Open 108 - Weak M.D. - Game over before 725

[Incognito]

Vote Count #4 of Day 1

Korts (1) <-~ popsofctown
Gamma (2) <-~ Netlava, ryan2754
ryan2754 (5) <-~ EsoMonty, Korts, Badguy, Caboose, roflcopter
popsofctown (1) <-~ BlakAdder

Not Voting (3) <-~ BSG, GIEFF, Gamma

With 12 alive, it takes 7 votes to lynch!

[Netlava]

I still like my Gamma vote. He is lurking rather hard for someone who seemed concerned at having forgotten about the game shortly earlier.

good to know you´re town though.

Having such a definitive pro-town read on someone this early is a bit strange.

[Caboose]

good to know you´re town though.

Having such a definitive pro-town read on someone this early is a bit strange.

You've apparently never played a game with rofl, then.

[GIEFF]

Ok, so let's vote on some resolutions regarding hypo claim today, we'll try to take them one at a time.

Resolution 1: We will hypo claim for both weak doc and hider today.
I'll call this as being already resolved, yes.

Resolution 2:
a. Every player must be hypo hide-targetted once.
b. Every player must be hypo protect-targetted once.


Ok, two things at a time. I agree with part a, not part b. I think weak doc is sort of valuable, and so we should go more towards rofl's plan of willy nilly selection there, so that the actual weak doc gets to actual pick someone he thinks is townie (he's just going to hypo claim for us so we get a scum confirm if he's wrong)

So my vote is for Resolution 2a to be passed, and Resolution 2b to be spiked. (let's keep weak doc at b for consistency if we can)

I agree with these three points, with the caveat that if we are not to follow Resolution 2b, we should be careful not to reveal the doc to the scum. To help in this regard, EVERYONE should try to mix up whether they pick a person that has been targeted yet for that night, whether they pick a person that they have targeted before, and the order in which they hypo-doc claim.

Gamma, I want to hear from why you claimed to want to end the meta-game discussion quickly (which I assume meant you wanted to scumhunt; please correct me if that is wrong), yet have provided no help at all to the town. Your actions do not support your (very few) words.

Vote: Gamma

Has Gamma been prodded yet?


I'm a little surprised that nobody else wants to spend the effort to get the best hypo-claiming system possible. I don't know if that's scumminess or just laziness, but because it seems to apply to just about everyone in the game, I'll assume it's the latter.

At L-2, I want to say I don't think ryan's behavior warrants so many votes. Like ryan, I thought Caboose's vote in Post 70 was more serious than joke, too, until Caboose explained that it was a joke.

Here are the reasons so far presented by the 4 people voting non-randomly for ryan:

• Kort's reason for voting (opportunism) is the only one that seems good to me, as ryan voted just 6 minutes after Caboose.
  
  
• Badguy's reason shows an inconsistency; two players voted for Gamma "without a reason;" why did Badguyonly focus on Ryan?
  
  
• Caboose's reason is a bit unclear to me too. Caboose, did you vote ryan, because you don't think that Gamma's post was scummy, or because ryan thought that YOU thought it was scummy, even after you said it was just a joke?
  
  
• rofl gave no reason. Do you find ryan scummy, rofl, or was this vote just for pressure? If the former, why?

Badguy, if you were so willing to vote ryan for voting without a reason, why haven't you said a word about Caboose or rofl for doing the same? Scum are the only ones with the need to fabricate false reasons (read: lies) for votes, so it is scummy to not consistently apply reasoning for votes.

FOS Badguy

[Korts]

Res. 1: yes

Res. 2A: reluctant yes
Res. 2B: no

hypo-claiming should be done in popcorn style in my irrelevant opinion, starting not with most pro-town, but randomly.

Meanwhile, rofl is town at the moment. Otherwise he wouldn't be pinning pro-town people, but attacking every scumtell.

I agree with these three points, with the caveat that if we are not to follow Resolution 2b, we should be careful not to reveal the doc to the scum. To help in this regard, EVERYONE should try to mix up whether they pick a person that has been targeted yet for that night, whether they pick a person that they have targeted before, and the order in which they hypo-doc claim.

:goodposting:

The ryan-wagon is obviously scum-ridden at this point.

unvote

GIEFF makes a good case on Badguy, but I'd like to hear from Gamma first.

