Micro 887: the coaLITion [game over]

[Hectic]

So where I’m at is I read Gamma not voting as non-survivalistic but by not voting, even if you and me were to vote LUV, that would still lead to a no lynch, so do we wait for that or should I just hammer Gamma?

let's wait to see LUV respond to accusations even if we're set on Gamma, might be useful to see what he has to say
also. hopefully Espresso returns tomorrow

[EspressoPatronum]

@Spangled my progression and reasons for LUV

Spoiler:

@EP
What’s your take on LUV, post-NC 39’s observation about how consensus seems to be that LUV is scum?

NC raises an interesting point, but I'm not comfortable enough with it to put LUV in my coalition.

First, I want active people in my coalition so I have a better chance at correctly sorting them. Putting LUV in because of inactivity and everyone else's behaviour seems backwards.

Second, all of my previous thoughts on LUV still apply. If we consider LUV's universal scum read ("USR") as a town factor in reading him, I'm still left with:

VOTE: EspressoPatronum

LUV, for

two

three

four reasons:
1. The lurking
2. I didn't like his early posts
3. I don't like his recent posts
4. I don't like the OMGUS vote

To expand:

1. My experience thus far has scum lurks surprisingly often. I even advocate for lurker policy lynches in most of my games bcz of how often I've seen scum skate by under the radar by lurking.

2. He wasn't helpful early. Telling us to ignore the mechanics of the game was anti-town. His early RC tr looks like he was trying to avoid attention. Alchemist gave a meta reason for his read, but I recall LUV leaving the TR without any reasons.

3. I disagreed with most of his catch-up posts. I also think that anyone touting a 'low activity' meta for town is doing a disservice to everyone else playing.

4. He again provided no reasons for what he was doing. I'm not even sure if OMGUS is scum indicative, but it's not a good look either way.

And NOW we have a problem.

3 people outside of the Coalition voting for it is a red flag.

HURT: Gamma

HEAL: Alchemist21

Who’s the 3rd?

Spangled

Spangled has GREAT in his. It isn't the same.

m

Oh, whoops. Thought he had completely aligned his with the others.

That makes me feel a bit better about compromising again.

Compromise is the only way I see this coalition getting passed. Everyone is too paranoid and it's making things chaotic.

I don't feel great about LUV in the coalition and I don't know about Gamma, but I'm keeping them in to get the coalition passed.

I also agree that Gamma is more town out of LUV and Gamma.

VOTE: LUV

Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)

The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote.

@Gg, Hectic? thoughts on this?

so Espresso here didn't want LUV in the coalition badly, but then used that same logic to say NC and LUV could be a thing because NC didn't want LUV in the coalition too?
is that what you're getting at?

Actually, I didn’t even think of that but on rereading this, I see your point. Why was he linking me and LUV, when he was doing the exact same thing?

I explained this at length several pages ago. We eventually stopped talking about it because we were too deep down the rabbithole of misinterpretation.

I'll bring it up again if you want, but remember that you asked me to.

[EspressoPatronum]

true, would like to hear some expansion from Espresso on that association actually, seems kinda hypocritical and loosely based
[..]

Sigh.

I'll link you to the relevant posts in my ISO. Let me know if you want me to go through it again in current time.

[EspressoPatronum]

I'm fine with a Gamma or LUV lynch btw. I can't see myself voting NC any time soon, so it's realistically one of those two.

[EspressoPatronum]

@all see spoilers below for my progression and case on the possibility of a LUV-NC connection.

In short, it came about because NC wanted to remove LUV almost immediately after I established that lynching within the coalition was in our best interest. NC and I then had a long discussion about NC's understanding of the coalition mechanics.

Spoiler: you asked for this

NC, did you read 665?

We CAN'T lynch until we pass a coalition or the deadline hits. I'm assuming we'll pull ourselves together enough to beat the deadline, so that leave us with this order of operations:

SCENARIO 1
A. We pass a coalition
B. We succeed
C. Game over

SCENARIO 2
A. We pass a coalition
B. It fails
C. We lynch
D. Game continues

Lynching outside of the coalition in the event of Scenario B makes no sense, as we have confirmed

at least

one scum in that group. We shouldn't risk voting outside of the coalition in the unlikely but possible event of both scum being in the coalition.

And NOW we have a problem.

3 people outside of the Coalition voting for it is a red flag.

