|
Well crap. That is a shame. GG mocsta.
I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB)
I will now continue my intended end-of-night dump, then go grab breakfast before coming back to all the end-of-night dumps that have been going up.
|
Voting patterns, part 2: I believe that scum voting would have been distributed at all times.
-----
Early phase:
Aquanim -> cDgCorazon 19 1740 shz -> Mocsta 19 1833 Chromatically -> cDgCorazon 19 2210 FatChunk -> threesr 19 2246 cakepie -> OrangeRemi 19 2321 Mocsta -> shz 19 2347 Mocsta -> threesr 20 0119
I have discussed this already, there could be one, possibly even two scum here if they chose to go for a more active-looking play. Too few to meaningfully discuss distribution.
-----
Havoc phase:
threesr -> Mocsta 20 0205 threesr -> FatChunk 20 0219 cDgCorazon -> Aquanim 20 0518 threesr -> cDgCorazon 20 0632 cDgCorazon -> threesr 20 0637 threesr -> FatChunk 20 0651
Mostly threesr causing a mess. He could indeed be lazy/bad/crazy as both Spag and myself had observed in D1. At the same time I cannot shake the niggling feeling that this is the great havoc-causing play that he had been waiting for. It is so careless and imprudent, it might be just crazy enough to work.
-----
Corazon wagon phase:
OmniEulogy -> cDgCorazon 20 0929 threesr -> cDgCorazon 20 1311 shz -> cDgCorazon 20 1317 Sylencia -> cDgCorazon 20 1405
If scum has not already put two on corazon, they would be doing it here. A third scum is either still lurking and waiting, not voting yet, or has already voted elsewhere -- in which case I feel it would most likely on threesr {FatChunk, Corazon, Mocsta}, which leads me to suspect FatChunk somewhat.
-----
Spaghetticus case initiation phase:
Aquanim -> Spaghetticus 20 1936 OmniEulogy -> Spaghetticus 20 2150 OrangeRemi -> nolynch 20 2247 Chromatically -> FatChunk 20 2354 cDgCorazon -> nolynch 21 0026 cDgCorazon -> threesr 21 0040
The main thing in this phase is that it is clear that many of us find OmniEulogy suspicious for the way that he followed as the second vote on Spag. I have mentioned this in my posted reads of Aquanim and Omni just a while ago as well.
We've got the nolynch votes, which at this point I would treat as cautious/confused newbie play rather than anything scummy.
Chromatically switches off from corazon onto fatchunk here. These were his top two scum reads. He left himself the possibility of moving onto Spaghetticus. I liked his thoughts on fatchunk, and had a mild town vibe off of that. However, it can also be seen as a careful positioning to not agree too quickly with Aquanim and OmniEulogy.
-----
Spaghetticus wagon phase:
Mocsta -> Spaghetticus 21 0052 cakepie -> Spaghetticus 21 0252 kickstart -> Spaghetticus 21 0531 Chromatically -> Spaghetticus 21 0657 shz -> Spaghetticus 21 0725 OrangeRemi -> Fatchunk 21 0850
After Mocsta's contribution, I found myself in agreement with Aquanim and Mocsta here, and less so with OmniEulogy who did not present as much in the way of compelling arguments for the lynch. My urging of chromatically to move was motivated by a high confidence from the high level of agreement with Aquanim, Mocsta and myself, conferring some mutual confirmation. I also still believed Chromatically to be town-ish at the time. However I now downgrade him to mildly scum-ish for his shortage of good justification when switching his vote over.
If scum has not already put two on Spaghetticus (i.e. both Aqua and omni being scum), then one of kickstart, chromatically, and shz is scum. - Kickstart I have commented about, if he continues to lurk as hard as he has done it will start shifting from null- to much scummier for him. - If chromatically is the scum, he would be scumbuddy with Aqua or Omni, but not both, I think -- unlikely to be all three of them, at most two of three.
I think a case against shz can be built upon his poor case initiation against mocsta in the early game, plus the fact that he wagoned onto both Corazon and Spaghetticus.
-----
I would look for one or two scum among {OmniEulogy, Aquanim, Chromatically} in that order of decreasing suspicion. Beyond that, shz is next most suspicious for me. Threesr is hard to place, but I still don't like the confusion he causes. The away / heavy lurking {Kickstart, Sylencia, OrangeRemi} are null-, with kickstart being of most concern. Their play on D2 (or lack thereof) will determine greatly how my read of them changes.
-----
To start the day I would like to continue the pressure on the heavy lurkers to start getting in on the discussion. ##Vote: Kickstart ##FoS: OrangeRemi Surely there is a lot more useful things to discuss now. With the loss of Spaghetticus and Mocsta, and Aquanim and Chromatically both under suspicion, we really need the quieter townies to start stepping up, if townies you be. If you do not speak up, then scum you are.
For Sylencia I will give a single good faith opportunity for now based on his away claim.
