|
Post by guiri on Jun 28, 2012 10:03:31 GMT -5
Who's reading between the lines? I've been voting richbeckman since TexCat was lynched because I think he's scum and his vote on D4 which served to protect TexCat supports that theory. YesterDay I voted cathi and her D4 vote also helped TexCat survive the lynch. In my post I explicitly state: "Key protective votes include the ones by cathi, patricia, Pleo, amykb, kagemoto, supermel, Annem, aleetha, richbeckman and crys."
I'm not making a case against rich or cathi based on their vote, I'm adding their vote to the evidence against them. I agree that amykb and aleetha's votes are worthy of analysis and are should be held against them too.
|
|
|
Post by wombat99 on Jun 28, 2012 10:19:04 GMT -5
<snip> richbeckman seems genuinely puzzled as to how his vote could have swayed the votes against texcat. If he had intentionally swayed the texcat vote, I don't think he would have responded indignantly like that because he basically issued a "prove it" challenge to guiri. (And unfortunately for richbeckman, yes, the vote record can be interpreted against him). Really!?!?!? Before I voted, the votes were LadyRogue 7, Meeko 6, and Texcat 5. Texcat was already saved. After I voted: LadyRogue 8, Meeko 6 and Texcat 5. The only possible way my vote saves Texcat is if it is a given that crys (the only person to vote after me and she voted for LadyRogue) was going to vote for whoever I voted for. So by not voting Texcat I prevented Texcat from getting 7 votes. [sarcasm]Yeah, crys is voting for whoever I vote for [/sarcasm] I voted late because I was at a loss as to who to vote for. I was waiting, hoping that some conviction would arise. It never did (I sure would like to find some today). I agree with you. To sum up more concisely what I was trying to say - I had a scum lean on you, I was looking to guiri's analysis to confirm that (I wanted some hard vote record evidence), but the post I referenced above made me reconsider my position. And Catinasuit's review of guiri's vote analysis shows how vote records are open to interpretation. Or mis-interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Jun 28, 2012 10:31:58 GMT -5
Who's reading between the lines? I've been voting richbeckman since TexCat was lynched because I think he's scum and his vote on D4 which served to protect TexCat supports that theory. YesterDay I voted cathi and her D4 vote also helped TexCat survive the lynch. In my post I explicitly state: "Key protective votes include the ones by cathi, patricia, Pleo, amykb, kagemoto, supermel, Annem, aleetha, richbeckman and crys." I'm not making a case against rich or cathi based on their vote, I'm adding their vote to the evidence against them. I agree that amykb and aleetha's votes are worthy of analysis and are should be held against them too. The confirmation bias is because it looks like you started with the premise that he was scum and have fitted the facts to fit your theory instead of checking to see if your theory fits the facts. Your post reads as though you went in with the sole purpose of showing that richbeckman is scum, when IMHO it actually shows the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Jun 28, 2012 10:42:20 GMT -5
The sole purpose of the post was to show why I believed richbeckman's vote helped save TexCat, responding to his question "And how in any way did my vote on Day Four help save TexCat?!!?". His weakly motivated vote on LadyRogue pushed TexCat out of contention for the lynch. Starrirain had indicated his intention to vote TexCat and had been called on it and there were 16 or so non-voters who may have been swayed.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Jun 28, 2012 10:43:39 GMT -5
would also consider richbeckman town like crys, precisely because if they were scum, they had no need to be on a town lynch at that point, when there was a safe scum lynch available. What do you mean by this? What was the safe scum lynch?
