Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Aug 7, 2007 19:33:17 GMT -5
[glow=red,2,300]WooooOOOOOoOooooOOOOOOooooooooooooo (and other ghostly noises)....[/glow] hockeymonkey ghost voice: Dotchan....you have edited your pooooooooooooost! I smite thee from the Great Beyooooooond! (no editing allowed: where do you think you are the SDMB? )
(OK Idle, I'll try to stop being the Edit Police now.) My deepest apologies, ghost of hockeymonkey! GreedySmurf checked in while I was composing my post, so I figure it'd be all right take advantage of the edit window. (A light hearted, non-oranged FOS at myself for being dumb. Sorry all!)
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Aug 7, 2007 20:41:19 GMT -5
Ok, well, to add to all that, I'm in the same place I was yesterday. Vote Mad the Swine for the reasons posted yesterday available per link in response to Blam above. In regards to your link above, are you suggesting that on scumboard I decided to come up with a plan to off a fellow scum and then come over here and tell the plan to everyone? I know many of you think I may play a little crazy at times, but I ain't that crazy. Nope, that's not what I'm suggesting, but I think you know that. I'm suggesting that you're projecting a loopier-than-usual persona as smoke and mirrors and noise. It's hard to nail someone for being inconsistent or pitching odd logic if all the logic they're pitching is rather odd. I think you (or some other early voter) were on the Drainbead wagon for statistical color, to confound the spreadsheets, and the wagon sort of got out of hand and the scum couldn't control it, despite diversionary alternate bandwagons. Hah, that's one of the last people you should be appealing to for some vetting process in my neighborhood. My vote is not cast in stone but there is little going on here today to move me towards another suspect. It will be interesting to watch what develops over the course of the day, I think.
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Aug 8, 2007 0:38:26 GMT -5
I've been finding JSexton rather scummy since Day 1, strangely as much for his inaction as his actions. I've been trying to decide if my suspicion is due to tunnel-vision so I went back through his posts and if anything I'm finding him more scummy. To recap, here are his posts so far (a little out of order for better grouping): Day 1: 1.2 - Comes right out and random votes dotchan1.12, 1.35, 1.111 - He defends and explains his random vote 1.119, 1.123, and 1.127 - About his rule clarification that the geniuses can win with the town 1.156 - A reply to cowgirl and storyteller about catching scum by following the money. He also talks about what is WIFOM and not WIFOM. 1.158 - Replies to Blaster Master and Roosh saying they are taking things out of context and that capybara wants to follow him and Hal Briston and not worry about geniuses. 1.242 - His vote for GreedySmurf: unvote dotchan vote GreedySmurf Call it...gut.
Before his vote the votecount was:
drainbead (2) - storyteller0910, Roosh, Mad The Swine dotchan (1) - JSexton Malacandra (1) - Blaster Master JSexton (1) - Malacandra dnooman (1) - Hockey Monkey Mhaye (1) - kat
JSexton's vote came shortly after Mad The Swine cast the third vote for drainbead.
1.252 and 1.253 - He makes his case against GreedySmurf quoting scum tells.
I note that he did so after capybara asked him to elaborate in post 1.247. The vote post was at 8:40 (CT), the post asking him to elaborate was at 10:39, and his case was posted at 11:08. This makes me think that he hadn't originally intended to elaborate unless (or until) asked to.
1.267 and 1.268 - He discusses the scum tells in his case against GreedySmurf with Hal Briston and Blaster Master
1.269 - He quotes drainbead and points out a contradiction in her stance on lynching lurkers. He also says he doesn't want to discuss the dnooman guest post, and that he has a name on the list of those not sticking their necks out and will see how the next day goes.
1.277 - Says "Roosh, I, I...what? I really have no idea what you're saying here." in response to Roosh's theory that one of the bandwagons is to save scum.
1.294:
Sorry, I suck at talking. What i was trying to say was what's being hashed out actually after that comment. I was saying of the 3 big vote getters: Dnooman/Drainbead/Greedy that the odds of us picking a townie to lynch were high cuz of the fact that scum would be more likely to nominate others to be voted for and distract us from actually lynching a real scum person. <snip> Make sense? Yes, I get you now. I suspect that when the game is over, it will turn out that you are right, and one of those wagons may well have been partially for deflection purposes. But I tihnk it's going to be circular to try and determine which at this point.
Now we know at least one bandwagon that the scum would have wanted to divert votes away from.
