Mini 581 - Andy's Death - Over

[Ythill]

Lol. Jenter's collecting votes already...

I don't random vote but y'all knock yourselves out.

This set-up is certainly the strangest normal I've been in so far. I think it will minimize lurking as a scum tactic. It's also safe to say there won't be any fake claims. This should be fun.

[Ythill]

Yeah, I think a mass-claim would be 8 townies. And by "won't be any fake claims" I wasn't counting 'nilla.

@JDodge: Innocence of youth? Explain?

[Ythill]

@JDodge: Innocence of youth? Explain?

"I don't random vote".

I just think it's kind of pointless. Discussing meta and the setup seems to get the game moving more quickly but, like I said, do whatever you want.

I think it's misleading of you to suggest an honest FBI mass-claim without identifying it as a D2 strategy. Doing it today would provide no benefit to the town, but would sacrifice our only power role. Even on D2, a scum counterclaim could potentially get the real FBI lynched, allowing the SK to N2K the confirmed townie and, again, sacrifice our only power role for no gain.

There'd be plenty of gain for the SK though...

vote JDodge

[Ythill]

...avinashv for supporting JDodge.

Not to mention quickly withdrawing that support to instead agree with myself and cam.

@ Seth: Are you normally so impressionable? Why didn't you think through the idea before agreeing? If JDodge is a townie with a trap, you've stumbled right in.

[Ythill]

EBWOP: I have misread Seth's statement and confused him with avinas. Sorry guys, I'll try to remember you are two different people.

Here's the post in a way that makes sense...

...avinashv for supporting JDodge.

QFT.

Not to mention quickly withdrawing that support to instead agree with myself and cam.

@ avinas:

Why didn't you think through the idea before agreeing? If JDodge is a townie with a trap, you've stumbled right in.

[Ythill]

@JDodge: If this was a game of pure statistics, we would rarely type other than to vote. A straight lynch without a mass claim will give us a good deal of information. You are also neglecting implied odds. It is true that FBI has a slim chance of finding the SK, but the payoff for town is far greater than having a confirmed townie on D2 who will inevitably be the N2K.

[Ythill]

Let me fix that.

unvote

I think it's a little early for L-1. We don't want anything wonky happening while we're still just talking about theory. I do still find JDodge as suspicious as when he first suggested the mass-claim (which, in all honesty, isn't incredibly suspicious) but I'm not ready to hang anyone yet.

Anyway...

@ Avin: Sorry. It was unintentional or at least undeserved patronization. If you follow my error to see how the original question came about, you can see why it was a little more harsh than befits the actual situation. That's what I get for trying to post when I'm exhausted and caring for a toddler. I accept your response as valid.

That's not saying I agree with your point, or JDodge's.

@ JDodge: I never claimed that statistics were not a part of mafia, only that the game isn't purely about statistics and I do not appreciate you trying to reduce it to that. Furthermore, you have overlooked one of my points...

I insist that the implied odds in this situation make discussion of the actual odds moot (or at least diminish their importance severely). My point is that the FBI finding the SK would be a huge payoff and the continued chance of that happening is well worth a slightly harder time determining today's lynch candidate.

[Ythill]

The matter of payoffs does not necessarily factor into statistics - the odds of winning a lottery are, say, 1 in 128 million. The payoff is $25,000,000. Does this mean that spending every cent you have on lottery tickets is a good idea?

Congratulations on proving yourself wrong by introducing a numerical payoff into the equation. Of course your example wouldn't be a good bet, not even to buy a single lottery ticket, because the buy-in is greater than 1/128,000,000 of the payoff. Lottery really is taxation for every fool in the nation.

However, consider poker and the strategy of playing pot odds. If you always pay bets of less than 1/3 the pot and never pay bets of greater than 1/3 the pot when holding four to the flush on the flop (which has a slightly better than 1 in 3 chance of beating the lesser hand your opponent is holding) you will always make money in the long run.

Implied odds

are different. Say you are holding four to the flush and an opponent makes a bet that will require you to pay 4/9 of the pot. It's technically a bad call, but if your opponents' stacks are deep enough that you can be sure to make your 2/3 profit on a hit, it is still a safe bet.

Implied odds

include the hypothetical win in the calculations, and are valid mathematically.

Admittedly, there is no clear numerical payoff here, unless we want to start talking about the chances of hitting scum

after

the SK is dead and also factor in the lack of a NK. Personally, I'm not ready to do that much math.

However, I think it's clear that catching the SK N1 and hanging him D2 would give the same advantage as your scenario (because the FBI would need to claim on D2 to give results) plus nearly double the length of time that town gets to try and catch scum while also removing one of those scum. That is a huge advantage and you are suggesting we throw away our 1 in 7 chance of having that advantage (not to mention the better chance of getting it if the FBI survives two nights) to slightly improve the chances of lynching correctly once.

Personally, I hope our FBI is more forward thinking than you.

And you are formally invited to my poker game.

[Ythill]

@ gob: One post before we lynch? Why are you in a hurry? Besides, JDodge is only at L-2.

[Ythill]

The last line of your #43 could be taken either way, but I'll keep your stated intentions in mind.

[Ythill]

Noting that avin and JDodge have made the scummy FBI-should-claim argument and are both still random voting Jenter, who has a a reputation as an easy mislynch.

[Ythill]

Okay, I had to read it three times but I get what you're saying and it looks correct. I think I'd have had an easier time with it if the odds had been reduced (i.e. 3/24 = 1/8) but good job anyway.

I'm not sure getting help from outside the thread is appropriate. So goodbye if you are modkilled.

I think this math chat might be losing some of the players (or boring them to death) and we should end it soon, though JDodge should get a chance to respond first.

Above and beyond the statistics, I think it's going to be important for us to keep the FBI alive as long as possible. Please realize that it behooves the SK to scumhunt, because being stuck in a 2s:1t:1 situation on D3 will be very problematic for him. Furthermore, because he has no buddies there will be no interaction clues. So long as he is careful with his NKs, the SK will be

very

difficult to catch. The chance of the FBI catching him might be slim, but it also might be crucial to winning this game.

[Ythill]

I like JDodge's defense here. It's in character and it dodges the easy route of changing one's views, instead finding a subtler, riskier way of standing up for those beliefs in the face of indisputable argument. I wouldn't say it looks pro-town but it certainly addresses my concerns.

Of the two

, I'd pick avin as scum and I'm really not sure I'd buy them as buddies.

Once I get some time I'll do my first reread and post some questions for everyone. Sorry I've been busy: just started a new job.

[Ythill]

Don't really have one yet. I suppose it would be you, technically, but I wouldn’t bet much on that being accurate. I believe you are scummier than Jdodge because you followed the meat of his opinion that was most beneficial to the SK while failing to support it with arguments.

The thread is gathering info. Rest assured: I will reread, ask some questions, and have a more reasonable suspect list soon. You will know my top suspect because I will be voting for him.

But, in the meanwhile, congratulations on not falling into the over-defensiveness trap.

[Ythill]

As promised:

@ JD: Thanks for taking the brunt of the opening assault. We’re finally getting some information into the thread. How much of your argument was meant to trap overzealous scum? Based on reactions, whom do you suspect?

@ gob: You’re still voting avin for his support of JD. Mafia is a team game, what’s wrong with supporting someone you agree with? Why are you not suspicious of those who are supporting one another on the other side of the argument?

@ Dave: You have the lowest post count at this point. Are you normally so reserved? Why has it taken you so long to basically agree with what others have posted?

@ cam: You don’t like Seth putting JD @ L-1, but you don’t say anything about Seth’s alignment. Why haven’t you questioned the person who undertook and stood by an action you think is bad for the town?

@ Seth: You limit your choice to JD or avinas because you say that voting anyone else would be a waste of time. Why is wasting time bad in this situation? What’s anti-town about exploring other options?

@ avinas: You agree with JD, citing the math which has now been questioned to the point that JD has changed his stance. Yet you are sticking to your guns without qualification. Why?

@ Jenter: I’m glad the math help didn’t get you in trouble. Anyway… you seem very focused on JD. Do you believe scum would enter the thread with such an obvious ploy? What do you think of the reactions to JD?

[Ythill]

I wouldn’t call anything I’ve posted a PbPA. Just some questions to broaden the conversation.

FTR, I really don’t like the pressure to vote. We’re not in any hurry that I’m aware of, and I think I’m explicit enough in my opinions that you don’t need a marker. Remember that I was the first to non-random vote. It’s not like I’m fence sitting, I’m just busy. New job is taking 8-12 hours a day (16 last Monday) and I take care of a toddler when I’m not @ work.

Anyway…

It's the contradiction between the two posts which is glaringly obvious.

You must be misunderstanding me because there is no contradiction. I'll try to explain better. What I liked about you sticking to your guns regarding the theory argument was that it demonstrated that it really was your opinion. However, my question suggested that there may have been (town friendly) ulterior motives for bringing up your opinion.