|
|
|
Post by crys on Jun 28, 2012 11:54:25 GMT -5
Quiet today isn't it..... It's also strange that two people I would expect to have pressure on them, Patricia and Inner Stickler have not had that much against them. Aside from that, I was looking at the vote analysis (post #20) guiri did on the Ladyrogue lynch and its riddled with confirmation bias. The important votes started when when Texcat was on 5 votes, a possible scum lynch, with a small amount of pressure on Meeko and LadyRogue. Pleonast was the first to move, and the important thing to note was that, the vote on Ladyrogue was a one off and by the end of the post, the vote was on Meeko. The next move, which really looks like a saver is the vote from amykb, which tied the vote between Meeko and Texcat. Why this isn't given more prominence, I don't know. I would guess that the next couple of votes on Ladyrogue by kagemoto and supermel were actually town based causing the three way split. With hindsight, annem taking Texcat out of trouble is obvious. I would also point out that aleetha's vote to push LadyRogue two vote ahead and effectively seal the lynch should also come under a lot of scrutiny. But none of that is mentioned here, but comments against richbeckman are. Reading between the lines, I am really suspicious now. It's an excellent piece of analysis pointing out exactly what guiri wants us to read, which is that richbeckman is scum, while glossing over the more interesting points. Big, big, FOS on guiri. And following on from that, I would seriously consider voting amykb for tying up the vote for texcat especially as the vote reason was an agreement with Pleonast and for voting aleethawombat_v3 for that consolidating vote. I would also consider richbeckman town like crys, precisely because if they were scum, they had no need to be on a town lynch at that point, when there was a safe scum lynch available. Crys 1.0 was nk'd and crys 2.0 subbed in for inner stickler. I am again town but pleonast put a whole barrel of WIFOM down in front of us with his antics. Feel free to keep drinking however I feel that will just result in more mislynches. I don't know about the other names on the list but me(inner stickler) is town. I don't think focusing on the list right now is a good idea. Interesting cases have been made on a couple others which definatly gives us things to think about. Sent from my SCH-I405 using ProBoards
|
|
|
Post by wombat99 on Jun 28, 2012 12:20:28 GMT -5
I raised the point that you seemed subdued when Pleo was lynched. You responded to that and said you'd been busy. Fair enough. You also said that you disagreed with my other points. I was just wondering what you disagreed with, since hearing different sides of an argument is sorta what the game is all about. That's all I was asking. Unvote: Wombat_99_V3I'm sorry Wombat. I don't specifically think you are scum this time. I was in a bad mood last night and annoyed that you are continuing this random campaign against me for what you continue to give no reason for. I assure you again that I'm plain old VT. More specifically the one that stands out in my mind is Archangel. You had a strong town lean on her, and I keep WANTING Archangel to be town, but my gut leads me elsewhere on her. Thanks, dizzy, but no need to apologize. No hard feelings What to do with those "gut feelings" is the hardest part of learning the game, for me... I know they have a place in scum-hunting, but how important of a place? And my gut's been wrong a lot. I just finished a quick 9-player game on another site and one of the players accused me (rightly) of having confirmation bias, so I'm trying to learn from that and not let my gut rule my actions as much anymore (and it's funny that confirmation bias has come up here with guiri now). I think you are a good player and I enjoy playing with you. But I will continue to point out things that I think are significant and worth noting in your play, and you keep telling me I'm totally off base, and we'll go on down the Mafia road. ;D
|
|
|
Post by AmyKay on Jun 28, 2012 12:56:08 GMT -5
I was looking at the vote analysis (post #20) guiri did on the Ladyrogue lynch and its riddled with confirmation bias. The important votes started when when Texcat was on 5 votes, a possible scum lynch, with a small amount of pressure on Meeko and LadyRogue. Pleonast was the first to move, and the important thing to note was that, the vote on Ladyrogue was a one off and by the end of the post, the vote was on Meeko. The next move, which really looks like a saver is the vote from amykb, which tied the vote between Meeko and Texcat. With hindsight, annem taking Texcat out of trouble is obvious. I would also point out that aleetha's vote to push LadyRogue two vote ahead and effectively seal the lynch should also come under a lot of scrutiny. And following on from that, I would seriously consider voting amykb for tying up the vote for texcat especially as the vote reason was an agreement with Pleonast and for voting aleethawombat_v3 for that consolidating vote. snipped. just to look at my own posts/thought process from Day Four, the first person I suspected was JustBeingGinger for discrepancy. Then, michelehunter for being interested in Septimus #1's protection history. Nothing came of either of those, so I decided to go back to previous suspicions and see if they were still there. Day 1 I went Meeko, so that's where I looked first. I had even mentioned in Night 2 