[BSG]

I agree with Res's 1 and 2a. If we would follow Res 2b, the doc has restrictions which will only hurt us.

The thing is, Ryan's vote was scummy. He first says that he agrees with Caboose. But when Caboose votes Ryan, he says that it was a gut vote. If that was the case, why didn't he say so in the first place?
Besides, I'm really interested how Ryan got that gut feeling. What in Gamma's post lead to that gut feeling?

I don't agree with you on Gamma. This discussion about the hypo-claims is good, but it distracts from the main job of the town. Also, Gamma has only made two posts after the post here. I don't call that lurking yet. However, if it appears that in the next post he shows no sign of scumhunting, then I'll be suspicious of him.

I also don't agree with you on Badguy. He clearly stated why he voted Ryan instead of Rofl or Caboose.

GIEFF, tell me why you think that Gamma is scummier than Badguy?

[EsoMonty]

I agree on resolution 1 and 2a. I agree that the Weak MD has strength besides dying to the Mafia and don't agree on resolution 2b.

unvote

I am unsure of how I feel about ryan at the moment. I don't have a good idea on where to vote. So, I am going to stay unvoted at the moment. Allow myself the ability to reread the entire thread again and then come back to a vote.

[GIEFF]

I don't agree with you on Gamma. This discussion about the hypo-claims is good, but it distracts from the main job of the town.

I disagree wholeheartedly. The discussion about hypo-claims IS the job of the town. If we make a mistake that leads to the weak doctor getting night-killed tonight, that is probably worse for the town's win probability than mislynching a vanilla townie on day one.

I also don't agree with you on Badguy. He clearly stated why he voted Ryan instead of Rofl or Caboose.

The only other reason given by Badguy was that ryan voted "for serious reasons" on page one. I don't see that as a scumtell, and I'm not sure why Badguy does, but the fact that Badguy HIMSELF also voted for serious reasons on page one is odd. Caboose and Blakadder ALSO voted for at least semi-serious reasons on page one(with non-joke justification), and neither's behavior was mentioned by Badguy; once again, he focused only on ryan.

It looks to me like Badguy doesn't really think this behavior is scummy (nor do I) and is using it to justify a vote for another reason. If you really think a serious vote on day 1 is scummy, Badguy, why did you do the same? And if I did believe day-one serious-voting is scummy, why shouldn't I interpret your behavior as scummy in addition to ryan's? And if I am to believe that YOU believe it is scummy, why didn't you mention other players who did it?

GIEFF, tell me why you think that Gamma is scummier than Badguy?

I am not sure who I feel is scummier; it is difficult to tell when neither has answered my questions. I like my vote on Gamma for now; hopefully more pressure will bring him out of the lurky depths.

[EsoMonty]

Gamma is modding another game that I am in. He said he would have very limited access for awhile in that game. Is it ok for me to link to the post if it isn't in this game?

[EsoMonty]

I take that back. I must have been thinking of someone else.

Nvm. carry on.

[popsofctown]

We seem to have a majority passing Resolutions 1 and 2a.

Resolution 3: the order of hypoclaims will be popcorn, with random people making hypoclaims throughout the day and changing at will (in accordance with Resolution 2a)


I vote nay. I think this will get the power roles caught easier and i favor an alphabetic plan.

[BSG]

As I already siad, the hypo-claim discussion is good. However, if this is the only thing we will do, who will be our lynch?
And as you might have seen, there are a lot of players not giving their opinion about the hypo-claims. They just agree with something that has been said by a player or vote for a suggestion made by a player.
Not only that, some of these players also haven't given their thoughts yet about any player at all. Do you think that this will change if we keep discussing about the hypo-claims?
My point is that the hypo-claims should be discussed, but it shouldn't be the only thing that's being discussed.

I'll wait with answering the rest of your post as I want Badguy to answer it first.

[popsofctown]

My plan was to finish hypoclaim discussion as fast as possible and then be done with it. Then we can scumhunt.

I'm a guy, i can't really multitask ~~~

[BSG]

Oh, I thought we could do both res 1 and 2a.
That we both hypo-claim for doc and hider, but that we were allowed to choose any target as doc, even if that target has been chosen already, while each player should be a hypo-claimed target with the hider claims. This way, the doc can still do his job, while the hider acts more like a cop.
This will only leave how we'll do the order of the hypo hider claims.

And don't worry. If I'm correct, I'm the only one who can multitask in this game.