Be back after breakfast.
|
Wait; one second. Would a jailkeeper action result in a roleblocked notification?
|
On December 22 2012 10:46 cakepie wrote: Wait; one second. Would a jailkeeper action result in a roleblocked notification?
On December 22 2012 10:47 Dandel Ion wrote: Yes.
Please confirm my understanding: because jailkeeper has priority over night KP, the jailkeep action will go through first, and will continue to apply despite death of the jailkeeper by KP (resolved later)
In which case, what I said here:
On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB)
may not be correct, as now that I have gone over mocsta's post it seems he certainly could have reasons to want to jail me for the night.
-----
Also a quick note for those thinking about possible SK: not compulsive kill in this setup
You can kill one person every night, but you don't have to. In my opinion, there is very little at the moment to suggest if there Descartes is in the game or not, and I do not feel that we should devote too much energy into figuring that out just yet.
-----
Self-reflection: When considering motives while thinking through the possibilities, I may have looked too hard for scum acting the busy townie, and assumed blues would be keeping low. I failed to give enough credence to the possibility of a cautiously active blue role, which is how Mocsta turned out to be playing.
-----
I was really concerned about the lack of scrutiny on myself throughout D1, and it does not help that when something as finally brought up, it had to come from a dead man's mouth. Corazon, OrangeRemi, Aquanim and maybe sylencia seem to be around atm. What is your take on Mocsta's read on me?
Anyhow, I'm going to stick around in the thread for a bit now while I toss around all the possibilities in my mind. Feel free to ask for my thoughts on anything.
|
For Corazon:
On December 22 2012 13:45 cDgCorazon wrote: Basically, he is stating that many of your posts have been fluff,
Because my RL schedule dictated that I could not be ever-present in the thread over the past few days, I costantly found myself being "scooped" in terms of arguments that could be made and evidence that could be presented. I tried to make up for it by playing hard and putting effort into writing carefully and in detail as time allowed. I am dismayed, and think it is unfortunate that he considered my post length to be lots of fluff padding.
=====
On December 22 2012 13:45 cDgCorazon wrote: you have only handed out questions to players, and have come under little fire
True, but I would urge you not to take my questioning at face value only. Clearly, I must seek something by choosing to target and pressure specific people. What does that imply about my read on them at that time?
For instance, with Mocsta I wanted to believe he was town, but kept getting thrown off by the way he posted and the kind of questions he asked, hence I posted to obtain a reaction that I could gauge. (more on that below)
With several cases, I wanted to get people to start talking, or talking more -- even if just in general, because I didn't have enough to start making a firm read on them yet.
I did not feel comfortable about the lack of scrutiny on myself, you might note that I even specifically asked for reads on myself! But it looked like people were pretty okay with what I was doing -- no one complained that I lacked in substance, and I was initially glad that my bursty availability in the game did not seem to be an issue.
=====
On December 22 2012 13:45 cDgCorazon wrote: How do you feel about it? That is what I would like to hear from you. Then I can make a judgement call on how right I believe Mocsta is. Right now, it seems like the two scum that Mocsta proposed have all tried to disassociate themselves from each other. Are you standing by how you jumped on the Spag lynch train? Or are you thinking on your own?
I feel that he has misinterpreted my intent, and tried too hard to cobble together things that do not exist in order to try to analyze my behavior when I have played with nothing to hide.
I feel that he may have taken offense to some of my comments directed toward him as well, and let that affect his judgement. I was quite seriously disturbed by the faint possibility that he was a scum acting active, and wanted to needle him a little and see how he reacted, but looks like that went awry. Like these:
Then he tries to cock block me by insulating my vocabulary knowledge. Ironically. his statement is wrong (but I think he already knew that..) Definition Infiltrate: "Gain access to (an organization, place, etc.) furtively and gradually, esp. in order to acquire secret information."
Scum already has access to the open discussion in the thread, so my reasoning is that the two criteria of "furtive" and "secret information" do not hold, and while scum may try to manipulate us, there is really no need to "infiltrate" to "gain information". Good blues would not be so stupid as to blatantly play all their cards openly from the get-go anyway, so the only town who might have some shared secrets that scum would want access to would be masons, if they existed.
I meant this as a jest with a mild touch of needling in case it was a true scumslip, too bad he took offense.
Then trys to associate me as scummy, and then to avoid me coming after him with an OMGUS, he backfoots and potentially infers I am still being pro-town.
I truly had some suspicions of Mocsta, and was open to the possibility that he could be a pretending scum, while being really unsure because of how earnest he came across and his high activity. Was it genuine or trying too hard at acting it? I understand it is the first game for many of us, but he was a bit too excitable for me to place properly. I got my answer when he calmed down a little . But it looks like I also sufficiently annoyed him by this act. My slight prod, in the hopes of helping me get a better read on him, got construed as "tore me to shread - respectfully", to use Mocsta's own words.
He also picks this out:
Show nested quote + I can understand if players with blue roles are inclined curtail their activity so as not to stand out too much and present an obvious target for scum kp. However, that is not a free pass to completely lurk either.