Obviously, if it's your opinion, you've discussed it on MS before and know what kind of response is likely. Therefore I question whether you were actually trying to bring about a mass claim or whether, in part, you were hunting for scummy reactions to that suggestion. I still do not doubt that favoring mass-claims is actually your opinion.

Do you understand? Would I be safe in assuming, from your response, that the simple answer to my question is: there was no intent to flush out scum with your suggestion of mass-claim?

Why would I be suspicious of people just for not supporting an FBI claim?

I thought you were unclear in your accusation as to whether it was simply for agreement or for specific agreement with that point of view, because all you said was, “I'm gonna throw a second vote on avinashv for supporting JDodge.” I've not suggested you

should

be suspicious of anyone and I feel your answer is overly defensive.

I’ve gotta feed the kid. Will be back to further analyze and post my suspicions later tonight.

[Ythill]

Current opinions…

Dave isn’t lurking. He’s not being very original or wordy, but he’s commented on all relevant topics, defended against accusations, and answered questions quickly. I get the feeling that he is reading along and commenting when he deems it important, which is exactly what he said he was doing. So I find it suspicious that gob and avin have basically called him a lurker for answering honestly.

Other than the above, I don’t think gob’s done anything damning.

Jenter has put a lot of effort into proving JD wrong and therefore scum, which seems protown but honestly could be the machinations of a purposeful mislynch attempt.

I don’t like cam’s role fishing. Nor do I like the way he responded to the accusation with ad hom. Furthermore, I don’t like the way he said he was refraining from voting JD only because JD was @ L-1, but then failed to place his vote when JD had fewer votes.

Avin is really setting off my scum-sensors. He’s seriously buddying to JD, which I think is not indicative of JD’s alignment, because scum are more likely to target town with this behavior. I really don’t like his “your work is not your own” accusation against Jenter, because really what difference does it make? But Avin

is

scumhunting. Time will tell if it is an act.

Ironically enough, I’m starting to get a pro-town read on JD because of his overall tone and paranoia. I look forward to seeing what he will do now that the theory talk is at an end.

I’d like to see more hunting from Seth and Dave.

Summing up, my top suspects of the moment are avin and cam (in that order) but I really do think it’s too early for a definitive read. It is interesting that they are voting for each other; I don’t know what I think of that but I’ll throw another vote on my top suspect for now.

vote: avinashv

Please note that all of the above pertains to finding

mafia

. I am at a loss as to how we’re going to catch the SK because unless he’s an idiot he’ll be playing very pro-town.

[Ythill]

...you have no logical reason nor basis to assume an ulterior motive...

Can you show me where I've made that assumption? All I did was asked you a question. An appropriate answer could have been, "none." Besides, I've already given a logic basis for

suspecting there could be

ulterior motive, which is a different animal than assuming.

I see what you mean about the SK comment (I'm assuming you mean that it could help the SK to know this) but I didn't think of it that way. I believe our SK has no motivation to act scummy and I don't really think me pointing that out gives him less motivation.

[Ythill]

Meh. It's no secret that Jenter is fairly full of shit, but I don't think it has anything to do with his role.

Earlier I was looking forward to seeing what JD would do once the theory discussion was over. The answer? Start another theory discussion. Grumble...

[Ythill]

You have an extremely low opinion of me, don't you Ythill?

Not really. I mean, on a personal level I don't even know you. I simply think that your

playstyle

makes you an easy mislynch.

And, like many people, you are "full of shit" when you're in an argument. It's an ego thing. The insatiable desire to be right or something. I do the same thing and I wasn't trying to judge whether it's a good or bad thing. Just saying that I don't think it indicates your alignment.

What's strange to me is that you aren't making as many scummy moves here as the last time I played with you (where you were town). Did you change your style on purpose?

[Ythill]

this is a greatly fruitless discussion.

QFT.

@ JD: Though I’m not as well-heeled here as you, I am also a fan of early game meta. If you are town, your experience is a boon to us; if you are scum, keeping you in the spotlight is good. So… Which of this game’s players do you have experience with? Can you tell us anything about them that will help us determine their alignments? Any warnings about others’ scummy-seeming bad habits? Based on your meta-play, who do you find most suspicious here?

@ Dave: What’s your read on cam? What do you think of the votes that he and avinas have on each other? What do you think of avin’s nitpicking against you?

@ Seth: What’s your read on cam? What do you think of the votes that he and avinas have on each other? Which do you prefer: the quick D1 from those other sites or the involved discussions here?

[Ythill]

Thanks for your answers everyone. JD, do you have any advice stemming from your meta experience with Jenter, cam, and/or avin?

I am going out of town on business this week. Will be bringing the laptop and should have internet access at my hotel, but I may have even less time for games.

Please consider me LA from 4/7 until 4/11, just in case.

[Ythill]

You are aware this is a team game, right? Does your policy stem from the fact that you don't want people to learn their own tells?

[Ythill]

LOL @ JD.

[Ythill]

I have returned from V/LA. Will be catching up on all of my games this weekend, hopefully by tonight.

[Ythill]

Whether that mathematical redundancy was his or not is irrelevant, it barely added to the flow of the game.

Absolutely false. It brought a logical end to the mass-claim discussion, in favor of town. And if the authorship was irrelevant, why did you include it in your accusation?

This is a strange turn of events, because the vote seems a little rash. A bit of a BW has started on me as the focus shifted away from JD, and it seems that you're trying to capitalize on that.

Factual sequence of events: I (non-random) voted first on JD, I unvoted when he got to L-1 (citing my intent to avoid an early lynch and a partial dismissal of the case against him); I stated explicitly that you seemed scummier than JD; I reread, asked questions, and awaited the answers; I reread again and,

at your request

(maybe demand is a better word), voted for the player I found most scummy, citing evidence regarding not only my vote, but every player in the game. And I said it’s still too early (IMO) for a definitive read.

I even gave (and am entertaining) one bit of evidence that suggests you could be town, because I am interested in learning the truth, not manipulating the thread. You twisted this evidence of my open mind into an accusation against me. You demanded a vote and then turned that vote into another accusation. You posted questionable defenses to my reasonable accusations, and slanted your defense as to reflect suspicion back onto me.

You went on to post a false dichotomy that Jenter correctly called you out on, and then dismissed his own defense that cited your attack as hypocrisy, neither addressing that defense nor withdrawing your accusation. You missed gob’s post (#115), which could suggest a lack of honest curiosity. And you seem to have taken Seth’s simple explanation of why he didn’t directly answer your question as an accusation that you are following me, which is far too proactively defensive for my liking.

Ythill* He quickly accepts JDodge's defense (which was"massclaim wins games; deal with it.") Then asks

How much of your argument was meant to trap overzealous scum?

Uhh, what? You're assuming that JDodge's massclaim debate was a trap. I questioned you on this before and you never responded, but when JDodge voted you that got your attention.You said:

However, my question suggested that there may have been (town friendly) ulterior motives for bringing up your opinion.

But it looks like your question more stated than suggested.

I’m repeating this for the last time. An applicable answer to my question was “none.” I didn’t assume anything. I didn’t state anything. I

only

suggested it by inference.

There is no conflict if my statements are taken at their face values and little reason to suspect dishonesty. If I planned on attacking JD, why clear him in the first place?. Nor would an existing conflict prove my alignment one way or the other, because a townie should be asking tough questions of every non confirmed player, even those people he has partially cleared.

Anyone think it's strange that Ythill would come to Dave's defense even though Dave has no votes? I'll get some discussion going: Ythill and Dave are scum buddies, true or false?

What does the number of votes have to do with anything? You can call my post a defense of Dave if you like. A seemingly false accusation was made by a player I was (and am) becoming more suspicious of. I’m not going to ignore it.

Nor is this proof of a buddy relationship. In my experience, scum are at least equally likely to defend (or be defended by) town.

Ythill has managed to create this character that plays "Consistent, logical" (to quote Jenter) play. While I completely disagree that it automatically makes him pro-town, it does make him reasonably active, and for him to defend Dave's extremely passive and a hinderance of a role is suspicious.

Someone having a different playstyle does not make them scum. And if I were to suspect lower content players as a policy, I’d be pretty damned paranoid. Besides, lurking isn’t a very strong scum strategy in this setup, which makes me suspect those who have attacked Dave more than I suspect him.

Calling us out on pointing a finger at the weakest poster in the game is also suspicious.

Gob is the weakest poster in this game. Your opinion of Dave flip-flops a little too much for my liking.

I like my vote even more now.

[Ythill]

Calling us out on pointing a finger at the weakest poster in the game is also suspicious.

Gob is the weakest poster in this game.

I take some offense to this. While I agree my posts may not be the most insightful or analytic, I don't see how Dave's are any better.

Sorry to offend. I was referring to post frequency and, specifically, your long period of inactivity. Fact is, over the last couple of days you are beginning to overtake Dave but, at the time of the “defense,” he was more active than you.

