|
So basically you're just saying the same things again?
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong
mysterymeat1, I don't think he did anything at all, yet seems present in the thread just lurking.
ahswtini, basically just said he didn't like sarcasm because it caused confusion and said that he didn't suspect tamburini and was on the fence on sweetfrost, that's pretty much it, no suspicious read at all.
I think dfs also hasn't said much, he did say tamburini was suspicious, don't quite remember if someone said it before though.
And I disagree with the second part of your question.
So you've just listed people that you think have been acting less proactively and more scummy than you. (Otherwise you didn't answer my query to "name [the better targets].") Can you link me to any significant interactions you've had with them? If you can't, how can you possibly disagree with my assertion that you haven't done anything to catch them, if you've made no cases against them and had no significant interactions with them?
|
On April 30 2014 10:08 Yell0w wrote:
I'd be willing to lynch either of them.
Yet you're not even taking the effortless action of voting for them, let alone putting in the legwork to build a case on them.
Come on, guys, this dude is obviously mafia. He's not even trying to catch any scum. He has no answers for the questions that matter ("Why aren't you trying to find scum?"), only incoherent responses (the bulk of his posts in response to me haven't actually addressed the points I've made), non-responses (see the bit I quoted earlier and called "not even wrong"), and half-baked doubt to spread about half the town.
|
On April 30 2014 13:43 Yell0w wrote:
@Eden
I answered all of your points in either my response to you or in other posts, restating your points again doesn't mean I have to answer again, actually counter-argue my arguments and I might reply to you, please don't just link to another logical fallacy without saying anything.
I just asked you why you weren't engaging anyone and you ignored it. Still have. It's because you're caught and don't have a good answer.
Y'all seriously kill this man.
|
On April 30 2014 14:07 Amiko wrote:
So, when Eden read you as his top town, he didn't have that answer from you yet. When he read you as his top town, he should have still thought you had not answered his question.
When she told me that the vote wasn't part of the reaction test I decided her reaction test wasn't really worth looking at any further. It struck me as the prototypical "reaction test" inexperienced players tend to use, where they suspect someone already, press their suspect on a minor point and scumread the answer no matter what it is because of confirmation bias. I read her town at the time independent of that question and decided the question wasn't worth pursuing further, so I dropped it.
|
I didn't phrase that as precisely as I'd have liked. What I meant is that you were already suspecting him, and so your test was designed with an innate bias toward finding him suspicious.
It's a moot point now, obviously I found Yell0w suspicious anyway in the end and I'm satisfied with your play for the moment.
Amiko, I like the precision of your questions, but where are they going?
|
On May 01 2014 06:10 Epishade wrote:
Dammit Meat, lol. Serious question now, does he get replaced/dropped, or is he just lucky he managed to place a vote before he got banned?
He got banned?
|
On May 01 2014 06:48 Epishade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 06:46 Eden1892 wrote:On May 01 2014 06:10 Epishade wrote:
Dammit Meat, lol. Serious question now, does he get replaced/dropped, or is he just lucky he managed to place a vote before he got banned? He got banned? He got 2-dayed for making a joke in the TB has cancer thread.
Ah. Is that what the lock is for?
On May 01 2014 06:53 mtamburini wrote:
Gonna be completely honest, all this reading gives me a headache I dont read this much for school. And to be hoenst I prob wont finish and I will read later again,.Im tired and hungry and Im just gonna claim my role. Im Bird Jesus and Ive got a target to shoot tonight right now but I will finish reading to find more connections to this person and/or more behavior I may have missed from everyone else.
I like tunneling its fun and you cant tell a lot about a person when you do so along with everyone else in the game. Im like 85% certain on this person and if I do mis shoot, well I will retract town leader position and stick my tail between my legs and sit in the corner and think about what I have done.
...why would you claim in this scenario?
|
Yeah this claim is fucking stupid.
- If there's a mafia roleblocker, mtamburini just wasted our vigilante for literally no gain.