Throws in blue role out of no where, potentially as a play to associate his role as blue.
This was merely my thought process in considering why others are lurking; and I should hope that my play not be characterized to be as lurky as several others -- because while I have not been able to be around at all times, I feel that have put in the required thought and effort at the times that I devote to this game.
Why would a blue role call attention to himself and hint at his role? It is too dangerous a move to me. Trying to ask for protection that is not guaranteed? Nah. Worse if scum figures what your role is, and prevents you from using it effectively, or kills you off. I personally feel that a blue role would/should play to be inconspicuous, stay alive and keep the role hidden for a while in order to make the most use of it.
Then:
Then stands by vote to Orangeremi for being a lurker. The real cause is.. the bandwagon on Croazon was big enough for a lynch. Nonsense, the corazon wagon was far from guaranteed at that point. That post was made Dec 20 0436 KST. I actually facepalmed at this. How do you arrive at such a conclusion..?
Also:
This is the breadcrumb post. You can read all teh fluff. giving excuses blah blah. But the guy who in post one was so in control, well reaonsed and calm.. decides to join the bandwagon on spaghetticus. Breadcrumb: try this one..
Why the heck would scum issue an open call to arms in this manner? That would be just silly. This is hardly a crumb of any kind, but rather two things:
1. having noted the possible spag-corazon association on my own, I was readily convinced by Aquanim's case, and wanted to take the votecount to a credible threat of 5 votes.
2. I still had a slight townread on Chromatically, and sought to see if he could deliver on his promise to move over as time ran out, with adequate justification.
But remember: I am not infallible either -- after a full day of important RL administrivia I was definitely not thinking as clearly as I could have with a fresh, rested mind. Looking back at it now I completely understand how I myself can be seen as sheeping, since I had failed to properly convey where I drew my own conviction from. Whatever I say about that now is going to be WIFOM, unfortunately.
When I got up just before the lynch, I was still not well rested, nor fully awake, and was more concerned about having my things ready to go to the embassy and getting there on time. I regret this, but at the same time am at peace with what happened because 1. I may try to play hard at this game, but ultimately I will not let it take precedence over important things in RL, and 2. the voting patterns turned out to be quite interesting and useful in my opinion.
I was still feeling pretty upbeat in early N1, seeing the different ways I could tease the voting behavior apart. But the social obligations that followed had me so physically exhausted (and slightly drunk) that it would not have been responsible to post in that state -- it was all I could do to drag myself out of bed to put up my dawn dump ahead of end of N1.
I will not deny I have had misreads and misplays, I am not the only one and we are all relatively new here. But I have sought a style that is open, upfront, and honest. The rest is up to town to judge.
|
On December 22 2012 14:01 Orangeremi wrote: @cake I'm interested in his theory regarding you+OE+Chrom scum team, but I don't know how much credibility it has.
you mean this:
I am hoping the links between cakepie, and definite mafia (OmniEulogy & Chromatically) is enough to seal the deal.
Simple: Mocsta is unfortunately chasing after shadows, looking for links that don't exist
In this post:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17290113
I skip over Aquanim, Chromatically, OmniEulogy and Spaghetticus because they were already actively posting and I did not feel I needed to prompt or pressure them, nor check anything in particular. As long as their filter continued growing at the same rate, I should have something to work with.
Later on, I had a slight town read on Chromatically and was happy to let him continue engaging and prompting everyone, pressing Corazon, and later on, FatChunk.
As for OmniEulogy, he remained in null+/- territory for me until fairly late, and by then I was more focused on narrowing down lynch candidates than figuring out new leads.
|
On December 22 2012 15:37 Kickstart wrote: First he basically claims blue.
Where might this be, if I may ask?
On December 22 2012 15:37 Kickstart wrote: he says I do nothing while saying a case can be made on shz, when I have already made a case and was the first to state suspicion of shz with this post:
Try waking up hungover and running out of time? I could barely get through the D1 and voting pattern analysis as it was, let along catch up to something you posted while I was asleep. I am still in the midst of sifting through all of that.
On December 22 2012 15:37 Kickstart wrote: And here cakepie is, saying he has a null read on me, listing tons of other slight scum reads, and throwing a vote on me. Not sure what he is doing, but the fact that he is voting me instead of one of his listed scum reads is suspicious.
How about, I think you're capable of more than one case, and wanted to prompt for more, even if it is scraps of suspicions? Looks like I got what I wanted but not quite what I expected. Regardless, bring it, and let me be on the answering and defending end of things for a change.
Still, I am startled that you would take such an early pressure vote so seriously.
##Unvote
|
On December 22 2012 16:27 Kickstart wrote:I take every vote seriously in every game I play, check my games if you like - I don't throw it around meaninglessly. If I vote someone it is because I think they are scum. And here is where you "basically claim blue": Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: Well crap. That is a shame. GG mocsta.