@ Dave: Check my meta. I'm always very active regardless of my alignment. Nor do I agree that pro-active play is a scumtell, but I suppose it would be more of a scumtell here than in other games, due to the setup.

[Ythill]

@JD: I've made my opinions clear. If you have specific questions, ask them. Otherwise you're just flinging mud.

I will be shy on time tomorrow, though I will probably have enough for a check in to address relevant topics.

[Ythill]

LOL @ Jenter. I think that may be the most creative ad hom I've seen on this site. If you'd said it about me, it might be my new quote.

[Ythill]

Sorry about being light content. The new job is taking a lot of time and another of my games has required a lot of attention over the last couple days.

To those harping on JD for wanting to hunt the SK first: I believe there is a valid pro-town argument for that approach. I also believe there is a valid pro-town argument for hunting the mafia primarily at first. I'm playing based on the second but I

do not

think it is scummy, per se, to be playing based on the first.

Ythill seems town because the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance.

This is a strategy that would befit mafia, who need to rely on the mislynch but would work against the SK, who must only avoid the lynch himself. So you are, in essence, accusing me of being mafia.

Yet, more recently, you have declared that I am the SK and even said you have no interest in hunting mafia before we find the SK. Please explain your contradiction.

[Ythill]

Every lynch helps the SK equally (except see below). There's no need for him to change his position, and therefore no need to risk suspicion by sitting on the fence or being vague. Not that I'm actually doing either anyway, but if I was they would be indicitive of a mafia alignment.

Killing at least one scum before D3 is crucial to the SK, because if D3 starts with 2 scum, the SK loses with town. Therefore a scum lynch is slightly more beneficial to the SK than a mislynch.

I don't believe you've explained the contradiction in your accusations.

[Ythill]

I don't see how you came to that conclusion JD. The contradiction is: you accused me of actions that would benefit mafia but work against the SK. Then you accused me of being the SK exclusively. Also, your statement about your goal for today (catching the SK, not mafia) shows that this apparent contradiction was not you changing your mind about my alignment.

Your only argument against this was that the SK benefits from mislynches, which is only tangentially true and, even then, doesn't address the contradiction. Now you change gears to say there was no contradiction to begin with? If that's the case, then why did you try to explain it?

Show how I pulled this contradiction out if thin air, if that is your stance. Where is it shown to have no basis in fact?

I dismissed my earlier suspicions against you but this slipery style of argument is making me suspect you again. Please address the contradiction directly or show how it is invalid.

[Ythill]

Ythill seems town because the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance.

This is a strategy that would befit mafia, who need to rely on the mislynch but would work against the SK, who must only avoid the lynch himself. So you are, in essence, accusing me of being mafia.

I think his post was meant to be sarcastic.

I caught that, which is why I am treating, "the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance," as an accusation.

[Ythill]

@ cam: Taking the above as an accusation, do you think it portrays me as mafia or the SK? If the SK, please explain how. Others are invited to answer these questions as well.

[Ythill]

You admit that SK benefiting from mislynch is true - how is it a contradiction if it is true?

I said "only tangentially true" because the SK benefits from

any lynch

but, in fact, benefits more from a scum lynch at this point. So the statement "the SK benefits from a mislynch" is true but the inference that the SK would prefer a mislynch is patently false.

And furthermore, how did you leap to the conclusion that what I accused you of befits mafia more than SK anyways?

I've already explained this but will reiterate. "...the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance," refers to fence sitting and vague suspicions, which would benefit a mafioso, allowing him to reserve his suspicions for strategic play. This would happen at the risk of appearing suspicious. However, the SK gains absolutely no benefit from this type of strategic play, only reaping the risk.

In short, there is no benefit (just risk) for the SK in failing to commit. He is as clueless as to the alignments of others as a townie, and he stands to benefit from catching scum. Your accusation, therefore, only befits a mafioso, which you say I am not.

Now will you address the contradiction, or are you going to insist on playing the slippery game with me?

[Ythill]

And fence-sitting/vague suspicions helps the SK equally considering it allows them to avoid heat on themselves.

Explain how this allows one to avoid heat. I think it's clear that the opposite is true.

I maintain that there is no contradiction...

Then explain why your first answer attempted to address the contradiction with the inapplicable statement that the SK benefits from a mislynch.

...and that you are solely trying to shift suspicion off of yourself by disregarding my claims without basis.

There was no attempt to shift suspicion. Initially, I questioned your claims

with basis

(that you are choosing to disregard) purely in my own defense. There was no attempt by me to reflect the suspicion back onto you. My only mention of suspicion against you came later, when you argued from a slippery stance, meaning one that embraces any claim in pursuit of the win, rather than attempting to determine and/or clarify the truth.

You've moved back up my scumlist but I'm still happier with my vote on Avinas.

[Ythill]

More importantly: what role does everyone think their most suspicious players are playing as?

My suspicion list refers to mafia. As I said, I am going with the "mafia first" plan, at least for D1. I may change tactics tomorrow.

Can't we hunt both of these bad guys at the same time?

We can only cast one vote.

On a side note, gob's last post seems townish to me.

[Ythill]

And fence-sitting/vague suspicions helps the SK equally considering it allows them to avoid heat on themselves.

Explain how this allows one to avoid heat. I think it's clear that the opposite is true.

You can't be held accountable for your actions if you have no real actions to be held for.

IMO, the accountability for failure to commit is more damning than the accountability for committing to a lynch, even if it's a mislynch. But I'm starting to understand where you're coming from at least.

Can you say that again, only this time making sense?

Your statement was that I was shifting blame. I assume you mean onto you. Yet I didn't shift any suspicion onto you at the start of this topic. I only did so when your argument seemed to get slippery.

[Ythill]

@ Dave: You've never voted Avinas. Why did you say you had? Also, why don't you want put him @ L-1

yet

? What, specifically, are you waiting for? And why aren't you being proactive in attaining it?

[Ythill]

Please don't hammer before Avin has a chance to post.

[Ythill]

I made a mistake.

You’ve made 17 posts, most of them less than 50 words. In that space you have only placed one vote and it was random. Furthermore, you say, “i pick my words carefully and dont rush into saying things.” I find it hard to believe that this was an honest mistake.

I dont think that he should be lynched yet because this is my first game...

The n00b card comes out. Yet… (1) Your opinion on mass claims demonstrates at least a basic understanding of the game. (2) You cite your playstyle several times in defense. Can you explain how someone making the fourth post of his first game would know what his playstyle was? (3) You’ve got the Futurama avatar, which demonstrates knowledge of site trends. Yes, I see your post count; the account is probably an alt.

I’m noting that you didn’t answer the last question I posted in #208. Why aren’t you proactively seeking the information you’d need to reach that crucial 80% surety?

Unvote; vote Dave.

BTW, you’re not off the hook avinas. Question for you: why did you ask Dave his reasons for voting you when it was plain he had not?

[Ythill]

No content from me today and possibly tomorrow, though I'll try to get a post in tomorrow. Sorry. Work is hell.

[Ythill]

Screeched to a halt here, huh?

You're right that my case against Dave isn't compelling. But suspicious? I don't agree. There's no reason to wait for an airtight case before making an attack (even with a vote). This is D1 and information gathering is a priority. Or would you prefer we just stop arguing until the mod drops a deadline on us?

You both make a good defense for Dave actually being a n00b. I'm wondering why he didn't address the topic though.

I'm not entirely clear on your logic for your first point. You point out that Dave is a low-content poster, but if anything, this strengthens Dave's case of forgetting the vote count. If he's not active in this thread then it makes sense that he would not know or remember what he has done in it.

If you only have three pairs of shoes, you probably remember what color they are. But if you have three hundred pairs? That was my point.

a) trying to distance yourself from Dave (scumbuddies?)

So I defended Dave out of the blue and now I'm distancing without provocation? Seems counter-productive to me. What would be the purpose?

b) trying to distance yourself from the avinashv lynch (to avoid future scrutiny because you're scum?)

Lol. Put avinas @ L-1 to see if this theory is plausible.

c) lost your mind and think you have a good case against Dave

I wouldn't call it a "good case" but then I'm not exactly calling for a hammer here. Dave's "mistake" struck me as scummy. His "assumption" that Avin also made a mistake further piqued my interest, and his n00b card defense seemed less than truthful. There's nothing wrong with a little inquisition. Nor is there anything anti-town about voting someone as a part of that inquisition.

Besides, there are other reasons for my actions that have nothing to do with Dave. Think about it.

[Ythill]

Speaking hypothetically: now that Dave has announced a possible vote for avinashv, his scumpartner would probably want to get off the bandwagon and vote elsewhere, or else both scum would be under scrutiny D2.

I didn't understand that this was what you meant, but I agree that it is plausible as distancing. It's not what I was/am doing, but your attack is valid.

Are you saying you'd hammer avinashv if he was at L-1?