- Even if he's not roleblocked, we have no way of knowing he's not the serial killer. In fact, his specific suggestion that the parity cop check him tonight and someone else n2 would fit perfectly with a serial killer planning to pick investigation immunity tonight.
- I think an actual vigilante would have thought through these problems before claiming.
- Even if we ignore the above, look at the context. This claim is basically "I'm just gonna claim because yolo didn't read." What purpose does this serve? How does this advance the town agenda?
I don't think mtamburini is mafia, but I'm thinking there's a good chance he's the serial killer. I'm going to reread the whole thread and see how I feel about everyone else; I don't think this changes my scumread on Yell0w because mafia/sk is, from what I remember, a decent explanation for their interaction.
While I'm reading, I want everyone online to tell me what they think about mtamburini's claim.
|
Why mtamburini Is Serial Killer
Serial Killer vs Mafia
Specifically reading someone as a serial killer as opposed to mafia on the first day is typically pretty difficult. The main long-run pattern that distinguishes the serial killer from a mafioso is that the serial killer doesn't coordinate with a team; you're only going to catch them purely by scumhunting in their actions specifically, as opposed to teasing them out as hypothetical teammates. On the first day, however, you can't really tease out mafia teammates definitively because you don't have any flips yet. All this to say that on the first day, behavioral analysis can tell us if someone is not town, but not if they are mafia or serial killer, because on the first day their behavioral incentives are largely the same.
Usually, on the first day, that's enough of an obstacle to prevent being able to zero in on the serial killer. However, if the person in question talks enough about mechanical factors -- like roles -- as opposed to behavioral reads, certain divergent incentives can be parsed out which allow us to make the distinction between serial killer and mafia successfully.
I intend first to prove that mtamburini's behavior is misaligned with town incentives and aligned with scum incentives (whether mafia or serial killer) and second to prove that mtamburini's role discussion doesn't align with mafia incentives but with serial killer incentives. This in turn will demonstrate that mtamburini is the serial killer.
Why mtamburini Isn't Town
Buddying
mtamburini has been buddying 27ninjabunnies a lot throughout the game. It started during the joke phase, which is fine enough, but it continued on after bunnies started serious talk in this post -- directed, no less, at him. She calls him scum for trying to establish himself as town leader, which to me indicates drawing a clear line in the dirt saying "the game starts now." Here's a list of his posts buddying bunnies:
- Here he says he REALLY hopes they're both town, invites her to rewatch an epicmafia game. The latter game is completely off-topic and we've moved on from the joke phase. The phrasing of that post is also bothering me.
- Here is some completely useless filler cheerleading bunnies's pressure on Yell0w. Well, not totally useless. He's communicating to us that he saw this going down and didn't feel like commenting on it or developing it in any way.
- Here, my god, what? His point on Yell0w is decent, but why the hell does he need bunnies to hold his hand while he votes for Yell0w? Is bunnies his seeing-eye dog, guiding him to the polling booth so that he can fulfill his civic duty to vote?
- Here he takes up for bunnies in response to Yell0w's question. This isn't too bad and in isolation I wouldn't bother pointing it out. I made the same point. But in combination with these other examples it's clearly revealing a trend.
- Free prize inside, he's buddying dfs here instead.
Talking About Irrelevant Shit
The title says it all, a good quarter of this guy's filter has nothing to do with the game.
- [http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/447955-newbie-mini-mafia-lv?page=12#225]No one cares about his past games.[/url]
- No, really, no one gives a shit about his past games.
- I can't tell what's worse, his ability to stay on-task or his music taste.
- Is moose in this game?
- Is moose a codename? Your favorite animal? What does this have to do with the game???
I was fair about this assessment and only took the posts from after the point I previously determined to be the beginning of "serious mode." You can see from the timestamps that this wasn't some isolated event, the guy went on like this for quite some time.
Not Scumhunting
This one might be a little bit of a surprise. He's pushing hard on Yell0w, right? So how can we write him up for scumhunting? Except that if we understand "scumhunting" to mean "an individual questioning or engaging suspects on a substantial level in order to develop his or her own case for killing a certain player," mtamburini hasn't really done anything like that. Let's look at his posts on Yell0w and see whether he qualifies or not...