HURT: Gamma

HEAL: Alchemist21

Who’s the 3rd?

Spangled

Spangled has GREAT in his. It isn't the same.

Okay, that’s a relief then. I think this is probably a winning coalition then. And you were the only one outside the coalition voting it, so I think it plus you is probably alltown. If we do add you, I would probably sub out LUV over Gamma, since I’m liking his recent posting.

This unfortunately comes after me establishing that we should vote within the coalition.

While I still believe you're town, I think I'd rather keep it {RCMA, LUV, Gamma, Espresso, NC} in the event that scum!NC tries to get 2 scum out of the coalition.

I'm going to start our pairings discussion. It's not super important to complete it until after we figure out the lynch, but I want it out there to get people thinking about it.

It's woefully incomplete rn, but it's a first step.

Possible Pairings

Gamma-Hectic

- I don't recall either of them having each other in the coalitions. Hectic's might have had Gamma for a while, but I think it was brief.

Gamma-Spangled

- pretty sure Spangled started pushing Gamma into the coalition after we removed Spangled. Spangled's vote on Gamma could be a scum gambit.

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

There are a few others, but I can't remember them off the top of my head. Imo, it's a red flag if someone in the core coalition (me, RCMA, NC, Hectic for most of the day, and Spangled for a little while) vetoed anyone else bcz a scum in the coalition would want to avoid having another scum in the coalition.

Unlikely Pairings:
(In progress, but it's pretty much all of the in-coalition pairs)

Impossible pairings

(>=50% chance of 1 or more being town)
Alchemist-Hectic
Alchemist-GREAT
Alchemist-Spangled
Hectic-GREAT
Hectic-Spangled
Spangled-GREAT

And NOW we have a problem.

3 people outside of the Coalition voting for it is a red flag.

HURT: Gamma

HEAL: Alchemist21

Who’s the 3rd?

Spangled

Spangled has GREAT in his. It isn't the same.

Okay, that’s a relief then. I think this is probably a winning coalition then. And you were the only one outside the coalition voting it, so I think it plus you is probably alltown. If we do add you, I would probably sub out LUV over Gamma, since I’m liking his recent posting.

This unfortunately comes after me establishing that we should vote within the coalition.

While I still believe you're town, I think I'd rather keep it {RCMA, LUV, Gamma, Espresso, NC} in the event that scum!NC tries to get 2 scum out of the coalition.

@NC

Yeah, I worded that poorly.

I was trying to say scum!NC wouldn't want 2 scum in the coalition and with want to take one out.

i'll be honest, i don't really have much clue what's going on this game

but Espresso, why is it favourable for scum!NC to get 2 scum in the coaliton, don't scum want exactly one in there since we're inclined to lynch from the coalition since we now know there's at least 1 scum in there?

That's exactly what I'm saying. Scum don't want 2 in.

If scum!NC and scum!LUV, NC would want to remove LUV in favour of someone else.

1-1 is the best outcome for scum.

I'm going to start our pairings discussion. It's not super important to complete it until after we figure out the lynch, but I want it out there to get people thinking about it.

It's woefully incomplete rn, but it's a first step.

Possible Pairings

Gamma-Hectic

- I don't recall either of them having each other in the coalitions. Hectic's might have had Gamma for a while, but I think it was brief.

Gamma-Spangled

- pretty sure Spangled started pushing Gamma into the coalition after we removed Spangled. Spangled's vote on Gamma could be a scum gambit.

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

There are a few others, but I can't remember them off the top of my head. Imo, it's a red flag if someone in the core coalition (me, RCMA, NC, Hectic for most of the day, and Spangled for a little while) vetoed anyone else bcz a scum in the coalition would want to avoid having another scum in the coalition.

Unlikely Pairings:
(In progress, but it's pretty much all of the in-coalition pairs)

Impossible pairings

(>=50% chance of 1 or more being town)
Alchemist-Hectic
Alchemist-GREAT
Alchemist-Spangled
Hectic-GREAT
Hectic-Spangled
Spangled-GREAT

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition

, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

I think you’ve completely misunderstood what I did and didn’t understand about the mechanics of this game. As I have already explained, the ONLY thing I was confused about, was the

timing

of the finalizing of the lynch part of it.

