Mini #1647: Eine Kleine Nacht-Mord, Game Over

[onion]

so GIF thinks i should already know why he thinks Llama is town for some reason. i suppose its up to me to figure it out.

ah so WAYYYYY BAck here in 080 you say something about Llama. You are talking about an apparent bias in his posts that flavors town as 'smart' and scum as 'dumb', and use this as a reason to town-read him. Can you provide evidence proving this bias existed? i'm not seeing anything like it in the Llamaquote you provided. so thus we return to the question at hand, unanswered.

GIF, WHY DO YOU THINK LLAMA IS TOWN? please don't link me to your previous posts because they have proven to be useless and devoid of content. please instead write a paragraph or two about it right here right now, possibly with post numbers supporting your theory. build a case, show us why it is you believe what you believe.

-=-

Lurkers annoy me greatly. day 1's are a great time to lynch all lurkers because it improves the rest of the game, and there's no information day 1 anyway, so they are just as likely to be scum as anyone else. I'm not sure our N0 start changes this. please don't lurk.

As town, it is to our benefit to force an environment in which all players act pro-town. Pro-town players express their ideas and post them in easy to use formats. They show how their suspicions change slowly over time and what changed their suspicions. They vote for people these suspicions point at. This is a healthy way to play as town, and so town should want to do it anyway. Scum don't want to play this way, because it limits their ability to get away with bullshit. By forcing them to play pro-town, it makes it easier to recognize their bullshit, and thus easier to catch.

I've been in enough games to know that there are just some idiot anti-town losers out there who choose to play anti-town regardless of alignment and continuously fuck the town over because they are idiots. We can't really get rid of them, and they are too dumb to learn to play better, and lynching them is only a short term solution because they'll just show up in the next game. Scummy actions are a subset of anti-town actions. Idiots who happen to be town and play anti-town perform, at least in hindsight, non-scummy anti-town actions. it is often hard to tell the difference though.

I'm not at all convinced that Tripod is just really terrible town and not scum, but i feel that lynching Llama would give us more information about Tripod than lynching Tripod would give us information on Llama. Llamascum would go a long way towards town-reading Tripod, at which point i'd be happy to minimize his harmful effects by ignoring him. it would prove him terrible but harmless, which is a big improvement.

Llamatown would cast even more suspicion than we already have on Tripod, and i could easily see me voting for him the next day because of it. it would show that he really is both idiotic and dangerous, having L-1'd a townie with a possible power role on page 2.

It also happens that Llama is pretty damn scummy. He keeps making these asserations that he's answered questions when he really hasn't. He doesn't justify his arguments and has seemingly random suspicions and town-reads. he's blendy and blendy is bad.

However, if we swapped over and tried to lynch Tripod to get information on Llama, it wouldn't work as well i don't think. Sure scum-Tripod would clear Llama of most suspicions, but town-Tripod wouldn't do anything.

-=-

Unvote: Derangement

because it was a RVS vote that didn't mean anything.

Vote: Llama

because he's on the Cogito List, because lynching him will provide valuable information about Tripod, and because he avoid justifying himself until severely pressed, and even then does so minimally, because he's blendy, and because llamas make terrible war mounts.

[GuyInFreezer]

ah so WAYYYYY BAck here in 080

Maybe read a post right above that.

[Untrod Tripod]

I mean

we could lynch onion so we don't have to read his posts anymore?

[TellTaleHeart]

Lurkers annoy me greatly. day 1's are a great time to lynch all lurkers because it improves the rest of the game, and there's no information day 1 anyway, so they are just as likely to be scum as anyone else. I'm not sure our N0 start changes this. please don't lurk.

So what's your read on either Marquis or CDB?

[GuyInFreezer]

I mean

we could lynch onion so we don't have to read his posts anymore?

Nah.
Who knows? His posts might tire out scums too.

[GuyInFreezer]

Still have a hard time believing town only reacts in a "I played with him?" statement than anything else.

You're having a hard time seeing it because that hypothetical town is based on you-town. I'm not LlamaFluff.

[GuyInFreezer]

GIF, WHY DO YOU THINK LLAMA IS TOWN? please don't link me to your previous posts because they have proven to be useless and devoid of content. please instead write a paragraph or two about it right here right now, possibly with post numbers supporting your theory. build a case, show us why it is you believe what you believe.

If you really can't see why I townread him, then you'll have to be satisfied with "it's a gut read".