I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB)
I will now continue my intended end-of-night dump, then go grab breakfast before coming back to all the end-of-night dumps that have been going up. You claim you were roleblocked, meaning you have a role. Funny how after this you make a post where you say "Why would a blue role call attention to himself and hint at his role? It is too dangerous a move to me." When you did it yourself (if your attempt at a claim is to be believed anyways).
Not a claim, but a statement of fact. I received a notification, and I felt that it was important enough to get that out early before I went back to my intended posting.
I stand by my statement that it is foolish for blue to call attention to themselves so soon.
But here in the OP it says:
All roleblocks will result in the target being notified. That is to say, regardless of whether the roleblock actually does anything at all or not. Feel free to verify this with the hosts, but I think my understanding is correct on this and so disclosing the existence of a roleblock (or, as it turns out, block due to jailkeeper) does not tell you anything about whether I am one of the esteemed scientists, or a simple white male voter.
|
On December 22 2012 15:50 cDgCorazon wrote:
This is the most interesting point that Mocsta's case that I feel you need to address. He is linking you with Chro/Omni, and is basically saying that because you were willing to follow both of them on the Spag lynch train, that Chro/Omni directed the other two mafia to jump on the Chro lynch train, and that is what you did. This is what Mocsta has accused you of, and now I feel like you need to address these accusations.
Chromatically:
I fail to see how I am "following" Chromatically when I am the one urging him to consider joining the Spag wagon. I liked that he had cases going against FatChunk and Corazon, though he had relented against Corazon and was at FC > Spag > Cor when I made that post that mocsta refers to.
With both Spaghetticus and Corazon at 3 votes, I did not feel that my vote was enough, and called on him on account of my townread on him and his willingness to consider Spag as an alternative to FC. Most importantly I felt I could rely on him to think carefully about the strength of the case, and take Spag up to a more credible 5 votes if he felt there was enough merit in the case. Surely I wasn't going to ask these guys: - Corazon, FatChunk (benefits from attention removed from them) - OrangeRemi, Kickstart, Sylencia (lurking/away) - shz (play was relatively weaker) - threesr (... nah.)
I genuinely did not want another swing onto someone else (which was numerically possible) in the space of a few hours, knowing I would have a severely limited ability to participate in such a discussion.
OmniEulogy:
I don't think I allude to Omni's case or support at any point. (more on my spag vote below). If you try to link me with Omni by the fact that I pretty much let him be throughout D1, or vice-versa, well, he was one of several who were generating enough text for my liking and thus was not the only one I didn't feel a need to prod for more. And basically no one expressed any misgivings about my play either. With 13 players and a need to focus attention on a few, it is hardly statistically surprising that any two given players do not pursue one another.
Were you sheeping on your vote for Spag just because the FC lynch train never took off
This was a side factor. With about 6 hours to go, it definitely looked more likely to me that a consolidation onto Spag was more viable than onto FatChunk.
or were you sheeping because another scum told you so?
Do I come across to you as a player who takes instructions from someone else? Of course I deny this, but anyone would do say the same -- town in honesty, and scum would lie. How is this question anything but forcing me to put WIFO[U]?
In other words, explain your vote for Spag.
Since I was playing catch-up, I continued where I left off and took notes while going forwards in the thread. When I got to Aquanim's case on spag, many points resonated with me, same was true with Mocsta's posts. Both of them I had a town vibe on, and Mocsta particularly after he relaxed the pace of his posting. The mutual confirmation of opinion among players I have a town read on (relative to the others) led to higher confidence, and as discussed above, I felt a need to bring the lynch toward greater certainty given that time was running low and I would not be able to participate much.
|
On December 22 2012 17:07 Sylencia wrote: @Cakepie What do you think about OE claiming he also got roleblocked? If true, would that mean the town RB blocked OE and the scum blocked you? If there was a roleblocker on each side that's how I would see it but what would that mean for the distribution of roles?
7-9 VT + 1 RB + 0-2 other blues(/SK)? 2 mafia + 1 RB
seems plausible I guess, but having 2 role blockers in the game suggests a lot more blues than usual..
All we know is one of the roleblock notifications could have arose from Mocsta using his jailkeeper powers; it is highly likely he would not have wasted the power leaving it idle. It is entirely possible for him to have targeted either OE or myself, if you read his end-of-night analysis. If it was indeed Mocsta, what was his intention? To block a perceived scum power role, or to block scum KP? Or to protect? Did he crumb his action? We may never know.
If both roleblock claims are true, then another RB exists. Is it the scum RB or town RB? Which of two targets did this RB block, and with what intention?
Don't forget, you must consider the possibility that either one or even both the roleblocked claims may very well be a lie -- though I would naturally assure you that mine is the truth.
I do not think it is worth pursuing setup theorycrafting at this juncture. The reason for claiming roleblock is open disclosure and insuring against fake claims and other shenanigans later in the game. There isn't enough to work with from the setup angle yet, except possibly say that we should expect some parity in the amount of roles for both sides for balance reasons -- which does not help us in anyway right now. Scum hunting still takes precedence.
|
One brief answer first:
-----
On December 23 2012 06:15 FatChunk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB). I'm just curious, why would you assume it's scum RB?
