Open 544: Tit for Tat (Game Over)

[Ibarra]

Hello. And to start differently, let me present to you a piece of reliable information:

Statistics says that those who willingly vote in RVS are 75% likely to be scum than those who don't/are reluctant.

So guys, what do you think?

[Ibarra]

Was that a RVS vote?

[Ibarra]

Vote: Loranthaceae

OK guys, this guy just RVS'd willingly = 75% more chance of being scum.

Where'd you get those statistics from Ibarra, the NSA?

More of an observation + analysis of the games I've played so far, here and on different forums.

[Ibarra]

Nah, actually this is the first game I've played after I compiled that information. ^_^
I used to RVS (and RQS as well), but I realized: Not only is RVS/RQS a very inefficient way to start the game, but the fact that getting OUT of RVS/RQS takes up a long part of the Day also means that scum usually push for it.

There are tons of non-"traditional" methods of starting a game.

[Ibarra]

And if you come up with statistics at least say where they are from.
PEdit: So you say that was more like a vague estimate than acualt statistics?

Sure thing, the site's over here: http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/84

I wouldn't say "vague estimate". I just noticed that roughly 3 out of 4 times, scum willingly gun for RVS. 3/4 = 75%

[Ibarra]

Basically the fact that scum push for RVS 75% of the time, and the fact that it takes a long time to get out of RVS = wasting the Day, RVS is scummy.

[Ibarra]

EBWOP: *means RVS is scummy.

[Ibarra]

what do you mean by RVS vote is random voting without information, yes, I am.

OK guys we found three people who are 75% more likely to be scum already.

[Ibarra]

Loranthaceae: I stopped playing on MS a LOOONG time ago. I play Mafia on a different forum.

[Ibarra]

And that my friends is how you start a game without having to prolong RVS.
Yes that statistic I made was BS, and pretty much:

1. The sense in RVS is to generate content. Sometimes it is difficult to get out of RVS, yes, but still it usually serves its purpose, you are achieving the same thing with a discussion about meta now (probably), but that is not always possible

BTW, anyone who

attempts to RV now

is definitely scummy, since there is already discussion and content. There should be no more reason to RV.

Unvote

P-Edit:

FoS:

Flames
That is too blatant of a OMGUS vote.

[Ibarra]

MTD: Do you consider sheeping to be a scumtell?

[Ibarra]

Flames of Disaster:
Yes you can use your vote any way you want, but generally speaking giving a lol reason for voting someone is suspicious.

Cell phone posting, so no story for you, look at time stamps, I wasn't sheeping, but thanks for coming up with a stupid reason to try and vote me + omgus vote because I'm annoying? Lol, yeah, I like my vote where it is even more.

And pretty much agreeing with Flames here. Why are you suddenly so defensive?

[Ibarra]

Account is locked, so back for a minute. Not defensive, pointing out the fact I didn't sheep, and if they were actually looking for scum, I would think they would look at time stamps before coming up with some lol reasoning.

The tone of your earlier post states otherwise though.

@Ibarra:

thoughts on Hopkirk?

Apart from waiting for him to clarify his vote, nothing. Nothing substantial yet to make a read on.

two tasty wagons
which one
do i hop on

Both have three votes on them, if you hop on either one, you'll be the fourth and therefore can call a kan on it.

(Sorry I couldn't resist.)

[Ibarra]

Picard looks town now after that post. I severely dislike the above post for its strong attempt to push a lynch without solid reasoning. Her nitpicking of where I put my vote itself is the scummiest reasoning possible. The fact that she attempts to push a lynch based on where I put my vote is shallow and is clearly an attempt at mislynch. It is predicted that she will make up some reasoning for voting me along the day and will strongly rally for a bad lynch under suspicious circumstances and premises.

vote tla

The reasoning behind this vote is wrong on so many levels:
1) If you read her post before, Tla already explained why she voted for you. Her latest post wasn't exactly a "strong attempt to push a lynch without solid reasoning".
2) How exactly is pushing a lynch based on where you place a vote shallow? Votes and where you put them are a great way of establishing reads. e.g. bandwagon analysis
3) Your two last sentences are preempting that voting you with Tla on the wagon is scummy.

Vote: Flames

ATM, it looks like you're grasping for straws for voting someone.

[Ibarra]

The fact that anyone is pushing for a lynch halfway through the second day irks me. We have almost two weeks until the deadline, we have no reason to rush this. It seems to me that multiple people are pushing for a lynch for flimsy reasons. I agree that votes can be used well for pressure at this point, but people like Flames, Picard, tla seem to be jumping the gun quite early on ending the day. Only scum want to rush through the day phase.

What's giving you the idea they want to end the game early?
Forming a wagon against someone early won't exactly end that day automatically (well unless someone quickhammers which REALLY scummy).
In fact, it will eventually give us more stuff to discuss about.

P-Edit:
Assuming the Day does end early yes, but like I said, pushing for a lynch early =/= that person will be lynched early.
It's when someone's at L-1 when a ton of discussion usually takes place.

[Ibarra]

@Lincolm:

I can't quite follow why you think Hopkirk is scum. Can you restate your reasons?

FoS: Saki

We haven't gotten anything from you but votes without reason under the pretext of "reaction testing". Also, that vote on Lor after he voted you isn't looking good either.

I feel like the Flames wagon is scum-motivated, for the record. No way does a wagon get 5 votes in 5 pages on D1 without scum being there.