More insinuating than saying, but yes. Avinas is still my PE#1.

Why wouldn't you simply FOS Dave? If we look back at your post history for this game, you were very big on directing questions at people's suspicious behaviour. You were also very slow to vote as avinashv pointed out.

I don't often FoS except as a conversation point. Votes are better because they carry weight. Just my opinion.

I was

not

slow to vote. I was slow to re-vote after clearing JD and pulling my initial vote off of him. You will note that I was not attacking much at that time either. I hadn't formed solid suspicions yet.

And I did direct questions @ Dave. When he responded with what might have been a lie, I called him on it and voted for him, partially for pressure. Partially for other reasons.

I'm too dense. Spell it out for me.

Tel you what... I'll share

one

reason because the tactic has already failed to bear fruit. Jumping from a wagon to vote someone else is often a good way to test for scummy reactions from one's wagon-mates. Obviously, if there's scum on Avin's wagon, they've managed to avoid the trap.

There is another reason but I'm not spelling it out for you yet. Ask me again D2 if I am still alive.

I'm leaving my vote on Dave a little longer, at least until I hear from him again. Also, still awaiting Avinas' answer to my question.

[Ythill]

PS: Did I say gob is starting to look more protown to me? Not sure if I have yet. The transition has been underway for a little while, but his last post is the icing on the cake.

[Ythill]

His content has diminished considerably since the suspicion has grown on him which is, I believe, the opposite of pro-town behavior.

@ Dave: If you are most suspicious of avinas then why do you assume his use of the word "vote" was a mistake? How likely do you think it is that this was a subtle trick to get suspicion back onto you?

[Ythill]

Instead you put him in mortal danger.

This is indeed the case. I fully intend to hammer, but I will not stand for whining about it being out of the blue. You have a few hours to pull your vote if you are uncomfortable with an Avinas lynch. Avinas has a few hours to claim.

[Ythill]

There really isn't even such thing as massclaim in this game, considering there is only one claim to be made really.

I am in full agreement with this statement, which leads to Seth's argument...

I don't think JDodge is the SK finder.

He's the most vocal proponent of massclaim, repeatedly saying that the SK finder should have no reason not to claim. If he's truly 100% behind that statement, then if he were the SK finder, he should say so.

To which JD rightly replied...

1) Why doesn't this logic apply to avin?

I say “rightly replied” because the logic does apply to avinas who said:

I agreed with him that the FBI agent has no need to false-claim.

Ergo, the FBI has no reason to avoid claiming at all. Avinas doesn’t just state this belief, he shows that he is 100% behind it by explaining why:

Because then we have one confirmed townie. The math is already shown in earlier posts. One confirmed townie means a lynch has a better chance of hitting scum, from a purely statistical standpoint. Factor in human deduction, and you're on better standing.

And further demonstrates this by explicitly stating that he is continuing to stand by the argument long after the math has been conceded by JD:

I'd like to say that I never abandoned my stance...I don't know where people got that from.

In summary, avinas is not the FBI. Were he the FBI, he would have claimed before L-1, which he’s been at twice in the last week. Since we know he’s not the FBI, there’s no claim he can make that will stay the hammer. Therefore there is no reason to await a claim.

Besides, there are other reasons for my actions that have nothing to do with Dave. Think about it.

I'm too dense. Spell it out for me.

The second reason has a little something to do with Dave. He’d voiced suspicion of avinas. I figured that, with a little pressure, that suspicion would become a vote and we could move this game (which was stagnating) along. I’m glad it worked, now I can only hope that I’m right about avinas being scum.

This level of blackmail and forcing of hands is not in any way a pro-town action.

This is a ridiculous accusation. Blackmail would be something like: I have proof that you are scum, JD, but I’ll keep it to myself if you take your vote off of me. I’ve done no such thing. I suppose you could stretch to say that's what I what I was doing with Dave, but I never gave him an ultimatum and my suspicions were stated up-front.

Nor have I forced anyone’s hand. In fact, I’ve done the opposite. I’ve given ample opportunity for anyone who

really

wants to avoid the lynch to unvote. Notice that, though two people on the wagon are saying they want the lynch delayed, neither of them unvoted. Three of the four people on the wagon have posted since my forewarning, which was all my last post was. And forewarning of the hammer is

extremely

pro-town.

Gob says I applied a time constraint but I’ve done no such thing. Any one of those three could have unvoted but they did not. I could have simply hammered in #244 but I did not. What I applied was

a time extension

before hanging the player who has been my explicit #1 suspect for most of the day.

unvote; vote: avinashv

Goodnight.

[Ythill]

I would guess either you and Avina are Scumbuddies... OR you're the SK

Note the apparent surety of avin's alignment, stated before the card-flip. I certainly hope avinas is scum, but Jenter sounds like he knows it to be true.

[Ythill]

These latest posts from avin do not seem to suggest a favorable outcome. I suppose we'll know for sure soon enough.

[Ythill]

@ JD: Right. Because your case is uber-compelling. The only reasonable point you made against me suggests that I'm mafia, but you're claiming I'm the SK. And now you're tunneling.

I'll look over the wagon during the next couple of days. There is no reason to rush things.

[Ythill]

I dislike two of Ythill's moves. I don't like the rush-lynch on avinashv...

I can't believe you're accusing me of rushing the lynch. You had a chance to unvote and did not. You are as responsible for the speed of the lynch as I am. The game was stagnating. Now we have information.

...and I don't like the Dave vote. You're saying that your vote on Dave was made to pressure Dave into voting? What a crazy plan.

I said that was

one of

the reasons, and I listed the others. Are you misinterpreting me or misrepresenting me? Also, meta me to find my penchant for crazy plans. D1 of Mini 539 is a good example.

And forewarning of the hammer is

extremely

pro-town.

Thanks for this, can you tell me what other actions that you've made are pro-town?

I don’t like the insinuation. I made that statement in reference to JD who was trying to say my warning of the hammer was anti-town. I’m assuming the question is rhetorical.

You basically said "you have a few hours to post or you're dead" which IS blackmail. That really looks to me just as a way to justify your hammer.

The extension had nothing to do with avinas. It was posted for those who demanded that we wait for a claim, which was pointless (I already explained why). I did mention that avinas had a few hours to claim, but he would have claimed vanilla even if he was scum. Also, look up blackmail in the dictionary. What you are claiming I did was

extortion

but that's not even true because I never said a claim would stay my hand.

Discussing NKs seems to always get bogged down in WIFOM. For example, the Jenter NK could be construed as pointing toward JD, since Jenter clearly didn't like him/ was convinced he was scum...

I don't think JD is the SK, and I don't think he would have killed Jenter if he was. Whomever killed the SK probably wanted the option of setting up JD or myself for the lynch. But you're right, it's a WIFOM game that will reveal no definitive answer. Why did you bring it up?

Ugh. Will

everyone

not voting Ythill

right this instant

please explain why they are not doing so in one paragraph or less.

Because self-voting is scummy?

Sorry this is all defense. I’m working ridiculously long hours today and tomorrow but I’ll have time on Friday and Saturday to reread D1 and get some hunting done.

[Ythill]

LOL. EBWOP...

Whomever killed the SK...

Should say "Whomever killed Jenter...."

[Ythill]

Forewarning of the hammer is not anti-town only when you are giving notice longer than 48 hours.

Thank you, oh great decider of arbitrary deadline criteria.

My criteria were as follows. I had a date with my wife that night. I checked the thread before we went out and saw that the people who had explicitly stalled (and another wagoneer) had posted again after my warning. None of them had unvoted.

Call it scummy if you like, of course, but I wasn't waiting for avin (who had been gone for a week) so the

only

person I dissed was cam.

JD, don't you find it suspicious that gob and seth asked the hammer to be withheld but didn't unvote after the forewarning? Or are you tunneling so hard on me that you're not hunting anymore?

[Ythill]

Replies first, then I'll get down to the business of looking at the evidence...

I like for people to post every 48 hours in games that I mod, although I generally don't enforce until 72 - not arbitrary. It's based on actually knowing how play works here.

This is nothing but an appeal to authority. Your experience doesn't make you right about everything and, in fact, you've already demonstrated a less-than-perfect knowledge of the game with your D1 mass-claim argument.

Your point here being...?

That I had criteria and that they were less arbitrary than yours. For example, I might have posted a 48 hour notice and had nobody post between that and the hammer. My "few hours" was based on checking the thread later and, seeing that 3/4 wagoneers had posted without unvoting, I figured enough time had passed.

What did you stand to lose by waiting? Someone might unvote and make you miss your chance perhaps?

You're mixing suspicions again. The SK (whom you accuse me of being) gains nothing from a quick lynch. Your suggestion here only befits mafia. Are you sure you don't want to start claiming I'm mafia?

@Ythill: Why are you saying I asked for the hammer to be withheld?

My bad. Reading back, the post I was referring to was #233 which was posted by Dave, not Seth. Sorry about that. Been working too many hours lately.

