On December 24 2012 12:48 Aquanim wrote:
Well, I'll start with the good old cliched question of who are your top scumreads and why.
The lynch was not very informative, what with the incredible bandwagonning that happened.
KickStart stayed with his convictions about shz, and was not convinced by the list that shz produced.
But he has hardly given us anything else to work with.
I refer you to my earlier post:
+ Show Spoiler +On December 24 2012 03:44 cakepie wrote:shzHis problematic D1 voting behavior has already been described by Kickstart: + Show Spoiler +On December 22 2012 00:04 Kickstart wrote:So I took a look through some filters and the person who stuck out most to me was SHZ. Just a quick lookthrough of his posts shows you that he been very wishy-washy on everything and committed to absolutely nothing. In my mind there are only 2 options for this sort of play, 1 is a timid towny who is unsure of themselves, 2 is scum trying to leave themselves options to try and work their way out of bad commitments. Since I believe this is SHZ's first game I am somewhat inclined to think that he is just a timid towny, but then I look at his voting and his justification behind them (read: NONE) and it seems he doesn't care at all about who gets lynched. Townys should worry very much about who gets lynched because they do not want to lynch town, even first time players know this and typically show that they care about who gets lynched. His votes are a big issue with me and I read them as scummy right now because to me it seems SHZ does not care who gets lynched (it is typical of mafia to not care who gets lynched, as long as it is town getting lynched), look at his vote posts: Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:33 shz wrote:
So if we need another wagon to jump, or not, to jump on:
##Vote: Mocsta
Why?
He/She did start a discussion, but I don't think that was all that useful, other than proving him being active and establish an alibi. Questions like the seafood one waste time and distract from substantial discussion. Also he/she is quite fast on "reading" someone as Town. Additionally he/she asked repeatedly about Mafia strategies.
This is no way a waterproof case, but I think its a start and something we could work with.
Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 13:17 shz wrote:
I would have done it tomorrow but I can do it now I guess.
##Unvote
##Vote cDgCorazon
Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 07:25 shz wrote:
It seems like we have the strongest case against Spag at the moment. I will still keepmy eye on Cora, but for now:
##unvote
##Vote Spaghetticus
@Aqua:
If you did not argue that, then its all good. Of course rational not equals town, but its not equal mafia either. Its neutral. He takes every chance to hop on whatever bandwagon is popular at the moment, providing no reason for being on any of them. Given this I think he is the person I am most suspicious of at the moment and want to see some real reads and commitment, not wishy-washy posts that don't commit himself to anything. @SHZWhy did you jump on every bandwagon without giving any reasons at all for why you think those players are scummy? Do you have any current scum reads that you would be willing to push instead of sheeping? And elaborated upon by Chromatically: + Show Spoiler +On December 23 2012 05:45 Chromatically wrote:shzshz has been playing like classic scum. Real stances are nonexistant, real contribution is nonexistant, yet he manages to blend in and look like a contributor very well. Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:19 shz wrote:
Could not sleep, so I can be at least productive here.
I think we pretty much made it clear that we don't accept lurking as a playstyle for Town, so I don't think this will be much of a problem. If it is, we also made the consequences clear for everyone.
Our focus should be to find null- & unconstructive posts which don't help us at all. That would be a pretty good starting point to pressure and get some more information.
Corazon did indeed more or less only reacted to direct questions and was not that talkative in general. I don't think that is a huge tell, but why not investigate further?
The interesting thing is that he/she kinda defended lurking and lying. I don't agree with the arguments at all, as they seem a bit weak and pointless. His first "contribution" is here. This looks like a good post at first: it's fairly long, it covers a lot of topics. However, all this is is a summary of what's happened so far. He doesn't take any stances on any of the issues of the time: look at the wishy-washiness on Corazon. He's afraid to take an actual stand, so he says things like "they seem a bit weak" instead of taking a position on it himself. This is merely the first in a long line of posts of this type, taking no stances while writing long posts anyway: + Show Spoiler +On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote:As I did not get any sleep tonight, I caught some of it up until now. This is getting somewhere. So I'll start with answering my questions and then stating my thoughts. Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:21 cakepie wrote:
shz: Tried to provide a case on mocsta as an alternative to cDgCorazon. However, the fast town read was first pointed out by spaghetticus, and OmniEulogy was the one who first pointed to the questions about scum startegy. Not sure the case is viable at this point, but I agree that Mocsta seems a bit too eager.