I played this game before as well as GS, so I totally do understand how coalitions work but we won D1 (or so I thought) in Skitter’s game, so the lynch part of that, never came into play and in GS, we voted coalitions and lynches on SEPARATE days, not

simultaneously

.

So, what I had understood, was that any lynch would obviously be voided in case of coalition pass but I thought, we had to have decided on it, BEFORE we knew the outcome of the coalition and then we were suddenly expected to rush the vote, before we had any real info to process - coalition result . Thank God, Sky granted us an extension.

I hope you are now clear on this?

Thank you for the clarification. This is the post I was referring to btw:

Assuming we pass a coalition and it fails, nobody should be voting to lynch outside of the 5 coalition members.

Why not? IF coalition fails - unless you think there’s two scum in it - unlikely. So, for today and today only, IF we lynch, it makes the most sense to lynch amongst the two scummiest players NOT in coalition. It was definitely GREAT for me, until Hectic decided to sub himself for Gamma pretty much immediately after voting the coalition.

I see how the timing misunderstanding coloured your interpretation of who we should be voting for. While that's good to kniw, I'm not sure if it changes my pairings observation.

Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely.

Maybe you are the one who isn’t fully understanding the mechanics in this game?

Honestly, maybe you're right. I feel like what I'm saying isn't very contentious, but it evidently is. Hopefully I can work this out in this reply to you.

If that doesn't work and I'm still misunderstanding your posts, can you help me out by stating, as succinctly as possible, comments the following:
- what is the purpose of EP's pairings post?
- where, specifically, is the point of contention between NC and EP?

So which is it @Espresso? Before coalition result, you link LUV/Me because scum!me wouldn’t want 2 scum in the coalition and afterwards, you do a complete 180 on this and say, scum!me would want that?

Ok let's take you and me out of the equation here. I'm going to use A, B, C instead. If I unfairly impose an assumption on A/B/C, don't apply it to you. I'm just working within this micro example here:
1. A and B are partners.
2. A thinks that voting outside of the coalition is town's likely avenue.
3. A therefore wants B in the coalition

4. C says something that disproves what A thought at step 2.
5. A now thinks that town's likely avenue is to vote within the coalition
6. A therefore wants B out of the coalition now.

In this example, A's sudden want to remove B from the coalition is suggests to C that A and B may be paired together.

Bringing it back to the case at hand, your recent posts have demonstrated that the actual events are far more nuanced than my example.

Assuming for a moment that the statements in the example are all true (which you have demonstrated they aren't, but work with me here), and that A=you, B=LUV, and C=EP, does it seem reasonable for me to conclude that you and LUV may be connected?

I don’t understand why you keep maintaining I don’t understand coalition mechanics? I’ve now played 2 games with that particular mechanic? Why would you think I’d expect a lynch to happen at all in the event of coalition fail,

considering I believed we had to decide this before it passed with no clear majority

?

I was perhaps being too general here + we may be talking past each other.

I don't think you don't understand all of the coalition mechanics. The specific mechanic I was referring to was setting up a vote before the coalition and why we should do that.

You understood it a different way because you've played games in this mode before. Totally understandable. I wasn't trying to attack your competency... my point of highlighting the misunderstanding was me jumping to the conclusion j of the ABC example (above) without explaining the specifics.

There is 0 evidence to suggest anything other than a no lynch would happen in case of coalition fail. [...]

On my reading, I assumed we would go right into the lynching phase of D1. Given our limited amount of time, I tried to complete the coalition and get ready for lynching. My posts in my ISO will support this.

[Gamma Emerald]

Yeah Gamma not doing anything makes me confident in this vote

Sorry I've kinda been resting

Really

not a fan of what you're doing rn on a personal level

[Gamma Emerald]

I think I want to do this

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

Let’s do it.

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

Um hi
What's going on, kinda out of the loop

hmmmmmmmmmm, the timestamps here kinda suggest to me that Gamma is actively lurking
like he didn't post anything before but then posts a few minutes after the two votes on him?
sorry if it's any way related to your situation though

Well I was doing other stuff on site
But like it was other look like what you saw or actually lurk it out which I wasn't gonna do

[Gamma Emerald]

yeah, this game is hard
who was RCMA scumreading again other than Alchemist?

