Mini 1782 Game Over

[Ircher]

Vote Count - Day 3 VC #4

Titus (1) - FA_Q2
Mhsmith (1) - Froot
Huntress (3) - Rosh, Titus, Johnny
Froot (0) -
Johnny (0) -
FA_Q2 (0) -
Garmr (0) -
Plain (1) - Garmr
Lowell (0) -
Rosh (2) - Lowell, Huntress
No Lynch (0) -
Not Voting (2) - Mhsmith, Plain

Deadline

Day 3 will end on May 13 8:30 PM EST or in (expired on 2016-05-13 20:30:00).

Lynch Threshold

With 10 alive, it takes 6 to lynch.

Mod Notes

None

[Roshar]

Can't wait.

And Lowell too. I'd really like a summary of your thoughts on his play this game. And what made him scummy to you D1 and D2. And if he's still scummy to you D3.

@APF, I'm gonna agree here in that is off that FaQ vote parked Clumsy D1 despite not knowing why Clumsy was scummy. What is your current read on Lowell?

FaQ, what is your current read on Lowell?

[Lowell]

The missus left me with the kids this weekend. I'll try to be around, but meh, we'll see.

[a plain farmer]

@Rosh:

My read right now on Lowell is a little bit townier than Huntress. I sympathize with your frustration when it comes to sorting him. His brief style does lend itself to not letting the town focus on things other than his scumreads, but it also doesn't give us much when it comes to seeing how he's fitting in with the rest of the town.

@Everyone:

I'd like to put a vote down, but right now I'm facing a dilemma. I'm still highly suspicious of FAQ. His posts the past couple days give me scum vibes, and his vote on Titus smells like a bus.

Titus has also been independently scummy so far. Her scumhunting has been very objective (lynching Max for information, and now lynching a couple of players that were rather lazy D1). The thing with these objective pushes is that they're very safe in that they adhere to an external methodology. When you're critical of them you're more likely to grapple with the theory of the scumhunting, whereas when you're critical of something more subjective you're inclined to think of what ulterior motives could be behind it.

Now, I don't think scum!Titus deliberately thought through all that, but I do think she might've instinctively/unconsciously seized upon this manner of scumhunting because of the safety of it. And the fact that it's D3 and the scum only need two mislynches makes me uncomfortable to follow her when she's identified two easy targets.

So my top two scumreads right now are FAQ and Titus. But I recall and exchange between Maverick(FAQ) and RC(Titus) starting around 150 that gives me the impression that they're not both scum. (I suppose I can't rule out scum theater, since Ircher did say in 3 that all PTs were open in the pre-game phase)

Right now I'm feeling like FAQ but I'd like to know what you guys think.

VOTE: FA_Q2

[Froot Loop]

@FruitLopp, Yup. Scum rarely push another mislynch when they have options open (Clumsy ftr). So it makes it more likely that Max and other mislynches were pushed by town.

Second, I am abstract.

I understood that you meant Clumsy and Max were the two wagons. Which other mislynches are you talking about?

@APF - which posts from FAQ do you not like? I thought his pressure on Titus at the beginning of D2 was ok and now that Max has revealed to be town, even better. Not concrete, obviously.

I'd like more activity from Titus and Johnny. Both of them have commented on things which is cool but I guess I'd describe their play as passive/reactionary. I don't think this playstyle is AI, to be clear, but I think it can be a method used by scum.

[Froot Loop]

Just to clarify the thing about Johnny and Titus - I think open play and discussion is a good method and providing analysis is an important part of that. Agreeing/disagreeing with others is like half the step there.

When I was reading through Huntress' ISO, it was really clear that she posts differently from me and I think the same is true of Johnny and, to a lesser extent, Titus. I'm not trying to impose a playstyle on them, just noting that I think that open, direct play leads to less uncertainty.

[JohnnyFarrar]

Bruh I'm open all day

[mhsmith0]

I didn't have time to deal with this today, but tomorrow I'm going to do a summary of my case on Roshar.

ftr I really want to see this. My mental priority right now is to try and sort this issue; I'll listen to other cases, but it seems like these are likely to be the two main wagons today, and I want to hear from huntress before I weigh in on what I think here.

