Open 305 - Faith + 1 [D6] [LYLO]

[andrew94]

@ghostlin, again you use the wrong terms on purpose???

im not active lurking. im clearly not.
am i posting anywhere else or playing dota?
i clearly have low time and try to post everytime i am on,.

[Quilford]

I'll post later today, promise. *studies*

[Amrun]

dvdkid, quilford, and andrew.

Waiting on content.

[edmund.angles]

Q: Can anyone tell me what aoe is? Google was of no use.

[Amrun]

He probably meant AtE, in which case, he's full of shit.

[edmund.angles]

I skimmed through Amrun's most recent game, and found an interesting idea, "hypo-claiming".
First of all, if cop gets a guilty, he claims.
But other than that everyone claims an 'innocent' investigation after each night.
The cop gives the actual result, everyone else makes it up.

Advantage: Cop gets killed with innocent results we have 100% confirmed townies - I love those:-)
Disadvantage: Well, town can't vote players they have hypo-'innocent' results on.
Not-Disadvantage: We have no role-blocker to fuck hypo-claiming up.

All in all, I think it is massively to town's advantage.

[Amrun]

That is not actually how hypoclaiming works.

Everyone claims random innocents AND guilties so that we don't out the cop.

But in this case, edmund's idea might work better.

We KNOW there's not a scum RB, which is basically the only way it could work.


I'm for it. I think it's a good idea.


Also, Quilford is content-dodging here but replaced into another game. Suspicion rises higher.

[andrew94]

claiming guilty outs the cop (as good as)
claiming only innocents is a better idea.

and yes i did mean ate, and no im not full of shit

[Amrun]

Want to quote my supposed AtE then?

[andrew94]

Once again, NO.

I'm done repeating myself. DONE.

Still not convinced you're scum, though. But your reading comprehension might be an issue.

This is SO pointless. I want to pull my hair out. Please, drop this stupid line of questioning that has no discernible benefit for anyone ever.

waiting for you to say that thats not ate

[Quilford]

People who were on the zMuffinMan wagon WHO I DO NOT CARE FOR:
- ghostlin
Far too serious about zMuffin's post re: policy lynches (ISO #1)

- dvdkid
Posts seem too uptight, formal
Not voting for his scumread (ISO #3)
Points out the obvious (ISO #1)

- C-Worl
Says very little across a lot of posts
Seems to be buddying with Amrun

Mah reeds:

=== Amrun ===
Posts contain original thought
I have no real issue with her content
// obvtown //


=== andrew ===
No freakin' idea why he voted Amrun
+ don't like his excuse of 'can't remember', no better than my excuse for not voting muffin though
+ I want clarification on 'aoe'
// null, leaning scum A TEENY WEENY BIT {little content} //


=== C-Worl === [[copypasta'd from above]]
Dislike his explanations for votes
+ 'I feel good about this', 'Totally feels like a good idea'
Shoots first, asks questions later
+ e.g. vote on zMuffin where he presents a case finally about 11 posts from him later
Possibly buddyin' with Amrun
+ #33, #30, #15 (of his ISO) etc
Says very little across a lot of posts
// leaning scum //


=== dvdkid === [[shamelessly copypasta'd from above]]
Posts seem too uptight, formal
Not voting for his scumread (ISO #3)
Points out the obvious (ISO #1)
// leaning scum //


=== edmund ===
Don't get all the craziness regarding his FoS about the RQS
+ Seems to me like a townie who wants to get on with it
Askin' good questions
// leaning town //


=== Ghostlin === [[shamelessly copypasta'd from above]]
Far too serious about zMuffin's post re: policy lynches (ISO #1)
the whole setting up mislynches thing is total bs - in muffin's first post, seriously?
// leaning scum //


=== GreyICE ||and sanchocolates|| ===
I want a case from him alone on why Ghostlin is scum
||sanchocolates never really provided any content when there was stuff to comment on||
// null //


=== Quaroath ===
seriously nothing to comment on
// null //


=== Scumhunter ===
DISLIKE HEAVILY "Hope you are town with me!" reeks of scum trying too hard (EDIT: upon further inspection of his meta this is a null tell)
goodposting re: ghostlin (ISO #4)
// slightly leaning town //


=== Snake ===
needs to post more
says "This is starting to feel more like a youth club than a game of Mafia..." but doesn't take steps to rectify
should elaborate on his ISO #3
// null, leaning scum A TEENY LIL' BIT //


=== Tragedy ===
GRAAH POSTS ARE HARD TO UNDERSTAND
good point in ISO #10
// null, leaning town //


=== muffin ===
don' like the policy lynch
don' like the 'OH IT WAS ALL A REACTION TEST'
banter back and forth with Amrun gives me a townie feel, however
+ no cracking under pressure
// null //


so um with that
VOTE: C-Worl

oh wow PEDITed 4 times over



HYPOCLAIMING IS A SHITTY FUCKING IDEA AND CAN LEAD SCUM STRAIGHT TO THE COP

MORE ON THIS NEWS BULLETIN SOON

[Quilford]

that's not really ate andrew it's just insulting

[Quilford]

OKAY SO HERE'S WHY HYPOCLAIMING IS A TERRIBAD IDEA

let's say 10 players in a game: A, X, Y, Z, J, K, L, M, N, P
A is cop
X, Y, Z are mafioso - let's make X a godfather, say, and Y a framer while Z is a plain old goon
Y has framed J last night
everyone agrees to hypoclaim
A claims guilty on Y -

from the mafia's perspective this could be legit

(it doesn't matter what the mafia claim)
J claims guilty on X -

X is a godfather and therefore the mafia know J isn't the real cop

K claims inno on J -

Y framed J last night therefore the mafia know K isn't the real cop

L claims inno on X -

from the mafia's perspective this could be legit

M claims guilty on A -

the mafia knows that A is not one of them and will appear innocent in reports, therefore M is not the real cop