I left out a number of posts to keep the useful ones grouped, but for completeness:
Random vote talk: 1.251 and 1.265
Other fluff posts (IMO): 1.113, 1.128, 1.162, 1.303
No posts during Night 1
Day 2:
2.51 - He posts his reads on everyone and votes for Malacandra. His case for the vote is:
Malacandra - Lots of attention here. the dnooman vote did seem like an attempt to derail DrainBead's lynch. Then, later, Mal votes GreedySmurf even while acknowledges that DB is probably the better lynch. Wow. Scum. vote: Malacandra
He has this to say about GreedySmurf:
GreedySmurf - Initially, my read was scum. However, I liked his posts after that. He's learning, whether through his own efforts or through coaching I can't say. I'm actually leaning town at the moment.
2.56, 2.77, and 2.84 - he and diggitcamara go back and forth about whether diggitcamara's vote on the GreedySmurf bandwagon is suspicious
2.78 and 2.85 - he and Malacandra go back and forth about his suspicion of Malacandra
2.167 - he replies to storyteller about Mad The Swine's theory that the scum set up drainbead
2.170 - He quotes GreedySmurf, Malacandra, and me (nesta). For GreedySmurf he says:
The phrasing is interesting. It may have been brought up before, but "forced to vote for Drainbead"? Could be an indication of a scum discussion.
About Malacandra he says:
I've talked about this post before, but it's even more interesting now in light of storyteller's theory. Was Mal under pressure to pile on Drainbead, but refused because he thought it would look too scummy? Could be!
And about me he says:
This was the only other one that stood out to me, mostly because the reasoning is so vague.
I find it a little strange that he reversed course on GreedySmurf saying now he was leaning town but then finds traces of scum discussion. (Please click on the link to read the quoted text to see JSexton's post in context.) I don't agree that it necissarly indicates scum coaching, but more that if GreedySmurf is town that he might feel forced to vote for drainbead to save his own skin.
Also, since he quotes my post, I'll defend my Day 1 vote by pointing out that it was vague because the case had already been made against drainbead so I didn't think it was necissary to state it all again.
2.182 - Says Roosh is awfully medium sized lately.
That's it for Day 2. He didn't have any posts during Night 2.
Day 3:
3.12 - Wonders why cowgirl didn't claim and says he's really torqued off about it
3.51 - Votes Malacandra, citing the same reasons from Days 1 and 2. He also points out that Malacandra was the third vote for cowgirl.
I listed all of JSexton's posts in the hope that everyone can review them and see if they come to the same conclusions I have.
The reaons I find JSexton scummy are:
1. He voted for GreedySmurf at a time that the scum would have liked heat taken off drainbead, but does so without stating reasons other than a gut feeling, and only elaborates when prompted.
2. In his first post on Day 2 he says he's now leaning town on GreedySmurf and votes for Malacandra. His case against Malacandra is that his vote for dnooman on Day 1 was to derail the drainbead bandwagon. I think the dnooman bandwagon wasn't destined to go anywhere since the only reason for it was because of dnooman's lurking (or lack of activity) and lynching lurkers on Day 1 has never been popular. This seems to me like JSexton was trying to shift the blame of trying to derail the drainbead bandwagon to someone else.
3. He votes Malacandra on Day 3 while just citing his Day 1 and 2 suspicions. From my review I don't recall him ever mentioning suspecting Malcandra on Day 1, which leaves us with his questionable logic for his suspcion on Day 2. He adds that Malacandra was the thrid vote for cowgirl, but says he's only partially serious about that.
4. This isn't how I suspect JSexton to act as town, but it is consistent with how I expect him to act as scum.
Now reason 4 is meta-gaming and vague, but I admit it has very much influanced my suspicion of him. I recall him in WereWolf1 and Mafia2, both of which he was town. He seemed much more focussed on outing scum and seemed to play as if he were going to be killed any night. I expected him to play the same way in this game. He's possibly the most experianced player in this game and I would expect him to be making more effort to find scum as soon as possible. Instead he seems to me to be hanging back and taking the safe road. Instead of pushing on a lot of people he thinks might be scum he's voting for the same safe vote two Days now without really trying to convince us. He started a bandwagon on Day 1 that could (if GreedySmurf is town) have derailed the lynching of scum, yet on Day 2 he seems to forget all about those suspicions without any prompting. I asked myself as I read back through his posts if an experianced player would do these things if scum and I think they would.
I fully admit I could be way off here, but after a lot of thought I don't think I am.