I do think it's strange that JD and Ythill both seem to agree that you are decidedly pro-town...

My "decidedly pro-town" read came before gob's shenanigans of stalling while failing to unvote. This sullies gob a bit in my mind, though not enough to call him mafia. I'm thinking that, if gob is not town, he's more likely the SK than mafia.

[Ythill]

Based on the events of yesterday, my current views are as follows. Dave and Cam are the most likely mafia. Either Gob or Seth are the SK. JD is town.

I’m not opposed to a D2 FBI claim but I’m also not sure about gob’s projections. I think the chances for town might be even better than he’s claiming.

One negative side is the risk that the FBI investigated Jenter. I don’t think this is likely. I believe that the FBI investigated JD, myself, or Seth. It’s obvious that the FBI got an innocent read, otherwise he’d have claimed already and we’d be on D3.

So… assuming FBI

did not

investigate Jenter and

did

hit innocent last night…

We have two confirmations as far as today’s lynch is concerned, because the best strategy will be to grant immunity to the FBI

and

his innocent. I say this because I believe lynching the SK is most beneficial to town today.

If we go by this strategy, there is a 50/50 chance that the innocent is mafia. If he is, there is a 2 in 4 chance of hitting mafia or SK with the lynch. If the innocent is town, there is a 3 in 4 chance of hitting anti-town with the lynch. In either case, if town is lynched, the SK might no-kill but, even if he kills, he has a 2 in 3 chance of hitting mafia.

So… every chance the town gets to catch scum is 50% or better and the pool of options diminishes substantially with each failed attempt. And we are in a scenario where either we trade scum for FBI straight across, or the FBI is guaranteed a second investigation.

I believe an FBI claim is the right move for today

so long as he did not investigate Jenter

.

[Ythill]

#1 - Needless ad hom.

#2 - Strawman - I never claimed that my experience made me correct. I stated my opinion on the argument., something that you asked for.

#1 - Ad hom? Fair enough. I don't think it was needless considering the appeal to authority.

#2 - Show where I asked. You said something was scummy. I said it was pro-town. You said it was only pro-town under certain circumstances. I called those circumstances arbitrary. You said they were not arbitrary because of your modding experience. Period.

Why are you lying? What are you trying to cover up?

There was no lie. I gave a "few hours" warning. I was vague on purpose.

I checked back a "few hours" later to find that 3/4 had posted and I hammered. If I had checked back to find nobody had posted, I

probably

would have made a check-in post. Fact is, I didn't hammer until 3/4 of the wagon had posted.

The SK gains just as much.

This argument is the content equivilent of "nuh-uh!"

The SK

must

find at least one scum before D3. That fact is apparent in our current situation, where the SK may be forced to no-kill tonight. A quick-lynch is not a benefit to somone who must find scum. Nor is a townie lynch a benefit to the SK until one mafia hangs.

Let me guess, your reply is going to be some variant of "nuh-uh," right?

[Ythill]

How'd you connect Dave and Cam as mafia?

Cam was the sleeper on the avin wagon. Dave was staying away because of that, but keeping his options open, until pressure forced him on. Cam chimed in with you to defend Dave, but his defenses seemed more contrived and argumentative.

I also have suspicions against them individually, which is the main reason I named them.

I don't see how you can be so sure that Seth or I are SK either.

Easy. If Dave + cam = mafia, that only leaves me, JD, you, and Seth. I know I'm town and I'm almost as sure that JD is, which leaves you and Seth.

If there's something wrong with my projections can you address them directly?

Sorry. I did but it kind of got lost in my own projections. I think that you put too much weight on finding mafia because I believe finding the SK is more important today. So I think that leaving the FBI's innocent out of the possible lynches for today is a good strategic move and your numbers don't suggest that.

Other than that, I think your projections look right, though it did lose me a little at the end (as you foresaw).

Considering my adjustment (immunity for the N1 FBI target) I think an FBI claim is the best option today

as long as he didn't investigate Jenter

(which is another possibility you missed).

I also don't see how we could possibly be "certain [we] can hit scum."

[Ythill]

I think Ythill is

some

form of scum... and I would be more sure if he wasn't making so many good points as to why he's more likely scum than SK.

Ah how the story changes. I suppose I should start arguing that I'm town.

I was not in any way stating that my opinion was better than yours because of experience.

It was heavily implied.

How is "a few hours" less arbitrary than 48 or 3 or 72?

The phrase is not. The actual timing of the hammer, being based on players' actions rather than an incriment of time, is less arbitrary. Moreover, you applying that magical number to whether someone else's actions are scummy or not makes it even more arbitrary, which was my point.

How is vagueness in any way helpful to the town in this instance except as a fearmongering tool?

A specific warning could effect the actions of the scum. For example, a player who checks in 11 hours after a 10 hour limit has been set.

It also wouldn't allow flexibility on my part. If I'd said, "I'll hammer in six hours," and then checked in six hours later to see that nobody had posted, I'd have to choose between going back on my stated course of action or hammering with zero feedback, both detrimental to town.

Finally, the vague statement "a few hours" conveys a sense of urgency, motivating concerned players to post and, if they are serious about waiting, to unvote immediately.

There was no argument presented...

That's what I was saying. It was a stance masquerading as an argument and I wanted to pull the mask off.

Unless the SK is near-certain that the person they're lynching is scum, in which case they would want to lynch before they missed their chance.

The same would be true of a townie. So your statement amounts to

Ythill is the SK because he did this thing that is a likely action from any role.

Needless attack.

Counter attack. And it wasn't needless. You may be town but I'm not about to let you push me around. We can't afford the mislynch.

Quite fun arguing with you, BTW.

[Ythill]

@ Seth: We have no consensus as to whether or not the FBI should claim, and obviously he hasn't so he, at least, isn't ready to. Why are you trying to out him? What is your opinion on an FBI claim today?

Thankfully, your exploration of this topic is entirely WIFOM. There is only one person we can be absolutely sure is not the FBI, but I'm not going to give a name or a reason.

I don't know why you said, "Ythill now

seems

to be advocating a claim," (italics mine). This is now my third time explicitly stating that, IMO, the best move at this point is an FBI claim

unless he investigated Jenter

. I've already explained why.

[Ythill]

This is why logic is more and more becoming a failing point in mafia and psychoanalysis is becoming a great and highly useful tool - you have to try to understand people's intentions by working on as many levels of competence, intelligence and rationality as humanly possible.

QFT. I'm interested in your case against Seth.

I'd like

everyone

to give a simple yes or no answer. Do you think the FBI should claim before we move on? We already know JD's opinion and my own.

I'm withholding my vote until we have consensus on the claim.

[Ythill]

(Why "thankfully" anyway, Ythill?)

Because it means you haven't revealed any important information.

@Ythill: I think what I meant was, it seems as if, since you advocate so strongly, if you were the FBI, you would have claimed, unless you investigated Jenter.

Or I could have advocated strongly without claiming to hide my identity. Like I said, WIFOM. Sorry you hear that so much, but it's true.

But SK would be better.

Which is why the FBI should claim IMO, but I'll follow consensus. So far we are 3:2 in favor of a claim. In a matter this important, a tie should go to not claiming, so I guess it's all up to Seth.

...this push for everyone to clarify their stance re: FBI claim is possibly a gambit?

I just want to know where everyone stands on this issue. Also, since I'm supporting a claim, I want to see if there is majority support. I can see how it could be construed as a gambit, but it would only work as one in extremely specific circumstances and, even then, it wouldn't accomplish a whole lot.

[Ythill]

Hellllloooooo???

[Ythill]

QFT (all of JD's #313).

3 of the people still in this game are not acting with the best intentions of the town in mind...

Are you suggesting that we forego the lynch, because scum will inevitably vote? Town comprises a majority faction at this point. Acting as a team will allow us to win this game, it will also help us to discover those who would manipulate our consensus for illicit gain.

Based on people's reactions to the plan the SK could probably pick out who is or isn't the FBI.

I'm openly and proactively supporting a FBI claim. What you say is true and presents a risk to the town, but the course of action I'm pursuing makes that risk moot.

I think it's most likely going to be used later as evidence towards the lynch.

You are absolutely right. I will use whatever information we have gathered in this thread to lynch the bad guys and I hope that, if you are town, you will do the same. I don't believe that someone's opinion in this matter, by itself, will provide inscrutible evidence of alignment, but it will certainly help. As will considering the manner in which that opinion was presented.

What bothers me about your play, Seth, is that you obviously thought revealing the FBI was a good idea. You demonstrated this by attempting a WIFOM process of elimination to narrow down the possibilities. But when it was clearly stated that an FBI claim would narrow down the SK possibilities in the same way, you balked.

Note that everyone except Seth has explicitly stated that they believe a claim would help. The only difference in opinion is whether we should go ahead with it now, or as a last resort. If he's the SK, Seth's sweating now because everyone else knows that an FBI claim will make it much easier to catch him and, even if he's not caught, offer a chance of forcing him to no-kill.

