Newbie 2107 | Random Music | Postgame

[HyruleHitman7]

HH’s vote was for comedic effect and I find that post to be less concerning than his other two posts.

What is of some concern is that he does appear to incite discussion without participating in it any. Now, he clearly is not willing to straight up lurk, and is instead essentially empty posting presumably to seem active (a latere, that's true of Baron too). His vote is clearly comedic, but I'm not convinced that he didn't just take the occasion to join a wagon with plausible deniability.

As I said, he still is not confirmedly scum in my mind, but I am reading some anti-town vibes from him. Other than that, I don't have yet formed any strong readings, but Redados and CCGeek I read town (CCGeek slightly more, but that's probably just personal feel), Baron slightly anti-town, and the other mostly null. Thou I'd also like to take note of the fact that Elmo did post, but to say nothing and not even submitted a random vote

That's a fair point. I can see how instantly voting in a bandwagon-like fashion may look scummy. I just couldn't resist the opportunity that I found myself in. After that joke I didn't really have anything I thought I would be able to post about, but now I obviously do. This is because, after seeing some of the opinions of you all, I've been able to gauge how this game is played (since it's my maiden voyage, so to speak). I'd definitely agree with most of your other reads, but as has been stated before, only time will be able to tell

[HyruleHitman7]

I am town.[/quote]

I concur.

[Elmo TeH AzN]

Can I make a small request?

Can you put your votes on seperate lines? Not in the middle of a paragraph makes it easier to see

[biancospino]

That means that if town can get a good idea of each person sooner, they can narrow down the outliers, so it would be in the best interest of each townie to talk as much as possible. However, if scum comes to the same conclusion, they will emulate this behaviour, and it may be seen as scummy, which could lead the townies to try to be less forward.

I'm not sure that follows. If a behaviour is clearly advantageous to town, then town should engage in it even if it is frequently faked by scum. In fact I'd argue that it being faked should benefit the town, which in the specific case is likely since a talkative scum may possibly incur in some manner of lapsus.

I have refrained from referring to myself as town thus far, as instantly labelling myself as such when there is little reason to suspect otherwise is incredibly suspicious, but I did find such a label on myself necessary in order to explain my line of thinking.

Again, I don't see

why

it is so. If the argument flows, then it ought to flow regardless of the point of view of the arguer; which I'm not sure it does here, even if I don't disagree on the conclusion

[Baron Kirkholm Uttgart]

In general, I’m not sure how to feel about talking a lot in the first day. On one hand, it shows that the player is into the game, which is good no matter their alignment, and willing to express how they’re feeling, which tends to be good for the town. However, I feel like there are so many reasons to talk if you’re against the town. Maybe you want to seem like you are willing to express how you feel, without it actually having any weight. Maybe you want to shift attention to others. Both of those would be pretty low risk, potentially high reward for someone against the town. So at least in the first 100 hours or so of this game, I don’t think there’s much value in reading into people’s comments, presence or lack thereof

Hmm. I disagree with some of this. Town is town, so they have nothing to hide. Because they have nothing to hide, they can share their thoughts with very little risk.

Scum has something to hide; they know everyone's alignment. They have to tiptoe around not giving anything away. Later in the game, when peoples' roles have been flipped, going back to read their thoughts from day one is really valuable.

I totally get what you said about having things to hide. I just feel like ‘trip-ups’ for scum will happen when their logic has a flaw compared with what town would think in that scenario (ie a perspective error) and therefore would be linked to events.

Right now events are so insignificant that ‘trip-ups’ could be perceived from either side, which is a danger. But I suppose even that is better than randomly guessing.

[biancospino]

Anyhow, it is night in my current time zone, so goodnight and I'll be back in (probably) 8 to 9 hours

[HyruleHitman7]

That means that if town can get a good idea of each person sooner, they can narrow down the outliers, so it would be in the best interest of each townie to talk as much as possible. However, if scum comes to the same conclusion, they will emulate this behaviour, and it may be seen as scummy, which could lead the townies to try to be less forward.