Vote JSexton
|
|
|
Post by dnooman on Aug 8, 2007 1:33:52 GMT -5
Hmm, let’s take a look back shall we? Post 270, just before 1pm: Malacandra posts this There are about 26 hours remaining before night. He joins two confirmed townies in order to take the heat of both myself and Greedy. I know I’m town, and I suspect that Greedy is, but this rings false to me. Status: Hockey Monkey sees this, thinks it’s scummy, unvotes me, and votes for Mal. Status: Blaster agrees that DrainBead’s statements that I’m town scream “scum” so he votes for her. Status: Cowgirl has still yet to say a thing, hence my suspicion of her. DrainBead decides to vote for Mal Why? Only the scum know. Status: Cowgirl finally unvotes me, and votes for Mal. Greedy throws a vote onto the drainBead wagon. Status: Mhaye votes for Mal and I vote for Drainbead. Status: capybara votes for Mal. At this point we have two confirmed town, and one confirmed scum on the wagon. Status: Pygmy throws out an odd vote for Hal, and Mal relents and unvotes me, all the while sounding indignant. Kat unvotes Mhaye and votes for greedy. Status: Then Mal says: Status: Mal brings Greedy to within one vote of the lead. At this point there are two confirmed town and one confirmed scum voting for him (okay confirmed later). nesta votes for DrainBead. Late votes, one for scum, one for town. I’m not sure what to make of this yet. The status at this point is: dotchan had not voted yet, and Mhaye decided to unvote Mal and vote for Drainbead… with only 17 minutes remaining. Final result:
Mal was on the Greedy wagon (1st runner up to the scum wagon), and was also on the Cowgirl wagon. He has followed diggit on both votes as well. I'm assuming that he's trying to frame diggit, otherwise, it's scum protecting scum.
Vote Malacandra.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Aug 8, 2007 3:46:46 GMT -5
Nesta, (I'm sorry, I keep reading your posts as Nestea) your post intrigues me quite a bit. Because they're sentiments I've had all game long but kept on the backburner (mostly because this week is terrible for me, and I've been quite busy but able to follow along, and I was hoping someone else would do a workup on JSexton).
Here's the thing though, for the longest time I had you pegged in my book as a "shady" character (Mostly for your day one vote vs. Drainbead being so late, i felt maybe it was a last min. jump on by a hidden scum-the low posting guy that doesn't get noticed much, ya know?)
So it's interesting that you are the one to call out Jsexton. I'm quite interested to hear his rebuttal towards you. Because I see what you're selling, but I'm not sure if i want to buy it, Nesta. Esp. with what seems to be push towards Malacandra, are you deflecting away votes? If so why the one person I had always suspected? Ah.... this is the problem with not being able to actively participate as much as i would have liked. This day's vote will be my weakest one, and I really don't like the idea of that, so I'll hold on for a little while longer, but hopefully by the weekend i'll be able to start examining posts in depth again.
Note To Self: Malacandra. Jsexton. Nesta. (And I'm not really sure I understand the MadSwine arguments. I'll have to re-read those again. It's late and i can't remember it too well, and i'd rather be more informed when I vote. When are the votes due by?
|
|
|
Post by Malacandra on Aug 8, 2007 8:49:10 GMT -5
Obviously my suspicions of JSextongrow every time he votes for me with less and less reason, but I think I will wait and see what he has to say in response to Nesta before I drop anything on him.
I'm really puzzled by dnooman's vote for me - or rather, by the case he's presented to support it. I certainly don't see how my participation in the cowgirl debacle is meant to be evidence of scumminess. I said at the time I switched from dotchan that I wasn't altogether sold, but I was leaving plenty of time for my fellow voters to bail out cowgirl if the general feeling was that she was town. Also, if ever I've seen having your cake and eating it, this determination that "following" diggit brands me as scum whether diggit is scum or town seems to be it.
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Aug 8, 2007 9:57:34 GMT -5
Nesta, (I'm sorry, I keep reading your posts as Nestea) That's a very common mistake. I curse the Nestea people for taking my handle. Here's the thing though, for the longest time I had you pegged in my book as a "shady" character (Mostly for your day one vote vs. Drainbead being so late, i felt maybe it was a last min. jump on by a hidden scum-the low posting guy that doesn't get noticed much, ya know?) If anything I think my vote for drainbead, late or not, is a point in my favor. If I were scum I could have tied it up with a vote for GreedySmurf at that time, or simply voted for someone else to take the safe road. I understand how late votes look bad, but on Day 1 we had so little to go on that I procrastinated until the very end, and I'm glad I chose correctly. On Day 2 I ended up doing the same thing, waiting to see if any scum slipped up, and it turned out to be a big mistake. That's why I stayed up later than I should have last night making a case against the person I find scummiest right now, so that I didn't end up in a situation of having to try to decide between just a couple of choices at the last minute.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Aug 8, 2007 10:10:49 GMT -5
Hi, all -
I am really struggling to keep afloat here - some random real-life stuff has all come to a head at the same time, and it's required the bulk of my time. I am past it now, so re-read and return to useful contribution is imminent. Thanks for your patience.
