Mini 280 - Game Over

[Fiasco]

Oh, brilliant. My first bandwagon, too!

[Fiasco]

Since there's probably about four scum around, three votes already seems like a dangerous level if you guys are pro-town. If I'm lynched, you'd be left with about four scum and five town (both minus nightkills), which is already nearly unwinnable. This bandwagon is based on absolutely nothing, and you should unvote.

[vikingfan]

Nobody, scum or not, will load up the bandwagon so fast- it will virtually scream that they are scum and will make for easy pickings in the next lynching round.

If it were four, I would be concerned, but lynchings occur VERY slowly on day one in general. Rest assured, if we get close to a lynch without more information or a claim, I will be unvoting.

But for now my vote stays.

[Fiasco]

You have a point, but do take into account that based on numbers, the scum are already pretty close to winning, so they can afford to take fairly big risks. I'm going to

unvote, vote draygn_mage

, because he's the only one so far caught in a knowable falsehood (of sorts).

[Fiasco]

Your silence creeps me out. It's like being hunted by mimes!

[LoudmouthLee]

So, Fiasco, he checked your profile to see when you signed up, and he didn't do the legwork to check what games you were in..

i would have made the same logical intuitive leap.

Hey

Mod

, where's Passdog and Jaguar?

[Fiasco]

He could have just asked me for proof or explanation. I have nothing to gain by lying about this, and to assume it is ridiculous, sorry.

I saw Jaguar online here earlier today.

[KingPin]

Vote: Jaguar

I've seen him on since the day began and I am keen to vote the silent ones before voting on the 'bandwagon-o-the-day.'

FOS: Fiasco and LML

Fiasco is way too defensive. He is responding to every little argument. This could mean two things. One: that he is in-experienced and just over eager to play the game. Two: that he is scum and trying to point out every possible fallacy in any and all arguments.

LML, for his blantant, I'll vote for scum 'with or without a reason' to suggest why he is scum.

KingPin

[Norinel]

Well, its been my experience that discussing the set up only allows the scum to spread disinformation. However on day one, there are only so many options available to us to start discussion: bandwagoning someone to a claim, discussing the setup, and discussing a "no lynch". Usually, the second two lead to the first method.

4: Discuss the general nature of the town's options on Day 1.
5: Discuss something utterly irrelevant.
6: Argue with the first person to invoke 1-5.
7: Bandwagon whoever sticks their neck out by doing 1-6.
8: Do 1-7 for a few (RL) days, then bandwagon the lurkers.

Sticking with dragyn_mage; feel like the Fiasco bandwagon is more of a distraction than anything else, but whether LML is deliberately distracting or not could go either way.

[LoudmouthLee]

Well, its been my experience that discussing the set up only allows the scum to spread disinformation. However on day one, there are only so many options available to us to start discussion: bandwagoning someone to a claim, discussing the setup, and discussing a "no lynch". Usually, the second two lead to the first method.

4: Discuss the general nature of the town's options on Day 1.
5: Discuss something utterly irrelevant.
6: Argue with the first person to invoke 1-5.
7: Bandwagon whoever sticks their neck out by doing 1-6.
8: Do 1-7 for a few (RL) days, then bandwagon the lurkers.

Sticking with dragyn_mage; feel like the Fiasco bandwagon is more of a distraction than anything else, but whether LML is deliberately distracting or not could go either way.

It's D1, Nor, and I feel like we've actually "gained" info. I feel, already, this has been a productive D1, better than just bandwagon (randomly), out power role, rinse, repeat.

No one else has given me a reason to unvote, so my vote on Fiasco currently stands.

[draygn_mage]

I haven't seen anyone better for step 7 than Fiasco, plus he's wriggling nicely and I can sit back and see who attacks him and who defends him.

Norinel's defense of Fiasco is noted.

[LoudmouthLee]

Vote: Jaguar

I've seen him on since the day began and I am keen to vote the silent ones before voting on the 'bandwagon-o-the-day.'