I'm not sure that follows. If a behaviour is clearly advantageous to town, then town should engage in it even if it is frequently faked by scum. In fact I'd argue that it being faked should benefit the town, which in the specific case is likely since a talkative scum may possibly incur in some manner of lapsus.

I have refrained from referring to myself as town thus far, as instantly labelling myself as such when there is little reason to suspect otherwise is incredibly suspicious, but I did find such a label on myself necessary in order to explain my line of thinking.

Again, I don't see

why

it is so. If the argument flows, then it ought to flow regardless of the point of view of the arguer; which I'm not sure it does here, even if I don't disagree on the conclusion

That's a fair point. I don't think frequent talking would be an issue for scum, though. Yes, they have to keep track of what information is and isn't known, but outside of that, mimicking town behaviour has few downsides. A more involved role may benefit the scum, depending on the kind of town they are dealing with. Lets go with two different kind of town environments:

1) A Loud Town

A town that likes talking. A

lot

of talking. This would be more likely earlier, as stated before, there is little consequence for frequent communication. In this environment, lots of messaging is the best option, and the expected status quo. In this situation, townies recognize that the best option is to talk a lot, and get a good idea of who each person is. This is a favourable situation for town. However, in this instance, scum is at risk. Not only must they secretly communicate and coordinate with one another on the side, they also must be involved with a higher level of communication and interactions to keep track of. Any slip up will be noticeable in a loud town. So, the outcome is: Town talks, and Scum talks

2) A Sus Town

A town where an air of paranoia permeates throughout. This would most likely be later game, when town begins doubting itself. People start contradicting, votes may begin to make more sense with hindsight, and a larger narrative can be crafted. Patterns emerge. Town would be more suspicious of one another, and things may be overanalyzed. In this environment, subtlety is key. Be there, but don't do much. Talk without saying anything at all. Don't be too chatty. Scum would need to follow these rules also, and would need to be more hesitant when engaging in conversation. So, the outcome is: Town is quieter, Scum lurks.

This is the ideal outcome for Scum, a "house divided against itself" if you will. Right now we're chatty, I'm obviously very chatty, and you all seem so as well, so of course scum will try to be. But as the game goes on, things I've said will be brought into question. Trust is a rare commodity. Especially if Scum is able to make us work against one another. If any doubt can be cast on an individual's motives, it can snowball to accusations. Overall, Scum is going to imitate Town behaviour. That's the name of the game. If we talk, they'll talk. If we're silent, they're silent. So, there's really little distinction when it comes to who is Scum and who isn't, even if a more talkative environment is what benefits the Town.

And, uh, yeah. That second reply is a good point, I simply noticed I had not referred to myself as town before, and wanted to point out the exact moment at which I claimed as such, for possible future reference. I see how it's kind of a weird thing to throw in there mid-rant, but the die has already been cast. I do agree that an argument ought to flow regardless of the point of the of the arguer, however, seldom is this the case. People usually can only see what they are looking for, which is why I always attempt to look outside of myself and come at an argument from different angles. Hopefully we can continue to view facts as they are, and use logic and reasoning in a respectful manner. With these techniques, Scum won't know what hit 'em.

[HyruleHitman7]

Anyhow, it is night in my current time zone, so goodnight and I'll be back in (probably) 8 to 9 hours

Slumber gallantly, friend.

[Baron Kirkholm Uttgart]

Is that not doing anything because of the way I’ve done it or because you can’t vote for yourself

also, you can technically vote for yourself. town should never vote for themselves (except for maybe during RVS). scum can vote for themselves, sometimes there's utility in hammering the lim on yourself to cut the day short and prevent discussion.

Interesting- there’s so much depth to this that I’ve never thought of.

Thanks for the vote button thing as well.

