Mini 749 - Antarctic Mafia [Game Over]
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Yes, I have to I'm wondering about the wisdom of a fish playing in a game full of penguins.
ZEEnon has 4 votes.
After a serious review of all the available evidence, the only sensible option is to....
Vote: na85
After all, he has as many letters in his name as numbers.Exactly as many. A serious scumtell in my book.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Obviously, the recent attacks on me have been serious and grave, and deserve a full and thorough response. There are a few points I would like to make absolutely clear.
1. As Amished suggests, there isn't nearly enough of me to go round. Penguins eat fish whole, and there is no way 11 penguins can possibly share 1 fish.So anyone wanting to kill a fish wants it all for themselves, hence is scum
2. It is well known that fish, like other animals, should be killed when in a state of happiness, so that their muscles are relaxed and the meat is more tender. It would be far more sensible to let me die peacefully.So anyone wanting to lynch a fish is antitown
3. Penguins only eat live fish.So anyone wanting to kill a fish is certainly not a penguin, hence is scum
4. Actually, the fish in the picture is a robot fish.
In light of this evidence, I fully expect those voting for me to:
1) Unvote me
2) Admit that they are scum
3) Vote for themselves
Anything else is merely prolonging the inevitable.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
JereIC wrote:Vote: Fishythefishbecause he just seems fishy.
Here is JereIC, completely changing his reason for voting for me! At first, he says I am a bit fishy, but when other players bring up another line of argument, he jumps on it, even after I have clearly demonstrated that it is nonsense! What is this, if not trying to force through a townie lynch, with no thought for logic, reason or debate?JereIC wrote:
Less arguing, more getting in mah belleh. OM NOM NOM NOMFishythefish wrote:Obviously, the recent attacks on me have been serious and grave, and deserve a full and thorough response. There are a few points I would like to make absolutely clear.
1. As Amished suggests, there isn't nearly enough of me to go round. Penguins eat fish whole, and there is no way 11 penguins can possibly share 1 fish.So anyone wanting to kill a fish wants it all for themselves, hence is scum
2. It is well known that fish, like other animals, should be killed when in a state of happiness, so that their muscles are relaxed and the meat is more tender. It would be far more sensible to let me die peacefully.So anyone wanting to lynch a fish is antitown
3. Penguins only eat live fish.So anyone wanting to kill a fish is certainly not a penguin, hence is scum
4. Actually, the fish in the picture is a robot fish.
In light of this evidence, I fully expect those voting for me to:
1) Unvote me
2) Admit that they are scum
3) Vote for themselves
Anything else is merely prolonging the inevitable.
At this point I think JereIC is obvscum. There is no need for a claim- I cannot think of a claim which could make me think about lynching anyone else. The only question that remains, before we lynch this vile scum, is who his partner(s) are. One, I think, is obvious- ZEEnon. It has struck me throughout that these two players are very carefully and deliberately. Add this to the excellent points Drake has recently made against ZEEnon, and I think we have tomorrow's lynch.completely avoiding ANY contact with one another-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I think it is important that we don't get too fixated on the issue that has arisen. I think, as others do, that ZEEnon overreacted to the RVS, but currently I don't really find either that overreaction or Nuwen's attack all that scummy. It seems overwhelmingly likely we are about to get into a horrible tunnelled town vs town episode.
Incidentally, my impression was that the baddies wouldn't be penguins. It was the word "predators" that did it.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
ZEEnon overreacted to joke votes, and gathered some real suspicion- to my mind, his overreaction is not very scummy. I agree that DDD’s vote on him looks pretty bad. The only use for that as scum would be if he genuinely thought that his attackers could be lynch for their joke votes, which doesn’t seem at all likely. I personally support the RVS as the only effective way to start a game.
The “slip” and the “slip in pointing out the slip” both seem pretty much irrelevant. If there was anything to be gained from this, it is that freeko stretches quite a long way in saying that the latter was a slip.
After the “glass houses” thing, DDD was attacked for using it to “prove” he was town. This was never meant to be taken seriously, as he says here:
I think this attack is another stretch from freeko, going too hard after a light-hearted post. All in all, I think freeko’s attack on DDD is overdone.Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:
I agree (there's that terrible scumtell again, freeko). It was utterly contrived because it was merely a way to throw Drake'sNuwen wrote:
Careful with linear logic, kids. Drake's comment snarkily called your play terrible and did nothing to prove your generalization that terrible play equals a terribleDebonair Danny DiPietro wrote:1) Those in glass houses should not throw stones.
2) I'm indicting someone for terrible play.
3) Drake is therefore insinuating my play is terrible.
4) Via my syllogism which he quoted to use accepting it as fact because otherwise his jab doesn't work; terrible play is town play.
5) Therefore I am town.townplayer. This is an inverted strawman - you're attempting to prove the statement "I'm terrible, I'm town" after assuming "terrible play -> universally been terrible town play" is an axiom. The only truism here is "terrible play equals terrible play." Hinging DDD's statement on "so far" deconstructs the statement's endurance even further in practice - if terrible play is qualified as town-only play 'thus far,' WIFOM is established for any future terrible play. Great door to create.
I don't like this contrived attempt to prove alignment.insultback at him. I contend my play isn't terrible and thus the whole syllogism is a moot point anyways.
Mizz.Mafia, you should try to play an active role in the game, which includes reading all the posts and forming opinions on the other players. Anything less is bad for the town.
Light-kun’s attack on na is frankly bizarre- na thanked another player for general information, and L-k attacked him for it, presumably without having read the thread properly- not terribly impressive really.
Because I think his attacks are contrived,
vote: freeko-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I think that this attack is entirely unconvincing, and, yes "contrived", by which I mean a stretch. You later retracted it to some extent, but you still posted it, and I struggle to see why.freeko wrote:
Here is an applcation of WIFOM. This could only be a slip if you had inforation to know that it was infact either a slip or not a slip. There is no posted vanilla claim so you cannot know if you are a penguin or not unless your role says as much. This could be the beginning symptoms of "perfect information syndrome" as well, where the scum have all the information of their rooles and can share that amongst themselves.drake wrote: Seems like a slip
I am more weary of those who attempt to point out a slip this early in the game than those who potentially made the slip. im gonna be watching you, drake. I think it is you who may have made the slip by pointing ourt that someone ekse had made a slip.
freeko wrote: I really think you gotta go at this point. Your little I am town WIFOM play is just another nail in your coffin as I see it. For those who missed it post #109 will reveal all. For me you have made 2 mistakes. The first was just your attempt to buddy up to me by outright agreeing with my post. That is something I dont like, especially when no other perspective or narrative is given. Its totally worthless at that point. The second is the "I am terrible therefore I am town" WIFOM smoke screen you created with post #109.