This was in error if you refer to my other post shortly after that: + Show Spoiler +On December 22 2012 13:18 cakepie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 10:46 cakepie wrote: Wait; one second. Would a jailkeeper action result in a roleblocked notification? Please confirm my understanding: because jailkeeper has priority over night KP, the jailkeep action will go through first, and will continue to apply despite death of the jailkeeper by KP (resolved later)In which case, what I said here: Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB)
may not be correct, as now that I have gone over mocsta's post it seems he certainly could have reasons to want to jail me for the night.
My first reaction was to associate the roleblock notification with the presence of a roleblocker, and it did not initially occur to me that the same could arise from the jailkeeper. Furthermore, at that point, having not gone over mocsta's pre-dawn post yet I had no reason to believe that mocsta would want to spend his action on me -- last I left off in early-mid N1 I thought he would be far more concerned about Omni/Aquanim/Chromatically and would have read me at null at worst.
-----
I'll be around for a few hours from now (with a brief interruption for dinner). Currently drafting cases, but since some people are here, please leave any questions you might want to direct at me and I will get to them later this evening.
|
At end of N1/start of D2 I said:
On December 22 2012 10:24 cakepie wrote: I would look for one or two scum among {OmniEulogy, Aquanim, Chromatically} in that order of decreasing suspicion.
Here we go on the top two of those:
-----
Aquanim
Casting the very first vote on Corazon was stated as pressure vote, and it was effective at generating activity -- except that it devolved into havoc for a bit with threesr shitting up the thread. The corazon "scumslip" did not help either. While this was happening he did not ask Corazon any questions himself, which is a little strange to me. Perhaps the volume of resulting posts was good enough for him?
Beyond that, it is his initiating and pushing forward the Spag lynch that might be the greatest cause of suspicion for anyone -- but Mocsta also thought it was a good case. I too have no right to fault Aquanim for his case, which I found to agree with many of my observations and suspicions.
After that, he has remained inviting and open to scrutiny about the D1 mislynch when answering questions about it. He has continued to pressure the most inactive players and most recently has been advancing his suspicions on OrangeRemi. This, continuing from his D1 performance, leans toward town behavior.
What is interesting to note is that he started two of the three wagons that actually got anywhere on D1. (the other being on threesr, who pretty much made himself an inviting target).
Overall, I find it much easier to explain his behavior by a townie hypothesis than by a scum hypothesis. Leading a wagon is far too conspicuous and risky, and to do it twice in one day phase has got to be absolutely nuts or balls of steel.
I shall record my thoughts on the scum hypothesis here for information and scrutiny: + Show Spoiler +If Aquanim were scum trying to influence/direct town, the scumteam would be making an exceptionally daring and risky play -- although the way town has played (and I do not exclude myself from blame here) actually makes it viable to run this risk, it was difficult to know this in advance.
Continuing the scum hyphothesis, with Aquanim aiming to lead the town lynches, the remaining scum would have to run interference and cause confusion and/or lend support to the target wagons. Out of all the possibilities for that, I think it is most likely that threesr is the scumbuddy designated to draw attention, run interference where necessary, and lurk where not needed. He can then be safely bussed D3+ if needed. One other scum I would expect to lie low, but remain careful not to be the most unhelpful/unproductive -- most likely a scum with a power role -- sadly we have several candidates that fit the bill here.
Regardless, I currently consider Aquanim to be null+, having completed the obligatory scrutiny required as a consequence of his leading the Spag wagon.
-----
OmniEulogy Managed to fly under the radar for the better part of D1, but then drew the suspicion of both Spaghetticus and Mocsta. Crucially, he wagoned onto both Corazon and Spaghetticus, and made really ridiculous statements with his VT claim, and "100% scum" read on Corazon.
His vote on Corazon was motivated primarily by the "scumslip", with little additional support
On December 20 2012 09:29 OmniEulogy wrote: He slipped up so badly I can't believe it was a mistake. He actually claimed mafia after an already terrible start while being defensive and being overly cautious of most of his posts. I think Theesr's constant back and forth with him made him slip up.
[snip]
I believe at the moment our best bet is to lynch Corazon at the end of D1, see who jumps on the bandwagon and if he flips scum we'll be able to look at who tried to defend him, who eventually gave in, and who was set on lynching him right away.
What rubs me the wrong way here is that with still almost a whole day to go, he is perfectly happy to settle down to a bandwagon on Corazon, on the basis of a supposed slip, for the sake of information gain, looking at who might jump to Corazon's defense. His vote takes it up to three, and makes it easy for threesr (re-vote), shz and sylencia to follow on the wagon, which I do not consider a positive outcome.
Besides this he was participative, although his discussion revolved around uncontroversial targets and did not reveal much, except when he FoS'ed OrangeRemi for an "unjustified claim" against Sylencia
+ Show Spoiler +On December 20 2012 18:22 OmniEulogy wrote: You have good points Spaghetticus but it doesn't really change my mind. People did come to his defense and tried to counter by voting for Threesr.