In general, I’m not sure how to feel about talking a lot in the first day. On one hand, it shows that the player is into the game, which is good no matter their alignment, and willing to express how they’re feeling, which tends to be good for the town. However, I feel like there are so many reasons to talk if you’re against the town. Maybe you want to seem like you are willing to express how you feel, without it actually having any weight. Maybe you want to shift attention to others. Both of those would be pretty low risk, potentially high reward for someone against the town. So at least in the first 100 hours or so of this game, I don’t think there’s much value in reading into people’s comments, presence or lack thereof

That's an intensely interesting view. I'd say I agree for the most part, as early activity has little consequences, and it's also hard to narrow down intentions before behavioural patterns begin to emerge. I think, however, it would benefit a townie more to talk more earlier. This is due to the fact that there are simply more townies, so they can outnumber the scum. That means that if town can get a good idea of each person sooner, they can narrow down the outliers, so it would be in the best interest of each townie to talk as much as possible. However, if scum comes to the same conclusion, they will emulate this behaviour, and it may be seen as scummy, which could lead the townies to try to be less forward. On the other hand, there are more town than scum, and you'll always need to break a few eggs to make an omelet. Therefore, although a more active role in the discussion is riskier, I've come to the decision that it will be far more efficient for me and my fellow townsmen. I have refrained from referring to myself as town thus far, as instantly labelling myself as such when there is little reason to suspect otherwise is incredibly suspicious, but I did find such a label on myself necessary in order to explain my line of thinking.

I forgot to respond to this too- I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with the group recognising behavioural patterns. To explain my argument around that idea, I feel like behavioural patterns will be hard to interpret, or over-interpreted at this stage.

[Baron Kirkholm Uttgart]

I’ve also realised the more I talk the more I potentially come victim to the suggestions of my own theory

[HyruleHitman7]

[/quote]

I forgot to respond to this too- I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with the group recognising behavioural patterns. To explain my argument around that idea, I feel like behavioural patterns will be hard to interpret, or over-interpreted at this stage.[/quote]


Agreed

[Spartan117]

Ok just while we’re in the RVS let me test something

VOTE: Baron Kirkholm Uttgart

Hey Guys just tuning in, not read through all the posts yet, where is everyone at? Anyone particularly standing out to anyone so far?

Little unsure why you are trying to test self voting? What could town ever utilise this for? Hmm

I'll show you what it's suppose to look like, here, glad I could help

VOTE: Baron Kirkholm Uttgart

[Brickwalll]

So, now that the ball is firmly rolling, some initial observations after a first read through.

Baron voting himself whether to test the voting function or not seems a bit off. Not saying anything conclusive from it but just a note. I also feel Baron's posts are lacking on content to some degree. Offered nothing of value and just fluff posting.

Bianco making a lot of alignment calls early in which is interesting. Don't necessarily agree with the alignments either, a bit too soon to make any calls.

Redados would appear to be pushing the game forward which gives me town vibes for now. Actively asking players to participate and get involved.

HyruleHitman is null for me presently. I like his post 45 where he references Redados and thread control. Don't necessarily agree with that particular argument in this case but feel like his intent is good for now. Can't say I loved the "break a few eggs to make an omelette" comment. Will comment on this one specifically.

Elmo following the thread but yet to post is interesting. Nothing much to comment on otherwise.

**Question: you all seem like experts quoting posts, what is the best way to use the quote function/multi-quote in a post, please?

[Redados]

Ok just while we’re in the RVS let me test something

VOTE: Baron Kirkholm Uttgart

Hey Guys just tuning in, not read through all the posts yet, where is everyone at? Anyone particularly standing out to anyone so far?

Little unsure why you are trying to test self voting? What could town ever utilise this for? Hmm

I'll show you what it's suppose to look like, here, glad I could help

VOTE: Baron Kirkholm Uttgart

he's clearly learning the forum mechanics, but I'll let you cook.

[Brickwalll]

That means that if town can get a good idea of each person sooner, they can narrow down the outliers, so it would be in the best interest of each townie to talk as much as possible. However, if scum comes to the same conclusion, they will emulate this behaviour, and it may be seen as scummy, which could lead the townies to try to be less forward.

I'm not sure that follows. If a behaviour is clearly advantageous to town, then town should engage in it even if it is frequently faked by scum. In fact I'd argue that it being faked should benefit the town, which in the specific case is likely since a talkative scum may possibly incur in some manner of lapsus.