FOS: Fiasco and LML

Fiasco is way too defensive. He is responding to every little argument. This could mean two things. One: that he is in-experienced and just over eager to play the game. Two: that he is scum and trying to point out every possible fallacy in any and all arguments.

LML, for his blantant, I'll vote for scum 'with or without a reason' to suggest why he is scum.

KingPin

IMHO (and all it is, truthfully, is my opinion), is that SCUM is more likely to try to bandwagon a lurker than a town player. I find your vote to be odd and misplaced.

[Fiasco]

LML, for his blantant, I'll vote for scum 'with or without a reason' to suggest why he is scum.

Actually, the "if I had a reason I would have stated it" part referred to his random vote on me.

[Fiasco]

If it helps, here's a bit of history. I wrote:

Ooh, my first random vote! (Assuming it was random.)

I originally wrote "(At least I'm assuming it was random)", and "(I'm assuming it was random)" before going with this version for brevity.

[Jaguar]

Limited to no access until Tuesday... Have a good weekend everyone

Yes, I was on for two seconds this morning on my way to a meeting. And for future reference, I am just about always offline from Friday afternoon until Tuesday morning, so this is likely going to happen again. And keep in mind that the game started only yesterday, so please give some people a break. If someone hasn't shown up after three or four days, then you have my support on going after people who aren't posting.

On another note, I am a her (points at little female sign in profile) and it's been a while since I've played regularly. I don't know a lot of you, including playing styles, but Fiasco is certainly raising the hair on the back of my neck.

You have a point, but do take into account that based on numbers, the scum are already pretty close to winning, so they can afford to take fairly big risks. I'm going to unvote, vote draygn_mage, because he's the only one so far caught in a knowable falsehood (of sorts).

But a scum win is never guaranteed. I think you are being very defensive and it would be very unwise for scum to all be on the same wagon. Out of 40 posts in the thread, you have 12. You are dominating the thread with some unnecessary posts (A couple of one-liners) and double posts. If this is your normal playing style, it is certainly not helping you any.

For now no vote, as the one person I would be voting for is already at three votes at the moment.

I like LML's last observation about lurkers. Perhaps I'm a bit prejudiced, but at this time I can't call it lurking. After all, the game only started yesterday, so Kingpin's vote is even more suspicious.

[Fiasco]

But a scum win is never guaranteed.

That's why I said "fairly big risks" rather than "arbitrarily big risks".

and it would be very unwise for scum to all be on the same wagon.

Unless they're in different scum teams (e.g. serial killer).

You are dominating the thread with some unnecessary posts (A couple of one-liners) and double posts. If this is your normal playing style, it is certainly not helping you any.

I disagree with your assumption that people shouldn't post unless "necessary". We need to get as much information out there as possible. Participation good, lurking bad. Now that I've turned off my sig, I can't see double posts hurting, either. I think it would be good for the town if more of you played more like this.

And yes, this is my normal playing style. If it's not helping the town, that's only because some in the town are silly enough to vote/accuse based on a non-harmful, slightly unconventional playing style. (When did that ever become a scum tell?)

[Aelyn]

Since there's probably about four scum around, three votes already seems like a dangerous level if you guys are pro-town. If I'm lynched, you'd be left with about four scum and five town (both minus nightkills), which is already nearly unwinnable.

This is only valid assuming all scum are in the same group together. If they are not, there is a significant chance of cross-killing which will weaken the scum's chances.

You have a point, but do take into account that based on numbers, the scum are already pretty close to winning, so they can afford to take fairly big risks.

Again, here you're making the implicit assumption that there are four scum working together, seemingly as a defence.

And yet:

and it would be very unwise for scum to all be on the same wagon.

Unless they're in different scum teams (e.g. serial killer).