He therefore can't support the claim. But neither can he vote against it, because his earlier actions don't jibe with that line of thinking.

Gob (my other SK suspect) was the one who brought up this idea today when he was of the opinion that it would help find

mafia

, but he's now balked as well, saying that we should go through with the plan at some vague future time if things don't work as well as we'd like. His statement is ambivalent and dangerously subjective, but I don't think it's as suggestive of alignment as Seth's actions.

It's interesting that both had a hand in initiating this (gob by starting the conversation and Seth with his process of elimination) but both are now of the belief that my attempt to include everyone in the decision is a gambit.

@ Seth: All I'm asking for is your "yes" or "no" on claiming now. You keep posting arguments that imply that opinion, and I don't see the townie benefit to keeping it vague. So please answer now. Last chance before I consider this a hung jury and move on.

[Ythill]

Thanks for being explicit, Seth. Of course the question of why you leaned both ways is still valid, but I think it takes a back seat to the result of your vote.

Consensus is settled @ 4:2 in favor of the claim, with the only dissent questioning the timing. On behalf of the majority, I'm asking the FBI to claim at this time

unless you investigated Jenter

.

Once the FBI names his investigation result, we will have a pool of four folks to select our SK lynch from. Just for the chance of showing off, I'm going to guess that the investigation target was JD.

And you were right Seth, I'm not the FBI.

[Ythill]

@ gob: Oh yeah... sorry: brain fart. You're totally right.

Now I'm

really

hoping he didn't investigate Jenter.

[Ythill]

Unless we get a counter-claim (which we shouldn't), the SK suspects have now been narrowed down to Dave, gob, Seth, and myself.

Dave's playstyle would be counter-productive to SK. Of course y'all don't know I'm not the SK, but I do. As I said earlier, my suspects are Seth or gob.

Since cam is town and I still believe JD is town, it comes down to which of the SK suspects I think is acting more like mafia and my pick would have to be Seth. Which means gob is the SK. Interesting little preemptive defense in #319, huh?

vote: goborage

[Ythill]

Explain please.

Already have. SK must hunt until one scum is dead. Dave is not hunting. Dave is mafia and therefore not the SK.

What constitutes "more like mafia"?

Hunting less, positioning more. Being more reactive than proactive. You know, being scummy. I'd look back and put together the quotes except I'm advocating for

not hanging

Seth today.

Your read on 319 is pure WIFOM - it could just as easily have been a pro-town move.

Yes, it could have but it was not. My belief that you are the SK is not based on #319 at all. My belief that #319 was a preemptive defense is based entirely on you being the SK. That's not WIFOM.

Another thing that is not WIFOM: you were the one person to explicitly stall the claim other than the FBI, and you did so by advocating a straight scum lynch when it is clearly in the town's best interests to hang the SK today.

I

could

be wrong. I seriously doubt I'm wrong about Dave. However, there is the

chance

that JD is mafia, you are town, and Seth is the SK. I suppose, by that reckoning, it might be better to hang Seth today (because we hit scum by either scenario) but I'd like to talk about lynching you first because, fact is, I think I'm right about JD.

[Ythill]

now, demonstrate a clear link between Dave and Seth.

Seth is silent during the early attacks on Dave.

#140 starts out by implying that Dave thinks high-activity is pro town. Then he gets to Seth and reads him as low-activity and therefore neutral. Then he says that too much activity is anti-town. Huh? His opinion pivots clearly on the "Seth" entry.

Cam and gob both jumped on me for making that reaching attack against Dave D1. JD was preoccupied with the VC and avinas was absent. Seth is the only one who posted support for the case and he didn't question my motives at all. Why not? The case wasn't very strong.

Dave only mentions Seth twice more and it's for low activity. Likewise, Seth only mentions Dave's low activity in the handful of other references he makes.

I don't know if it's "a clear link" but it's suggestive. I normally don't like to persue this sort of evidence unless one party is proven scum; too much confirmation bias.

Somebody else should look at evidence suggesting they

are not

scumbuddies.

[Ythill]

I think we've come to the conclusion that Dave is a noob.

I still think he could be an alt. Real n00bs tend to say too much, not too little.

I never advocated a mafia lynch.

And I never said you did. You advocated a "straight scum lynch," meaning that you lumped mafia and SK together. You did this both in your original claim plan and again when you said, "My new conclusion is that if you are certain you can hit scum then the FBI claim is bad." You then withdrew your support from the claiming idea shortly after it was shown to be an effective method for hunting the SK alone.

[Ythill]

Probably just the case in my limited experience then.

[Ythill]

Dave's "mistake" was made

before

the incorrect Vote Count was posted, so that's not a valid reason.

I want to hear from Dave and avin on this issue.

I don't think Seth and Dave are scumbuddies partly because of this.

Seth is the only one who posted support for the case and he didn't question my motives at all.

I don't see how this connects Seth with Dave. If anything it connects you and Seth.

You seem to be under the impression that scumbuddies will defend each other and provide obvious evidence of their relationship. I don't think that's true. I can only cite my experience here, but mafia more often ignore one another and/or provide weak support to cases against their buddies, in case they are lynched and revealed as scum.

Defending Dave against my weak attack was more likely a town (or SK) tendancy, IMO. It is fitting that a buddy of Dave's would fail to question the case for fear of making a connection, and that he may support that case with a weak attack that points out the obvious.

But let's assume your argument is valid and that Seth and I are scumbuddies. That would mean the SK is either you or Dave and I think it's clear that Dave is not the SK. Furthermore, since Dave is the one who -on his own- seems the most likley to be mafia, it makes sense to me that the SK (you) would want to set him up as the lynch.

I never withdrew anything. Right from the start I was on the fence with the claim plan.

You were the first to bring up the D2 FBI claim. In #285, you compare three scenarios. You find two of those scenarios more favorable for town if the FBI claims. One you find less favorable but unlikely to happen. You

do

claim to be on the fence but the slant of your opinion is apparent, and your angle is that the claim will help us find the SK

or

mafia.

In #289, after I've tweaked the claim plan to make it more likely to hit the SK, you post in hindsight to call one scenario worse for town. You explicitly state that your "new conclusion" (implying an old conclusion existed) is that we should only claim as a last resort to a straight scum lynch (implying that the old conclusion was that we should claim sooner).

In #300, you register you vote for claim consensus as "no atm," solidifying your opinion that we should prefer a straight scum lynch over a plan that makes it easier to single out the SK.

So yes, you did withdraw support. You did so when it was pointed out that giving immunity to the FBI's innocent would make us more likely to hang the SK or to neutralize his NK. By your plan, there was a decent chance of us hitting mafia and leaving the SK alive with the FBI's identity revealed, which would be a best-case-scenario for the SK.

[Ythill]

...and stuff.

[Ythill]

Whichever of which three?

@ Seth: IMO scumhunting = anything proactive that leads to catching scum (attacks, questions, pointing out out inconsistancies, setting traps, etc).

[Ythill]

Whichever of which three?

Cease the dumb act. Please.

It's not a dumb act. Look at what you said...

This leaves (1)camisade/(2)Ythill/(3)Dave. If (4)gob =/= town then gob = SK.

I'm going to vote for whichever of these three gets a vote first, and no one else.

That's four, and one of the first three is the FBI. I was wondering if you meant me, Dave, & gob or me, Dave, and cam. So, whichever of which three?

Assuming, from your last post, that it's the latter... Why don't you believe cam's claim?

[Ythill]

Quite.

Anyway... I am still of the belief that our set-up fits one of two patterns:

(1) gob = SK; Seth + Dave = mafia
(2) Seth = SK; Dave + JD = mafia

I think (1) is far more likely but, just in case, Seth might be the best lynch because he is almost certainly scum of some kind.

Yes, I've said this all before but I'm reiterating. Please argue with me about this if you do not agree. Especially cam, whom I trust to be town. I'll try to keep an open mind.

Also, JD, please explain why you are so certain Seth is town. I just don't see it.

[Ythill]

I have, but I'll appease you and do another isolated reread. After I'm done, I'll expect an answer from you.

Working an 18 hour shift today, so I'll get to this over the weekend.

[Ythill]

Reread complete. I still don't see where you get the immovable town read from. He's mostly null, playing a little dopey (sorry) and a little n00b. There are some general scumtells and the suggestion of ulterior motives, there is also a certian aloofness that seems scummy. I don't see any serious towntells.

I suppose the third option is gob=SK, Dave+JD=mafia, but I still see JD as townier than Seth.

So, JD, explain why you are so convinced Seth is town. Maybe I'm missing something?

[Ythill]

...of all of us, he has the least connections to other players.

Clearly caused by his posting rate, not his alignment.

[Ythill]

@ Seth: Who are the mafia?

[Ythill]

Yay! Hi TSQ.

Please confirm that Seth is your scumbuddy.