The quote in my above post was intended to illustrate that DDD did not mean his WIFOM proof of innocence- which I think was totally clear. Because of this, your attacks on him for this reason seemed, again, a stretch. Incidentally, I have no problem with your attack on him for buddying.freeko wrote:
WIFOM.. and more of it. You only seem to want to wrap yourself in a WIFOM web. Here you go again, irreguardless of your play being terrible in your eyes or not. It is the evaluation of others interpretation of your play that matters equally so.It was utterly contrived because it was merely a way to throw Drake's insult back at him. I contend my play isn't terrible and thus the whole syllogism is a moot point anyways.
I think the saying goes something like: Its a tangled web we weave, when it is the intent to deceive?
Though I do understand the intent to retort drake by trying to turn the insult back at him. Wouldnt a better play have been to just ignore it?
I think two of your posts have been rather flawed. Sorry I didn't quote them back at you when saying this. I certainly didn't say anywhere that you were "obviously scum", as you say in your post- and I don't think that. I merely think that, on the little information we have, you are as good a candidate as any, and would ask you not to put such extreme words into my mouth.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Sure. When somebody insulted DDD jokingly (as in with no serious evidence or accusation), ignoring it would have been a valid response. DDD instead gave a joking reply- to me this seems just as valid.freeko wrote:[On DDD's response to Dtf's insult]The whole thing could have been avouided by simply ignoring the issue. That he chose to approach it inthe way he did should tell you something.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Light-kun, in your percentages, Amished and I follow your two explained suspects by a mere couple of percents, at 6% clear of the approximate baseline. You haven't mentioned either of our names yet, and we happen to be two of the very few other players who have criticised you. Can you explain your suspicions?
I don't like this from DDD:
My problem is with the bold bit (my bold). I'm not saying, as L-k seems to imply, that every post has to provide new information- there is nothing wrong with response and it's often appropriate to acknowledge other people's arguments and/or your mistakes. However, it is a bit of a stretch to say that a post is useful because in the overall context it can be used to create links between you and drake- townies don't need to conciously create or not create links, and this should not be your intention while voting.DDD wrote:
A) I took the blame for my part in the action.L-k wrote:
Blaming someone else for your distracting play is scummy. This is noted. Also noted is that you fail to actually contribute in this post, and your circular logic from the other pages doesn't help your case.Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:
Conceded and apologies to the town for the distracting post in that case. However I'd like to remind the town that mine was the response to an equally distracting and useless insult from Drake. I'd hate for him not to get his credit for his part in this fiasco.Nuwen wrote:
I agree. Cute logic battles are fun, but shouldn't take precedence over actual scum-hunting. If you're retorting simply to retort, you're at best creating spurious fluff that convolutes the game and detracts attention away from actual tells. Worse still, this distraction can be interpreted as an anti-town attempt to disrupt focus.freeko wrote: Wouldnt a better play have been to just ignore it?
B) I was not the only one involved, but felt Drake's role in the incident was being overlooked because I was around and willing to talk about the issue. I don't feel I should be indicted simply for posting a lot and I don't believe someone should be given a pass for not being around.
C) How is this post not helpful? If I'm scum I'm either early bussing or trying to frame an innocent. If I'm town I'm showing a potential trap set by scum or maybe it's one big misunderstanding. If I'm killed in some fashion or cleared by a cop then it provides you a wealth of information about my relationship with Drake. It might not be useful this second, but long term it's plenty useful if you know how to use it.
D) The circular logic thing is a tired argument at this point, either you believe me that I was making a joke responding to a joking insult or you'rean idiotconvinced that I'm an idiot because only an idiot would've made that post in seriousness.
LK, you had no problem joining in with the parade of calling my tongue-in-cheek "circular logic" post unhelpful at best. Yet, later you unhelpfully bait na85 in a "tongue-in-cheek" name-calling move. Hypocrisy? Looks like it from here.
On the other hand, I agree that the "circular logic" post has been done to death, if not further.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
How exciting for me, I can't wait . If this helps: my remark was not a jest, except to some extent the accusation of omgus. I feel that fairly large differences between players' scumminess need explaining- particularly when the differences between players you have criticised repeatedly and players you have never mentioned is tiny. I would like such an explanation soon.L-k wrote: Fish, I will only respond to you at the moment: You seem to have indicated, either subconsciously or unintentionally, something that I feel should be considered a bit of an assumption. It could, also, be a jest, but this mark is one of the few telling comments I've seen. I'm not going to comment on it just yet as I need to reread that post to decide and look at your play in isolation.
1) Excellent quote pyramid culling.Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote: Cutting down on the quote pyramid...
1) Did my post supply you with more information for the future?
2) Does it not help the town to have more information?
You say the town doesn’t need to purposefully create links and maybe it’s true, but does it hurt the town to do so? I don’t think so; I think the more information provided the better.
I think you're most bothered by my transparency because it is a bit unconventional. However, as I’ve noted before I think it’s an asset to the town, not a detriment. Scum have to lie and deceive to win the game, the town need to uncover the truth, if I don’t worry about appearances and simply present the facts as I see them then the town will benefit from one less layer of bullshit to cut through.
2) Transparency is excellent. I'm not suggesting you should conciously avoid making links to other players- however, you suggested this making such links was thepurposeof your post- and townies don't need to conciously create links. Indeed, by artificially taking the decision to make a link, you remove the usefulness of the link- it will no longer be your natural response to a player. The position of "my post was useful because it creates links" doesn't explain you posting it in the first place. Also, as Amished says, links at this stage are only really useful if it's scum (or other informed players) making them- and any purposeful link would be drowned by WIFOM
This probably doesn't need saying, but at this point it's fairly certain Mizz_Mafia was entirely genuine, and that Mizz_Mafia's replacement should be treated as if she never existed.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Indeed. I only meant that, in this instance, I think it's clear than Mizz_Mafia was genuine in her lack of understanding of the game, and that there is nothing to judge the role by so far.na85 wrote:
You think so? I wouldn't go so far as to say that.Fishythefish wrote:Mizz_Mafia's replacement should be treated as if she never existed.
I think you should judge a role by all the players who play it.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I entirely agree with Nuwen that being defensive is not a scum tell. Defense is a necessary part of the game for a townie, when you are being attacked, and DDD's lack of scumhunting is entirely unsurprising.
I agree that this would be nonsensical. However, perhaps you weren't trying to be less subtle, but made some mistakes and made things worse trying to get out of them? Just because you do something well once doesn't mean you will be able to repeat it in another game. Your argument can be summarised "when I'm scum, I'm not scummy. I'm scummy- therefore I am not scum". This is not a valid explanation of why you are scummy. I feel you are trying to use dodgy arguments to justify your play.Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:Well sure, apparently me playing with my content filter off looks to the rest of you like scum making 86,000 mistakes instead of a simply different play style. Furthermore, if freeko is any example the status quo is to ignore and evade any arguments made against you instead of taking them head on like I prefer to do which does in fact only seem to get me into more trouble as this post surely will, won't stop me from making them though.