that Meeko was still acting like a bully, being harsh, and using that as the "ultimate deflection." Let me clarify the Meeko/Gadarene for you. Meeko was being very aggressive and it came off as an attack on Pleonast. Mind you I don't know any of these people, but I dislike bullies and Meeko was being a bit of a bully imo and then he got a little crazy there for a bit, however I just chalked it up to a personality misunderstanding because there is no inflection in text. snipped. I understand that Crys is talking about a specific Meeko instance, but I've been ruminating about Meeko's bully attitude throughout Day Two. It is rather harsh a lot of the time, but he seems to be the only one who does this (to such an extreme), so I'm not sure if it's a scum tell or just the way he is. I don't believe the bulk of his comments to be misunderstandings of inflection, but the extent to which he goes to gang up on others is rather disturbing. One one hand, I think he could be very vicious town, which is good. On the other, being so hardcore ALL THE TIME rubs me wrong - it's like the ultimate deflection, ya know? so, when I voted for Meeko on Day 4, I mentioned that he had continued to get irate at others, gave examples regarding Patricia and Idle, and voted. Yes, I did say "I think Pleonast hit the nail on the head by saying Meeko is HYPER-DEFENSIVE and doesn't make positive contributions." but I had clearly outlined how hyper-defensive I thought he was back on Night 2 and with the latest of his comments, but the kicker is that, that early in my first game, my votes were ALL "in agreement" with someone else's. [Day 1 I agreed with lauriern, Day 2 with kagemoto. I tried to start my own thought process on Day 3, but when the masons began to confirm one another, I moved to voting with everyone else on endhoot.] so my "choices" were TexCat's "are you scum trying to throw suspicions anyway and anywhere you can?" or Mahaloth's of "trying to shift suspicion to just about anybody at this point." as the other voter, Patricia , didn't explain her reasoning, so I assume it was the same from her Day 2 early vote on him: "He jumped in on the first post acting like a helpful town." Patricia's reason wasn't mine. While Mahaloth and TexCat echoed the "hyper defensive" mindset, Pleo was the last to post about Meeko at that point, and the additional reasoning of "lack of positive contributions" made a lot of sense to me - if all he did was deflect, he wasn't adding, so I agreed with him, though my main reason was the same as Mahaloth's and TexCat's. while I can't change the fact that I effectively DID tie the vote at the time, consider two things: I didn't "move" to be a "saver" by following Pleo, and that was the Day where Idle wasn't really around - so vote counts weren't getting updated as often as they had been, and I can tell you I wasn't personally keeping track when there were still ~50 players in the game.
|
|
|
Post by michelehunter on Jun 28, 2012 15:36:56 GMT -5
I reviewed Amykb's votes
Meko day 1 Michelle71 Day 2 Day 3 no vote when we had a known scum Mecko Day 4 Colby11 Day 5 Day 6 another know scum no vote Day 7 actually voted for Pleo Day 8 innerstickler
Seems strange to me when we had 2 known scum there was no vote, and only on the third one Pleo was there a vote
vote Amykb
Sorry was the best info I found any one want to counter this?
|
|
|
Post by AmyKay on Jun 28, 2012 19:44:57 GMT -5
I reviewed Amykb's votes Meko day 1 Michelle71 Day 2 Day 3 no vote when we had a known scum Mecko Day 4 Colby11 Day 5 Day 6 another know scum no vote Day 7 actually voted for Pleo Day 8 innerstickler Seems strange to me when we had 2 known scum there was no vote, and only on the third one Pleo was there a vote vote AmykbSorry was the best info I found any one want to counter this? let's be clear, guys. I voted on Day 3, first of all. Ok, I guess I won't be voting Silver Jan tomorrow That'll teach me to try and use the remains of a Day with a guaranteed lynch to do some extra analysis. Sorry. yeah, same problem here. I was behind the idea that if we could get someone else, then the Vig could handle endhoot anyway. My bad, guys. vote endhoot vote end of dayAnd Day 6 was the one that lasted 21 hours, beginning while I was out of town (as declared on the "away thread" more than a week before) and ending before I could read much, as I pointed out on Night 6.
|
|
|
Post by michelehunter on Jun 28, 2012 19:53:01 GMT -5
Yep, it's over. Endhoot - 28 votes (Susan K Murphy, kagemoto, Suits101, michelehunter, Mahaloth, texcat, wombat99, dizzymrslizzy, crys, richardbeckman, jmj697mn, annem, cassipietz, cathi, supermel, jlrinmke, Silver Jan, colby11, Total Ulla, Septimus, gnarlycharlie, CatInASuit, Paranoia, Archangel, LadyRogue, Meeko, Hal Briston, Phoenixphyre) annem - 2 votes (JustBeingGinger, starrirain) texcat - 2 votes (guiri, Aleetha) jerelijah - 1 vote (jerelijah) wombat99 - 1 vote (patricia) End of Day votes: 24 of 23 Sorry I went by the vote count for day 3
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Jun 28, 2012 20:38:49 GMT -5
Let me clarify the Meeko/Gadarene for you. Meeko was being very aggressive and it came off as an attack on Pleonast. Mind you I don't know any of these people, but I dislike bullies and Meeko was being a bit of a bully imo and then he got a little crazy there for a bit, however I just chalked it up to a personality misunderstanding because there is no inflection in text.
snipped.