[onion]

GIF, you flat out say in 079 that that post is full of negative things about llama, reasons why he looks scummy, and then you say

Even though I say negative things like this, I don't think you're scum. Granted I've never seen your scumgame but I have seen you being biased like this as town. And my gut leans town anyway. I think you're reaching on UT.

which is you saying you think he isn't scum, not explaining why you think he isn't scum. you even disclaim it as probably gut which is still not a reason. this is the reason i'm asking you to explain it because you HAVE NEVER EXPLAINED IT. so instead of being useless, how about putting some effort into this game and making your reasons known.

[ChannelDelibird]

Hello, I'm here - an afternoon of board games turned into a full day unexpectedly. Full catch up tomorrow or lynch me

[TellTaleHeart]

Alrighty!

[Marquis]

hi. it's snowing really hard. i'm cold. so i'm inside all day.

i have some business to take care of rn. then after that, i'll try my best to devote some time to mafia. thanks and maybe!cya later tonight.

[GuyInFreezer]

full of negative things about llama, reasons why he looks scummy, and then you say

Never called them scummy. Just said they look bad.

[Onion Bubs]

Lurkers annoy me greatly. day 1's are a great time to lynch all lurkers because it improves the rest of the game, and there's no information day 1 anyway, so they are just as likely to be scum as anyone else. I'm not sure our N0 start changes this. please don't lurk.

As town, it is to our benefit to force an environment in which all players act pro-town. Pro-town players express their ideas and post them in easy to use formats. They show how their suspicions change slowly over time and what changed their suspicions. They vote for people these suspicions point at. This is a healthy way to play as town, and so town should want to do it anyway. Scum don't want to play this way, because it limits their ability to get away with bullshit. By forcing them to play pro-town, it makes it easier to recognize their bullshit, and thus easier to catch.

I've been in enough games to know that there are just some idiot anti-town losers out there who choose to play anti-town regardless of alignment and continuously fuck the town over because they are idiots. We can't really get rid of them, and they are too dumb to learn to play better, and lynching them is only a short term solution because they'll just show up in the next game. Scummy actions are a subset of anti-town actions. Idiots who happen to be town and play anti-town perform, at least in hindsight, non-scummy anti-town actions. it is often hard to tell the difference though.

(agreementnod.gif)

Just one quick question: when you refer to lynching the idiot anti-town losers as a short term solution, how short term are you talking? Are you saying it would be a helpful thing to do for the duration of the current game, or are you saying it's only good for a brief moment of satisfaction when each idiot anti-town loser is eliminated from the game, or are you saying something else?

It also happens that Llama is pretty damn scummy. He keeps making these asserations that he's answered questions when he really hasn't. He doesn't justify his arguments and has seemingly random suspicions and town-reads. he's blendy and blendy is bad.

Not so sure about this bit. LlamaFluff's thought processes are clear as crystal from where I'm sitting and there doesn't seem to be a major inconsistency or anything. Unless there's something I'm not understanding in what I've just quoted.

[Derangement]

I'm blaming this delay on the bank for blocking my card when I tried to renew my car insurance because that got me angry and I wanted to avoid having another angry post. So let's see what it was you wanted me to answer.

Welcome back, and sorry to hear about your bank woes.
Hope it gets better soon.

If I do not make it obvious why I'm voting someone, then that is because either:

• <snip>
  
  
• I'm more interested in determining someone's alignment than I am in convincing everyone else of my current read on them;

1. <snip>
   
   
2. Couldn't you do this without use of a vote, at least to begin with? Give the players some stuff for them to respond to (such as the questions you asked me), and then if you think their responses aren't as townie as they should be,
   then
   put a vote on them. At that point, you have a reason to believe they deserve the vote, plus you can then compare the way they behave under pressure to the way they behave ... erm ... not under pressure.

I often do just that.

However, there are also the occasional times when I'll want to gauge whether the thing that made me suspect someone was done on purpose.
Or even if I'm just reading too much into things that are actually innocent.

I believe we can get just as useful information from

which

issues are brought up in a person's defence, as we can from what is said to placate those accusations.

I have a question for both of you and for anyone else who agrees with these posts. Scum will try to do pro-town stuff because it makes them look more townie and thus they are less likely to get lynched, right? Well what's the townie's motivation to do anti-town stuff? If you can't answer that, then why, for all intents and purposes, should "anti-town" be treated any differently to "scummy"?

First and foremost, I feel the need to point out that there is an important difference between scummy-looking null actions (which

feel

iffy, but upon close inspection don't actually seem to benefit either faction), and actual anti-town posting (which actually seems to make things worse for town, or better for scum).