I know at least some of you are you going to yell WIFOM because while it is, it's also easier than actually doing some actual content analysis. Check my one completed game here. As scum I deftly put myself into a position to win only blown in endgame by a terrible partner.
I can play with more subtlety than the bull in a china shop technique I've taken on. Now I already hear some of you crying, "but you're just playing this way so you can pull out this argument and try and reverse field", but why would I abandon a winning strategy to instead draw everyone's attention and criticism so I could then later pull-out a wacky WIFOMy argument such as this? It's nonsensical.
JereIC also makes very good points about your modifying of things that you say later.
unvote, vote DDD
(4th vote! Forget DDD, that makes me scum! LYNCH TIME!!!!!)-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
This was mostly a joke, because there had been recent talk of the "4th vote is scum" meta, which I find rather absurd. It was only intended to head off suspicion directed at this vote specifically because it was a 4th vote. All votes should be treated on the explanations for them, which is unrelated to their position.DraketheFake wrote:
What are you doing? Did DDD ever even say that? Pointing out your behavior as "suspicious" in an attempt to head off suspicion indicates a clear lack of confidence in what you're doing and/or substandard reasons for doing it, which the rest of your post doesn't brush up against at all.Fishythefish wrote:(4th vote! Forget DDD, that makes me scum! LYNCH TIME!!!!!)
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
How's the rumination going?L-k wrote: Fish, I will only respond to you at the moment: You seem to have indicated, either subconsciously or unintentionally, something that I feel should be considered a bit of an assumption. It could, also, be a jest, but this mark is one of the few telling comments I've seen. I'm not going to comment on it just yet as I need to reread that post to decide and look at your play in isolation.
freeko's last post is unimpressive. He should at the very least acknowledge the arguments made against him in 225, and not doing so adds enormously to the "freeko is ignoring my arguments" statement from DDD. As well as totally ignoring the attack against him, he also says nothing new, but parrots arguments already put forward by other players and himself. This looks particularly bad because one of them- lack of scumhunting- has now been to some extent invalidated. To my mind, this post looks as if freeko decided to post against DDD, then scraped around for some arguments, rather than attacking DDD because he has some arguments against him. This could be motivated either by a desire to be seen to be making arguments (anti-town, as it leads to bad arguments), by tunnel vision on DDD (anti-town) or by a desire for a quick lynch (scummy). Whichever it is, I don't like it.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I disagree with the recent criticism of DDD for wanting to survive. Sure, a lynch of a townie can be beneficial, but this rare, rarer if planned, and there is no obvious reason this one is. If DDD is a townie, at this stage he should prefer anyone else to die other than him, since anyone else could be scum. My lynch would be my least favourite today- can anyone honestly say different? (sets a cunning trap for jesters!)-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I agree that freeko's position has turned into a nonsense. freeko, you need to seriously reconsider your position on DDD. You are suffering from extreme confirmation bias, in which you automatically see DDD's posts nonsense. 262 reads like it is a token attempt to look like you are open-minded, without any actual intention of reconsidering your position. You are actively harming your case against DDD. You read like a scum desperately trying to get a townie lynched, or a hopelessly tunnelled townie.
unvote, vote freeko-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
What with the main suspects being dead, this game needs a proper reread. I'll catch up some time tomorrow.
For now- not much point in lots of information discussion, but a DDD kill does not look like a scum kill. More likely a vig, or a SK hunting for scum.
Oh, and to clarify one thing- I did think we were in a penguins vs. other things situation, because of the flavour at the beginning- it mentioned penguins a lot, and, when referring to mafia, mentioned "predators".-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
So, reading through the thread again I can't say anything leaps out at me. Thoughts on a couple of players receiving attention at the moment:
Light-kun
I agree with Nuwen that his vote is bad. The implication behind it is much worse than a random vote- he appears to be saying that he has picked a player, and will then try to construct a case on them. It is also true that his change of stance on DDD does look a little odd- when moving to attacking DDD's attacker, his opinion on DDD seems to change dramatically.
The initial percentages have now been explained; however, in the new ones, I still have an elevated percentage. There is still no explanation for this, beyond an incredibly weak and old one that I explained. I really think if you are going to make lists like this, they should be explained more thoroughly. Otherwise you are just throwing out random accusations with no reason.
Zeenon
Yes, Zeenon overreacted hugely to joke votes/posts. However, I don't really see this as a scum tell- townies can overreact as well. The point that he tried to make safe posts from then on is a valid one, and does point to zeenon actively trying to avoid attention.
Jazzmyn wrote:And there was this strange little post directed to Light-kun:
That just struck me as odd, as it looks like ZEEnon either trying to explain to his scum partner why/how he had screwed up or, alternatively, trying toi agree with the rest of your points, so i didn't address them or else it would be seen as me agreeing with you too much and/or me just posting for the sake of posting.appearto be explaining to his scum partner why/how he had screwed up, i.e. buddying up to Light-kun.
This post by ZEEnon is an open admission he is trying to avoid looking scummy, but I don't see it as anything more than that myself.
Jazz's impression of ZEEnon is scum who couldn't take the heat; I agree with the latter, but not so sure of the scum bit.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
The percentage I wanted explained was my own.
I have a problem with L-k's last post in that it twice uses the line "I did it to get reactions";
Light-kun wrote:I elevated (read "lied") to see his reaction.
I also find it extraordinary that your first reaction to someone not agreeing with a case is to label them as a possible scumpartner of the attacked player. It looks like you intend to make me agree with you lest I be labelled ZEEnon's scumpartner.L-k wrote: I planned on demonstrating my case alter and I typed arbitrary to see how people would react. Didn't get much from it though. Oh well.
vote: Light-kun-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Sorry, in my last post I didn't explain myself:
Was meant to be accompanied by... which is a claim I always find very suspect. It can be used by the mafia to justify any behaviour, and so when it's not obviously true, like here, it is scummy.I wrote:I have a problem with L-k's last post in that it twice uses the line "I did it to get reactions";-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Analysis of L-k's claim:
- Obviously, L-k killed DDD. The risk of a vig counterclaim would be too big.
- I doubt that L-k is scum. DDD would have been a really strange kill.
- He could be SK.
- His claim stacks up; his provocative play and withdrawal on DDD fit with vig.
