Open 579: Pick Your (Chocolate) Power -- Game Over

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

Okay, legit question, why don't we lynch romitelli?

VOTE: romitelli

[Alchemist21]

Why the hell is ANY of the stuff you called out on me scummy?

Advocating a lack of scumhunting is scummy. You find scum and win by scumhunting.

Tell me why Town players wouldn't go for doc if they got a high draft pick. Are you saying that your spot in the draft is some magical border where all townies suddenly decide it's ok to go for doc now? You're setting it up to try and mislynch the doc by saying, "The doc/roleblocker slot were taken by someone above me, and whoever did is probably scum."

[davesaz]

davesaz for the earlier posts in his ISO I mentioned before.

I don't really get this. I pointed out something of the form "anyone knows if I don't do x it's scummy" (in a game state where we were basically still in RVS), and then posted that I had researched it and that it wasn't unusual. How is that in any way scummy? From someone with meta saying that I'm getting old and I tend to post immediately when I see something, vs. trying to remember that I need to research it? (That meta may not yet be in a usable state, TBH)

The kitty case makes absolutely no sense and there's no way you can link that to alignment either directly or indirectly, making it a bogus point. The argument that it helps end RVS can't really be used either since your ISO#4 has very little content for the amount of words in it. The entire sequence doesn't really make sense from a town mindset.

Let's make this very clear. If anyone does X, and then says "if I don't do X then I'm scummy", I'm going to research that as a possible trust tell. Period. It's the definition of trust tell, as I understand it. I did research it, and there was no evidence that it actually was one, and there was evidence that it was new and a joke, so I posted that Anen was cleared on that point. That was the entire point of ISO 4, and I used that many words because I didn't want it to be an otherwise empty post.

This is as town as it gets. The mindset it doesn't make sense for is the scum mindset.

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

I don't expect ANYONE to go for doctor, the whole way down. There was one game where i sabotaged my draft phase and ended up like 2nd last and got doctor. That the top 3 happens to contain the doc/roleblocker is WEIRD. There's been like one game where someone who wasn't me went for doctor or roleblocker, I think. And I only go for it because usually nobody else does.

Idk why doctor isn't picked, but it rarely is.

Advocating a lack of scumhunting is controversial. It's not scummy just because it's controversial. Why is it more likely from scum than town?

Like, if it just gets suspicion and does nothing else, it's indicative of a lack of foresight. Which alignment is more likely to not plan ahead how people react to their words? Especially something controversial?

I have no idea what dave and anka are arguing about at all.

[davesaz]

Please explain how 375 is more useful to scum. The idea of "looks townie but is probably more useful to scum" is something that really needs to be backed up with something, because otherwise it's a "too townish to be town" argument.

I put this post in the same category as ruling out the possibility that scum wouldn't pick two numbers the same.

Eliminating

possibilities is good for scum, because it prevents town from reading the other player in the set as scum once the first one flips. The correct town mindset is that it's

unlikely

that scum picked two numbers the same, or it's

unlikely

that there are two scum in this set of players. Thinking that it's impossible for a player to be scum is the foundation for scum winning.

Is this just a terminology thing? Maybe. But I'm not in a big rush to dismiss the difference.

[wgeurts]

Damn it dino, don't make us lynch you in my third(?) game with you.

[Mathdino]

History of Doc Picks:

Open 542: Doc was 3rd in the draft order, no one else picked it.
Open 518: RB was taken by scum, 8th in the draft order, no one else picked it (hi Siv).
Open 506: Doc was 4th in the draft order, no one else picked it (hi Siv).
Open 486: RB was taken by scum, 3rd in the draft order. Other picks unknown.
Open 472: Doc was not taken.
Open 427: Doc was 7th in the draft order. Other picks are unknown.

So it's usually one doc pick per game. Notable that 542 had a town doc 3rd in the draft order, so your logic's a bit shoddy, Siv.

[Amy Farrah Fowler]

Okay, top three scumreads:
Anen - for previously stated reasons.
Romitelli - For lurking, although if he doesn't pick his prod up this may be prone to change because in that case he may simply have flaked.
[wheee free slot because I have multiple weak scumreads]

[Amy Farrah Fowler]

WIFOM but I reckon flubber's play is simultaneously too bad to be scummy yet with a few specks of towniness in there.

And can someone refresh me on why Siv is the main wagon (is he still the main wagon; people appear to be moving off?)

[wgeurts]

So uh, can we like lynch Romitelli?
Or siv?
How long do we have left?

[Mathdino]

Please explain how 375 is more useful to scum. The idea of "looks townie but is probably more useful to scum" is something that really needs to be backed up with something, because otherwise it's a "too townish to be town" argument.

I put this post in the same category as ruling out the possibility that scum wouldn't pick two numbers the same.

Eliminating

possibilities is good for scum, because it prevents town from reading the other player in the set as scum once the first one flips. The correct town mindset is that it's

unlikely

that scum picked two numbers the same, or it's

unlikely

that there are two scum in this set of players. Thinking that it's impossible for a player to be scum is the foundation for scum winning.