Here you show you're well aware of the possibility of multiple kill groups, which would seem to invalidate a major part of your defence (which, incidentally, is invalid since the town's in exactly the same boat regarding everyone else.)

In addition to this, you've also been posting very defensively and have been answering every single point against you as and when it comes - it feels to me like you're acting like a trapped mongoose, flurrying around in an attempt to escape but all the while just drawing more and more attention.

FOS: Fiasco.

Expect it to turn into a vote soon enough if nothing changes.

[Fiasco]

Now that everyone knows that I know that everyone else considers defensive posting to be a scum tell, it's no longer a scum tell, so I can post defensively to my heart's content. Right?

Aelyn's post is interesting, because he's the only one alive with whom I've been in a game before; I had vaguely expected him to defend me, because my playing style (as town) was similar there. I didn't get accused much, but when I did, I always defended myself, I think.

He's correct that I've overstated the probability that, if a pro-townie is lynched, any individual scum group will win; I said they would be "pretty close" to the win, and while that's ambiguous, it's probably less than a 1 in 2 chance in reality. (When I wrote that, I had been thinking about whether or not we might already be in lynch or lose; if we lynch a pro-townie, the mafia nightkills the SK, and the SK nightkills a townie, we're very close to a loss but not quite there yet. This may explain some of the confusion in my mind. I've always considered a mafia + SK the main possibility and agree that my arguments are worse than they would be given four unified scum.)

I do still think that if we lynch wrong, the town is in very bad shape. In the other mini I've been in, the town lynched right the first three times but still lost. I also still think the three votes aren't without risk. One confused townie, one SK and one self-sacrificing mafia member would do the trick.

Aelyn seems to be saying the following is an argument independent of his other ones:

which, incidentally, is invalid since the town's in exactly the same boat regarding everyone else

but I don't understand what he means here.

One last point. Whether you think posting a lot is good or bad, it would be irrational to data-mine the most scummy tell out of all posts. Instead, you should look more at the scum tell rate. Someone with two tells in four posts is scummier than someone with three tells in ten posts, assuming equally contentful/risky posts.

FoS Aelyn

: 4th votes based on little are scummy. Instead of attacking me for addressing the arguments, you should be attacking people like LmL for not addressing the arguments, as would happen in any normal situation.

FoS Passdog

: lurking.

(This will be my last post for the near future; in a day or two I'll probably write something about the main arguments against me, as well as about which of you I think are the scum. I have seven people against me now and it looks reasonably likely that I'll be lynched. We need to get as much information out of this as we can.)

[LoudmouthLee]

Now that everyone knows that I know that everyone else considers defensive posting to be a scum tell, it's no longer a scum tell, so I can post defensively to my heart's content. Right?

Aelyn's post is interesting, because he's the only one alive with whom I've been in a game before; I had vaguely expected him to defend me, because my playing style (as town) was similar there. I didn't get accused much, but when I did, I always defended myself, I think.

He's correct that I've overstated the probability that, if a pro-townie is lynched, any individual scum group will win; I said they would be "pretty close" to the win, and while that's ambiguous, it's probably less than a 1 in 2 chance in reality. (When I wrote that, I had been thinking about whether or not we might already be in lynch or lose; if we lynch a pro-townie, the mafia nightkills the SK, and the SK nightkills a townie, we're very close to a loss but not quite there yet. This may explain some of the confusion in my mind. I've always considered a mafia + SK the main possibility and agree that my arguments are worse than they would be given four unified scum.)

I do still think that if we lynch wrong, the town is in very bad shape. In the other mini I've been in, the town lynched right the first three times but still lost. I also still think the three votes aren't without risk. One confused townie, one SK and one self-sacrificing mafia member would do the trick.

Aelyn seems to be saying the following is an argument independent of his other ones:

which, incidentally, is invalid since the town's in exactly the same boat regarding everyone else

but I don't understand what he means here.