Corazon started off the game saying he hoped D1 would be quiet and peaceful and no real information should come out during it which also seems a little scummy as everybody else started off hoping for some good conversation and to build up leads. Not wait for N1/D2 where we lose somebody and have no information about why they die.
The fact that he's new CAN explain these things but I refuse to believe he is dumb. I think he thought it out and tried to come across as reasonable. I've already said I want to start going after the lurkers with our remaining time D1 and if we find something that removes Corazon from suspicion so be it.
My vote is not locked yet it is just on the person I find most likely to be scum. I don't think he's past the point of no return either. I believe the vote count is 5 for Corazon and 3 for Threesr at the moment. and as I said Threesr would be my #2 if it weren't for the fact that it wouldn't make any sense for both him and Corazon to be scum.
I'd like Corazon to tell us his top scum reads, and why they seem to be.
I'd also like to note to Spaghetticus and everybody else that if you are looking for more people who came to Corazon's defense, Orangeremi tried to make a case of why Corazon wasn't scum and went back to lurking. I'd like to actually hear why Orangeremi refused to give us an idea of who his top scum reads were and why he didn't actually say why Corazon wasn't acting scummy. The fact that he then put out the same three names for his top scum reads that everybody else had and then went into hiding again is also suspicious.
In Orangeremi's own words "Instead of looking for scum players, they would be making unjustified claims hoping others hop wagon in an attempt to get an innocent player lynched." and then "Otherwise, I have a slight suspicion of Sylencia that is based solely on a hunch and little to no evidence."
based on that... ##FOS Orangeremi
The next big thing from him is his vote onto Spaghetticus, which is mainly supported by the fact that Spaghetticus attempted to defend Corazon, who he considers "100% scum", and for a what he considered a poor defense against the case.
The one way I can try to justify this as town is if he were tunneling so incredibly hard and by extension tunnels Spaghetticus as well simply by association (and perhaps even OrangeRemi as well, who tried to find an explanation for Corazon not being scum). This would, of course, be a terrible way to play as town -- why not lynch the 100% scum read then, especially if you are going for simple and straightfoward play? More importantly, it runs counter to his express intent from earlier: to lynch Corazon and then assess the information gained from that.
On December 21 2012 00:15 OmniEulogy wrote: I'm going to play safe in my first game as VT in mafia.
As has already been pointed out, this VT claim is utterly ridiculous, and is atrocious ahead of N1 as it helps scum focus their PK onto blue roles. It is premature, since there is hardly a threat of him being lynched. He has tried to explain it as "pre-emptive" to protect himself -- but at what cost in terms of risk to our blues? This is a selfish play without any motive to help the town.
As for playing safe, I cannot see his Spaghetticus vote and VT claim as "safe" plays, if he were indeed a VT. The safe vote, considering his position on different players at the time, would have been to stick to his vote on Corazon. The VT claim is a "safe" play only for self preservation, and not in the interest of town.
In N1 Omni chummies up to Mocsta and Chromatically, agreeing with both of them that he has a strong town read on the other person for the same reasons. Mocsta certainly did not agree that the evidence pointed to a strong town read on Chromatically.
Apart from these, Mocsta raises a few other points on Omni that he considers suspicious in his pre-dawn post, but I feel that he may be reading too much into things on some of these suspicions -- the same way that he is wrong about casting me as his third suspect.
On D2 Omni starts by fending off questioning from Chromatically about his VT claim, and then... chooses to pursue threesr -- who has conveniently not even been playing. Now that that has proven futile he chooses to FoS FatChunk and OrangeRemi in OMGUS fashion.
-----
Assessing the state of the game:
- Threesr has conveniently disappeared since before the end of N1. While he was around, his attitude was lazy and unhelpful.
- FatChunk and KickStart have one-page filters; this is especially strange for Kickstart.
- Sylencia and OrangeRemi have two pages, but still not quite enough to work off of. It will not be easy to make a case stick on them just yet
- I have two pages of posts, but they are longer. Shz has a little over two pages.
- Omni, Chromatically, Aquanim and Corazon are most active
In my D1 voting pattern analysis, I tried to trace how scum may have planned to distribute their voting and thread posting activity. In our current state, feeling the loss of Spaghetticus and Mocsta, I consider that the greatest threat to us is scum that is amongst the few remaining highly active players. The lurkier scum have too much room to hide for now, and it is difficult to nail them townies who had been lurking before step it up some more; threesr has been absent and is on track to be modkilled at this rate, and in any case his absence for now means he is not in the thread causing havoc.
I have too many "just-below-null" reads at the moment to tease apart (will post some thoughts after this). But OmniEulogy is my biggest scumread at the moment, and a scum Omni continuing to masquerade as town in D3 and onwards is far too dangerous for me to contemplate. ##Vote: OmniEulogy
Any other lynch today for me is more than two-thirds likely to be a mislynch, and scum will kill at least one more useful townie tonight, putting us at 6-3 with 3~5 lurkers -- a terrible spot.