Q: Evaluate my play. Does it look town, or does it look scum? Why? Your analysis is quite thought out and you point out three POIs and try to get something out of it by pressuring them. This is good. At the same time you still trying to get reads on most of the others by asking questions. I don't think these three are your only suspects. All in all I tend towards town as I don't see much evidence which would support you scumminess. I don't agree with your vote for Orangeremi at the moment though. Yes, he did not contribute until now, but I would give him some more hours before lynching him for that. @MocstaSo I'm scum because I said that my case against you wasn't waterproof? What would have happened if I acted so sure about you, as you act about everyone who attacks you? You getting quite defensive and jumping to, rather fast, conclusions about who is mafia and who is not. You changed your vote from me to threesr immediatly to countervote him and then spam a couple of posts saying "how easy it was", "he slipped", in big red bold latter. This is way over dramatized. To top that of you trying to martyr your way into town. I don't like that at all. I'm still not 100% conviced, but this is not helping you. For now my vote stands. And I think threesr, however fishy and rare his posts are at the moment, has a point. You seem quite conviced and at the same you are saying you are not. I don't have an opinion on FatChunk yet, as he did not contribute enough. If we don't find a conses by the lynch-deadline, we should lynch one of the lesser active players, for sure. Answers a question directed to him, defends himself a little against Mocsta, and still takes no stands. Noncommittal reads on Mocsta ("For now my vote stands"), threesr (leaving his options open by throwing a little suspicion his way), and FatChunk (doesn't have an opinion). On December 20 2012 08:45 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:36 cakepie wrote:On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote:
I don't have an opinion on FatChunk yet, as he did not contribute enough. If we don't find a conses by the lynch-deadline, we should lynch one of the lesser active players, for sure. Really? As opposed to Mocsta, who you have your vote on? If you had to lynch for inactivity and/or lack of serious contribution, how would you order the 3-4 candidates? Mocsta did contribute more than FatChunk before I voted him. It seems some of the players have awaken and contributed to the discussion, but some are lurking too much. 1. I'm really getting tired of threesr. Even if he/she isn't mafia he/she is creating so much chaos, only commentates snarky and very brief. He/She is dangerous whethere scum or not. 2. Kickstarter stated that he/she thinks lurking is bad, but lurks him/herself. 3. Orangerem is lurking too much. 4. Sylencia too, but that was announced, so we have to see how the next couple of play-days go. More noncommittal reads. Wants to lynch threesr even if he's not mafia and attacks Kickstart, Orange, and Sylencia for lurking (very easy for scum to do). On December 22 2012 01:58 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 00:04 Kickstart wrote:
@SHZ
Why did you jump on every bandwagon without giving any reasons at all for why you think those players are scummy? Do you have any current scum reads that you would be willing to push instead of sheeping? "Whatever bandwagon is popular right now" is not true. My mocsta vote was to push for an discussion and I did explain my Corazone vote before. If you want to quote, don quote out of context. + Show Spoiler [Corazone reasons] +On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote:
The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects.
Corazon
If Mafia:
- threesr most likely not scum.
- FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr.
If Town:
- threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either.
- FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before.
FatChunk
If Mafia:
- Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed.
- threesr most likely not scum.
If Town:
- Corazone still possible mafia.
- threesr still possbile mafia.
threesr
If Mafia:
- Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk
If Town:
- Corazone still possible mafia.
- FatChunk still possible mafia.
I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. On December 20 2012 12:53 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 11:50 Chromatically wrote:
@shz
We should be lynching the player who is most likely to flip scum, not based on any information we might gain. We can look at association stuff after the flip, but we want to focus on lynching scum before. Based solely on who will flip scum, who do you want to lynch and can you move your vote there? Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 12:48 Chromatically wrote:
@Spag
Our objective as town is to lynch mafia. What we should not be doing is lynching for information instead of lynching mafia. The information gained from a flip is not great enough that we should lynch a townier player. If you look at what shz's post actually says, there's very little actual conclusions that could be drawn. Most of it is just "x is possible scum". All of it is just worrying about the d2 lynch, which we should do on d2 instead of now.