[Ythill]

@JD: Damn it, answer my question. Why are you so convinced that Seth is town?

@Seth: You too. Who do you think are the mafia?

@TSQ: Any words of widom from your reread? Due to your predecessor's actions, I'm convinced you are scum but I'd still like your help finding the SK. Enemy of my enemy and all that jazz.

@Everyone: What's your opinion of gob's vote for Dave/TSQ?

[Ythill]

Thanks JD.

[Ythill]

@Seth: So you have exactly the same view as me except you've swapped my name in for yours. I suppose I can't argue with

most

of your logic.

@JD: No hurry. Think things through.

[Ythill]

Sorry to have vanished. I'm reinstalling my system at home and shouldn't be posting from work. Will catch up tomorrow or Friday.

...saw the votes BTW. I will be back to defend myself soon.

[Ythill]

Sorry about the delay. Like I said, I had to reinstall my OS but it’s all better now.

@ Seth: Yes, TSQ is hostile. It’s either endearing or annoying… the former, IMO.

The next person I would look for, based on my own perceptions of how a SK would act, is YThill. This is because to a SK, any lynch is a good one.

Obviously your own perceptions are based on the SK role in general, as opposed to this set-up. As I’ve said before, it behooves the SK to scumhunt.

Therefore, I would expect a SK to keep their options open.

So an SK wouldn’t, for example, blatantly clear JD? Or try to push through a plan by which we would permanently rule out two lynch targets? Your theory of an SK’s priorities does not fit well with my behavior.

Ythill has sat on the fence the whole game, and attacked pretty much everyone at one point or another.

I must disagree with the first part of this statement. I have made a number of declarations of my beliefs and they have been decisive. I became convinced of A’s scumminess D1 and was instrumental in getting him lynched. Nor was I quiet about it. Though it’s true that I spent some of D2 working towards the claim plan rather than naming suspects, I have since made declarations about the alignment possibilities that some might call closed-minded.

Having attacked everyone at one point or another? Guilty as charged, but I don’t think that’s a behavior exclusive to the SK. Note that some of those attacks allowed me to make determinations about folks’ alignments. For example, my early attacks against JD allowed me to determine that he was not the SK.

He only seems to commit to "hard reads" on players when the momentum, and writing, is already on the wall.

So your point is that the writing is already on the wall about you being mafia?

Also, the "I waited for players to check in before I hammered so they are just as responsible as I am." is completely bullshit. First of all, you were the agent of action, not them.

Everyone who voted was an agent of the action. I never claimed that their participation somehow lessened my culpability, only that their lack of unvote negated any statement they made about how I was

solely

responsible.

You are solely responsible for not giving A a chance to respond to accusations.

Exactly the type of scummy statement I meant to nip in the bud. Your predecessor tried to set-up the statement you just made by claiming that we needed to wait before lynching. Yet he didn’t unvote. He was given the opportunity to. Therefore he and, by association, you cannot claim that I was

solely

responsible for this.

Did I hammer? Yes. Was it too quick? Matter of opinion… but the statement could be valid from a certain point of view. Was I therefore responsible for a mislynch? Absolutely, though I felt it was a good lynch before the card-flip. Was I

solely

responsible for the lynch or even the speed of it? Absolutely not.

I didn’t need to hear more from A, and I explained why. Obviously neither Dave nor gob needed to hear more from him either,

but they tried to pretend that they did

which is far scummier than anything you’ve posted about me.

I would expect an experienced player to do the exact same thing you did... That is exactly what you did, and the fact that you did it makes you more scummy, not less, in my eyes.

Laughing at this. If you would expect an “experienced player” to do something as the SK, and go as far as to include that qualification of experience in the accusation, then what do you have to say about my lack of experience? This is like my fifth or sixth game of mafia ever, anywhere. Not playing the n00b card because I have learned a lot in the past few months but there’s no way I’d call myself an experienced player. For instance, this is the first time I’ve ever played a game with an SK, first open set-up, first game with less than twelve players, etc.

[Ythill]

P.S... Anyone who likes to meta, check my post records for an ongoing game in which I was recently NKed and was scum.

Do not talk outside the game thread about an ongoing game except where allowed to do so by your role. Likewise, do not use bbcode to hide secret messages - this equates to discussion outside the thread.

Andy

[Ythill]

I didn’t need to hear more from A, and I explained why. Obviously neither Dave nor gob needed to hear more from him either,

but they tried to pretend that they did

which is far scummier than anything you’ve posted about me.

How is waiting for the potential lynchee to make a final post scummy?

Don't play dumb. I never said waiting was scummy. I said pretending that you wanted to wait (but not doing anything about it) was scummy.

[Ythill]

P.S.

Thanks for the reminder, Andy.

My hope was that nobody would actually

talk about

the ongoing game but I suppose I could have been more explicit in that.

[Ythill]

I wasn't in a rush, which should be evidenced that I had previously asked for Avin’s hammer to be withheld, before I got the last of the information I was after. I already explained why I didn't wait at the end. Your only stated purpose for waiting was to get a claim. A claim was pointless and unlikely to come.

Refraining from waiting when there is no reason to wait is not rushing.

You did not make a definitive "He's scum" stance in a way which was memorable so that the lynch could clearly be attributed to you.

Avin is really setting off my scum-sensors. He’s seriously buddying to JD, which I think is not indicative of JD’s alignment, because scum are more likely to target town with this behavior. I really don’t like his “your work is not your own” accusation against Jenter, because really what difference does it make?

Summing up, my top suspects of the moment are avin and cam (in that order)…

I even gave (and am entertaining) one bit of evidence that suggests you could be town, because I am interested in learning the truth, not manipulating the thread. You twisted this evidence of my open mind into an accusation against me. You demanded a vote and then turned that vote into another accusation. You posted questionable defenses to my reasonable accusations, and slanted your defense as to reflect suspicion back onto me.

You went on to post a false dichotomy that Jenter correctly called you out on, and then dismissed his own defense that cited your attack as hypocrisy, neither addressing that defense nor withdrawing your accusation. You missed gob’s post (#115), which could suggest a lack of honest curiosity. And you seem to have taken Seth’s simple explanation of why he didn’t directly answer your question as an accusation that you are following me, which is far too proactively defensive for my liking.

You've moved back up my scumlist but I'm still happier with my vote on Avinas.

Are you saying you'd hammer avinashv if he was at L-1?

More insinuating than saying, but yes. Avinas is still my PE#1.

These are only a few examples. I skimmed over less explicit accusations, as well as a period when I asked some hard questions of Avin and his answers cemented my suspicions, not to mention the point where I said I was going to hammer him in a few hours. So the point emerges: did you fail to read the thread or are you building a case of lies?

The point isn't that the SK will never ever say "X is town" or "X is scum"...

Yet I said those things plenty. Did I change my mind from time to time? Yes. But it was as I received new evidence. Are you suggesting that deciding everybody's alignment during the random phase and then tunneling in spite of the ongoing game is a protown style?

My opinion has not moved with the town. It has not moved in response to being questioned by others. It has changed only as new evidence and realizations have come.

Considering a large % of the town had called for a claim, if you were a townie, it is still in your best interest to let the player claim even if you did not personally need it, because it is good for the town.

Two of seven is a large percentage? How do you know they were town? I saw no pro-town reason to withhold the hammer and I believe that the timing of the lynch produced good tells on people. Perhaps you see this differently because one of those tells embroils you.

6 games makes you a veteran in my eyes.

Okay. Thanks, I guess.

So your argument amounts to: I think a fat SK would act exactly as you have. Oh, you're only 150 pounds? Well, I think that's fat.

You still haven't shown why an

experienced

intermediate level player would act that way as the SK. Nor have you shown that I am likely to act that way independent of the shifting stereotype you have arbitrarily and stubbornly placed me in.

[Ythill]

Will do tomorrow night. I'm working a 26 hour shift starting in about an hour.

[Ythill]

I think you need to reread what my argument was in "the X is town Y is scum" argument. You responded to exactly what I said I wasn't saying lol.

Well... if that was what you had been saying, I win damnit!

Though I quoted and responded to the wrong bit after misreading it, I believe I still addressed the argument. Your take is that my suspicions have been vague and flighty enough to craft a net allowing me to reasonably vote for whomever. I said that those suspicions did change but only based on the changing evidence. You attributed an ulterior motive and I countered with the actual motive.

I also looked back but couldn't find where I called Dave town. I did defend him against allegations of lurking (that came from my main suspect) but I only said that IMO he wasn't lurking. Can you quote my town read on Dave?

Moreover, I still believe your opinion of the SK’s likely strategy is flawed. Look at the facts:

• SK: Loses if we hang him today. Likely to lose if we hang town today. Can only kill the FBI if we hang scum today.
• Scum: Might win tonight if we hang town today. Could prefer an SK lynch to a town lynch but it’s really a judgment/strategy call and they can still win the game no matter who we hang today.
• Town: Might lose tonight if we hang town today. Obviously benefits more from a SK lynch than a scum lynch, though they can win the game in either case.