- Here he makes a good start, buddying of bunnies aside. Yell0w is indeed suspicious for worrying as much as he is about being townie. But he literally doesn't do anything to develop this point any further. Yell0w and I, for example, talked for a few posts back-and-forth about this point and what it means. mtamburini doesn't engage Yell0w on this at all: he never asks Yell0w why he was so worried about looking townie, nor does he respond to anything Yell0w said to me or to others about this same point when we did press Yell0w on it.
- Here he adds "sarcasm" as a reason to lynch Yell0w. Not only is this point independently terrible, he does nothing to develop it further, and he commits the same behavior he says is indicative of scum, then when Yell0w calls him out on it, he doesn't even bother to handwave it, he just ignores Yell0w's point completely.
- Here he says that Yell0w's defense has been "WIFOM" and not-game-related. Please. This coming from the king of off-topic nonsense. And simply handwaving everything someone says as "WIFOM" is utterly unconvincing.
- Here in his role claim he says "I like tunneling its fun." At this point he's openly admitting that he's not trying to find mafia. Tunneling isn't trying to find mafia.
mtamburini is scum because he's been buddying heavily, he's posted a lot of contentless trash and he's not actually scumhunting, just finding an excuse to park his vote on someone and ride out the phase.
Why mtamburini Isn't Mafia
mtamburini says that he claimed in order to dispel any confusion about there being multiple kills tonight, arguing that it's common practice in video mafia. For there to be any confusion about kills tonight, the number of kills in the night would have to subvert our expectations regarding the number of deaths. That means there would need to be more or fewer kills. mtamburini is telling us there will be more (he specifies two kills instead of one). If he were mafia, then he would have no way of assuring us that there's an extra kill, and he would have needlessly put himself in the line of fire on day two because he would have had to argue that the person he shot was separately shot by the mafia. This only works if he's the vigilante or the serial killer.
The second thing pointing to him being the serial killer is his argument about the parity cop. He says that the parity cop should check him first then someone else n2, so that the parity can have perfect information about his scans. This would effectively turn the parity cop into a normal cop, which substantially increases the power of the cop. Doing this as mafia doesn't make sense; as soon as someone flips the wrong way, he's caught. This only works if he would actually scan as an innocent. He would scan as an innocent if he were the vigilante, the godfather, or the serial killer. Even if he's the godfather, though, this is a very bad strategy because the parity cop scanning the godfather as innocent still gives perfect information to the town; if the parity cop happened to scan his scumbuddy next, the scumbuddy would be lynched and flip guilty. This makes a lot of sense if he's a serial killer planning to take investigation immunity, however. In that case, anyone who scanned opposite to him would get lynched, which advances his agenda of killing off the mafia. Furthermore the mafia can't afford to nightkill him n1 because if he does take investigation immunity, he's effectively "upgraded" the parity cop to a normal cop. And if the mafia aren't going to nightkill him, and he's the serial killer, he doesn't have to worry about being nightkilled, so nightkill immunity isn't helpful anyway. He has no reason not to take investigation immunity here.
mtamburini is the serial killer because his proposed strategy regarding his role and the parity cop doesn't make sense unless he's either the serial killer or the vigilante, and he's not town (see first half of case).
mtamburini is the serial killer.
##UNVOTE
##VOTE mtamburini
|
That doesn't change the substance of my point, all it means is he either planned this out ahead of time or stumbled into it after picking investigation immunity; both of them are reasonable explanations.
|
On May 01 2014 09:26 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
After reading that, I see the strong probability that tambo is serial killer.
However, what if he is vigi? We lose a huge asset.
For mafia, who would be the logical n1 kill? The vigi claim. That's obvious. Whether or not he's serial killer doesn't matter to them, mafia's not gonna take that chance. Mafia will kill him n1. I say we let him be. I say we take the chance and believe him.