I dislike your post saying that we should "expect a town lynch". Good towns can find scum d1. Good players can be correct in their reads with over "40%" certainty. We we will never be able to be sure, so we have to single some guys out, discuss, search for tells, and lynch one. And I think it is to our benifit to also include possible information we can get from it in our decisions. We will most certainly lynch town too, so better make it worthwhile in terms of information. This is not me saying we should lynch town for information, it is saying we should always keep in mind that our lynch can flip as town, so better take the safe bet and at least get some information out of, if the worst case will happen. I think all three are good (for the amount of information we have) picks. Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 11:56 OmniEulogy wrote:
That is true but I think he's saying all three of them are the top scum picks and then based on information we gain from each of them the one we benefit the greatest from is Corazon from his list. Excactly. But after I read the reasons to vote for Spaghetti, it made sense. Of course it didn't matter anyway because he was dead at that point, but whatever. At the moment I'm leaning forwards FatChunk. But not sure at all at the moment, and I'm busy as fuck so I don't think I can contribute more tonight, I am working on a post with my thoughs on anyone but I have to go now~~. Sorry for the lack of contributions. I will look into FatChunk and see if my suspicion holds true. And I still have the feeling that out of the big mass contributors, there is a scum somewhere.Chroma, Mocsta, etc. Do whatever you think of it. Leans toward FatChunk, but is not sure. Also points the finger at "the big mass contributors", which says nothing at all. Next, let's examine his voting patterns: Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:33 shz wrote:
So if we need another wagon to jump, or not, to jump on:
##Vote: Mocsta
Why?
He/She did start a discussion, but I don't think that was all that useful, other than proving him being active and establish an alibi. Questions like the seafood one waste time and distract from substantial discussion. Also he/she is quite fast on "reading" someone as Town. Additionally he/she asked repeatedly about Mafia strategies.
This is no way a waterproof case, but I think its a start and something we could work with.
The first vote on Mocsta for some fairly lackluster reasons. I'm not going to say much about this, it could have town or scum motivation behind it, really no way to tell. I could see the scum motivation of discrediting an active townie and possibly pushing that as their mislynch if a mafia was in danger. Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote:
The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects.
Corazon
If Mafia:
- threesr most likely not scum.
- FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr.
If Town:
- threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either.
- FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before.
FatChunk
If Mafia:
- Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed.
- threesr most likely not scum.
If Town:
- Corazone still possible mafia.
- threesr still possbile mafia.
threesr
If Mafia:
- Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk
If Town:
- Corazone still possible mafia.
- FatChunk still possible mafia.
I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. He votes Corazon shortly after this post, but with no other justification. He's blatantly lynching for information and is not even paying remote attention to whether Corazon is actually scummy or not. This is the first time he's actually mentioned Corazon since his first (non)read. This was also during the phase of the competing threesr/Corazon wagons, so this is obviously an extremely safe vote. Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 01:57 shz wrote:
Before I'm on the road for most of the day before the lynch:
1. We should not assume someone is playing bad or good because of information from sources outside this game. I don't think this is very worthy of discussion. For all we know everybody could be a smurf, played with a smurf before, or just played somewhere else. Don't assume anything, look at their actions in this game.
2. It is too early to discuss possible SK. We don't know if this role is even in this game. We should stick to looking for scum for now.
3. New development!
- So, Carazon is on the verge of getting lynched today and Spaghetticus comes out of nowhere to help. What does that mean?
Either Carazon is Scum, Spaghetti is not, both are or neither is. If Spaghetti is scum, Carazon is too. Otherwise it does not make sense to help him/her out. But this does not help us very much. So the question is if we should change from Carazon to someone else?
What are the argument for not voting Corazon Spaghetti provided:
- Statistics: This does not matter at all. If there is a 75% propability for the wrong lynch in day it stays the same whether we Lynch Cora or anyonw else.
- Votes arent locked, wie can always change Thema before the deadline.
- There is still discussion going on. Cora defended, people analyized. We are not just stopping to post just because Cora is the target at the moment.
I'm not convinced by Spaghettis arguments. Art the Moment I can see him as scum too. I'm not ruling out voting him out.
- Aquanim changes his vote from Corazon to make a case against Spaghetti.
While I agree that Spaghetti is possible scum, the argument that rational posts = scum is dumb.
