Micro 1000: Names on the List v1.01 [game over!]

[Datisi]

vote count 3.02

with 8 votes in play, it takes 5 to make a decision. day 3 ends in (expired on 2021-04-09 17:05:00).

execution

The Bulge [1]:

bugspray

bugspray [1]:

Rathe

Mad Hatters Tea Party [1]:

Not_Mafia

not voting [5]:

Michael Scott, Ythan, Dunnstral, Mad Hatters Tea Party, The Bulge

game state

parity:

~ mafia members alive: three (3)
~

doom counter

: one (1)
~ town will be endgamed once they are brought down to:

three (3)

members.

previously published lists:

~ ythan, dunnstral, not_mafia, the bulge, bugspray ~ 3 town, 2 mafia

mod notes

~ 24 hour posting period will be resetting at 6:00pm CET
~ not_mafia has used 6/20 reserve posts.

[Michael Scott]

VOTE: Not_Mafia

-Jimothy

[The Bulge]

like what are the grounds for even saying that? do you mean every time a wagon stalls that's what's happening, or just in this game's context? are you saying that every counterwagon is led by scum?

This is a flagrant misrep. Every coubterwagon being led by scum is absolutely different from what I said.
Geriatric or not if the scum were unhappy with the gamestate they will do their best to change it.

a question cannot be a misrep. you said that there was no counterwagon because scum didn't make one, I'm saying there was no counterwagon because

nobody

made one. your scenario doesn't explain why the wagon stalled in the first place. I think it's because of the slow pace of the game, and I'm not really sure why you think it has to do with how scum is directing the flow of the day. I was curious if you think this is just always the case in situations like these, or if you're commenting specifically on this game's situation. thank you for clarifying that, but I still think your original thought is incomplete and underdeveloped.

Every single one of the bulge's arguments are LHF that stand up to little scrutiny. 419 is calling out a lurker with more words.
Read a bulge post and ask if it looks like it genuinely is looking for scum

This one does amuse me.

I want to take a look at hatter to see if I can find anything that supports my gut feeling they're happy with the slow unproductive pace of the game. not sure how to better explain atm and like I have no meta experience with them but it seems to me that they're holding back somewhat in terms of actually advancing the game, just the impression I get from their style.

Disregarding of the matter that I am the second most active player in the game...

obviously, this is not about post count. in fact your activity is part of what makes me suspicious. your post before this one is an excellent example: I think you're most concerned this game about appearances. you make sure to stay up to date on relevant discussion, but there is very little game-advancing content, and almost no original lines of questioning from you all game. you just kind of... say a lot of things. your posting frequency and manner of writing lead me to believe you are capable of being a greater asset to town than you have been.

[The Bulge]

I'm getting the impression that bugspray's attack on me is agenda-based, like they're trying to force a dichotomy between us since the list was revealed, but I'll let it ride for now

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

My concern in this game is the elimination of threats to masses. I require slight pressure to function optimally and while I have no doubt in my ability to take control of this game and use my persona and strength of will as a deux ex machina...

I do not wish to. The effort required is not sustainable for a healthy Hatter.

The manner of your reflections and summarisation of your thoughts also leads me to believe you are also capable of much much more, but you seem lazy in comparison. Have you perhaps lost your muchness?

[bugspray]

I am awaiting consensus on where we should vote, N_M using Michaels slip, or Rathe based on my belief that voting outside of the list is the better option due to overall increased odds based on the smaller pool.

Assuming you have no information of any player's alignment shooting inside the published list randomly gives a 2/5 or 40% probability of hitting scum. If you know the alignment of one player in the group to be town then you instead have a 2/4 or 50% probability of hitting scum.

Assuming you have no information of any player's alignment shooting outside the published list randomly gives a 1/3 or 33% probability of hitting scum. If you know the alignment of one player in the group to be town then you instead have a 1/2 or 50% probability of hitting scum.

Fortunately, every town player knows they are town so we can calculate the probability of eliminating scum both inside and outside the group (the group/pool/etc. meaning the list we published yesterday).
Known facts:
* The group contains three town and two scum
* The outsiders contains two town and one scum.
* Every town player knows they are town

Assumptions I am making (these will all skew the derived statistics to appear scum favouring and are unlikely to be all true)
* Scum will never vote to eliminate their scumbuddies
* No town have any information about players' alignment other than their own

From this we can calculate the expected value of a random player dayvigging both in and out of the group by taking the average of all the probabilities.