-V

How many scum do you think are in the wagon?

This is how Saki plays though

Just saying that meta is unreliable.

@Captain Picard:

What do you think of Saki's posts? They're not exactly active, but not full of content either.

[Ibarra]

not really.

why is it unreliable?

Because people can "change" their meta if they want to.

why me, the low hanging fruit

why not throw a vote instead of a fos, when you can be more reckless with votes (in early-game)

Because I still find Flames more suspicious that you are.

[Ibarra]

Sorry about that. I just finishing modding a game on another site, and I have yet to study for an exam on Fri.
V/LA until then.

Noted.

[Ibarra]

That's a lot to catch up with. Reading now.

[Ibarra]

Gah, can't seem to read the rhythm of the various one on ones in the thread.
One on one's generally are counterproductive and prevent you from seeing the whole picture because of the tunneling.

I am waiting for people to respond to me. I am asking questions where scum reads will be based on responses.

This statement pings me for some reason. This statement feels devoid of any town motivation behind it.

My vote is where i want it.

You say that you're waiting for replies, but you don't prod people when they forget to answer, then contently say your vote is where it is. You only reply when people call you out. That is horriblly anti-town.

Unvote

Actually the fact that Flames claimed VT and not a PR makes me want to reconsider him being scum. Optimal scum play would be claiming PR to at least have the town PR CC.

Vote: Hopkirk

[Ibarra]

Can anyone link me to a game with town PRs where scum claimed VT when rushed to L-1 on D1? I really can't wrap my mind around the fact that scum would claim VT in a situation like that.

Oh hey

Caligno

Ankamius is here. If only Lincolm didn't replace out.

@Tla

Can you summarize your case against NSU? 1 on 1's are really hard to follow...

[Ibarra]

I guess scum claiming VT on D1 isn't much of an impossibility as I thought, although I will say that IMO optimal scumplay would be doing just that.

I'll reread and

TRY

(emphasis on try since I dislike writing very long posts) to summarize what I think about the thread so far tomorrow.

[Ibarra]

@TNE

, you spelled Crisostomo wrongly. (For those who don't get the context, Crisostomo Ibarra is the name of the protagonist of a book)
And no. I'm not reading you that town yet.

After rereading the thread, I somewhat agree with

Tsukasa

TNE about Flames and Picard being scum buddies
Flames' vote at #36 looks like an early attempt at distancing, and then Picard overreacted to that vote at #45 as if trying to increase the distance.

Hopkirk's earlier posts felt like they had town intent with them, but towards the end I felt there being a lack of town motivation especially when replying to the posts asking him to contribute. Also noting that if Picard is scum, I doubt Hopkirk is scum. Because attacking BOTH of your teammates is something I don't generally see scum do.

Loran's posts seem town to me. His post at #77 where he didn't just join on any of the wagons then (Flames vs Picard) seem good.

@Caligno:

Why are you reading Hopkirk town?

Saki has gone through the game without really contributing at all...

NSU is pretty complicated. I'm reading pieguy as null-town, but Varsoon as null-scum

(And for the others in the null list, I can't sense the motivation behind your posts.)

Town

:
Loran

Null-Town:

TNE

Null:

NSU
Mala
Ankamius
MTD
Tla

Null-Scum:

Hopkirk
Picard - if Picard turns scum, Hopkirk is town.
Saki

Scum:

Flames - I'm going to go back and trust my initial read here after seeing that scum do claim VT in the situation Flames was in.

Vote: Flames

After from being suspicious, I believe a Flames lynch will give us a TON of information at the moment, considering the wagons and votes on him. This information may become useful during the Night as well, so I would prefer we lynch Flames at the moment instead of having him as "vig bait".

[Ibarra]

Bah my reads are all messed up again. Tla brings up a good point re: Picard and his outing of his main account's game, so I'm a bit unsure about that now.

[Ibarra]

So Zekrom's recent posts have been rubbing me the wrong way.
You're asking why we're lynching "town" but news flash, you're not confirmed town.
The fact that you're emphasizing this too much is definitely suspicious.

Vote: Zekrom25

^ That's the hammer vote guys

[Ibarra]

Well allow me to thank Sakura for ruining the reaction test with her vote count.

[Ibarra]

So

Zekrom

any explanation on why you "edited" my post?

yeah, sry from me as well, I expected no more to come from Zek anyway, and even more so after the VC obviously.

FTR, I wasn't planing on only looking for his reactions, but the reactions of everyone as well.

@Loran

: Why do you want the vig to target me?

[Ibarra]

Just saying that I have exams today, Wednesday, and Friday, but I'm not declaring V/LA. I'll read and post after my exam for that day, but will probably study on the next day.
Will catch up later after my exam.

[Ibarra]

I should read this.

Yeah I should probably hurry up with my reread too, but I burnt out really quickly this time.

Who should I sheep atm?

[Ibarra]

Yeah sorry. This week is a low energy, high stress week for me.
I'll get to it once I get motivation again. Hopefully soon. At the most by this weekend.

[Ibarra]

These two week deadlines are too long TBH. Shorter deadlines create a more sense of urgency = more motivation.

[Ibarra]

Please just replace me.

(Sorry Sakura)

I misjudged when my exams were going to happen, and basically I'm in this situation.
I might as well give it to someone else who will be more active.

Pretty said though since both Lincolm and pieguy are gone, half of my initial reason or playing here is gone. (Well Tsukasa and Caligno are still here, but yeah.)