Of course, if I am wrong about Omni, then we will be pretty much in the same place as well. But this is the best shot I've got at the moment, and I've got to take it.
|
On December 24 2012 01:26 cDgCorazon wrote: Right now, I am going to vote for a no-lynch, as my mind is not made up on who we should lynch. We have about 5.5 hours left in the day, so anything could happen.
##Vote:No-lynch
If anyone has a problem with this, let me know.
I hope you intend to change that at some point. With the current spread of votes across different candidates, and time running short, I am concerned that this would make it too easy for a lynch to go through with as few as 3-4 votes, with scum comfortably scattered to thwart analysis.
|
On December 24 2012 01:43 Kickstart wrote: Eh nothing changed for me yet, going to go ahead and put my vote on SHZ since he is the scummiest to me.
Care to share your number 2 read?
|
shz
His 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:
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?
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
-----
OrangeRemi
Recall that I assessed his D1 as follows:
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
-----
Kickstart
I 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
|
On December 24 2012 02:11 OmniEulogy wrote: Anyway, Cake seems town to me. Aqua remains town.
1. Care to explain why you think I am town? Mocsta listed me at his #3 read, and Kickstart has his misgivings as well. Other players have put me at null or difficult to read. What makes you think otherwise?
2. Please elaborate on why you consider Aquanim to be town. As far as I can tell, your assessment of Aquanim is given here:
On December 21 2012 19:48 OmniEulogy wrote: If Aquanim were scum, he didn't need to try to get Spag lynched to save Corazon, as Corazon defended Spag and imo proved his innocence. If Aqua were scum he could have sat back and let us lynch Cora. - same thing happens N1 but his name isn't out there for starting the lynch. For this I believe Aqua is town.
Which is based on your change of heart about Corazon:
On December 21 2012 19:48 OmniEulogy wrote: I'll start off with Corazon. After re-reading everything he's said a few times I believe I owe him an apology. As he defended Spag while the vote was on him I'm willing to say I believe he is town. He stuck with his vote on Theesr the entire time. I am willing to overlook every mistake up to this point in his posting and trust that what ever he says from now on is from the mouth of a townie.
This has already been pointed out as ludicrous. "100% scum" to "what ever he says from now on is from the mouth of a townie.", just for Corazon not joining the Spaghetticus wagon?
Care to elucidate beyond this reason?
|
EBWOP: clarification
On December 24 2012 04:02 cakepie wrote:
Care to elucidate beyond this reason [why you think aqua is town]?
|
Well, this is not a pretty state of affairs. We have failed to trade effectively early, and our lead in numbers, and more importantly, in activity have taken big hits. I do not see any remaining room for mislynching -- even one-for-one trades are not going to cut it now.
Aqua, Syl:
On December 24 2012 06:10 Chromatically wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2012 06:01 OmniEulogy wrote: hmm I think even if I vote Shz I'll still get lynched but I'm not going to vote for somebody I don't have a scum read on. Let's examine the possibilities: Omni and shz: Omni knows for certain that he is town. He thinks shz is town, but is not sure. Obviously, he would rather lynch shz over himself, because shz at least has a chance of flipping scum. Omni would vote for shz.Omni and shzOmni knows for certain that shz is town. Obviously, he would rather get shz mislynched than have himself lynched. Omni would vote for shz.Omni and shzOmni knows for certain that shz and himself are both scum. He doesn't want either of them lynched. He might vote for shz over himself, but only if shz is under more suspicion (which he's not). Omni probably wouldn't vote for shz.Scumteam 100%.
I take issue with "100%" being thrown around so carelessly again. Thoughts on this, and on Chromatically in general?
|
Here is what I think on my own post above:
On December 24 2012 06:10 Chromatically wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2012 06:01 OmniEulogy wrote: hmm I think even if I vote Shz I'll still get lynched but I'm not going to vote for somebody I don't have a scum read on. Let's examine the possibilities: Omni and shz: Omni knows for certain that he is town. He thinks shz is town, but is not sure. Obviously, he would rather lynch shz over himself, because shz at least has a chance of flipping scum. Omni would vote for shz.
Omni's late-late D2: he refused to hop onto that wagon for the sake of a chance at saving his life, choosing instead to stick to his conviction that shz was not as suspicions as other players out there, and pursuing one of those. Shz has increased his amount of activity, and perhaps Omni saw value in this, when the dearth of D3 discussion would very well be the last of our downfall.
In contrast to his poor choices in D1, here he has made the VT play of taking one for the team... I just fear that the cost was too great this time around.
-----
On December 24 2012 08:37 Aquanim wrote: Let's say he's dying like I think a town player would die. Like I said, though, scum might do this in hopes of last-minute deliverance. And if there was a competing wagon I'd feel a lot happier about the outcome of this day.
Your vote was absolutely not required on the Omni wagon. Why did you not find a better use for it, if this is all you had to say about the way the lynch was headed?