Is this just a terminology thing? Maybe. But I'm not in a big rush to dismiss the difference.

Yet at the same time, paranoia about people still being able to be scum after there's like a 90% chance they're town sets the table for scum keeping up mislynches.
The ONLY way that my line of thinking on ruling out possibilities is the foundation for scum winning, is if scum did in fact both pick the same number in the draft, which would be shooting themselves in the foot because PRs would screw them over pretty bad. Scum needs to bag PRs to have a decent shot at this.
Also, I believe my Siv/Alchemist lack of being a team is extremely solid given Siv's hatred for the 4 pick. He knows 4 is a bad idea, doubt he'd've let Alchemist do that.

Damn it dino, don't make us lynch you in my third(?) game with you.

Might wanna elaborate on that threat, wgeurts. Is this because I don't feel like going with the top 3 scumreads thing?

[Mathdino]

Advocating a lack of scumhunting is controversial. It's not scummy just because it's controversial. Why is it more likely from scum than town?

Like, if it just gets suspicion and does nothing else, it's indicative of a lack of foresight. Which alignment is more likely to not plan ahead how people react to their words? Especially something controversial?

This argument is literally one of the worst I've ever seen, mostly because you're saying what scum do and what town do and applying it to yourself.

[davesaz]

As scum you don't want people to join your wagons? Last I checked, goal of scum was to survive and mislynch. You're comparing our playstyles where it's not applicable; I'm fairly cautious especially when weirded out. The speed of those wagons, the majority of the votes of which were without reason and pretty much sheeping, was just bad. Read my posts before you set up a straw man.

Hope you don't mind my going a point at a time and not necessarily in order...

I did read your posts. There are 4 possible orientations to this topic, presented in the totally arbitrary order of scum first, then town:

1. Scum, doesn't want an actual wagon to take off. Examples of this orientation are establishing an early bus to distance, but not wanting the buddy to actually get lynched. Also establishing a pattern of vote hopping to disguise later vote hops when the hop is needed to get a mislynch.

2. Scum, does want a wagon. Two possible reasons, wants a mislynch, or wants to get to L-1 to prompt a claim and out the PR.

3. Town, doesn't want a wagon. RVS votes are the obvious example, also town may kick off a wagon as a reaction test and want to dismantle it as soon as a good reaction is seen.

4. Town, does want a wagon. Two cases for this one, the target is a real scum read, or it's getting close to deadline and town prefers a mislynch to a no-lynch.

Cases 1 and 3 are the relevant ones to examining why someone leaves a wagon. Town, in case 3, will usually acknowledge that the target responded well to the test. Scum, in case 1 when the original motivation was to bus and distance, can use the "good response" reason to leave the wagon when their partner does actually respond well. If the partner hasn't responded well, scum have to manufacture a bogus reason to leave the wagon, or have a decent wagon to jump to. If scum are trying to establish a vote hopping pattern, it's actually beneficial to just hop without giving a reason for leaving the old wagon.

What I struggle with is fitting your stated reason for leaving the wagons into case 3. If you originally thought the target was scummy, it would be a case 4 and you'd want to try to lynch. So you didn't think the target was lynch worthy in the first place, or you did find the target scummy at that time and your stated reason "the wagon went too fast" is the truth. But with 3 scum and wagons reaching 4 or 5 votes, there is no real danger of a quick lynch. Why not let it cook for a while and see if the wagon grows any more? Thinking the wagon grew too fast, and in particular thinking that the majority of the votes are sheeping, ignores the possibility that town merely agreed that the target is scummy.

This makes me think that case 1 is a possibility. But you do correctly point out that this could just be a difference in style.

P-edit. 375 could also be a difference in style. I'm a "never say never" player. That does not mean that I think that the combinations are likely. I agree that there are some unlikely combinations, but that does not prevent me from investigating them anyway.

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

Math, thanks. I need to break that habit.

[wgeurts]

@MathDino
You're doing a good job of making people suspicious, I think it's however incorrect. The amount of effort you're putting in would be odd as scum.

[Mathdino]

Scum draft pick history:

Open 542: 1, 2, 6
Open 518: 5, 12, 42
Open 506: 1, 5, 6
Open 468: 1, 10, 22
Open 472: 1, 3, 7
Open 427: 1, 4, 8

With the exception of the last one, it always seems to follow the pattern of low number, middle number, high number. Relatively speaking.

davesaz, what I find hard to reconcile about your manner of scumhunting is as a "never say never" player you're awfully black and white. You:
1. Assume that these 4 cases are all that's possible.
2. Attempt to shoehorn my behaviour into one of these 4 cases.
3. Assume what I WOULD do which is a blatant oversimplification.
4. Straw man again on why I left those wagons.

I thought Amy was scummy. The speed at which everyone jumped on her wagon made me uneasy however, and made me think it might be scum motivated. I'm unsure of this, but the circumstances were very odd.