N claims inno on P -

from the mafia's perspective this could be legit

P claims guilty on K -

the mafia knows that K is not one of them and will appear innocent in reports, therefore M is not the real cop

and therefore the mafia have reduced possible cops down to three

[Quilford]

this has happened several times to me online (Epicmafia) and face to face

almost every time after two hypocops the mafia kill the real cop - normally it only takes one

FoS: Amrun and edmund for suggesting this idea which is a massive benefit to the mafia

[andrew94]

however there is no godfather no framer and no roleblockers

[C-Worl]

Oh hey, Quilford's voting for me. That's never happened before. >.>

[Amrun]

Andrew, that is not AtE. You perhaps need a lesson on AtE.

That, my friend, is a huge amount of frustration being expressed in the kindest way possible. Why you think that would invoke pity or sympathy I do not know. It is actually quite antagonistic.


Quilford needs to read more carefully.

The proposed plan of hypoclaiming is that EVERYONE claims innocents ALL THE TIME until the real cop gets a guilty.

Yes, it outs the cop, but it outs the cop with a guilty and a string of innocents, which may very well win us the game.

There is no RB to throw a wrench in this plan.

Also, Quoraoth lurked this hard one other time I've seen him, he was scum.

[zMuffinMan]

@zMuffin : You haven't really said why you find Ghostlin scummy, you have only answered his questions.
I don't really see the case on Ghostlin, please someone enlighten me.

OMGUS

Spoiler:

No, but really, you don't see any reason to think Ghostlin is scummy?

In his initial posts, he's just looking for things to call scummy that really aren't scummy. The vote on me because I called two people scum on page one, and the FoS of C-Worl due to his reaction to me calling him scum on page one. This just seems like insincere scum hunting, and this was further reinforced when he said

FYI: I never find it a good thing when I have at least three good suspicions of who might be scum in RVS/RQS. It's great if there's acutal scum among them, but it makes any acutal scum not among them easier to hide.

(Referring to edmund, C-Worl and I)

When I questioned what about my initial play was scummy, all I got from him was that it's possible I could be bussing and it's possible I could be setting up chain mislynches. When I asked him why he thought that, here was his response:

Look, here's the reasons I have for you doing what you did:
1) OMGUS. Null, but damn suspicious because you ratted out C-Worl without any reason at all.
2) You really hate andrew. Still null, and makes you not useful to town if your dislike of a single player is going to make you unreasonable for the rest of the game. It also gives scum something to play off of if neither of you are scum in the later stages of the game.
3) You're trying to bus C-Worl/Andrew or some combination of the two. Scummy, because it alleviates suspicion off of you.
4) You are setting up lynches. Scummy for obvious reasons.

2 null reasons, 2 scum reasons, and your reactions so far to the proceedings lend to me more of a belief you're scummy then a poor townie caught in the crossfire.

Point (1) is just wrong.
Point (2) is also wrong, but entirely irrelevant to the game.
Point (3) is pure speculation that isn't actually backed up by anything at all.
Point (4) is also pure speculation, and just plain stupid. Anyone who's actually suggested I was trying to set up lynches during RVS deserves a big "VI" stamp on their forehead.

Also no justification as to why my actions are "scummy".

What has he done since then?

Zero justification for still having his vote on me, and he's attacked andrew for "chainsawing" Amrun and suggesting andrew is doing it because he's scum with me. Amrun never really attacked me, so this makes no sense whatsoever, really.

Also, he's active lurking. He isn't reading the thread (evident in the questions he's been asking lately - especially asking me to justify andrew/C-Worl being scum).

He's not actually furthering the game in any way. All his actions so far point to him being scum.

I actually think he's scum, and Snake is likely his partner based on Snake's active lurking and interactions with Ghostlin. Amrun would also make sense as third scum, but wavering on her at the moment.

don' like the 'OH IT WAS ALL A REACTION TEST'

It was never a reaction test. It was a joke. But I ran with it seeing the reactions it got.

--

Also, this hypo-lynching idea is bad and unnecessary and shouldn't even be discussed today. And yes, it's still bad even though there's no roleblocker/godfather/etc.

e.g. for simplicity's sake, say 11 alive tomorrow because we mislynch + a VT dies tonight

A scum
B scum
C scum

D inno on A
E inno on B
F inno on C
G inno on D
H inno on E
I inno on F
J inno on G
K inno on H

Now, we assume the cop must tell the truth and can't randomise his result.

A/B/C scum know D/E/F cannot be cop. The pool of cops is between G/H/I/J/K. Scum are going to want to lynch one of them that day and kill another that night, and town wouldn't know who was lying or telling the truth about their claims, so they wouldn't know who to protect, etc.

It's pointless and the downsides outweigh any benefits

[Amrun]

Hmm.

Good point, there.

But cop isn't the only PR and even if the cop gets killed before he gets a guilty then we get a couple of innocents which would be awesome.

[edmund.angles]

Damn, I feel really stupid for bringing the hypo-claim idea up today - any arguments for or against can wait 'tlll tomorrow.

[Amrun]

No, today is better. We should decide for or against today.

[C-Worl]

The theory sucks a big one for a huge reason. If we just do innocents what does the cop do when he gets a guilty on someone?

[Quilford]

that's another excellent point

honestly it all works the same way; I was just trying to make the point that villagers claim with contradictory stories and make it easier for mafia

[C-Worl]

nvrmnd just saw amrun's post

[Quilford]

against

, Amrun why are you still pushing the idea?