All in all, I believe the claim, and the scenario where L-k is a SK isn't so bad.
unvote-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Interesting point. However, for me vig makes more sense for L-k's play at the beginning of the day than SK. SK wouldn't want to draw attention to the possibility of that role, particularly when they are very likely going to want to claim vig at some point. As a vig, the play can be explained by a rather overdone distancing attempt. As I said before, I don't think mafia makes sense for DDD's kill.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
So in essence, you think my acceptance of his claim is too well thought out, but agree with this thinking. In my response post you don't like, what is there you actually disagree with? What do you think L-k's role is?HowardRoark wrote:The Response: This is too easily (in my mind) accepted. Also, it is too well explained.
The Problem: I can't see a scum team taking this kind of a chance, especially with this evidence for an easy linkage, during D2.
I agree with Fishythefish that a SK would probably not come out with a claim like this and that the kill doesn't fit a scum nor SK pattern.
Why claim then is a good question.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I have to say I hadn't thought of 3) as a possible motive for anything. Since when is being right a towntell? I never said I took his claim at face value. On analysis, I think that it's likely to be true, as the other scenarios are unlikely for various reasons, and that the second most likely scenario (SK) doesn't need immediate attention. Him being a vanilla seems very unrealistic- think how he'll look when the real vig counterclaims the DDD kill. I don't think DDD was a scum kill (oh, and another reason for this is the manner of death- as someone noted, red circle = gunshot = man with a gun = SK or vig, probably. Particularly since, in the flavour, "Predators about....a..a...a mafia", suggests that the mangled carcass is the scum kill, and DDD the vig/SK kill.)HowardRoark wrote:I agree with thepartsof your response that I noted. As far as your acceptance of it, I see that you could
1) be part of a scum team trying to pull a gambit (least likely)
2) honestly accept it at face value (naive)
3) be scum setting up a "I told you so" (not sure)
I just don't know whether to believe the claim or not. He could be the Vig, he could be a SK (although I think bringing yourself into the spotlight like this would be quite detrimental to your win condition), he could be scum, he could be vanilla attempting to draw a NK. There are a lot of possible scenarios.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I think you mean L-2? That's what you reached.Light-kun wrote:I'm at L-4, and you question why I would reveal my role?
My problem with picking two lynch targets is it is very good for the mafia if they have a roleblocker- they roleblock if and only if LK is hitting one of them. If LK is a SK, he will surely be shooting for scum at this stage (even if we lynch scum that looks like the right move for him)? For this reason, I'd be tempted to let him choose his target. Note that if LK is really a SK, he'll still probably be nightkilled in the upcoming day or two, as the scum can't tell between the two, and don't like SK's anyway.Nuwen wrote:This is an easily testable claim. Today, we're going to pick two lynch targets. One will be vigged. We can lynch LK prior to entering LYLO if everyone is still concerned about him still being an SK. An SK that plays along with the town will find his win condition very hard to meet in the endgame; either way, town gains an extra kill. If he doesn't vig our consensus targets, we kill him the next day. I don't want to use today's lynch to test his claim - if LK really is a vig, he'll probably be nightkilled in the upcoming day or two.
Overall, I think if we ask any doctors out there not to protect LK, the risk he poses to the town is minimal, and we should let him act alone for now.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
3. As I've already stated; to keep the scum in the dark.Nuwen wrote:p.s.,FoSin Fishy's direction. It's very anti-town to suggest that a kill ability not be handed over to the control of consensus. The only reasons to support sovereign kills from LK:
1. Second scum team pair, attempting to free themselves from town-dictated kills.
2. Absolute trust in LK's judgment.
The former is plausible, the latter is naive.
I haven't run across this situation before. Perhaps it accepted wisdom, but I don't think it's clear that it is anti-town not to hand over a known kill ability; yes, maybe the town will choose better targets than L-k alone, but we have the disadvantage of having to declare our intentions. I don't have to have absolute trust in L-k; as long as he has the same motives as us, he can make slightly worse decisions than the town as a whole, and the result is still better.
In what situation do you think the town's interests and L-k's interests will not be aligned tonight?-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Interesting analysis.
I disagree a little about Howard's unvote. Acknowledging the possibility of the lynchee being town isn't in itself suspect- you are never going to be 100% sure of anything. Howard's stated reason in this case, to give freeko a chance to contribute, is not entirely implausible, and if this was a distancing attempt, it is certainly, as you say, weird.
About 2); I'm sure we all considered the possibility that freeko was just that sort of townie. After 276, freeko made a lot of posts which suggested that he was probably scum rather than a scum's dream townie. freeko looked more and more like a scum trying to get a lynch.
On 3)- I'm not sure I understand. I didn't make an L-5 vote, and my L-6 vote was much earlier than the wagon and I don't think it was referenced again?
There is a problem with your theory that both wagons were shoved along by scum. By maybe post 230, it was clear that DDD or freeko was likely to be lynched. From here, the scum's only strategy would be to act as normally as possible, and to join one or other of the wagons for a decent reason. In particular, they had no reason to move from a DDD wagon to a freeko wagon.
I've explained this. I think that if our motives align with his (ie. if he wants to kill scum), we'd be better off letting him pick the kill, so the scum have less information for killing/roleblocking him. I think that our motives are extremely likely to align with his.DraketheFake wrote:We should either pick the kill or not kill at all. Fishy, why on earth would you want him acting independently?-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Why do you think I am scum based on this swap, given that both wagons were on townies?Light-kun wrote:If Fishy was on the Danny wagon at L-3 and then swapped to Freeko, I think that fishy is scum.
Well, if you think I disagree with the analysis simply because it fingers me (as well as two other players) as more likely scum, then that is scummy. In fact, I just don't see Nuwen's logic for thinking that the late switchers are more likely scum. My other disagreement was over point 3), which I think is factually wrong.L-k wrote:And while Nuwen has made errors, Fishy seems unconfortable with the analysis, as though he fears the possible conclusion of Fishy=scum. Sure, town would too, but I might just be reading too much into it.
Really? Please elaborate.L-k wrote:Also, if Drake the Fake is scum, Nuwen is scum. They look connected.
A note on vote analysis: L-k here thinks I am scum based solely on a vote- apparently independently of context. Myself, I think think my switch was both justified and explained. I think it is likely that the reason the DDD wagon turned into a freeko wagon was because during day 1DDD got less scummy and freeko got more scummy.
It seems very early to be making such certain statements.L-k wrote:Jazz- I'll be very surprised if scum, but this is not impossible.
Note that L-k's mafia prisoner's dilemma relies on the serial killer knowing the identity of the mafia (as well as vice-versa, but this is already true). If this is unknown, the townies chance of winning is 50%, as is the mafia's. The point that the serial killer has thrown the game still stands.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I think that DDD's wagon is more interesting than freeko's. By the time freeko's got rolling in any serious way, it was clear that he or DDD would be lynched, and scum have an easy time sitting back and voting for the scummier of the two. If there is scum impetus behind a wagon, it is most likely either right at the beginning of freeko's or at any point on DDD's wagon. After this of course scum may have joined/moved wagons, but probably not in a way which is different from a townie.