I understand that Crys is talking about a specific Meeko instance, but I've been ruminating about Meeko's bully attitude throughout Day Two. It is rather harsh a lot of the time, but he seems to be the only one who does this (to such an extreme), so I'm not sure if it's a scum tell or just the way he is. I don't believe the bulk of his comments to be misunderstandings of inflection, but the extent to which he goes to gang up on others is rather disturbing. One one hand, I think he could be very vicious town, which is good. On the other, being so hardcore ALL THE TIME rubs me wrong - it's like the ultimate deflection, ya know?
It's interesting that you are still looking at me as the guilty party, when we now know that Pleonast was scum, and as such had ulterior motives in EVERYTHING he did. The situation Pleonast and I were in, is an order of magnitude more Pleonast's ""problem"" than mine. A victim of circumstance, if you will.
Why you are blaming the symptom while nourishing the source on this one is beyond me.
And one final crack at it :: If I look off because of my part with Pleonast, ... It's because Pleonast was Scum.
I could go on with things you may need to know about me. Beyond what I've already offered in this area, it would all be metagaming.
so, when I voted for Meeko on Day 4, I mentioned that he had continued to get irate at others, gave examples regarding Patricia and Idle, and voted. Yes, I did say "I think Pleonast hit the nail on the head by saying Meeko is HYPER-DEFENSIVE and doesn't make positive contributions." but I had clearly outlined how hyper-defensive I thought he was back on Night 2 and with the latest of his comments, but the kicker is that, that early in my first game, my votes were ALL "in agreement" with someone else's. [Day 1 I agreed with lauriern, Day 2 with kagemoto. I tried to start my own thought process on Day 3, but when the masons began to confirm one another, I moved to voting with everyone else on endhoot.] so my "choices" were TexCat's "are you scum trying to throw suspicions anyway and anywhere you can?" or Mahaloth's of "trying to shift suspicion to just about anybody at this point." as the other voter, Patricia , didn't explain her reasoning, so I assume it was the same from her Day 2 early vote on him: "He jumped in on the first post acting like a helpful town." Patricia's reason wasn't mine. While Mahaloth and TexCat echoed the "hyper defensive" mindset, Pleo was the last to post about Meeko at that point, and the additional reasoning of "lack of positive contributions" made a lot of sense to me - if all he did was deflect, he wasn't adding, so I agreed with him, though my main reason was the same as Mahaloth's and TexCat's. I don't understand why you are going out of your way to agree with Pleonast. Can you please elaborate on this? I think that Town would want to distance themselves from Scum.
It is not a virtue to emulate scum. It makes one think that you are scum as well.
while I can't change the fact that I effectively DID tie the vote at the time, consider two things: I didn't "move" to be a "saver" by following Pleo, and that was the Day where Idle wasn't really around - so vote counts weren't getting updated as often as they had been, and I can tell you I wasn't personally keeping track when there were still ~50 players in the game. I don't follow this. Are you saying "We have a Lazy Mod, So even if everything else happens, it doesn't happen as a matter of mere technicallity."
Things ""Happen"" in Mafia regardless of when the Mod speaks. A Day ends at a given point in time, even if the words "Day had ended" (or that effect) have yet to be spoken by the Mod.
And a second crack : Ignorance of Mafia Rules (General, and In-Game Specific) is no excuse.
<font style="font-size: 12px;">I reviewed Amykb's votes Meko day 1 Michelle71 Day 2 Day 3 no vote when we had a known scum Mecko Day 4 Colby11 Day 5 Day 6 another know scum no vote Day 7 actually voted for Pleo Day 8 innerstickler Seems strange to me when we had 2 known scum there was no vote, and only on the third one Pleo was there a vote []vote Amykb[] Sorry was the best info I found any one want to counter this? As per Michele's vote, I think I am more likely to second it, over counter it.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Jun 28, 2012 20:40:20 GMT -5
NETA : Mine was in Purple for the above post.
I couldn't find a better way to preserve the quoting AND indicate my response in a easily accessible way.
|
|
|
Post by AmyKay on Jun 28, 2012 21:10:48 GMT -5
@Meeko
yeah, I can't figure out how to reply in-line (the purple was confusing enough), so here are some thoughts on your post:
I'm not calling you the guilty one NOW; I've said at least twice since Pleo was lynched that I now think you're Town. Rehashing my thoughts on Day 4 was just to qualify my vote on you not being a "defense" against Texcat, as CIAS suggested I might have been a "saver" there.
Your symptom/source line is over my head. Perhaps it's an idiom with which I'm not familiar. Are you saying that I helped Pleo by voting you?