I have refrained from referring to myself as town thus far, as instantly labelling myself as such when there is little reason to suspect otherwise is incredibly suspicious, but I did find such a label on myself necessary in order to explain my line of thinking.

Again, I don't see

why

it is so. If the argument flows, then it ought to flow regardless of the point of view of the arguer; which I'm not sure it does here, even if I don't disagree on the conclusion

This is the ideal outcome for Scum, a "house divided against itself" if you will.

Right now we're chatty, I'm obviously very chatty, and you all seem so as well, so of course scum will try to be

. But as the game goes on, things I've said will be brought into question. Trust is a rare commodity. Especially if Scum is able to make us work against one another. If any doubt can be cast on an individual's motives, it can snowball to accusations. Overall, Scum is going to imitate Town behaviour. That's the name of the game.

If we talk, they'll talk. If we're silent, they're silent.

So, there's really little distinction when it comes to who is Scum and who isn't, even if a more talkative environment is what benefits the Town.

I felt this whole paragraph to be not of much value. It is quite straight forward what you say with a lot of assumptions in between. You also managed a little self-promotion with '

i.m obviously very chatty

. This, along with your omelette breaking comment, is starting to raise some flags imo.

[Brickwalll]

In general, I’m not sure how to feel about talking a lot in the first day. On one hand, it shows that the player is into the game, which is good no matter their alignment, and willing to express how they’re feeling, which tends to be good for the town. However, I feel like there are so many reasons to talk if you’re against the town. Maybe you want to seem like you are willing to express how you feel, without it actually having any weight. Maybe you want to shift attention to others. Both of those would be pretty low risk, potentially high reward for someone against the town. So at least in the first 100 hours or so of this game, I don’t think there’s much value in reading into people’s comments, presence or lack thereof

Hmm. I disagree with some of this. Town is town, so they have nothing to hide. Because they have nothing to hide, they can share their thoughts with very little risk.

Scum has something to hide; they know everyone's alignment. They have to tiptoe around not giving anything away. Later in the game, when peoples' roles have been flipped, going back to read their thoughts from day one is really valuable.

I totally get what you said about having things to hide. I just feel like ‘trip-ups’ for scum will happen when their logic has a flaw compared with what town would think in that scenario (ie a perspective error) and therefore would be linked to events.

Right now events are so insignificant that ‘trip-ups’ could be perceived from either side, which is a danger. But I suppose even that is better than randomly guessing.

@Baron, what did you mean when you said "I totally get what you said about having things to hide"? Why do you totally it?

[chazary]

Hi everybody! Excited to get back into this. 10pm on a Saturday is not prime starting time and I am still quite hungover, so bear with me while I catch up

Initial thoughts:

- Red suggesting town should never vote themselves reads as town. Not sure why scum would feel the need to say that. Might also just be a good person trying to help a newbie. We’ll see

- while I do agree with Baron’s assessment of being so active this early, it also reads as a little defensive. Plus voting yourself is an odd thing to do even if you are testing it out. Why not use your test vote to get the ball rolling? This is RVS after all and there’s little to no consequence for voting randomly.

Other than that I’d need to quote other peoples posts to really explain what few reads I have so far. However I’m on my phone rn and don’t feel like it :p

Might be risking the “RVS is over now that people are posting” argument against me, but I didn’t get to participate so VOTE: Elmo

[Redados]

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Elmo

[Elmo TeH AzN]

Elmo following the thread but yet to post is interesting. Nothing much to comment on otherwise.

If you had the weekend I had. You would be recovering also. I'll have a look tomorrow or something soon.

[CCGeek]

Oh boi, woke up to a LOT of discussion for sure. Have a lot to catch up on. Will be busy for the next 10 hours, however. Just a heads up.

[CCGeek]

I skimmed over the posts so far and no comments on the Elmo BW, except the fact that he will be on T/LA till tomorrow (post #5).
However, HH definitely started becoming chattier. Some of his arguments do have merit, yes. But I don't have the time in hand rn to poke holes in his posts, will probably do that once I'm back in the evening.
Brickwall and bianco feel neutrally townish atm, and we have almost no fruitful interaction with Elmo to get a grasp on his behaviour/alignment.
Spartan and chazary attempting a wagon after the initial d1 discussion is fair. BUT, I'm not sure how to read into it, however. Or if it is worth reading into.