Of course, a vote at any stage without a good justification is scummy. But this argument is more compelling when there is a scummy reason for the vote, and yesterday this was truer towards the start of the day.
I can't really be accused of getting the freeko bandwagon going. My vote was for different reasons to all the other votes on him, including my later vote, and is pretty much unrelated to the bandwagon on him. I think you are clouded by hindsight; at the time, freeko was under no kind of pressure, and this is no more an attempt to bandwagon than any other first vote on a player. As I've expressed above, can't see a reason to think that hops from DDD to freeko are particularly scummy votes. The part of my voting pattern most worthy of attention is definitely my vote on DDD. This is the most beneficial vote of the three for scum by far, and merits attention; I suggest you look at the post and other posts I had made on DDD, and decide whether or not you think I justified it sufficiently.HowardRoark wrote:I can go with Fishythefish starting the freeko BW, hopping off to get the Debonair Danny DePietro wagon going, and then hopping back onto the middle of the freeko wagon to ride it out through the end of the day as freeko dug his hole deeper.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
----Nuwen wrote:...don't let me forget to respond to your point about the paired wagons...
It is interesting that jere, dtf and I overlap on 3 wagons. However, I really don't follow the logic which suggests that these players are more likely scum than others, except that we were on the DDD wagon at its critical phase. As I've said, without much response, the late period of day 1 was one where scum just had to vote for the scummier of DDD and freeko, and so I feel there is little to be got from vote analysis here. L-k's play this morning was (apparently deliberately) extremely odd, and it is unsurprising he got a mini wagon.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
(obvious correction made)Light-kun wrote:
It is because both were town that this is useful and implicates you. You seem to say here that you are not scum as both were town. But if you were town, would you have not presented a new case or tried to expand your thoughts. As vig, I knew I could kill two birds instead of one. So, my suspect (or someone like DDD who threw me for a loop) could easily be eliminated. You don't have this power and still seem to be subtly looking for the more scummy since, if scum, you would know who is/isn't a townie.Fishythefish wrote:
Why do you think I am scum based on this swap, given that both wagons were on townies?Light-kun wrote:If Fishy was on the Danny wagon at L-3 and then swapped to Freeko, I think that fishy is scum.
1) Minor point- you seem to be saying I think my switch a towntell. I am not arguing this, I am arguing it is null (as a vote alone- case analysis is a different matter).
2) I don’t quite understand. You are saying I should have tried to present a new case or expand my thoughts. At that time, we had two players who were by far and away scummier than all the others. I made my thoughts on these players clear. Your last sentence I don’t understand. If you are saying that I was subtly looking for the scummier of DDD and freeko, you are right except for the word subtly. I wanted to lynch the scummier of the two scummiest players, as they were the most likely to be scum. This is pretty much the point I’ve been making for a while now- scum and town alike would vote for the scummier of DDD and freeko from the middle of day 1 (assuming town thought one or other of them were scummy).
1. I don’t understand where you are coming from on this one. I am denying Nuwen’s logic, I don’t think his conclusion that the people who switched later are likely to be scum is valid.L-k wrote:
1. Why are you not denying it and just agreeing with it as a possibility?Fishythefish wrote:
Well, if you think I disagree with the analysis simply because it fingers me (as well as two other players) as more likely scum, then that is scummy. In fact, I just don't see Nuwen's logic for thinking that the late switchers are more likely scum. My other disagreement was over point 3), which I think is factually wrong.L-k wrote:And while Nuwen has made errors, Fishy seems unconfortable with the analysis, as though he fears the possible conclusion of Fishy=scum. Sure, town would too, but I might just be reading too much into it.
2. Well, arbitrarily (and based somewhere from experience), people tend to think that certain parts of a wagon are more likely to be scum based on the person's play style, manner of the switch of vote, etc.
3. I forget what you're claiming is factually wrong. May look at this later.
2. I certainly agree that judging scum based on play style and manner of switch is valid- on the other hand, if you are saying that certain parts of wagons always contain more scum, I disagree. You have to look at the circumstances of the wagon- and in the case where there are two realistic lynches, both townies, I don’t think late voters look any worse than early ones.
3. Not very important.
You misunderstand- you also assume the SK knows the mafia. Unimportant.L-k wrote: Not really. Serial killer should always rationalize that killing the mafia is better because he cannot win if mafia lives. Mafia should think the same thing. As a result, Prisoner's dilemma is a theoretical town win. (This assumes mafia cannot no kill and sk doesn't have a vest.)
Covering both these points- I feel that before I joined freeko’s wagon, freeko’s aggressive attacks on DDD made it highly likely that one of the two would be lynched. No other player was close to them in scumminess. No, noone said this yesterday. Why not make a case on someone else? Well of course I was looking at other players, and thinking about the possibility that neither of the main suspects might be scum. But there was no-one approaching these two in scumminess.L-k wrote:
This is where you joined....which you exclude. Okay, go on.Fishythefish wrote:I think that DDD's wagon is more interesting than freeko's. By the time freeko's got rolling in any serious way,
Maybe for fear of being called out on it but did anyone actually claim this? Why not make a case on someone else?Fishythefish wrote: it was clear that he or DDD would be lynched,
Yes. If the scum weren’t on these wagons to start with, it was easy for them to join. Alternatively, if townies weren’t on these wagons to start with, it was the right thing to do to join when they thought freeko/DDD was scummy. This comes back, again, to the point that late on day 1 the sensible courses of actions for both townies and scum were the same- since the scum's sole concern was to vote like a townie, vote analysis becomes pretty useless.L-k wrote:
Which would then include the later of Freeko's (or DDD's) wagon.Fishythefish wrote: and scum have an easy time sitting back and voting for the scummier of the two.
Agreed that serious case analysis needs to be done. I will do this, when I have more time (this will happen, it could be a few more days though). However, I think this is slightly oddly targeted- in day 2, there has been practically zero case analysis, and a lot of vote analysis, in which I have been disagreeing with other players. It seems odd to accuse me of being “mildly amiable” and attacking me for not doing something that noone in the town has done. As for stating opinion, Nuwen has in affect labelled three players as scummier than the others. I disagree. This seems pretty important, and so I'm arguing my side.L-k wrote:
Particularly with the Freeko wagon, why are you not making a case? You're just stating opinion while being mildly amiable to everyone. Nuwen isn't in this game to do all the work you know.Fishythefish wrote:If there is scum impetus behind a wagon, it is most likely either right at the beginning of freeko's or at any point on DDD's wagon.