I didn't have to go "out of my way" to agree with Pleo to vote you. I had already said you were a fly-off-the-handle individual whose posts were primarily deflections. I could have said "I agree with Mahaloth" (then-known Town) or "I agree with TexCat" (now-known Scum) and added in "Meeko has no positive contributions," but I went with Pleo, who said both. How was I supposed to know Pleo was later going to flip Scum when I agreed with his post? When I agreed with kagemoto on Day 2, I didn't know he was going to later be Town. And why would I have agreed with lauriern on Day 1 if I knew she was Scum? I agree with you - why emulate Scum? well, if you don't know they are, how can you help it?
Nope, not blaming Idle, as he had told us he'd be away. You were the one who blamed him, actually. I was just pointing out that I didn't even know I was causing a tie - no update had been made and I wasn't keeping track myself (still am not, if you care).
Can you explain "Ignorance of Mafia Rules (General, and In-Game Specific) is no excuse" please? I'm unaware that I ignored a rule, apparently.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jun 28, 2012 22:26:26 GMT -5
GnarlyCharlie - 4 votes (CatInASuit, JustBeingGinger, Archangel, supermel) Patricia - 2 votes (PhoenixPhyre, Silver Jan) Suburban Plankton - 1 vote (Meeko) Richardbeckman - 1 vote (guiri) Meeko - 1 vote (Suburban Plankton) JustBeingGiner - 1 vote (gnarlycharlie) AmyKB - 1 vote (michelehunter)
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Jun 29, 2012 0:58:15 GMT -5
@ MeekoCan you explain "Ignorance of Mafia Rules (General, and In-Game Specific) is no excuse" please? I'm unaware that I ignored a rule, apparently. The Ignorance ~ No Excuse comes from your while I can't change the fact that I effectively DID tie the vote at the time, consider two things: I didn't "move" to be a "saver" by following Pleo, and that was the Day where Idle wasn't really around - so vote counts weren't getting updated as often as they had been, and I can tell you I wasn't personally keeping track when there were still ~50 players in the game. I don't follow why you offered that "idle wasn't really around". Or "I wasn't personally keeping track" This seems to suggest that you took a slower speed, or decided not to do something that you thought you should have done. I was simply stating that even if Idle doesn't update vote counts, they are at any given time updated. You don't need to wait for Idle to officially state the vote count, for the vote to be that count. If Ed was here he would comment on my analogy fetish, but :: If A Mafia-tree falls in a forest, and no voter is around, it DOES make a sound. I got the impression that you slacked off on something, or somethings, simply because Idle slacked off on something, or somethings. It's like monopoly, the bank can never run out of money. You only thought the bank was out of money. You only thought the vote count wasn't updated. The vote count is always current and right, despite what you think of it*. I was trying to say, Don't let Idle's lack of (Whatever) prevent you from doing (whatever). This just seems to be too convenient of a dodge and could be seen as opportunism. Scum love opportunism. *This should also cover corner cases in advanced games with double voters and vote switchers etc.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Jun 29, 2012 0:59:53 GMT -5
I was going to ask about the vote on me.... but then I was like, oh yeah, right, the OMGUS.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Jun 29, 2012 8:09:55 GMT -5
So about a day or so to go, and only 11 votes out of 29.
Can everyone please make an effort to vote and stick down some reasoning as to why you are voting that way.
I really don't want to have to rely on a "may-be, may-be-not" detective for guidance and direction, but lack of discussion only hinders us in finding scum.
|
|
|
Post by wombat99 on Jun 29, 2012 8:54:43 GMT -5
would also consider richbeckman town like crys, precisely because if they were scum, they had no need to be on a town lynch at that point, when there was a safe scum lynch available. What do you mean by this? What was the safe scum lynch? CatInASuit, I would like to know what you meant here also.
|
|
|
Post by wombat99 on Jun 29, 2012 9:03:03 GMT -5
Agreed, CatInASuit. Here are my thoughts: I started the Day thinking I was going to have a hard time deciding between several good lynch candidates: Gnarlycharlie, richbeckman, annetastic, and phoenixphyre. I'm not going to vote for gnarlycharlie as I said here: <FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12px">Regarding Gnarlycharlie: The case against him consists of (1) his sudden and suspiciously timed de-lurking and (2) players who have played with him before sensing a change in his playing style. I cannot speak to (2), and i am reconsidering (1). If there was a scum leadership change when Pleo died and gnarly was taking over as the new leader, surely it would not have been handled so obviously. Gnarly could have waited a bit then eased back into the game and not make the transition so obvious. I think I'll be giving Gnarlycharlie a pass Today unless some new evidence comes to light. I'm not going to vote for richbeckman as discussed here: <FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12px">
<snip> richbeckman seems genuinely puzzled as to how his vote could have swayed the votes against texcat. If he had intentionally swayed the texcat vote, I don't think he would have responded indignantly like that because he basically issued a "prove it" challenge to guiri. (And unfortunately for richbeckman, yes, the vote record can be interpreted against him).