I thought wgeurts was a little bit scummy based on a tell I thought I saw, so I voted him basically to see where it'd take me. It took me to L-2 again, with a ton of unwarranted votes that don't at all match wgeurts's scumminess. I jumped off to regroup and do some wagon analysis.

Everyone suddenly agreeing with me on those wagons is strange and unrealistic from my POV. Perhaps I AM ignoring the possibility that town agreed he was scummy, but even then, you're attacking my logic, not my alignment.

Also, I have to reiterate that the only way that my ruling out of possibilities is scummy is if you believe that 2 scum picked the same draft. Otherwise, if I were scum and we all picked 3 different numbers, that PoE doesn't help scum at all. So do you think wgeurts and I are scum? Furthermore, since you're speculating that this fits into 'case 1', why would I NEED to distance from my partner when there's already incredibly solid evidence we're not scum together? Unnecessary risk.

[Mathdino]

Phantom quote, pls ignore.

[davesaz]

@MathDino
You're doing a good job of making people suspicious, I think it's however incorrect. The amount of effort you're putting in would be odd as scum.

I've seen scum put in even more effort, many times. And that does factor into my scum hunting, on a case by case basis.

[davesaz]

davesaz, what I find hard to reconcile about your manner of scumhunting is as a "never say never" player you're awfully black and white. You:
1. Assume that these 4 cases are all that's possible.
2. Attempt to shoehorn my behaviour into one of these 4 cases.
3. Assume what I WOULD do which is a blatant oversimplification.
4. Straw man again on why I left those wagons.

I thought Amy was scummy. The speed at which everyone jumped on her wagon made me uneasy however, and made me think it might be scum motivated. I'm unsure of this, but the circumstances were very odd.

I thought wgeurts was a little bit scummy based on a tell I thought I saw, so I voted him basically to see where it'd take me. It took me to L-2 again, with a ton of unwarranted votes that don't at all match wgeurts's scumminess. I jumped off to regroup and do some wagon analysis.

Everyone suddenly agreeing with me on those wagons is strange and unrealistic from my POV. Perhaps I AM ignoring the possibility that town agreed he was scummy, but even then, you're attacking my logic, not my alignment.

Also, I have to reiterate that the only way that my ruling out of possibilities is scummy is if you believe that 2 scum picked the same draft. Otherwise, if I were scum and we all picked 3 different numbers, that PoE doesn't help scum at all. So do you think wgeurts and I are scum? Furthermore, since you're speculating that this fits into 'case 1', why would I NEED to distance from my partner when there's already incredibly solid evidence we're not scum together? Unnecessary risk.

1. On these being the only 4 cases, if you can name another I'm all ears.
(pre-empting the "changing one's mind" scenario, in logic terms that becomes the position you're changing to)
2. It's only shoehorning if there are other valid cases.
3. I think I'm comparing what you did do to what players of either alignment might do. I would not presume to say I know for a fact what your intent was.
4. I don't think you're using the term "strawman" in the same way I would

I agree there is a difference between being town with different logic (note I'm not even going to call it faulty), vs scum.
If you carefully read my conclusion you will find that I'm not sure which interpretation fits this evidence.
Given I'm not voting you, and my read was weak to begin with, there is plenty of time to update it one way or the other depending on how the game progresses.

[Mathdino]

Alright, I think that's fair.

And yeah, the other scenario is unsureness in the wagon, wanting to see where it takes us early, and jumping off when the circumstances got fishy. So changing my mind, then.

I'm curious to see what you come up with when you check out Alchemist a bit more, your read on him boils down to 'interesting'. His behaviour toward Siveure was very odd, I'd say.
Also, can you talk about your meta analysis of Flubber? I've yet to see a good fleshed out argument on him that doesn't ignore meta.

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

Wait, math, why is alchemist/dave unlikely?

[Mathdino]

Shit.

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

Because tbh my dave read is BS and going to get revised seriously if I get to day 3 or so.

I don't want to go near him until then.

[Mathdino]

Yeah, I'll have to agree. I want a flip before I start looking at him again.

I think his behaviour surrounding your breadcrumb was pretty townish and I have a personal hypothesis for what happened back there that I won't reveal for obv reasons.
I think somehow that turned into me making it unlikely he was scum with Alchemist I guess.

[Venrob]

Ok, I just read up to here... Sorry for the inactivity, internet went down- not sure if it was the hackers or not, in fact it is probably just fricking Frontier being a shitty internet provider. I will try to be somewhat active, but the internet is going on and off a lot sooo.... New internet is being gotten on the 8th, so I'm going to have to

V/LA until Dec 8th

. Will try to get on when i can in the meantime, but this internet is just not functional when I need it to be.

As for my catch-up, yay siv finally updated his wiki (which was bothering my OCD by not being updated TBH)
My vote stands right where I think it is necessary.

Noted. ~insanity