I have explained my position on this multiple times, before you made your post and in this post. "Proof"? I am pointing out what I perceive to be a flaw in Nuwen's reasoning. Proof does not come into it. You are attacking me in an absurd way, isolating statements which do not stand alone, and ignoring my explanations and arguments.L-k wrote:
So, you're either saying townie would be just as scummy in hopping or scum would be just as innocent in hopping. Meh.... I see specious reasoning here. Where's the proof? The back up? *Ding* IRONY! (Is referring to self, shut up.)Fishythefish wrote: After this of course scum may have joined/moved wagons, but probably not in a way which is different from a townie.
I was trying to express my opinion that vote analysis is most useful in conjunction with case analysis. There had been no case analysis done yet and I felt the vote analysis that had been done to be lacking.L-k wrote: You are telling me this for what purpose?
That’s really helpful. I disagree- can you point out where you don’t agree with me and why, wherever you haven’t already covered that point?L-k wrote: This entire reason reads as bullshit.
@ Howard; my main point about my first vote for freeko is that, if you read it only in the context of what had happened when I made it (rather than all that followed it), it no more looks like an attempt to bandwagon than any other first vote for a player.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I agree that so far today I have "been lazy", if by that you mean I haven't provided a good case against anyone. Yesterday I was not- but noone was even close to being scummier than the person I was voting for, or had enough against them to make a case worthwhile.
I agree when I vote on the DDD wagon is passive, but I think the posts I had made on him were good enough justification. On freeko- while the 4th vote here is passive than the others, as scum I would have no particular reason for making that vote. So yes this is passive, but here it's not scummy.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
That isn't what I'm saying. I'm saying that the reason I would have for voting freeko as scum would only apply if I thought he was the scummiest player. I'm certainly not claiming my vote is a towntell, and so wifom doesn't come into it.JereIC wrote:Fishy, in 433 you say you wouldn't have had reason to vote for Freeko if you scum. First off, wifom, no? Secondly, wouldn't the reason be lynching a townie? Not everything has to be part of an intricate strategy.
As for the reason being lynching a townie; when I voted for freeko, I changed the vote situation from 4 for DDD, 3 for freeko to the other way around. This doesn't get the scum any closer to a lynch on a townie, unless I think that freeko is going to be easier to lynch than DDD; ie. that freeko is scummier than DDD. So yes, as scum I would have had a reason for switching, but only if I genuinely thought freeko was scummier than DDD. In other words, my switch is not useful for telling my alignment.
I have returned from the land of limited access. I'll now be posting more often and providing some actual analysis.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
On DraketheFake:
He is very involved in the random vote stage. He makes a joke vote against ZEEnon, who doesn’t get the joke, and DtF carries on pressing. This is all well and good except this:
Now, normally this could be dismissed completely as part of Drake’s joke/random vote. However, 4 votes is quite a lot at this stage in the game. ZEEnon clearly thought the votes on him were real votes. I think the risk of ZEEnon actually claiming was small, but it was big enough to make Drake’s post unwise for a townie. There’s a possibility that he was scum taking a long shot on getting a claim, and able to easily disown his post as a joke if that happened.DtF 62 wrote:There's 4 votes, Mr. non (5 if we're using Fishy's math). A claim seems prescient. Maybe even cogent.
Funny thing to bother saying- DtF points out a possible slip, but doesn’t call this slip scummy. This paragraph seems simply to be vessel for the claim of town.DtF 97 wrote:Seems like a slip, because for all intents and purposes I was under the impression that the Mafia would also be penguins. You seem to imply knowledge that they aren't penguins, which would be unfortunate for you, but I think I may have started it by calling everybody "gentlepenguins" so I'll let it go for now.
DtF also votes DDD in this post- I think his reasoning here is just fine. He continues to attack DDD for a long time- when he mentions other players, it is generally to counter their points.
I do not like the manner of DtF’s switch to freeko. Commenting on my vote here:
It isn’t clear what makes DtF change his mind about this. He unvotes in the same post, and here his read is that freeko could well be simply a tunnelled townie. His next post, 283 is the only one in which we get any clue about how this read changes. He starts by saying freeko is not player he enjoys playing with. His second point could equally have been made in 276- nothing has changed. The third similarly- freeko had been offering “glittering generalities” for a long time. Nothing has really changed since he read freeko as equally likely a tunnelled townie or scum. Less still changes before DtF finally votes freeko:DraketheFake 276 wrote:
Ugh. This this this.Fishythefish wrote:You are actively harming your case against DDD.You read like a scum desperately trying to get a townie lynched, or a hopelessly tunnelled townie.
But I don't know that I agree with your vote. It seems that both instances are equally likely, and freeko is the sort of hypothetical townie that a scum being wagoned love to have pop up. Which isn't a strike against DDD, obviously, but these sorts of interactions are rarely good for the town unless he really is just a scum playing in a bizarre fashion.
DtF’s first point does nothing to clarify why he no longer thinks freeko is the scum’s dream townie. He doesn’t explain what he dislikes about the second, which I had read as a sarcastic “you never believe that anything I do is rational” from freeko.DraketheFake wrote:
How much fun is it going to be for you to read the equivalent of 7 other players collectively shrugging their shoulders and pointing to how abrasive and useless you've been all day?freeko wrote:No, instead I am perfectly fine with being lynched. Its going to make for a fun D2 with everyone having to explain themselves as to why they voted for me
freeko wrote:Nothing I do is ever rational.Vote: freeko. L-1, etc.
My read on this period is a contrived change of position from DtF.
vote: DraketheFake-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
By the way, a question to any experienced players: in a normal game, how common is it for a serial killer to be able to no kill? This is obviously relevant to testing L-k's claim.
Incidentally, on reflection I no longer support letting L-k choose his own kill. The benefits are marginal, and if L-k is the SK, his interests may not align with ours, particularly over the matter of whether or not he should be shooting at all.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Yes, I am saying that the optimal play for both scum and town was to vote for the scummier player, which is what I did.Light-kun wrote:So... you're saying optimal play for scum is to do exactly as you did. You're vote clearly says you thought he was scummier, but you spend your post avoiding saying to that affect. Intentional or not, my conclusion is your trying to downplay or neglect the fact you thought Freeko was scummier (thus easier to lynch maybe?) because you do not want to appear scummy. This worry makes you look scummy.
I hardly thought it was neccessary to state that as town I voted for the scummier player- that is just what townies do. The whole point of my argument has been that all you can draw from the vote analysis is that I thought freeko was scummier than DDD- I am hardly trying to downplay this.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I'll have another look over that.DraketheFake wrote: You're going to have problems making the second half of that statement stick.