He scumread me with Alch lol

[Gamma Emerald]

VOTE: LUV
Kinda should have done this sooner but I feel like I've been rather transient this D2.
(Also am conscious about explaining another vote but it's more explaining personal condition)

[Spangled]

I'm cool with a Gamma lynch; their nonchalance and weird tone is ultimately NAI, and if those are gone my (much earlier) point about their sheepiness and weird changing of reads stands. I do want to know from everybody, though, especially Gamma and LUV - what scumteams do you think can there be, at this point, making no foolish assumptions about 1-in-1-out or not?

Well this is what is making this so hard. If LUV was hellbent on Espresso scum, why suddenly jump on Gamma once Gg started a wagon on him?

Yeah...
I mean, was he hellbent on scum!EP though?
Also, do you prefer LUV or Gamma?

[Spangled]

I want to hammer pretty soon; I won’t be online leading up to the deadline. I could vote LUV though. So Gamma — convince me you’re town, case LUV, etc. I see you online; please, go!

[Gamma Emerald]

Uhhh I really don't know half of why I'm being voted so what do you want from me

[Spangled]

Well, if you think LUV is scum, why is he? Gobble reckons in 1227 that some of LUV’s posts are towntells. What do you think of that?
What in LUV’s actions (or lack thereof) is scummy?
If LUV is scum, who’s his partner? Why?
Case him for me; get him if you’re town and want a town win.

[Gamma Emerald]

I feel like his early D1 was kinda slinking about and I also felt his approach to the coalition was a scum one. Don't really know much of what he's done recently. If gobs wants to come in and explain that read he's welcome to go ahead
If LUV is scum I kinda think gobs is a decent partner pick because rn I do kinda suss his lack of logic

[Spangled]

What did you think of Gob’s entrance?
Why isn’t LUV town?

[Spangled]

Come on; help me!
What are your reads right now, and why?
If we lynch LUV and he flips green, who’s scum?

[gobbledygook]

Yeah Gamma not doing anything makes me confident in this vote

Sorry I've kinda been resting

Really

not a fan of what you're doing rn on a personal level

I would characterize that you haven’t done anything all game, so this isn’t a comment on your play post accident. I know you need to rest if you have a concussion.

[Gamma Emerald]

@Spangled, does Gamma feel like he did in CK9++?

@Gamma, does Spangled feel like he did in CK9++?

@EP, tl;dr me your scumread on LUV

@NC39, why did you guys kill outside of the coalition yesterday?

@everyone, what were RCMA's reads at the time of their death?

Will get to this later tonight.

Honestly this post feels very busybody-like, it doesn't escape me that it was targeted at the coalition members minus LUV. I think gobs-LUV is actually a valid scumteam here.

As for why LUV "isn't town", I feel like that's asking why I don't think there are reasons to townread him which I don't see any presented rn

[Gamma Emerald]

Yeah Gamma not doing anything makes me confident in this vote

Sorry I've kinda been resting

Really

not a fan of what you're doing rn on a personal level

I would characterize that you haven’t done anything all game, so this isn’t a comment on your play post accident. I know you need to rest if you have a concussion.

I feel like that doesn't represent my play fairly at all

[gobbledygook]

Gamma, why did you over explain your coalition actions and then stop trying to do anything with the coalition?

[Spangled]

@Spangled, does Gamma feel like he did in CK9++?

@Gamma, does Spangled feel like he did in CK9++?

@EP, tl;dr me your scumread on LUV

@NC39, why did you guys kill outside of the coalition yesterday?

@everyone, what were RCMA's reads at the time of their death?

Will get to this later tonight.

Honestly this post feels very busybody-like, it doesn't escape me that it was targeted at the coalition members minus LUV. I think gobs-LUV is actually a valid scumteam here.

As for why LUV "isn't town", I feel like that's asking why I don't think there are reasons to townread him which I don't see any presented rn

So you think that the posts quoted in 1227 weren’t towntells?

[Spangled]

Oh, yeah, Gobble. Why

were

the posts quoted in 1227 towntells?

[gobbledygook]

I think it would be really ridiculous for scum to think that and type those things.

[Spangled]

I think it would be really ridiculous for scum to think that and type those things.

I really don’t see it. Why can’t he BoP someone as scum, or call himself obvtown for... disengaging?

[gobbledygook]

BoP as scum? Which post is a BoP post?

I think the appeal to Nancy was town and then the ridiculousness of the obvtown statement is likely to come from town. I wouldn’t be sad if we moved onto LUV, but I’m liking Gamma for right now more than LUV.