If he's the vigilante then he's either getting shot tonight (in which case he gets to use 1 kp at most) or he's getting roleblocked (in which case he'll never get to shoot). I should have gone over that in more detail in my analysis, but my posts preceding it should suffice I think.
|
|
|
You can do jumping jacks if I'm wrong for all I care. If I've got your vote to kill this guy I'm sure is the serial killer, I'm satisfied.
|
I finally get a free afternoon and no one's around to play. Sigh.
|
On May 01 2014 11:17 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
If you're town, are you more concerned about a serial killer? or are you more concerned about mafia?
As town, I'm more concerned about mafia, which are guaranteed to be in the setup, rather than the serial killer.
After a bit of mulligan, I've noticed something.
Eden is mafia.
He has been talking quite a bit less than the other game.
He pushes yellow first.
Then he gets out the serial killer case on tambo. Before this, he was pretty much sure that yellow was mafia. It doesn't make sense to go after serial killer if you're town, and you have a mafia suspect, because what if tambo was telling the truth? From a townie's perspective, he should have stuck with the yellow lynch, rather than potentially killing vigi.
He changed his vote to tambo because he believes the vigi claim. He's afraid of leaving the vigi alive. That means, that if eden is mafia, there's definitely no roleblocker.
Yes, it is possible that tambo is serial killer. However, Eden's actions following tambo's roleclaim is a dead giveaway of his alignment.
Eden is mafia.
You're not assessing this properly. Take a look at my incentives with each alignment.
Town: I want to kill the serial killer and the mafia if I believe both to be in the game. I think mtamburini is fakeclaiming as serial killer because his claim only makes sense in the scenario I described in my big post. He's just making himself the n1 kill if he's actually the vigilante, which is colossally stupid. It's better for me to kill the serial killer over a mafia because removing the serial killer takes away 1 of the 2 anti-town kp. If I killed, say, Yell0w and he flipped scum, we've caught a mafia, but we're equally close to winning (as in either case we've killed 1 anti-town player), and we still have 2 anti-town kp instead of one to deal with. The serial killer is always the better kill.
Mafia: I can just shoot mtamburini tonight without drawing any attention to myself if I think he's actually the vigilante. If I'm mafia and I come out with this big case saying that the vigilante is actually the serial killer, and I don't get him lynched, I'm getting shot that night. If I do get him lynched, I'm getting myself lynched the next day. In both cases I'm needlessly throwing away my life to get rid of a vigilante I could just shoot that night at no cost.
|
On May 01 2014 11:40 Epishade wrote:
Goddamn, this game is out of control.
I am finding it pretty hard to look past Eden voting for Tamburini when Tamburini claims vigi. It just doesn't make sense. Tamburini wouldn't claim vigi as a serial killer in the CHANCE that there's not already a vigi in the game. My mind's been a little jumbled lately since Tamburini roleclaimed because that threw my most likely candidate for scum out the window. But I really don't like Eden voting on a potential vigi, especially when that vigi is going to either die from mafia or get roleblocked later. It's a whole waste of a lynch on a potential confirmed town.
I'm changing votes to Eden. I can't see a good possible reason to lynch Tamburini anymore, as much as I didn't like his roleclaim.
##UNVOTE
##VOTE Eden1892
Why not? Nothing in the ruleset forbids multiple of the same role from appearing in the game.
On April 09 2014 00:01 Promethelax wrote:
Set-up information
Overview:
The setup is a semi-open setup for 13 players; that is, all the possible roles are given but the number of each is not known.
My turn for questions.
1) Why are you guys just blindly lining up to believe a role claim that makes no sense whatsoever from a townie POV and plenty of sense from an sk POV?
2) Epishade, what happened between "I think Eden's post brought up some good points about tamburini being the serial killer" to "tamburini wouldn't claim vigi as a serial killer"? You flipped on that in the span of an hour with no explanation.
On May 01 2014 11:57 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
If you're town, you don't want vigi to die. Sure, he might be SK, but he might be vigi also. You don't even know if there is a SK. I think tambo's claim was strange too, but I'm not willing to risk losing vigi. You are. That makes you mafia.