-----
On December 24 2012 13:01 cDgCorazon wrote: @Aqua/Cake: Do you feel like these lynches are scum-driven, trying to get the town to kill each other off, or are they mislynches on townies that are acting erratically or do not know how to play like a townie?
Have the lynches been scum driven? I think not, except for the slim chance that Aquanim is incredibly gutsy master scum on D1 as I explored here:
+ Show Spoiler +On December 24 2012 00:43 cakepie wrote:AquanimCasting the very first vote on Corazon was stated as pressure vote, and it was effective at generating activity -- except that it devolved into havoc for a bit with threesr shitting up the thread. The corazon "scumslip" did not help either. While this was happening he did not ask Corazon any questions himself, which is a little strange to me. Perhaps the volume of resulting posts was good enough for him? Beyond that, it is his initiating and pushing forward the Spag lynch that might be the greatest cause of suspicion for anyone -- but Mocsta also thought it was a good case. I too have no right to fault Aquanim for his case, which I found to agree with many of my observations and suspicions. After that, he has remained inviting and open to scrutiny about the D1 mislynch when answering questions about it. He has continued to pressure the most inactive players and most recently has been advancing his suspicions on OrangeRemi. This, continuing from his D1 performance, leans toward town behavior. What is interesting to note is that he started two of the three wagons that actually got anywhere on D1. (the other being on threesr, who pretty much made himself an inviting target). Overall, I find it much easier to explain his behavior by a townie hypothesis than by a scum hypothesis. Leading a wagon is far too conspicuous and risky, and to do it twice in one day phase has got to be absolutely nuts or balls of steel. I shall record my thoughts on the scum hypothesis here for information and scrutiny: + Show Spoiler +If Aquanim were scum trying to influence/direct town, the scumteam would be making an exceptionally daring and risky play -- although the way town has played (and I do not exclude myself from blame here) actually makes it viable to run this risk, it was difficult to know this in advance.
Continuing the scum hyphothesis, with Aquanim aiming to lead the town lynches, the remaining scum would have to run interference and cause confusion and/or lend support to the target wagons. Out of all the possibilities for that, I think it is most likely that threesr is the scumbuddy designated to draw attention, run interference where necessary, and lurk where not needed. He can then be safely bussed D3+ if needed. One other scum I would expect to lie low, but remain careful not to be the most unhelpful/unproductive -- most likely a scum with a power role -- sadly we have several candidates that fit the bill here.
Regardless, I currently consider Aquanim to be null+, having completed the obligatory scrutiny required as a consequence of his leading the Spag wagon.
It would be exceedingly sad if we were all jumping at our own shadows and killing each other off while all the scum lurk and laugh in their own QT. However, we cannot discount the fact that some of the cases and arguments presented contained too much speculation and reading too much into things that simply aren't there. This is partly inevitable when there is so little to work with. A good part of this is zealous newbie townies focusing on trying to convince ourselves, and others, that particular targets are scummy. Confirmation bias has seeped in, and cases are not being scrutinized and torn down. This is our biggest failing. We are not, however, acting erratically (except, well, threesr), if that is your concern.
|
I want to address the "content" post by shz:
1. How on earth did you arrive at me having a town read on Sylencia? I am certain I have never had Sylencia above null. I challenge you to cite the source for this. My filter is not that long, so I have no clue how you could have hallucinated this.
2. I did not claim to be a roleblocker. Get your facts right. My filter is not that long, go over it again.
On December 24 2012 04:44 shz wrote: I may have overlooked something, so you can of course correct me.
[...]
I am conviced we will find connections and answers in here.
I take issue with the post for this: it is disguised as a thourough summary, but says conspicuously little about most players except for the ones that he is trying to connect together, with incredibly tenuous links at the very best. These connections that he is trying to form are even weaker than what Mocsta had to give, when he himself easily dispelled Mocsta's Omni-Chrom connection. The flawed analysis depends upon erroneous "evidence". An honest mistake, or carefully camouflaged misdirection? Notably, he has not "overlooked something", but is creating "facts" to suit his purpose.
I would have liked to give shz credit for increasing his activity, but this is even more of the same jumping at shadows as before, and it will be the death of us if shz is town and continues to play like this. It does not help his position at the top of my suspects list.
Like Chrom, and possibly Omni, I am conflicted about the possibility that shz would be a mislynch and cost us too much of in light of the precious little remaining activity. I want shz to build us a new case or two so we can tear it down. How he goes about this will go a long way toward my cost-benefit evaluation of pursuing suspicions on him vs potentially devastating mislynch.
-----
@ Aquanim, Chromatically: what do you think of the connections that shz seems to be implying? Can something be built out of that at all? What about other connections; do you see any that are worth further pursuit and scruity?
I had "found" some Omni-shz connections myself, but held off from posting those knowing well how they can seem stronger than they really are with confirmation bias glasses on. Looking back at this and in the light of the environment in this game, I am starting to doubt the usefulness of such links -- I do not think they are worth much unless otherwise moderately strong cases can be made against both sides using other evidence. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|