my system will be, which is assuming that more of my assumptions are accurate for a given game than not.

Could you plug every player into your model and post their results?

I did plug every player in, and I will not share the results

Why can't you share the algorithm you use or the data points you rely on?

I want my system to remain accurate in future games. If I released that information the meta would shift, and my ability to accurately identify scum would rapidly decrease

What's your percentage of confidence based on?

if a townie did something in 12% of my sample games, and scum did the same thing in 56% of my sample games, I derive a value from that, and plug it into an equation.

Is your vote for me in part based on my FOS and then voting for Zakarum?

no

But you go on later to say that scum will point a FOS at a buddy, but

not vote

for that buddy until a late bus is needed. You are implying then that typical scum behavior is: FOS (for buddys) not followed by votes (unless bus). If you discount our hindsight (i.e. before the end of Day One), couldn't one have used this logic against Spider Jerusalem? Couldn't one argue based on this logic that Spider pointed a FOS ryan (his buddy) and not voted for him? And was unable to bus his buddy because ryan modkilled himself first?

This is the kind of paragraph that led me to try to develop an accurate model based upon objective observations. It is all bull in my eyes. Not that that makes opie any more scummy to me, pretty much every player is so full of bull I have a lot of trouble telling scum from townie.
Based upon a large number of games, I've noticed a couple of voting patterns that

generally

hold true. That kind of analysis is still too intuitive for me to build an algorithm around it. I would like to.

Bookitty, I would not be expecting a vote from Adel. Here's why:
(a) He pointed a FOS at you in Post 335;
(b) Adel claims to be town;
(c) Townie's don't follow a FOS with a vote for the same person.
Therefore, I wouldn't worry about a vote from Adel. For if Adel

were

to vote for you then he would be acting contrary to typical townie behavior and thus likely scum.

is opie warning his scum buddy not to overreact to my post?

[Adel]

I think the graph is really fun to look at, and the summary of events was useful to some extent. But I really don't think it's any substitute for actual analysis of what is said, and who said it, and why. If it were, then computers could play the game, and people wouldn't be necessary.

I thought Zakarum was scummy before Adel arrived, and her latest postings seem very distractive and not very helpful to town, even though they're visually stunning. Basing your vote on wordcount? It seems really counter to the spirit of Mafia, and hopelessly random. If she could have pointed to instances where her theory was proven correct, I might have felt differently, but at this point, it just looks like a lot of razzle-dazzle and distraction, and not really helpful to town, especially considering the (in my opinion, at least) scattershot results she seems to be deriving.

Based on my own impressions being nearly diametrically opposite to Adel's results, and on Zakarum's past play, I will:

unvote; vote Adel

I consider this to be the overreaction opie was warning against.

[mcpaltp]

Beep boop. I'm a little suspicious of how Opie and Bookitty are jumping so hard on Adel. I'd love to hear from the other members of the thread to see what they are thinking. As of right now, I'm still on the side of "not trusting Adel" mostly due to his lack of transparancy in his magical algorithm. Great grist for the analysis mill, though. Keep it up guys!

<3 <3 <3

[Adel]

another scum warning.

FoS: mcpaltp

for trying to warn a scum buddy against over reacting. I have linkage between mcpaltp and opie

or

Bookitty. I dubt all three are in the same scumgroup though- my model is terrible at predicting all 3 members. If Bookitty or opie are lynched and revealed as scum today, mcpaltp is my first choice for lynch tomorrow. He is

not

a good choice for today's lynch though.