One last point. Whether you think posting a lot is good or bad, it would be irrational to data-mine the most scummy tell out of all posts. Instead, you should look more at the scum tell rate. Someone with two tells in four posts is scummier than someone with three tells in ten posts, assuming equally contentful/risky posts.

FoS Aelyn

: 4th votes based on little are scummy. Instead of attacking me for addressing the arguments, you should be attacking people like LmL for not addressing the arguments, as would happen in any normal situation.

FoS Passdog

: lurking.

(This will be my last post for the near future; in a day or two I'll probably write something about the main arguments against me, as well as about which of you I think are the scum. I have seven people against me now and it looks reasonably likely that I'll be lynched. We need to get as much information out of this as we can.)

I have heard over and over again... 4 unified scum.

Where did you get this? Where is this coming from?

I believe you have too much info, sir.

[Jaguar]

FoS Aelyn: 4th votes based on little are scummy. Instead of attacking me for addressing the arguments, you should be attacking people like LmL for not addressing the arguments, as would happen in any normal situation.

Aelyn did not vote you. I'm confused here.

I have heard over and over again... 4 unified scum.

Where did you get this? Where is this coming from?

Did I miss something in Fiasco's last post? I don't see in the last post that Fiasco was still on four unified scum. As a matter of fact, he pointed out the SK/mafia scenario where the mafia takes out SK. That doesn't look like four scum together.

[LoudmouthLee]

Maybe I misread... re-reading.

[Norinel]

Well, its been my experience that discussing the set up only allows the scum to spread disinformation. However on day one, there are only so many options available to us to start discussion: bandwagoning someone to a claim, discussing the setup, and discussing a "no lynch". Usually, the second two lead to the first method.

4: Discuss the general nature of the town's options on Day 1.
5: Discuss something utterly irrelevant.
6: Argue with the first person to invoke 1-5.
7: Bandwagon whoever sticks their neck out by doing 1-6.
8: Do 1-7 for a few (RL) days, then bandwagon the lurkers.

Sticking with dragyn_mage; feel like the Fiasco bandwagon is more of a distraction than anything else, but whether LML is deliberately distracting or not could go either way.

It's D1, Nor, and I feel like we've actually "gained" info. I feel, already, this has been a productive D1, better than just bandwagon (randomly), out power role, rinse, repeat.

My point exactly.

Norinel's defense of Fiasco is noted.

dragyn_mage's attempt to tie me to Fiasco is noted.

it feels to me like [Fiasco's] acting like a trapped mongoose, flurrying around in an attempt to escape but all the while just drawing more and more attention.

I can't really fault that behavior, as I've been known to do it as town (London Mafia II being the prime example)

But

FOS: Fiasco

for the scum grouping thing (I know 3 scum + SK can yield bad situations for the town after a bad day 1 lynch, but it doesn't seem like there's anything particular to this game that makes it worth overly discussing now),

Passdog

for not yet posting, and

Don Gaetano

for minimal content except to start the Fiasco fiasco and then all but disappear.

[KingPin]

UnVote

I clearly stated that I would vote for the silent ones. Maybe you disagree, maybe you don't. Frankly when I see your name at the bottom of the page, indicating you are online, and then you do not make a response, if only to say "hello and I think so-and-so is acting suspicious," then I'll vote for you.

Now, since there hasn't been a peep out of Passdog I'll

Vote: Passdog

.

Regardless of your views towards voting the silent ones, you'll have to admit that it does force them into being active.

I still hold my

FOS's

for LML and Fiasco, good lord they both rub me the wrong way.

[LoudmouthLee]

I rub everyone the wrong way. I'm aggressive. Sorry. I still find that scum are more likely to target lurkers than townies, so I'll levy a

FoS: Kingpin

You can view it as OMGUS, I view it as a hunch... as a repeated lurker hunt, when, in turn, you only have two posts of merit.

[draygn_mage]

fos norinel

for using the obvious Fiasco fiasco line.