[CCGeek]

*V/LA mb, autocorrect is ass.

[HyruleHitman7]

I felt this whole paragraph to be not of much value. It is quite straight forward what you say with a lot of assumptions in between. You also managed a little self-promotion with '

i.m obviously very chatty

. This, along with your omelette breaking comment, is starting to raise some flags imo.

Ouch. But, you do know how to make an omelette, right? You do need to break eggs. As for how that analogy relates to this game, well, that's obvious. Not everyone here is going to make it out of this with their heads resting firmly on their shoulders as they do now. Either the Mafia gets you or you're voted off, either way, a big component of this game is who gets the axe. Also, I don't really care if you think my paragraph is of any value, as this would depend entirely upon your standards of what constitutes as valuable. Since you are a stranger on the internet to me, I have no idea (yet) of what you hold as valuable or invaluable. For clarity's sake, where did you find some of my assumptions? I might be able to clear up some of the confusion I've created. As for my comment about myself being chatty, do you find it false? Redados was chatty, and you took the time to respond to several posts in order to catch up, and are chatty as well. I was really just stating the obvious. Besides, what kind of egotistical idiot would I have to be in order to actually believe that saying the equivalent of, "GUYS I'M SUPER INNOCENT AND NOT SCUM" would help garner any trust or alleviate any legitimate accusations? The answer is just a slightly more moronic version of myself as I am right now. Lastly, I'd like to state that I appreciate your input, as keeping each other in check by questioning our statements is a key component of all of this. I'm glad you highlighted where any misconceptions lay within my posts, and poked a few holes in it.

[Redados]

I skimmed over the posts so far and no comments on the Elmo BW, except the fact that he will be on T/LA till tomorrow (post #5).
However, HH definitely started becoming chattier. Some of his arguments do have merit, yes. But I don't have the time in hand rn to poke holes in his posts, will probably do that once I'm back in the evening.
Brickwall and bianco feel neutrally townish atm, and we have almost no fruitful interaction with Elmo to get a grasp on his behaviour/alignment.
Spartan and chazary attempting a wagon after the initial d1 discussion is fair. BUT, I'm not sure how to read into it, however. Or if it is worth reading into.

Thanks for pointing out that Elmo is V/LA, I didn’t notice that. UNVOTE:

[Redados]

I felt this whole paragraph to be not of much value. It is quite straight forward what you say with a lot of assumptions in between. You also managed a little self-promotion with '

i.m obviously very chatty

. This, along with your omelette breaking comment, is starting to raise some flags imo.

Ouch. But, you do know how to make an omelette, right? You do need to break eggs. As for how that analogy relates to this game, well, that's obvious. Not everyone here is going to make it out of this with their heads resting firmly on their shoulders as they do now. Either the Mafia gets you or you're voted off, either way, a big component of this game is who gets the axe. Also, I don't really care if you think my paragraph is of any value, as this would depend entirely upon your standards of what constitutes as valuable. Since you are a stranger on the internet to me, I have no idea (yet) of what you hold as valuable or invaluable. For clarity's sake, where did you find some of my assumptions? I might be able to clear up some of the confusion I've created. As for my comment about myself being chatty, do you find it false? Redados was chatty, and you took the time to respond to several posts in order to catch up, and are chatty as well. I was really just stating the obvious. Besides, what kind of egotistical idiot would I have to be in order to actually believe that saying the equivalent of, "GUYS I'M SUPER INNOCENT AND NOT SCUM" would help garner any trust or alleviate any legitimate accusations? The answer is just a slightly more moronic version of myself as I am right now. Lastly, I'd like to state that I appreciate your input, as keeping each other in check by questioning our statements is a key component of all of this. I'm glad you highlighted where any misconceptions lay within my posts, and poked a few holes in it.

I am super innocent and not scum.