[JohnnyFarrar]

The day just started tho?

[mhsmith0]

The day just started tho?

It's about the mid point to the "day", 5/10 votes are on one or the other, and right now there doesn't seem to be all the much interest in other wagons. Plenty of time for things to change... but this board hasn't shown all that much interest in wagon-hopping to date.

fwiw, i'm still town reading roshar, and undecided on huntress. Depending on what huntress says... well I guess we'll see.

[a plain farmer]

@APF - which posts from FAQ do you not like? I thought his pressure on Titus at the beginning of D2 was ok and now that Max has revealed to be town, even better. Not concrete, obviously.

It's not any one post or group of posts, but instead that he seems to be making only perfunctory efforts to figure out the game, and is otherwise just skirting by.

I didn't have time to deal with this today, but tomorrow I'm going to do a summary of my case on Roshar.

ftr I really want to see this. My mental priority right now is to try and sort this issue; I'll listen to other cases, but it seems like these are likely to be the two main wagons today, and I want to hear from huntress before I weigh in on what I think here.

Not that I think you're doing this, but let's make sure we're not resigning ourselves to a certain pool of lynch possibilities at this point based on the inertia of existing votes.

[Ircher]

Vote Count - Day 3 VC #5

Titus (1) - FA_Q2
Mhsmith (1) - Froot
Huntress (3) - Rosh, Titus, Johnny
Froot (0) -
Johnny (0) -
FA_Q2 (1) - Plain
Garmr (0) -
Plain (1) - Garmr
Lowell (0) -
Rosh (2) - Lowell, Huntress
No Lynch (0) -
Not Voting (1) - Mhsmith

Deadline

Day 3 will end on May 13 8:30 PM EST or in (expired on 2016-05-13 20:30:00).

Lynch Threshold

With 10 alive, it takes 6 to lynch.

Mod Notes

None

[Huntress]

My initial scum read on Roshar was partly gut and partly because she seemed to be reading people as scum mainly for their playstyle. See my comments on her read of Jake's and Max's posts. (1171, 1198, and 1209). See also Nos's replies to her (1105, 1106).

On Day two I thought Roshar's response to Lowell's 1331 seemed reasonable so I moved Lowell ahead of Roshar on my scumlist. I don't recall anything else from Day two that affected my read on her.

Day three she came in with a barrage of half truths and misreps. I replied to her first two posts (see 1554 and 1577), but when she came right back with a third long post (1578) repeating much the same stuff, with the same incorrect claims about my motives and the same false assumptions as to cause and effect, I decided enough was enough (see my 1586). I may be wrong but I had the feeling that 1578 and the two posts immediately following it were aimed at antagonising me in view of what I've previously said about my posting and availabilty. Does anyone think 1579 and 1580 were genuine?

I also didn't like Roshar's overreaction to Froot Loop's point about the neighbour discussion and the assumption that it was aimed purely at her.


Re: Lowell

Day one it was mainly the fact that he was so brazen about wanting to rush the end of the Day, and his voting patterns, which Nos brought up in 1094. Day two it was the way he said to blame him for the mislynch, and for that post about Roshar. Another thing I noticed but didn't mention was the feeling that he might have been trying to buddy up to me. However, I don't think he's likely to be scum with Roshar.

@ Roshar:

Why did you think it would bother me to put someone to L-1?

[Froot Loop]

Bruh I'm open all day

Wahey. Good to know.

ftr I really want to see this. My mental priority right now is to try and sort this issue; I'll listen to other cases, but it seems like these are likely to be the two main wagons today, and I want to hear from huntress before I weigh in on what I think here.

Cool, listen to this:

Vote: mhsmith

Smith hasn't come up with any scumreads on his own and his play in general has been asking questions or coming to watery/town conclusions. He did some meta and then voted for Clumsy but said he was open to other cases (1137.) He speculated about the neighbour - whatever you think about this, it's empty posting at best. His speculation around the time of the Max lynch (1501 and 1503) wasn't helpful and he again asks for any other cases which he'd listen to (1501.)