The former is mostly a matter of play-style, and isn't a reliable indicator either way.

The latter, however, can be because of any of the following:

1. Scum did it.
   Lynch this.
   
   
   
2. A town player did it on accident.
   Avoid being this guy at all costs.
   
   
   
3. The town player's reason for doing it arrives at a different conclusion than
   your
   reasoning does.
   One of the two is probably wrong in their logic.
   
   1. If you're wrong, then this action was not really anti-town.
      The sooner others help you realise this, the faster you can go back to finding actual scum.
      
   2. If the other player's wrong, then they need to be made to see this before they cost town the game by making further bad plays.
   
   
   
4. A town player made a gamble, believing that the potential for a good outcome out-weighted the price town had to pay if it backfired.
   Ideally, one should avoid gambling if it would gain less than one stands to lose, after accounting for how likely one thinks each outcome is.
   
   
   
5. A town player knows something the others don't, and their action was actually safer than it appeared to be.

The distinction between scummy and anti-town comes from which of these scenarios you're looking at.
Problem's telling (a) apart from (b) through (e).

[Untrod Tripod]

well that's certainly a more polite way of saying what I was trying to say earlier

[Derangement]

I will move my vote to him in 24 hours unless he posts something of substance in that time period.

why are you bothering to vote for prawneater when you're expressing an interest to vote for Marquis with the game in its current state?

I'm not necessarily scumreading you, but that point reaaaaaaaaaaaally feels like coaching

I'll second the question, with sprinkles on top:
What was your reason for doing things the way you did, and

announcing

intent to vote later?

If you can, please explain why this is preferable to voting Marquis now, and moving your vote to Prawneater later if Marquis posts something to your liking.

[Derangement]

I'm not at all convinced that Tripod is just really terrible town and not scum, but i feel that lynching Llama would give us more information about Tripod than lynching Tripod would give us information on Llama.

I

really

don't like this.

You're outright proposing we chain lynches on these two players, depending on their flips.
This alone is already catastrophic if

both

of them happen to be town.

But then, here's the implications you're assuming:

1. Llamascum would go a long way towards town-reading Tripod, at which point i'd be happy to minimize his harmful effects by ignoring him. it would prove him terrible but harmless, which is a big improvement.

   scum!Llama
   =>
   town!Tripod
   , which (by contraposition) is equivalent to:
   
   town!Llama
   <=
   scum!Tripod
   
   
   
   

2. Llamatown would cast even more suspicion than we already have on Tripod, and i could easily see me voting for him the next day because of it. it would show that he really is both idiotic and dangerous, having L-1'd a townie with a possible power role on page 2.

   town!Llama
   =>
   scum!Tripod
   , which is also equivalent to:
   
   scum!Llama
   <=
   town!Tripod

Add both A and B together, and you're assuming that there is

exactly one scum

in {Llama, Tripod}.
Your conclusions would be undesirable (town-read on a mafioso) if both were scum, and outright catastrophic (two mislynches) if both were town.

Why, then, do you assume only A, and specifically decline to accept premise B when you say this:

However, if we swapped over and tried to lynch Tripod to get information on Llama, it wouldn't work as well i don't think. Sure scum-Tripod would clear Llama of most suspicions, but town-Tripod wouldn't do anything.

So, if Tripod is town, Llama can be town after all?
Why does the order in which you choose to lynch change how many scum you think there are among those two players?

---

Also:

Llamatown would cast even more suspicion than we already have on Tripod, and i could easily see me voting for him the next day because of it. it would show that he really is both idiotic and dangerous, having L-1'd

a townie with a possible power role

on page 2.

I can't stress enough how bad an idea it is to try and actively figure out who has or doesn't have a power role, at this point in the game.

Vote: Llama

because he's on the Cogito List, because lynching him will provide valuable information about Tripod, and because he avoid justifying himself until severely pressed, and even then does so minimally, because he's blendy, and because llamas make terrible war mounts.

Normally, I love light-hearted banter, but there's such a thing as too much of it, if it gets in the way of scum-hunting by cluttering arguments with fluff.
RVS-like arguments have no reason to appear outside of the RVS stage like this.

[Derangement]

Hello, I'm here - an afternoon of board games turned into a full day unexpectedly. Full catch up tomorrow or lynch me

hi. it's snowing really hard. i'm cold. so i'm inside all day.

i have some business to take care of rn. then after that, i'll try my best to devote some time to mafia. thanks and maybe!cya later tonight.

Thankies!