Really!?!?!? Before I voted, the votes were LadyRogue 7, Meeko 6, and Texcat 5.
Texcat was already saved.
After I voted: LadyRogue 8, Meeko 6 and Texcat 5.
The only possible way my vote saves Texcat is if it is a given that crys (the only person to vote after me and she voted for LadyRogue) was going to vote for whoever I voted for. So by not voting Texcat I prevented Texcat from getting 7 votes. [sarcasm]Yeah, crys is voting for whoever I vote for [/sarcasm]
I voted late because I was at a loss as to who to vote for. I was waiting, hoping that some conviction would arise. It never did (I sure would like to find some today).I agree with you. To sum up more concisely what I was trying to say - I had a scum lean on you, I was looking to guiri's analysis to confirm that (I wanted some hard vote record evidence), but the post I referenced above made me reconsider my position. And Catinasuit's review of guiri's vote analysis shows how vote records are open to interpretation. Or mis-interpretation. I can't vote for annetastic since she's been declared Town; Which leaves me with phoenixphyre as I discussed here: <FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12px">
- snipped -
as for not knowing what detectives do or can do, I did not know. I thought, seriously, that they were just more experienced at picking up on stuff, not that they could actually go and ask "is this person town or scum?" and as for doctors I thought they were given a list of people to be killed and picked one to save..look I could have gone on line and checked all this out, read up on how to play and what to say, there are reams of pages on it, but then I am not learning my game, but playing what someone else says to do and that seems kind of useless.
-snipped -
I have pages and pages of quips and vote lists and such just trying to figure out how the game works, but that does not mean I know yet.
- snipped -
You say you have pages and pages of quips and vote lists, so you are putting a lot of effort and time into the game; I would think that working out the basics of what Detectives and Doctors do would have been important to you also. I'm sorry, this just doesn't ring true with me. I'm hesitating on her because we've lynched too many newbie Townies and maybe she is just that, as she claims. But I will probably come back to her if no other decent lynch candidate emerges. So there is my thought process on who *not* to vote for. Next post, thoughts on other possible lynch candidates for today.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Jun 29, 2012 9:17:21 GMT -5
would also consider richbeckman town like crys, precisely because if they were scum, they had no need to be on a town lynch at that point, when there was a safe scum lynch available. What do you mean by this? What was the safe scum lynch? What do you mean by this? What was the safe scum lynch? CatInASuit, I would like to know what you meant here also. A poor choice of words from myself. At the end of Day 4, richbeckman could have placed a vote on Texcat with LadyRogue still in the lead and with only a couple of hours left in the Day. The lynch would likely have been the same, especially as crys voted the same way afterwards, and he would gain plenty of town cred when Texcat was subsequently lynched.
|
|
|
Post by wombat99 on Jun 29, 2012 12:22:11 GMT -5
Thinking about who to vote for Today: I've still got no good clear candidate myself and I'm kinda at a standstill for things to even discuss.
Crys, for one, mentioned the need to get organized and I would like that too.
Let's give some thought to how to *win the game* vs. scum-hunting.
29 players left. Let's assume we started with 15 scum. 7 are dead. So we have 21 Town and 8 scum.
The Town win condition is that all scum are dead. Scum win condition is that the number of scum is equal or greater than the number of Town. (Side note: This is why Hal makes my eye twitch! If he is scum and pulling a Pleo, we are sunk and there's no way to catch him besides lynching him, or if there's another detective out there who investigates him.)
12 more Town can die before we get to the earliest possible LYLO. That is at least 4 more Days (assuming worst case scenario of a mislynch and two Town NKs).
So - I think Town has some breathing room and maybe we need to be less worried about avoiding a mislynch (it's likely to happen no matter what) and more focused on creating a strategy or roadmap for winning the game.