[JohnnyFarrar]

The less I like Smith, the more I like Froot. #thingsimdiscoveringaboutmyself

[Huntress]

@Huntress, They are the VCs I was using to make my determination.

Yes, but I asked you why those particular ones? The timing seems odd.

FAQ:

I like his play so far. He's made some good points.

What are these points you guys like?

1140 1395 1396 1428 and 1565 are the main ones I think. I've seen nothing from him that gives me a scum vibe.

[mhsmith0]

Re: 1637

1) Reading people as wolf for playstyle, from 1171
from 891, specifically relating to 521, 574, 615
521: she's attacking him for what he's doing, but it's more of a counter to his argument than the explicit driver of a read. She's explicit on this with "It's done by both town and scum" and "Can go both ways though"
574: she's not attacking him for playstyle so much as she's accusing him of lying, explicitly pointing out that if it were the case he'd have defeated his purpose by admitting to trying to draw out buddies.
615: I can potentially see Huntress's point here.
So i can see a bit of AI reading playstyle, but 891 felt more like the drivers of the read are the 476 quick vote after FA's 475, and her comment about Jake's "1-dimensional view of how town would have thought", and her

Also, jake's stance on having not cared about pre-game, then voting for RC on start of D1 with a policy lynch reason, that later changes to some posts he found scummy (posts he didn't bother quoting and posts that came from pre-game) is all over the place. Feels like he's making up things as he goes. And his push on mhs doesn't resonate with me.

So while there's some play-style shade thrown, it's not the fundamental driver. I'd also note that in that post there are some specific times where she seemingly goes out of her way to talk about stuff that could be play-style things that are null "Vindictive. Anti-town. Not necessarily scummy." etc.
I will say it's a bit weird to have an intent to hammer post when some of the post was actively defending stuff of his as null, but that may be a playstyle thing.

2) Other 1171 stuff:
Max and timing - yeah I'd agree w/ Huntress's point that the analysis came later
finding fault rather than wolves: maybe. Did that meta read ever come up?
Max was basically accusing Huntress of non-participation, which is more of a mafia-aligned behavior. Whether said accusation is fair is a different story, but that was the accusation. As far as town reads go, that's putting information into thread, and I'd think that's generally a good thing.

3) 1198:
574 - I think Jake has been sufficiently opaque and unclear in his wording of things in general that I don't particularly have a problem with either Roshar's or Huntress's side of reading what he was up to. Even re-reading that post I don't know what he was trying to say, so... *shrugs*
615 - I agree with Huntress here.
521 - I largely agree with Huntress here. I do think it's reasonable to attack jake's self-defense there, but I'd otherwise agree that it seemed like Jake was trying to sort me out there.

4) 1209:
I'm fine w/ Huntress on the Jake points. Ditto the vote timing.

5) Nos's responses:
Nos 1105 - I'm a bit sympathetic to both sides here. It's difficult for everyone else to read Nos if she isn't being open about her thought process and engagement, and Nos has a playstyle she likes and seems to think is effective. Meh on my end here.
Nos 1106 - I enjoyed Nos's rebuttal here. OTOH, Roshar's point seems reasonable to me. Nos said she'd move it when something else pinged her, 28 pages later, nothing pinged her, and she wasn't really pushing me either. I get that it can potentially be a playstyle thing, but it seems weird IMO. I think it's fair to push on it.

6) Day 2 - I was fine w/ Roshar's stuff on D2 as well (after mulling it over anyway)

7) 1554
I find Huntress's explanations here plausible. Roshar's attribution of wolf motivation is reachy, although not an unreasonable explanation for what happened. But there is entirely reasonable town motivation for what happened too. This is IMO null behavior on Huntress's end.

8) 1577
I feel fine with Huntress's responses here too.