[Derangement]

Does he prefer to play town or scum? (CDB, you can answer this if you see it first.)

Would it make a difference?

[Untrod Tripod]

people love to indulge in meta questions like that

ime when people ask that it's so they can get reassurance from someone else that the lurking is more than just lurking

[onion]

i am not recommending a chain lynch in all situations, only half of them. If Llama flipped scum, it would bonify Tripod and we shouldn't lynch him probably ever. If Llama flipped town, it would be another strike against Tripod and, added to other cases, might mean we lynch him, or we might not. it would be compelling in comparison to what we have right now at least, but who knows what might crop up between now and then.

However, doing it the other way around doesn't work anywhere near as well. If tripod flipped scum then sure it would bonify Llama, but if Tripod flipped town, that wouldn't tell us much about Llama. So a towny L-1'd someone on page 2. what does that say about llama? not much. that's why we should do it in the other direction.

Its hard to see them both being town, but i suppose its possible. the Cogito list also contains CBD and GIF, both of which are by no means being town-read. But none of those people got L-1'd on page 2, so lynching them produces less data at this moment.

[prawneater]

Scum-me would be freaked out that I was on a suspect list and I'd want to see what my dynamic was with CES. Town-me wouldn't care as much.

Re: your hypothesized reaction to the list of suspects, that's an interesting way to go about it, but I'm having a little trouble following. When you say that you would want to see the nature of your dynamic with Cogito Ergo Sum, what do you mean?

Now that I think about it, it doesn't matter how I interacted with CES. I would just want to do a quick re-read of the game because other people are probably reading it for meta.

In other news: I'm fine with killing one of the onions for sanity's sake.

We should just have a poll on which onion we think is scummier and lynch that one.

Onion Bubs is the scummier of the two imo.

[petroleumjelly]

Day One, Vote Count #11

LlamaFluff – 3 – prawneater, Untrod Tripod, onion
Marquis – 3 – TellTaleHeart, GuyInFreezer, Derangement
onion – 1 – ChannelDelibird
prawneater - 1 - Onion Bubs
Untrod Tripod – 1 – LlamaFluff

With

11 alive

it takes

6

to lynch and

4

to lynch at deadline. Deadline is

March 5, 2015, at 6:45 AM PST

.

Not Voting – 2 – Equinox, Marquis

[Derangement]

Allow me to clarify why I don't like the plan Onion's proposing.

If tripod flipped scum then sure it would bonify Llama, but if Tripod flipped town, that wouldn't tell us much about Llama. So a towny L-1'd someone on page 2. what does that say about llama? not much. that's why we should do it in the other direction.

This states that the possible scenarios are:

1. Town!Tripod
   voted
   Scum!Llama
   into L-1;
   
2. Scum!Tripod
   voted
   Town!Llama
   into L-1;
   
3. Town!Tripod
   voted
   Town!Llama
   into L-1.

If Llama flipped scum, it would bonify Tripod and we shouldn't lynch him probably ever. If Llama flipped town, it would be another strike against Tripod and, added to other cases, might mean we lynch him, or we might not.

This argues that the most likely scenarios are:

1. Town!Tripod
   voted
   Scum!Llama
   into L-1;
   
2. Scum!Tripod
   voted
   Town!Llama
   into L-1.

Why is scenario C missing from this list?

To me, it feels like an unwritten assumption that Tripod is more likely to be scum than not.

Which makes the vote for Llama feel

wrong

.
Like Onion's doing it to gather reasons to (maybe) lynch Tripod later, and not because he actually thinks Onion's the scummiest of the two and needs to hang.

Its hard to see them both being town, but i suppose its possible. the Cogito list also contains CBD and GIF, both of which are by no means being town-read. But none of those people got L-1'd on page 2, so lynching them produces less data at this moment.

I urge anyone to use caution when using the Cogito list as a guide to finding scum.
Having played with CES

is

the simplest explanation for why he was NK'd, but it's not the only one.

It's fine to use it as a starting point, but don't let it become a crutch that prevents you from accepting a scum-team with no members in it, if you think there's evidence towards that. :3

[Derangement]

In other news: I'm fine with killing one of the onions for sanity's sake.

We should just have a poll on which onion we think is scummier and lynch that one.

Onion Bubs is the scummier of the two imo.

Sanity is for the weak!

I'm not going to try and lynch someone, if I simply see them as bad-town right now.
I'd rather try and correct their ways while there's still time, and focus on lynching scum.

Now, if someone

does

look scummy, they'd better have a good explanation for why they did what they did.