I don't know what the strategy should be but some that have been mentioned are
- lynch inactives - lynch experienced players who are suspiciously still alive - lynch low-information players - lynch high-information players
I lean towards lynching the inactives (But then who would I sub in for the next time I'm killed? LOL) That's as far as I can get, so experienced players, please weigh in here.
|
|
|
Post by AmyKay on Jun 29, 2012 13:14:12 GMT -5
@ MeekoCan you explain "Ignorance of Mafia Rules (General, and In-Game Specific) is no excuse" please? I'm unaware that I ignored a rule, apparently. The Ignorance ~ No Excuse comes from your while I can't change the fact that I effectively DID tie the vote at the time, consider two things: I didn't "move" to be a "saver" by following Pleo, and that was the Day where Idle wasn't really around - so vote counts weren't getting updated as often as they had been, and I can tell you I wasn't personally keeping track when there were still ~50 players in the game. I don't follow why you offered that "idle wasn't really around". Or "I wasn't personally keeping track" This seems to suggest that you took a slower speed, or decided not to do something that you thought you should have done. I was simply stating that even if Idle doesn't update vote counts, they are at any given time updated. You don't need to wait for Idle to officially state the vote count, for the vote to be that count. If Ed was here he would comment on my analogy fetish, but :: If A Mafia-tree falls in a forest, and no voter is around, it DOES make a sound. I got the impression that you slacked off on something, or somethings, simply because Idle slacked off on something, or somethings. It's like monopoly, the bank can never run out of money. You only thought the bank was out of money. You only thought the vote count wasn't updated. The vote count is always current and right, despite what you think of it*. I was trying to say, Don't let Idle's lack of (Whatever) prevent you from doing (whatever). This just seems to be too convenient of a dodge and could be seen as opportunism. Scum love opportunism. *This should also cover corner cases in advanced games with double voters and vote switchers etc. I offered that information simply to disclose that I didn't know I was making "that powerful" of a vote by creating a tie. Yes, I can now see that was ignorant to a certain degree. I can't help that now, and there's no point in hiding it. I appreciate you using the "tree in the woods" analogy - yes, you're right - votes "count" whether they're tallied or not. I will reconsider keeping track myself, despite how many players are in the game. Now, back to figuring out my own vote for toDay...
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jun 29, 2012 13:16:39 GMT -5
I was going to ask about the vote on me.... but then I was like, oh yeah, right, the OMGUS. Well, that and the fact that you've now revealed yourself to be The Grapist. That being said... Unvote: Meeko Vote: gnarlycharlie Looking at gnarly's posts, the signal to noise ratio seems awfully low. I don't know if I fully buy into the whole "he was really quiet until after Pleo was lynched, so that's why he's Scum" theory...but it seems that he's still not saying much even though his posting volume has increased quite a bit. I still think Meeko is Scum, but since nobody seems to agree with me. I find gnarly more suspicious than Patricia at this point, so I'm changing my vote to put a bit of distance there to try to avoid any late-Day shenanigans.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Jun 29, 2012 14:48:44 GMT -5
I was going to ask about the vote on me.... but then I was like, oh yeah, right, the OMGUS. Well, that and the fact that you've now revealed yourself to be The Grapist. That being said... Unvote: Meeko [/color] Vote: gnarlycharlie [/color] Looking at gnarly's posts, the signal to noise ratio seems awfully low. I don't know if I fully buy into the whole "he was really quiet until after Pleo was lynched, so that's why he's Scum" theory...but it seems that he's still not saying much even though his posting volume has increased quite a bit. I still think Meeko is Scum, but since nobody seems to agree with me. I find gnarly more suspicious than Patricia at this point, so I'm changing my vote to put a bit of distance there to try to avoid any late-Day shenanigans.[/quote] How can you avoid any late Day shenanigans? By placing a vote on gnarly? By not voting Patricia? If there are still as many as 8 scum left don't you think they have a good chance of controlling the vote? Why do you want to distance yourself from Meeko? This post is confusing little old me, can you explain a bit more?
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on Jun 29, 2012 15:10:41 GMT -5
I don't really see a case on most of the people on the chopping block right now. I'm going to go back to my comments from Day 5? I think that Patricia is just way too fixated Meeko and stopped only to jump on jlrin. I don't trust her and have gotten a bad vibe from Day 1.