9) 1578
Meh. It's a narrative, and yes, it COULD be the truth. But it feels like conf!bias fitting Huntress's actions into the story that Roshar already believes, as opposed to truly having found anything damning (or being something that Roshar was completely making up).
I'd also note that there is plenty of time to shift wagons EOD. EOD1 was 8:45 PM EST, something like 6 hours after the actual hammer (which itself was about 3 hours after Huntress pushed out Roshar and Lowell as alternatives), which is plenty of time for people to show up and move things around.
1579-80... yeah, I do think it's plausibly genuine. In my mind, Roshar fits a model of aggressive newb!town, which is why I'm town-reading her even with some stuff that feels reachy in my book.

10) Overall: I think Huntress's case on Roshar is a LOT less strong than Huntress seems to think it is, but I can see this as a legitimate thought progression, and I'm increasingly inclined to think the reverse is true as well. If someone wants to try and re-sell these wagons to me, I guess I'll listen, but right now

I ACTIVELY OPPOSE BOTH OF THESE WAGONS

.


So what's a better wagon then? I think the answer is VOTE: Lowell

1) Two of three dead townies reading him as mafia: Clumsy at 1217, Nos at 1219 through 1227 (Max read him town at 1461 though)

2) Plausible NK motive with Nos (she seems like a strong player, so others may have as well, but since she wasn't getting town read, it seems like a more plausible kill for him to have pushed for);

3) Overly cheap town reads as nos noted at 370

4) A pattern of hanging around a lot of peoples' lynchable range without ever really attracting any kind of serious wagon. See 1210, 1316, 1395, 1608, 1637, etc.

5) Posts I really don't like:
590. Tosses in a wolf read of Jake basically as he's under heavy fire.
867. Policy lynch suggestion (after also suggesting "lurker hunt" earlier)
1412 "I'm obvtown" ... for reasons that are completely unclear to me, and apparently much of the rest of the board

Right now I'm town reading Johnny (mainly due to FA), Roshar, and I'm leaning town on Huntress. So join me on Lowell, or convince me someone else is a better lynch.

[mhsmith0]

Bruh I'm open all day

Wahey. Good to know.

ftr I really want to see this. My mental priority right now is to try and sort this issue; I'll listen to other cases, but it seems like these are likely to be the two main wagons today, and I want to hear from huntress before I weigh in on what I think here.

Cool, listen to this:

Vote: mhsmith

Smith hasn't come up with any scumreads on his own and his play in general has been asking questions or coming to watery/town conclusions. He did some meta and then voted for Clumsy but said he was open to other cases (1137.) He speculated about the neighbour - whatever you think about this, it's empty posting at best. His speculation around the time of the Max lynch (1501 and 1503) wasn't helpful and he again asks for any other cases which he'd listen to (1501.)

Cool, listen to this:

1) How does my play in this game differ from my play in the last game we were together (when I was town)?
2) Is it your opinion that being "open to a better case", especially early game, is wolf-indicative? If so, can you explain why?
3) Is it your opinion that I did NOT have a solid read on Clumsy D1? Because my recollection is that I did, and re-reading my posts, I think I was pretty clear on that front. You yourself even said you liked it at 988. Or is it that you thought that I didn't have useful conclusions other than that one?

[Roshar]

Yo mhs, you there?

[mhsmith0]

Yes

[mhsmith0]

Only for a bit tho, about to do dinner

[Roshar]

I can see how my push on Huntress may look like I suffer confbias. I am working backwards. B/c I know she's scum.

I role blocked her N2. And there were no NKs for that night.

I had planned to come out a little later (three days before end of day) to get some reactions on her case and possible associations, but I think we've got enough.

At this point, I think mafia know who I am due to my heavy push on Huntress (I'm assuming mafia knows which one of them is using the NK role), so there's really no point in trying to keep this any longer.

Day 3 Begins!

No kill occurred.

I will

not

be moving my vote from Huntress today.

I will only lynch Huntress today though.

[Roshar]

I'm down for lynching Lowell tomorrow though.

[mhsmith0]

Might as well full claim please, along with who else you've targeted. Sorry for being dense

[Roshar]

Town Even-Night Roleblocker. I'm assuming (unless town is super under powered) that there's an Odd-night role blocker.