Shooting in the group:
* scum1 in group: 0%
* scum2 in group: 0%
* town1 in group : 50%
* town2 in group : 50%
* town3 in group : 50%
* scum1 out group:0%
* town1 out group: 40%
* town2 out group: 40%
average = 28.75% (and this is very generous to scum)

Shooting outside the group
* scum1 in group: 0%
* scum2 in group: 0%
* town1 in group : 33%
* town2 in group : 33%
* town3 in group : 33%
* scum1 out group:0%
* town1 out group: 50%
* town2 out group: 50%
average ~= 24.875%

Shooting randomly with no respect to the group (3/7 because each town knows not to self elim):
* scum1 in group: 0%
* scum2 in group: 0%
* town1 in group : 42.86%
* town2 in group : 42.86%
* town3 in group : 42.86%
* scum1 out group:0%
* town1 out group: 42.86%
* town2 out group: 42.86%
average ~=26.79%

Shooting outside the published list gives us a worse probability to hit scum than shooting inside the list.

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

My, it appears my logic regarding the complexity of the pool is as mad as I... not unless Im mistaken we need a correct elimination today, what are peoples considerations around the Michael Scott tell upon Not_Mafia?

[Rathe]

VOTE: mad hatter

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

VOTE: mad hatter

And a good morning to you too.

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

VOTE: Mad Hatters

VOTE: mad hatter

I must confess I find these most intriguing.

Michael I am inclined to offer you a named place at my table...

While I understand the maths for shooting on the list, I feel voting for rathe would be quite a powerful move at this time, and would confirm Not_mafia's alignment as anti-town.

[bugspray]

While I understand the maths for shooting on the list, I feel voting for rathe would be quite a powerful move at this time, and would confirm Not_mafia's alignment as anti-town.

How would elimiating rathe today confirm NM's alignment?
Why did you specifically say anti-town rather than scum?

What woudl we learn abot n_m's alignment if rathe flips green?
What woudl we learn abot n_m's alignment if rathe flips red?

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

While I understand the maths for shooting on the list, I feel voting for rathe would be quite a powerful move at this time, and would confirm Not_mafia's alignment as anti-town.

How would elimiating rathe today confirm NM's alignment?
Why did you specifically say anti-town rather than scum?

What woudl we learn abot n_m's alignment if rathe flips green?
What woudl we learn abot n_m's alignment if rathe flips red?

My aren't you full of questions today. Defending your allies? I suppose I should entertain you...

Rathe and Not_Mafias associatives are strong enough for me to connect the two.
The difference to me in this setup is negligible.

If Rathe flips green, as unlikely as it is, I believe the game is over.
If Rathe flips red, the associatiatives at there.

[Datisi]

prodding not_mafia.

[Not_Mafia]

Why has Mad Hatters not been eliminated yet?

[Ythan]

Happy birthday nm.

[Not_Mafia]

Thanks

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

Why has Mad Hatters not been eliminated yet?

For the same reason you have not. People are considering what has been presented.

I am now confident enough to VOTE: Not_Mafia

[bugspray]

Feels like mhtp's responses to my questions were done as a chore to make the problem go away

[Not_Mafia]

Feels like mhtp's responses to my questions were done as a chore to make the problem go away

Because Hatter is scum

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

Feels like mhtp's responses to my questions were done as a chore to make the problem go away

I would simply ignore your, your presence in this game has been minimal and you are not a concern to me.

As you have extended an intent to attempt to discredit my answers, I will offer the same courtesy.

Your numbers are impressive, but simple. You do not account for the complexity of human nature, nor do you provide allowances for bias.

Your numbers, are worthless.

In a game of psychological assessment there exists bias from many locations. Experience of the game, hunting prowess, personae moving to disguise. All the while attempting to look busy, to find the holes, find the agenda. And then further to the creation of connects which results in our fun little game being a behemoth of a web.

The difficult of the uninformed majority is that they must lie, they must use manipulation and hide behind logic as much as they possibly can.

Your numbers, are logical.

Nothing more than an attempt to look busy and engaged in the hunting process.

You are attempting to hide behind the jabberings of insanity whilst bearing a shield of cold mathemathical logic.

Meanwhile, my solve is created.
Michael is confident within their read of Not_Mafia's guilt.
Not_mafia simply wishes for my eviction, nothing more would ever dare be presented.
Rathe has been quite careful around Not_Mafia, and yet sheeps happily.
Bugsprays attempts to discredit me further are clear, as they know I am capable of stepping up when required.