[GIEFF]

My plan was similar to yours, pops; I was hoping to get all this hypo-strategy out in a few days, and then focus solely on scumhunting.

I vote nay on Resolution 3, although I don't think strictly alphabetical is best. Is there a way to give us a little more flexibility? The hider clearing as many townies as possible before dying is CRUCIAL, and limiting his ability to hide behind who he/she thinks is town on the first few nights is very bad. What if the town voted on who gets to hypotarget first? A big drawback of this is just the time commitment it would take to get everybody in the thread and paying enough attention to vote, but I feel it gives us more flexibility than a simple alphabetical system.


I am waiting on Badguy and Gamma to answer the questions I've asked.

[EsoMonty]

I vote nay on resolution 3.

Nor do I think an alphabetical or a voting system will work.

I will vote for an amended resolution 3.

the order of hypoclaims will be popcorn, with random people making hypoclaims throughout the day

and changing at will

.

[Korts]

I vote nay on Resolution 3, although I don't think strictly alphabetical is best. Is there a way to give us a little more flexibility? The hider clearing as many townies as possible before dying is CRUCIAL, and limiting his ability to hide behind who he/she thinks is town on the first few nights is very bad. What if the town voted on who gets to hypotarget first? A big drawback of this is just the time commitment it would take to get everybody in the thread and paying enough attention to vote, but I feel it gives us more flexibility than a simple alphabetical system.

I've thought about suggesting this before, and no. It gives scum the "most pro-town" vote of the town, and they get an easier NK. I think letting a random person start (random.org or dice should do the trick) and then continuing popcorn style is the best while still keeping scum relatively in the dark.

(FYI popcorn goes thus:

A: claim. gogogo B!
B: claim. gogogo E!
E: claim. gogogo C!

etc.)

[Caboose]

BSG is town.

[GIEFF]

Oh OK, good; I thought popcorn style meant random. I do like the popcorn idea; starting the chain randomly should be fine, in that case.

[roflcopter]

gieff is obvtown by this point. esomonty is tickling my scumdar.

[Korts]

GIEFF is dealing mostly in information and not analysis, though. He's more town than some, but there are more town people than him around.

[Gamma]

Sorry, I'm a enormous idiot that I couldn't post. Really my fault, no excuses. Lurking's not my style, sorry I have slipped into the pit of inactivity again.

SECONDLY

What I meant in my post is that I don't want to give scum the day off, here. For the most part hypoclaim discussion is taking over this day. I hate that.

Imo, I think we should at least

start

the hypoclaiming. But then we leave it at that until we're ready at that. I have no problem with the hypoclaiming, Ryan. Sorry my opinion made you

butthurt

feel that way.

Also, Netlava, if I ever go inactive again I'm trusting you to lead a savage lynch all lurkers bandwagon, etc.

[GIEFF]

SECONDLY

What I meant in my post is that I don't want to give scum the day off, here. For the most part hypoclaim discussion is taking over this day. I hate that.

Glad to see you de-lurk, Gamma, but I still find it odd that you complain about the direction the game is taking, yet make no effort to change it. Why not help us resolve the hypoclaim discussion by participating in it, or ensure the scum don't get the day off by posting some analysis, a case, a body part of suspicion, or anything else of some use to the town?

Also, caboose and rofl, can you answer my questions in Post 103 regarding your votes for ryan?

[popsofctown]

Resolution 3: declined/pigeonholed

Resolution 4: We shall use a random method to pick the first hypo claimer. After he or she gives both hypoclaims, that person selects someone to hypo claim next.


**if resolution 4 passes (i like it quite well, it satisfies my fishing concern), we are going to have trouble picking someone to run the random number generator, since they could, you know, lie. Does someone know of some public online website that regularly gives out lotto numbers? We could declare a day, look at the lotto number for that day and assign first pick using x%12= number zero to eleven that matches the first page of the thread.)

[Caboose]

@GIEFF: I voted ryan because of his mistating the reason that I voted Gamma. I think that's opportunistic.

I am unsure of how I feel about ryan at the moment. I don't have a good idea on where to vote. So, I am going to stay unvoted at the moment. Allow myself the ability to reread the entire thread again and then come back to a vote.

^Fencesitting, +scumpoints

I'd like to know why Gamma is instructing NetLava to lead a lynch on him if he goes inactive.