If anything overly emotional argumemts are Moore scum. Here's his next big post, as the Spag case has been made, but before the wagon has really taken off. This is another post which looks informative at first, but actually has no content. There's literally no positions taken in this post at all. He has a paragraph about Corazon/Spag associations, but doesn't reach a conclusion. He shoots down a little of Spag's defense, but that's very easy for scum to do. Note that he doesn't actually vote Spag at this time, even though the case was posted already. Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 07:25 shz wrote:
It seems like we have the strongest case against Spag at the moment. I will still keepmy eye on Cora, but for now:
##unvote
##Vote Spaghetticus
@Aqua:
If you did not argue that, then its all good. Of course rational not equals town, but its not equal mafia either. Its neutral. Blatant sheep onto the wagon when it's finally clear that Spag is the lynch for today (6 on Spag v 3 on Cora). Zero justification is given at all for this vote, ever. Note that he only votes Spag after the wagon has taken off and it's clearly a safe vote. Apart from that, that's it. shz has: - sheeped onto Cora and Spag with no reasoning when the wagons took off - posted long posts that look good, but take no stances at all - lynched solely for information - done nothing else I have the following to add. Chromatically has also identified this post: + Show Spoiler +On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote:
The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects.
Corazon
If Mafia:
- threesr most likely not scum.
- FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr.
If Town:
- threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either.
- FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before.
FatChunk
If Mafia:
- Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed.
- threesr most likely not scum.
If Town:
- Corazone still possible mafia.
- threesr still possbile mafia.
threesr
If Mafia:
- Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk
If Town:
- Corazone still possible mafia.
- FatChunk still possible mafia.
I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. Chromatically already notes that it bad to lynch for information rather than trying to read if Corazon is scum or not. I would add that this is nearly a full day to go before the lynch, with plenty of time left for positions to change, so presenting this information gain analysis as guidance for choosing how to vote is ridiculously premature. It is also interesting to note that despite his conviction that Corazon is "the best vote at the moment", he does not change his vote yet, instead keeping it on Mocsta (it has already been brought up how that itself was a terribly bad and flippant "pressure vote") Only when Chromatically prompts him here: Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 13:12 Chromatically wrote:
Yes, right now I want to lynch Corazon, with FC in a close second. Tomorrow I will examine them again to make sure that that really is my preference; hopefully at least one will have responded by then.
If you want to lynch Corazon, can you move your vote to him? Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 13:17 shz wrote:
I would have done it tomorrow but I can do it now I guess.
##Unvote
##Vote cDgCorazon
Does he change the vote... TWO HOURS LATER ... although he was around during much of that duration. And the "best vote" could wait until tomorrow? This is irresponsible. Why did he need to be prompted by Chromatically before he would change his vote? To lessen the amount of responsibility he would have to bear for it? Omni is bigger fish for now, but you're next on my list. ##FOS: shz----- OrangeRemiRecall that I assessed his D1 as follows: Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 08:50 cakepie wrote:
Held up patiently against my pressure vote in D1, choosing not to jump into anything in haste at all. Inspecting his filter in relation to the whole thread will reveal that he is present and paying attention, watching and waiting, and hopefully analyzing. I continue to sense that he is present and lurking rather than completely absent, answering enough questions to seem active. The only time he came close to questioning anyone was when he asked what I thought about Mocsta's theory about me being scum with Omni and Chrom, and that is only in response to me asking thoughts from the present players in (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/postmessage.php?quote=766&topic_id=386911) Hypothetically, for his play to be town, he would be have to be continuing an incredibly cautious playstyle of not singling out players on the basis of only weak suspicions, and completely avoiding points that have been brought up before so as not to be accused of sheeping. The current state of affairs does mean that some of us may find ourselves with many weak scumreads, and he admits as much... but there is no initiative from him to question anyone further, not even people who are clearly available in the thread. It is no longer acceptable to sit and wait and analyze passively. The quieter players have already been called on several times to step up and speak out. In case it was forgotten, this still stands from before: ##FoS: OrangeRemi----- KickstartI voted him early D2 to prompt for more, but all I got was anger in response. He clearly took issue with my play, yet did not pursue the matter, even when I openly invited questioning. Then he states that he did not like my play when asked for his opinion by Aquanim. He has built a case against shz based on his tendency to vote and jump on wagons without justification. He has commented on threesr, but that is not very useful. No other case was forthcoming despite a request from Aquanim. Somewhat more useful than OrangeRemi, but I was hoping for more from him. I regret backing off so quickly from pressing him for more -- part of it was due to shock at his reaction, and part due to the confusion of trying to figure out why and what I might have done wrong. As it is, all we've got is a case and vote on shz and his remaining suspicions on me -- and it is not clear if that forms his next strongest case. His thoughts about threesr do not really carry any new information since threesr has reverted to lurking, and many of us already agreed long ago that it is more worthwhile to pursue scum. You can do better than that, Kickstart. If not a case, at least reveal some of your other suspicions to us, or explain why you have chosen not to do so. ##FoS: Kickstart
My top concerns are still the same as with only slightly increased suspicion on Shz for his connection play, with correspondingly increased apprehension.