[Mad Hatters Tea Party]

Nae lits git doon to batttle

[Dunnstral]

In my mind this game is revolving around whether Mad Hatter is scum or not right now

My thoughts are that there are some slots I have some suspicions on and most of them seem to want hatter dead

VOTE: Not_Mafia

[The Bulge]

I've been doing some interesting reading today! Hatter has two completed games on site, both town, and I read through their Animals uPick iso along with a good chunk of the game, and then skimmed their iso in Superb Idea. Animals uPick sees our friend in the thick of it all along, staying consistent with lines of questioning for several different slots, prodding at players at risk of flying under the radar, and ensuring that their own stances are clear and their actions justified. You would only need to skim their iso to see that their convictions are strong (of course I'm not just talking about pushing a Guilty), and despite the roleplay aspect also present here, their content comes easily and naturally.

Compare this now to the game at hand, where Hatter has hardly commented on any posts not addressed to them, and almost seems to go out of their way to not directly put pressure on any particular slot. Much of their iso is mechtalk, and much of the real game content (or even the fluff/shitposting, for that matter) is in response to a post directed at them. Any time we get a glimpse into Hatter's reads or thoughts on gamestate, it's passive and inconsequential, with absolutely no engagement (besides mozamis), which is in stark contrast to the vigourous scumhunting initiative we've seen from townHatter, following up on every conviction and placing themselves at the center of every line of questioning. It's the difference between an investigative journalist conducting interviews, and someone giving a play-by-play from a helicopter.

I believe Hatter is finding it difficult this game to create meaningful content. It would explain the abundance of mechtalk in a not super mechanically intensive setup (they even resort to focusing on the geriatric ruleset on more than a handful of occasions). Maybe it's nerves. There was something early on in their iso promising content eventually once the game had progressed past RVS, which pinged me at the time, and I found nothing like this in either of the towngames I looked into. I've also noticed they might be leaning on or at least making reference to their gimmick more in this game than others, but I'm not sure about that one and don't care to cross reference at the moment. I mentioned that despite the gimmick, in the other games, Hatter's posts flowed more naturally (taking into account the differently paced games, of course) and they were unafraid to take the spotlight when pressing their reads. I believe the lack of anything resembling that level of initiative here indicates that Hatter is less comfortable playing this game for some reason, or that they are intent on not making too much of a splash any which way and thus content with the unproductive pace of the game.

There are only two notable examples this whole game of Hatter engaging another player who did not first engage them. Besides the aggressive stance against mozamis, all we have this game from Hatter in terms of consistent and explicitly game-relevant engagement with another player is when Rathe subs in. Don't quote me on this, but new replacements are an excellent opportunity for scum who haven't been producing a tonne of good content to swoop in and show off a little. This is especially true in the case here where Rathe is [presumably] a newbie, with whom Hatter already has a rapport. I believe they saw an opportunity the moment Rathe subbed in to begin developing a narrative that he was not playing to his town meta, which was of course followed up by both of them appearing off the list and Hatter quickly advocating we eliminate between the two of them and widely-townread Michael Scott. Hatter probably feels confident in a 1v1 against Rathe, and has been laying the foundation for it since he joined the game. The line of questioning directed at Rathe is by far the most initiative Hatter has taken all game, and besides setting up the newb replacement for a potential miselim, they also gain some sort of credibility for finally actually pushing a stance this game. The timing of this all, and the congruency in contrast to the rest of Hatter's inquiries this game, make it impossible for me to dismiss this as coincidence.

[bugspray]

VOTE: mad hater tea party

I dayvig mad hatter tea party

going to wait until my next prod and then remind people that we should eliminate this slot bye

pedir yeah like look at how mhtp has basically just been saying my arguments suck without explaining why and never providing direct answers
it's not behavior i'd expect from town ever

[The Bulge]

I can pull quotes and citations yada yada if anyone seriously asks, but anything I made reference to is in the isos if you care to look and see for yourselves. I will point this one out in particular though before I dip out for now:

mad hatter i think u r mafia i dont want to battle too much with u

Nuance is a very powerful tool, and extrapolation an interesting one.

A discussion and clarification is VERY different to a battle. That you immediately jumped to this being a battle speaks volumes about how you consider me and my positions in this game. Extrapolation then leads me to believe you are fearful of me for some reason. We now enter "tinfoil" territory. I believe this is due to the interactions you've witnessed between myself and mozamies, and you are fearful of my turning my attentions to you and establishing the connections between you both.

Refusing to engage with me will only be detrimental to you, ultimately. Locking a read on me with so little witnessable process is also incredibly detrimental overall in my opinion.

For now, I am confident throwing a solve out of Mozamies and Rathe both reading independently and associatively.

The part I bolded here. it screams "caught for the wrong reasons" to me. the most detrimental part of holding that opinion should be that it is not a correct one because you are town. Not because you didn't get your due process.