No, it doesn't. You know better than this. You don't even have to look further than the last newbie claim to know my attitude about fishy claims on the first day. If I think I've got a legit read on someone as being anti-town, I don't give a fuck what they say they are, if they can't prove their claim in a reasonable way, I'm not trusting it. Cavalinho had no realistic way of verifying he was the parity cop last game, I lynched him without batting an eye d1 because I thought he was scum. tamburini can't prove his claim at all because there's no way to tell that he isn't the serial killer, I'm lynching him without batting an eye d1 because I think he's serial killer. If I'm wrong, no big deal, it's a setback but tamburini hasn't been helping us win at all with his behavior d1 and we're not going to win or lose based on power roles anyway. If I'm right, we just cut the anti-town kp in half on the first day. The choice is obvious to me. How is it not to you?
|
On May 01 2014 12:07 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
It's not obvious because there's no guarantee that there even is an SK. I'm not risking killing a vigi on the possibility that there is a SK.
There's no guarantee that there even is a vigilante, either. I'm not risking not killing a SK on the possibility that there is a vigi.
|
I mentioned the parity cop strategy earlier, but I'm working back through the scenarios and you might be right about it working itself out anyway. Lemme get back to you in a little bit.
|
I'm running through the possible scenarios and not getting any non-obvious conclusions. If he's the serial killer we want to lynch him, if he's the vigilante we don't want to lynch him, there's no surefire way today to know the difference, and the serial killer and vigilante are identical as far as the mafia's incentives go -- a source of additional nightkills that could get targeted at them but are statistically more likely to hit town -- so the mafia aren't going to do anything that would let us discern the difference. Hell, he could even be the vigilante and plausibly survive the night depending on whether or not there's a jailkeeper or town roleblocker in the game -- if the mafia player sent to kill the vigilante was roleblocked or jailed, then there'd only be one kill and mtamburini would be alive, in which case we'd probably assume he's a nightkill-immune serial killer and mislynch him anyway. There's just too many possible role interactions to verify anything with certainty.
No, I don't think there's any "policy" decision to make, so to speak; the logic from role interactions doesn't give any absolute conclusion like it does in some cases (ex: don't lynch a d1 normal cop claim and make the mafia play around it). It comes down to whether or not you believe his claim. As I've argued before, his claim makes no sense from a town POV. He was completely unprompted. It was way too early out to be claiming to avoid a lynch. If he wanted to confirm himself as town he'd have waited until d2 to claim and then he'd have shot tonight, then claimed the kill on d2. No one asked him for his claim, and it distracted us for the last few pages. Furthermore he's done nothing substantial besides this to scumhunt or make any progress toward clarifying the game state.
|
Catching up and doing a final quick skim of the past day or so. Also I might be repping a newborn mafia community elsewhere in a big mafia tournament soon B)
On May 02 2014 01:38 Amiko wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 11:51 Eden1892 wrote:
Town: I want to kill the serial killer and the mafia if I believe both to be in the game. I think mtamburini is fakeclaiming as serial killer because his claim only makes sense in the scenario I described in my big post. He's just making himself the n1 kill if he's actually the vigilante, which is colossally stupid. It's better for me to kill the serial killer over a mafia because removing the serial killer takes away 1 of the 2 anti-town kp. If I killed, say, Yell0w and he flipped scum, we've caught a mafia, but we're equally close to winning (as in either case we've killed 1 anti-town player), and we still have 2 anti-town kp instead of one to deal with. The serial killer is always the better kill.
@Eden1892: I agree with you generally, this doesn't make sense to me given mtamburini's preferences. Please answer this: Why is the serial killer a better lynch when the serial killer seems to want to shoot yell0w, who you think is mafia?
1) Presume he's the serial killer, how do we know he can be trusted to follow through? I don't trust the guy as far as I can throw him, and I can't throw him for shit.
2) Has he actually explicitly stated this intention to kill Yell0w? The assumption isn't surprising, but I don't think he ever said who he was actually going to kill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