Vote: Patricia
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jun 29, 2012 15:17:18 GMT -5
How can you avoid any late Day shenanigans? By placing a vote on gnarly? By not voting Patricia? If there are still as many as 8 scum left don't you think they have a good chance of controlling the vote? Why do you want to distance yourself from Meeko? This post is confusing little old me, can you explain a bit more? Well obviously I can't do anything single-handedly. But I figured a 3 vote margin was better than a 2 vote margin. I'm not sure how I'm "distancing myself" from Meeko; can you explain that? I would certainly be willing to switch my vote back if a couple other people want to join me. But at this point I don't see the use in having 5 different one-off votes. If there are as still many as 8 Scum left, then I suppose they do stand a good chance of controlling the vote. But I don't know how many Scum are left, do you? And what of it anyway? Should I be saying "Well, there are probably still 8 Scum left, so they can control the vote anyway...we might as well just give up now..."? I'm really not sure what your problem is with my vote here. If it's a matter of you thinking that I'm Scum and I'm voting for gnarlycharlie in order to save my Scum-buddy Patricia, then come out and say it. If it's something else, then say that.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Jun 29, 2012 15:41:47 GMT -5
How can you avoid any late Day shenanigans? By placing a vote on gnarly? By not voting Patricia? If there are still as many as 8 scum left don't you think they have a good chance of controlling the vote? Why do you want to distance yourself from Meeko? This post is confusing little old me, can you explain a bit more? Well obviously I can't do anything single-handedly. But I figured a 3 vote margin was better than a 2 vote margin. I'm not sure how I'm "distancing myself" from Meeko; can you explain that? I would certainly be willing to switch my vote back if a couple other people want to join me. But at this point I don't see the use in having 5 different one-off votes. If there are as still many as 8 Scum left, then I suppose they do stand a good chance of controlling the vote. But I don't know how many Scum are left, do you? And what of it anyway? Should I be saying "Well, there are probably still 8 Scum left, so they can control the vote anyway...we might as well just give up now..."? I'm really not sure what your problem is with my vote here. If it's a matter of you thinking that I'm Scum and I'm voting for gnarlycharlie in order to save my Scum-buddy Patricia, then come out and say it. If it's something else, then say that. I am not sure if you are scum or not, the votes on gnarly are worrying me because I think he is Town, he could be laughing his head off over me though. I didn't even mean to smudge you. I didn't get the "distancing" comment? I am just talking here, I have a vote down already and it's unlikely to change. So, I really haven't got a problem with your vote, I have a problem with the distancing thing, who are you distancing yourself from or have I got that all wrong? I keep reading your sentence and I still don'y get it. Are you putting distance between Patricia and gnarly?? Sorry if I am harping on but I cannot wrap my head around it. BTW, how on earth would I know how many scum are left, I was just using other player's maths
|
|
|
Post by crys on Jun 29, 2012 15:59:55 GMT -5
Quiet today isn't it..... It's also strange that two people I would expect to have pressure on them, Patricia and Inner Stickler have not had that much against them. Aside from that, I was looking at the vote analysis (post #20) guiri did on the Ladyrogue lynch and its riddled with confirmation bias. The important votes started when when Texcat was on 5 votes, a possible scum lynch, with a small amount of pressure on Meeko and LadyRogue. Pleonast was the first to move, and the important thing to note was that, the vote on Ladyrogue was a one off and by the end of the post, the vote was on Meeko. The next move, which really looks like a saver is the vote from amykb, which tied the vote between Meeko and Texcat. Why this isn't given more prominence, I don't know. I would guess that the next couple of votes on Ladyrogue by kagemoto and supermel were actually town based causing the three way split. With hindsight, annem taking Texcat out of trouble is obvious. I would also point out that aleetha's vote to push LadyRogue two vote ahead and effectively seal the lynch should also come under a lot of scrutiny. But none of that is mentioned here, but comments against richbeckman are. Reading between the lines, I am really suspicious now. It's an excellent piece of analysis pointing out exactly what guiri wants us to read, which is that richbeckman is scum, while glossing over the more interesting points. Big, big, FOS on guiri. And following on from that, I would seriously consider voting amykb for tying up the vote for texcat especially as the vote reason was an agreement with Pleonast and for voting aleethawombat_v3 for that consolidating vote. I would also consider richbeckman town like crys, precisely because if they were scum, they had no need to be on a town lynch at that point, when there was a safe scum lynch available. I have read, read and reread the information in the posts for Day 9 and this one haunts me. CIAS says there was a safe scum lynch available, however we didn't know that was the case. This kind of pings me like a PIS slip. Granted I do know that it could have been bad wording since hindsight is 20/20 and now we KNOW that pleo was scum. For some reason this whole post just screams to me, but I am not exactly sure why. Is it actually what CIAS posted or the points that are brought up? I guess I need to go look at some more voting history now. All I know is the last time I had such strong feelings about a player he turned up scum even though he had me questioning my mental capacities by claiming detective lmao.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jun 29, 2012 16:02:00 GMT -5
Jan,
I went back and read my first post again, and I think maybe I understand what you were asking...
I wasn't trying to "distance myself from Meeko", I was trying to "put some distance between gnarlycharlie and Particia".
I still think Meeko is Scum, but nobody seems to agree with me. I also think gnarly is Scum, but I don't think Patricia is. My single vote on Meeko isn't accomplishing anything, so I moved it to gnarly to increase the separation between him and Patricia, as I'd rather see him lynched than her.
Does that help?
|
|