The SK is

the least likely

to want to keep his options open because he is only likely to win if we hang one of the two scum. This situation was similar (though not as desperate) on D1.

Now, it seems to me that the SK would be scumhunting avidly on D1 (not Dave, JD, or cam). The SK is likely to want to appear as if he isn’t interested in a D1 mass claim (not JD). He is likely to try and appear interested in a claim before D1 lynch, even if the claim is not needed (Dave and gob). He is unlikely to support a plan that would make it easier to find the SK (gob and Cam), but would be interested in a plan that reveals the FBI identity (everyone, though not all agreed on the timing) and/or one that makes it easier to find mafia (only gob strongly supported this while opposing the anti-SK version).

The SK would also be unwilling to lynch someone who is unlikely to be mafia. Seth and I are voting gob who is

obviously

either the SK or town. JD and TSQ are voting for me when all of their allegations point to me being the SK and a few points suggest I am not mafia (plus JD has been cleared). Cam’s vote doesn’t matter in this regard because he is the un-counter-claimed FBI. The only player left is gob and he’s voting for the person more likely than anyone else to be

mafia

.

TSQ: Forget, for the moment, my barbed counter-attack about you being scum because it made you miss my point...

If you believe I am only posting my suspicions after the writing is on the wall, then you must also believe that the writing is on the wall regarding gob. Why are you persuing me instead of him? What I mean is, what evidence do you have that he is not the SK (allowing you to dismiss the writing on the wall)?

[Ythill]

And... hi Grimmy! I am quite interested in your opinions once you catch up.

[Ythill]

Sigh...

Again. Note that I waited until those who asked to stall the hammer had posted but not unvoted. You will see my full defense, in argument form, during your reread.

[Ythill]

Just curious, would you make the same play again in the future?

It would depend on the situation but I wouldn't specifically avoid it because of what's transpired here. I mean, sure, people have said it was scummy but if they lynch me they will see my alignment and then they'll look at it from my point of view.

See, from my point of view the move caused two players to reveal their true colors. I can't complain about that.

[Ythill]

Precicely those two. However...

It is not just that they didn't remove their votes (which I wouldn't find scummy by itself), but that they also pretended they didn't want to lynch Avin yet.

Due to other evidence it is my opinion that TSQ is simple mafia while gob is the SK. Nothing new here.

[Ythill]

@Ythill: if we are a scumpair, we're sure being obvious about it.

If we are a scumpair, I got the wrong role PM.

@ JD: Actually, my "cop-out" response is: why didn't they unvote when the hammer was imminent? This sort of negates your projected response, but thanks for trying to be efficient.

TSQ can't really explain why Dave didn't unvote. However, gob has stated that he thought I would honor his request to withhold the hammer. Why would he think this?

If I am scum or SK and Avin was town or SK, I certainly wouldn't have withheld the hammer. If I am town, I wouldn't have lied about the fact that I was going to hammer. The

only

scenario where I would have withheld that hammer is if Avin and I were scumbuddies. At the time, gob had neither made nor hinted at any such theory.

In the absence of his silly excuse, the only reason I can see for gob (1) saying he wanted to wait on the lynch and (2) neglecting to unvote when a lynch was imminent is that he actually did want to lynch Avin but wanted us to believe otherwise.

Seriously, JD, these are some pretty solid tells. I know you can be stubborn but I still don't understand why you can't see what's going on here.

[Ythill]

Was skimming the thread in preparation for making a "where is everyone" post, and I noticed Seth's new sig. I think that's the first time I've been quoted in a sig. It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, like an inverted bunny rabbit.

Anyway... where is everybody?

[Ythill]

Or, y'know, he didn't want to immediately end the day and wanted to make absolutely sure he was ready for this in such a setup where mislynching is so harmful.

Then why didn't he unvote. You know? Like we'd assume that a rational and intelligent member of the town would have in your example?

Stop dilluting the case. Facts:

I wanted to lynch Avin. I had both the power to do so and the power to prevent it at that moment. I was explicit in my intent, allowed gob and Dave to post, and then did exactly what I said I was going to do.

Gob wanted to lynch Avin. He had both the power to do so and the power to prevent it at that moment. When he heard it was going to happen, he

said

that he didn't want it to happen yet but he

failed to excercise

the power to attain that outcome.

It's not like he didn't know he had the power. It's not like he has any reason to assume that I'm town. Did he give such a read? I don't believe so. In fact, he was

suspecting me

just before the lynch, because of my attack on Dave. Why would a townie assume that one of his suspects was a townie?

Short answer: he didn't. He's lying... again.

Perhaps my actions were not the best pro-town course, but they were transparent. Gob's were dishonest. Townies can err strategically but can they accidentally lie?

[Ythill]

Several people had asked ythill NOT to hammer...

Probably just a function of language here, but two is

not

several.

...it was in the towns best interest to wait for the claim, he should have waited...

In hindsight, it was in the town's best interest to not lynch Avin at all. However, from my point of view at the time of the hammer, it was in the town's best interest to not wait.

Avin was quite obviously not the FBI and I explained how I determined that fact. I was not alone in my determination. I was pretty sure (as sure as can be on D1) that he was mafia and I thought that moving forward with the lynch before someone chased a red herring off the wagon was in the town's best interests.

The argument was instead that [Ythill] deprived the town of information, and went against the best interests and wishes of the town.

I gave the information sought, which was: "is Avin the FBI?" I acted in accordance with what I believed the best interests of the town were. I went against the wishes of two players of unconfirmed alignment; you calling them "the town" is inaccurate and could be subtle manipulation on your part since you are one of them.

[Ythill]

@ Seth: Nice dirty trick. All you would have gotten was "bah, go town" or something of the sort, but I like your style.

Seth really doesn't seem to care who gets lynched, nor does he have any thought on the scum setup. I can only attribute this behaviour to an SK.

Actually, the role least likely to care who gets lynched (so long as it is not them) at this point is mafia.

There are several possible scenarios running in my head. Picking an SK is a crapshoot. Depending on who it is, certain mafia pairings become impossible.

We talked about this D1, it's not that difficult. First we identify the FBI and his confirmed non-SK, then we pick out the mafia, then we know who the SK is. It's not the other way around, because one mafia must die for the SK to win and the SK will therefore be harder to catch.

I'm noting that, with me making a strong defense, gob has now taken the "OMG anyone but me!" approach to voting.

I'm also noting that, when questioned, Seth has conveniently forgotten that he

did

name my supposed buddy: TSQ. Maybe he's decided he doesn't want to bus anymore?

[Ythill]

um............ bah?

[Ythill]

LOL. Great game TSQ. You caught me red handed.

I'm claiming bragging rights because I knew who everyone was on D2! And yes, I knew gob was town. I was confident enough that Dave/TSQ was scum that I wasn't going to hold back the NK.

But, honestlty, I was hoping someone would bite on the "gob is most likley the SK but Seth is either SK or mafia" line, to the tune of lynching Seth, so that I could have been proven right, killed Cam, and pushed to lynch gob on D3.

I'm really surprised nobody pointed out that the SK NKed my strongest supporter (Jenter). It's not like I could bring it up myself, but it was kind of the point of, you know, killing my strongest supporter.

My first game as SK and I guess I didn't do too well. I have to wonder though, if TSQ hadn't replaced in...

Anyway... congrats to the mafia.

[Ythill]

@ Shea: Who the hell is Brandi? You know, besides our savior...

Ythill, what made you sure I was mafia?

Exactly what I said... Dave was obv-scum. His interactions with Avin and his reaction to my statement that lurking couldn't help mafia proved it to me beyond any doubt. Cam was confirmed town. Gob and JD seemed very townie to me, you were the only one left. The way you buddied up to me after I attacked you was another point against you.

I really didn't see a lot of buddy evidence. And I don't usually trust buddy evidence when I do see it.

...what the hell am I doing that makes people think I'm cold, unhelpful, aloof, and egotistical?

I don't see you as overly egotistical, so I don't know about that one.

Aloof and cold probably come from the same root. You just seem very distant from the game, not very curious, not prone to anger, not very tense in a pressure situation. Maybe it's just your writing style, but you don't seem to care who wins or loses.

Unhelpful is due to your low post rate and lack of original ideas. I see you commenting a lot about what others bring up but not much initiative to bring up your own points. Or maybe you don't bring them up forcefully enough that they register with the reader. What's interesting about this is that you seem far more "helpful" as scum.

[Ythill]

The way you buddied up to me after I attacked you was another point against you.

I did?

Maybe not intentionally, but yeah. Attacking gob, agreeing that Dave was obv-scum and clearing JD. You pretty much agreed with everything I said, except you said that I was scum instead of you. A townie whom I had just accused of being scum probably wouldn't allow himself to agree so much with my line of thinking, because he would be suspicious of my alignment.