You misunderstand. Your reason for unvoting DDD is explained; however at this point you think it just as likely freeko is tunnelled townie as scum. You don't explain properly how your position changes from this to freeko being scum.DtF wrote:Um... yes it is? I bolded the section of the post that made me unvote DDD, and you quoted it: I agreed with your sentiment that he was harming his case against DDD, and then I wrote "this this this." I like how you try and allude to the fact that my 283 only sort of eplxains my position - which I think it does pretty well - and then only link to it.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Note that my reasoning does apply less to you than me; it is less clear that when you switched, the DDD wagon was still a real possibility. However, I'm not saying you are scummy simply because you switched, but because you made a vote without proper justification.DraketheFake wrote: Hmm. I like how this applies to you but doesn't to me.
Vote: Fishythefish
Why the vote? (I'm guessing you didn't think much of my case against you . Other factors?)-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
My entire voting pattern was being talked about when I made this post. That is why I gave my thoughts on the vote analysis of all of my votes.DraketheFake wrote:
This is such a suspect sentiment. Refusing to admit that adding a fourth vote onto a player pushes the second wagon to the forefront is short-sighted at best, and then to say "I can't be suspicious for this vote, but you should check out my other suspicious vote" is both a decoy and just odd.Fishythefish, Post 414 wrote:I can't really be accused of getting the freeko bandwagon going. My vote was for different reasons to all the other votes on him, including my later vote, and is pretty much unrelated to the bandwagon on him. I think you are clouded by hindsight; at the time, freeko was under no kind of pressure, and this is no more an attempt to bandwagon than any other first vote on a player. As I've expressed above, can't see a reason to think that hops from DDD to freeko are particularly scummy votes. The part of my voting pattern most worthy of attention is definitely my vote on DDD. This is the most beneficial vote of the three for scum by far, and merits attention; I suggest you look at the post and other posts I had made on DDD, and decide whether or not you think I justified it sufficiently.
Of course my vote pushed the second wagon to the forefront. But since the scum didn't care which wagon won, this is not that beneficial for them- unless you think DDD's wagon was already doomed when I switched.
Meh. My position here started as "I don't think that the voting analysis is very strong here, because the paired wagons were both townies and the mafia didn't care which lynch happened. I think without case analysis, conclusions on how likely those three players are to be scum are unconvincing". If you read the many posts I've made on this, that is all I've ever really said, and I don't think this position is absurd or scummy.
However, I take the point (made implicitly in various places) that DDD's wagon did become unviable at some point- arguably quite early on- and I didn't take this enough into account. This does invalidate my analysis to some extent, and my position that these votes were neutral is too extreme. Vote analysis does suggest that late voters on freeko are more likely to be scum, as are early voters on DDD (which I never denied). I still think this is lessened by the fact that both the wagons were on townies. I am amazed that Jere seems to think the vote analysis is strong enough that anyone would think it sensible to kill all three of us without further ado, and I think the main reason noone has suggested that is it's a horribly anti-town idea.
I am currently pretty unclear about what the case against me actually is. Jazz, could you explain the points against me you find compelling please?Jazzmyn wrote:I find the case against Fishy more compelling than the case against Drake, although I get a scum-vibe from both of them.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
I had read your stick wit fishy as "stick wit fishy for the lynch, his posts are too big", and presumed it was a joke.Looker wrote:Lol. Those don't say anything about me hating humungous posts. If you read the first one again, you'll see that I'm advocating fishy's huge posts, as to say "stick wit fishy, he knows what he's talking about". And the following posts are me trying to figure out if I'm ever going to have to do that because I suck at them.
Anyway, proper post coming later tonight.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
- Drake hasn't responded to my case since I clarified it- Drake, I think that between your unvote of DDD and your vote on freeko, it is completely unclear why you changed your mind. His withdrawal (to some extent) of suspicions on me could be genuine, or could be an attempt to make me less suspicious of him. I lean towards the latter because of his extremely easy switch to a lurker- it smells like he wants to change his vote, and has looked for the easiest way out. I'm still happy with my vote.
- Netlava thinks L-k is likely SK/scum now, whereas before likely SK. If you think there is more than a very outside chance of L-k being scum, you should say why, because that is a very different thing from him being SK, and it is scummy that you are happy with not lynching him. If I thought L-k was probable SK with a non-negligible chance of mafia, I'd be pressing hard for a lynch.
Netlava's case on Jere boils down to some pretty minor uses of emotional language. I'm not at all convinced by it.
-Nuwen, Howard, Jazzmyn and Looker need to post on recent developments, or just anything in some cases.
- JereIC brings up what I feel is an insane plan, and expresses surprise that it has not being suggested by anyone else. Well, the big question is why, even if he is surprised? He doesn't want the plan to happen. I doubt he is calling everyone in the town scummy for not suggesting it. I can see only one reason; he wants to say "Well, I don't want to be lynched. But if it's for the good of the town, fair enough", while not actually thinking the plan is likely to be carried out. Jere; what good did you think it would do to bring up this plan?-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
There is not even close to enough evidence to conclude that at least two of we three are scum. The town cannot afford three deaths for one scum; if we are up against three scum this is a loss. I don't recall that post of Nuwen's?JereIC wrote:Fishy - why is the kill-em-all plan insane? I'm still open to the possibility that there is a major flaw with it, obvious to everyone else, but I've yet to see anyone spell that out. And I don't remember you responding this way when Nuwen was talking about killing claimed townies a few pages ago.
Note that my questioning of your motives is independent of how good the plan is to a neutral townie. Since you are not advocating it, there was no good reason for you to bring it up.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Of your posts which you quote:
276. Is the unvote post.
283. Of the points in it, the first is saying you don’t like playing with freeko. The second and third points point out the nonsense that is freeko’s argument. There is no explanation of why this nonsense is a scummy nonsense rather than a tunnelled nonsense. Your fourth point points out a minor and seemingly irrelevant mistake in freeko’s post. You again refer to the possibility of freeko being town, and don’t say what has made this seem less likely.
289. You attack freeko’s style, but say nothing to actually suggest he’s scummy.
303. Yes, here you mention you would be happy to kill him, but at the same time you undermine yourself- you wording is very ambiguous as to whether or not this is partly or completely a policy lynch.
I take your point that the “nothing I ever do is rational” can be taken seriously.
309. I have to say I don’t understand this post. You seem to be saying that as scum freeko wouldn’t act as he was in fact acting?
My point still stands; yes, you criticised freeko in this period. No, you did not explain why your position changed from “tunnelled or scum, indistinguishably” to “scum”.
Light-kun, you need to acknowledge that if the town wants to tell you what to do, you will follow.
Howard; do you think lurkers are more often scum than other players?
I'm going to be away over Easter weekend; little/no access until Tuesday.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
"still"- was he ever in agreement?Jazz wrote: First, however, I would like LK to confirm that he is still in agreement with taking direction from the town as to his night action, including whether or not to take any such action.
If L-k will not confirm this, in my mind he is automatically today's lynch.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Last post before I leave.