I still want more from Kickstart, patience running thin.
Notice I say "concerns" rather than "suspects" -- other than shz, it is still incredibly difficult to build a case on the others that would stick well. Such is the sorry state of our town.
-----
More shz
On December 24 2012 08:42 shz wrote:
My vote does not matter anyway, but I'm gonna go with my gut for now and really hope we either start giving lurker shit or they come out and contribute more so we can actually get something done.
##Vote: Chromatically
Once again he tosses his vote around carelessly without a solid case.
@shz please justify your vote beyond gut feelings and perceived connections. Are you going to build a case against Chromatically on D3? Who are your top two candidates that you have the most suspicions about?
-----
On December 24 2012 13:59 Aquanim wrote:
Agreed. Now that Omni has flipped town, why do you think Shz is scum?
I am going to take up this question even though it is not directed at me.
Shz has not done much to allay any of the concerns brought up about his voting behavior, simply dismissing them as useless:
+ Show Spoiler +On December 23 2012 08:45 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 05:45 Chromatically wrote:
Apart from that, that's it. shz has:
- sheeped onto Cora and Spag with no reasoning when the wagons took off
- posted long posts that look good, but take no stances at all
- lynched solely for information
- done nothing else Agreeing with comments and arguments is sheeping = scum. Repeating others information and arguments = scum. If that is your reasoning, you will find scum in everyone. You can't provide unlimited new information.
Others have at least tried, at some point, to bring something new, or at least outlined their thought processes. Shz has done none of that. This feels like a sorry excuse for him to invoke.
In D2 he starts with a bunch of three longer posts to dispel the Omni-Chrom connection, and to "defend" Omni. Even with the wagon on Omni under way, he does not add any further opinion, besides this, when asked, he does not elaborate:
On December 24 2012 05:35 shz wrote:
I am not convinced that Omni is scum, and you mostly ignore my ignored my arguments why.
If he was not convinced that Omni was scum, why did he not try to stop the wagon and direct attention to whoever or whatever he felt was more suspicious? Why did he not use his vote until very late in the day, when he could cast it around carelessly with the excuse that it would not have made any difference?
I offer one scum motive hypothesis for consideration: rather than join an easy wagon to mislynch a townie, he wanted gain some town cred by posting in Omni's favor. His vote wasn't needed to confirm an Omni lynch, so he could save his vote in case of an eventuality later in the day, while distancing himself from a mislynch he knew was coming. The extent of his defense of Omni lasted for only as long as was needed to convince Omni that he was town. The defense revolved around debunking the Omni-Chrom link that was weak to begin with, and did not address other arguments against Omni.
It was enough as long as he got the desired outcome from Omni:
On December 23 2012 22:54 OmniEulogy wrote:
@Chrom I am much less convinced in voting on Shz after his defense of us because if he was scum it would be easy to push a lynch on me. I also said before that I had a neutral opinion of Shz and that has more or less stayed true. His recent contributions have been well thought out and although it isn't really scum hunting I believe it's still good that he is trying to explain who he thinks is town and why.
[...]
Actually based on Shz's case for me, and I know I'm town, it wouldn't make any sense for scum to defend me and put himself at risk through association right now so I'm leaning towards him being town.
On December 24 2012 06:23 OmniEulogy wrote:
1) I flip town, Shz is cleared, and Chrom doesn't know what to do anymore considering he's going to look like scum.
Although Omni did not completely dismiss the possibility of scum shz, still:
On December 24 2012 05:18 OmniEulogy wrote:
Shz stepped up and as I've said before either made a really smooth play as mafia by defending me (knowing my alignment) or really did look through the posts and come to the right conclusions.
With the wagon safely underway and with himself safely off of the wagon, a scum Shz would have become free to start setting up his next misdirection play.
|
EPT