1. Do you really believe a SK would go against the town's orders? The main reason I changed my mind was because I think there's a fair chance that, if L-k is SK, he won't be able to follow our orders to no kill.Jazzmyn wrote:for being so quick to accept Light_Kun's Vig claim and for being so against the idea of having the town direct LK's night kill or no-kill, purporting to prefer to let him choose independently, despite the fact that we need to test Light-Kun's claim since he could just as easily be a SK as a Vig. (And then a couple of weeks later Fishy posted, apropos of nothing and only after the hot light of suspicion had been directed to himself, that 'incidentally', he is no longer in favour of letting LK choose his own kill. That looks to me like Fishy realizing that he needed to backtrack in order to attempt to look more like a townie.)
2. OK, you may think my position was totally wrong, I'm not too bothered about that. But how could a loose cannon of a vig/SK benefit the scum? If I was scum, I'd sure as hell want to know whether he was a vig or a SK. Also, I'd just love him to get lynched. Knowing his target couldn't hurt either.
3. Related to 2, there had been no suggestion that I was scum for my position, though many disagreed with it, apart from a very minor point from Howard. Why would I feel the need to backtrack?
Do you think my voting pattern is more scummy than the other two players?-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
You say that directing L-k's kills tests his claim. This is only true if L-k the SK can be distinguished from L-k the vig by directing his kills. The relevance is that if directing L-k's kills is not helpful in this regard, it is less important.Jazzmyn wrote:
Where do you get from my posts that I think that?Fishythefish wrote:Do you really believe a SK would go against the town's orders?
Jazz wrote:
Is there some reason why you didn't post your rationale at the time?Fishythefish wrote:The main reason I changed my mind was because I think there's a fair chance that, if L-k is SK, he won't be able to follow our orders to no kill.
My rationale is all but explicitly stated by the post in question. I wonder whether L-k would be able to no kill as the SK, and then say that I have changed my mind because L-k's motives might differ from ours over whether to shoot.Fishythefish wrote:By the way, a question to any experienced players: in a normal game, how common is it for a serial killer to be able to no kill? This is obviously relevant to testing L-k's claim.
Incidentally, on reflection I no longer support letting L-k choose his own kill. The benefits are marginal, and if L-k is the SK, his interests may not align with ours, particularly over the matter of whether or not he should be shooting at all.
My point is that if there is no reason for scum to take the position I took, it is not a scummy position. Weird =\= scummy.Jazz wrote:
I don’t imagine it would, any more than a loose cannon LK here will benefit the town. I’m afraid I don’t understand your point or why you’re asking me the question.Fishythefish wrote:OK, you may think my position was totally wrong, I'm not too bothered about that. But how could a loose cannon of a vig/SK benefit the scum?
You are correct about the suggestions that my position was scummy, certainly in the case of Nuwen's post. However, the matter had not been mentioned in a few pages, and the pressure on me about this matter was minimal.Jazz wrote:I think it’s more accurate to say thateveryonewho was active in the game at the time disagreed with your position, and I seem to recall that there was also some suggestion that your position was scummy. In addition to Howard’s post to which you refer, Nuwen FoS’ed you for it in her post 392 and Drake’s 399 sounds pretty accusatory as well.
Why?Jazz wrote:
Yes.Fishythefish wrote:Do you think my voting pattern is more scummy than the other two players?
---
This is a horrible post. I am “becoming more scummy by default”? What does this even mean? My defence of what hasn’t been good? It is very unclear why you find me scummy. I don’t think that the claim that I haven’t explained why I changed my mind is a reasonable one, as discussed above. All in all, it looks like you want to say that you are suspicious of me without providing any actual reasons.JereIC wrote:LK - I think Fishy is becoming more scummy by default. He hasn't said anything to hang himself, but his defense hasn't been good, and he had done a poor job explaining why he changed his mind from being against ordering your kills to being for it. I want to see how he responds to Nuwen's post that I pointed out before deciding whether or not to vote for him. On a related note, I think DtF is acting oddly. Sometimes he's saying that the three of us are townies caught up in a flawed voting pattern analysis, other times he seems to be building cases against me and Fishy.
Re: the plan I talked about - the reason I brought it up is I anticipated somebody suggesting it, and was actually putting a bit of effort into coming up with counter arguments. When no one did, I really was surprised and confused.
Being surprised and confused about no-one bringing up this plan does not explain why you brought it up.
---
I think that L-k should not kill tonight, regardless of the alignment of the lynchee- firstly because another kill would not be very beneficial to the town (kills are not very helpful when there are an even number of people in the game), and secondly because this helps us find out whether he is a vig or a SK.
---
Given that many players in the game will be penguins, and there are only so many species of penguin, I think it would be (slightly) beneficial for the town if claims consisted of species as well as role. There would be a possibility of species counterclaim, since it seems fair to assume that each role has a unique species. The benefit is small, but I can see no disadvantage.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
Indeed. A good part of my reason for wanting species claim was to see whether or not L-k claimed human (or at least something which can hold a gun), which seems his likely species. I now believe L-k is a serial killer.
Whether this makes him the automatic lynch or not is different.
Some maths assuming 3 mafia, random lynches, random kills, no double kills, no prs:
Lynch L-k leaves us 4-3. Probability of winning 5.71% (=3/7*2/5*1/3 to kill scum each day).
If we don't lynch L-k:
35.7% chance of an instant loss with three townie kills by tomorrow.
53.6% chance of two townie and one scum kill by tomorrow. Here, the situation would be 3-1-2. Lynching L-k would be a loss. From here:
- 60% chance we lynch/shoot one scum and one townie. This leaves 1-1-1 or 2-0-1 depending on the scum's choice of kill. Presumably they go for the latter, giving us a 33% chance of a win. 1-1-1 is a 50% win for the scum, rather than a 67% win.
- 30% chance we lynch/shoot two townies, for a loss.
- 10% chance we kill two scum and win.
10.7% chance we kill two scum by tomorrow, leaving the situation at 4-1-1. Here, if we don't lynch L-k (which is much the better option):
- 60% chance we lynch/shoot two townies and end 2-0-1 with 33%.
- 40% chance we lynch/shoot the scum and win.
Therefore overall odds of winning are:
(0.536*0.6*0.33+0.536*0.1+0.107*0.6*0.33+0.107*0.4) = 22.5%, which is a huge improvement.
According to these calculations, lynching L-k willneverbe right until the scum are gone, which is rather surprising. Perhaps my maths is wrong?
It is possible we have some serious PRs who are going to start finding scum soon. This seriously improves our odds if we lynch L-k, and has less effect on the other scenario. However, if my maths is right I think that the improvement from not lynching L-k in the random scenario is sufficient to justify leaving him alive.-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England
-
-
Fishythefish Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: November 2, 2008
- Location: England