|
|
|
Post by JSexton on Aug 8, 2007 11:22:04 GMT -5
I've been finding JSexton rather scummy since Day 1, strangely as much for his inaction as his actions. I've been trying to decide if my suspicion is due to tunnel-vision so I went back through his posts and if anything I'm finding him more scummy. <snip pbpa> The reaons I find JSexton scummy are: 1. He voted for GreedySmurf at a time that the scum would have liked heat taken off drainbead, but does so without stating reasons other than a gut feeling, and only elaborates when prompted. It wasn't gut, ever. I had the explanation post mostly made up already. I was curious to see how Greedy would react to a "gut" vote, but he didn't come in for a while. I ended up just posting the case. And many of the points brought up against him day one by other folks. I didn't mention him on day on, true. I was focused elsewhere. After re-reading day one with the knowledge of some alignments, that's when my suspicion of Greedy eased and Mal's went up. In contrast, nothing about the events of day 2's lynch and night 2's kill made me less suspicious of Mal. I guess there's been a bunch of conversation about this "tell" in recent games that I've missed. So be it, but in my experience, it's been surprisingly accurate when no one is talking about it. Obviously, if everyone is hyper-aware of it, it loses any value, but when it's not on anyone's mind, it's remarkable in retrospect. It's not something I lynch over, but when I'm building a case on someone, it makes me happy to see them popping up on bandwagons in the three-spot, because it reassurs me that I'm right. You've never seen me as scum, correct? That's because I was expecting that. Due to my experience, I was immediately hailed as the town's savior, and while I don't think I deserved that rep, I figured that the scum might be buying it a off me. Therefore, I played aggressively, trying to generate as much as I could before I died. Since my godawful performance in M2, I think that rep is lessened, and I can be more laidback. I'm a much better analyst in later days. Right now, I'm putting my vote on the person I think is likeliest to be scum. Admittedly, the case is weak, but most cases are for the first couple days. No one's made any real slips, at least not that I saw. I was blindsided by drainbead. I didn't see her as scum. I didn't "forget" about them. I explicitly changed my mind about Greedy.
|
|
|
Post by JSexton on Aug 8, 2007 11:26:00 GMT -5
Obviously my suspicions of JSextongrow every time he votes for me with less and less reason, but I think I will wait and see what he has to say in response to Nesta before I drop anything on him. Bring it. I like the "less and less reason" bit, which is simply untrue. I've posted reasons. You can disagree with them, but saying they don't exist is misrepresentation. This kind of statement is a red flag. Allow me to translate: "I thought I was playing better than that. Sure, you're right that I'm scum, but I'm puzzled how you knew it from that. I may have made scum tells, but that wasn't one of them!" I've been caught out as scum on similar statements, and I've learned from that.
|
|
|
Post by Malacandra on Aug 8, 2007 11:50:37 GMT -5
This kind of statement is a red flag. Allow me to translate: "I thought I was playing better than that. Sure, you're right that I'm scum, but I'm puzzled how you knew it from that. I may have made scum tells, but that wasn't one of them!" I've been caught out as scum on similar statements, and I've learned from that. Well, yes, or more accurately, no. That's a nice... creative interpretation of what I posted, but what I meant was more along the lines of "I've looked down this so-called case and I'm just not seeing the kind of premise-->evidence-->conclusion that I'd expect to see". The trouble with that, from my point of view, is it's difficult to argue against something as nebulous as that: on the other hand, arguing against your putting words into my mouth is as simple as saying: "Bull".
|
|
|
Post by Mad The Swine on Aug 8, 2007 12:11:19 GMT -5
Sure, my idea was that the vote to kill off drain was preplanned by the scum as a sacrifice,so they could hide in that vote late in the game. There has been some talk of getting one of the scum to volunteer and how it would suck for the player that had to die right off,all I can offer to that is,well,nothing...who knows the circumstances cept the scum,they could have had a number of reasons as to why drain was chosen.
First of all, I understand you do things a little off the cuff. Having a conspiracy theory doesn't seem particularly out of character for you. What seems peculiar about you is the way in which you're espousing your idea. Storyteller asks you to explain why something is a scum tell and, rather than providing some kind of convoluted explanation, it's simply that you can say whatever you want.
Further, with regard to your conspiracy theory, there are logical flaws (at least from my perspective) that I would like to see addressed farther. Plus, I just don't see it passing the risk/reward threshold. IMO, in doesn't seem likely that someone either volunteered or was "volun-told". It seems more likely that if one or more scum voted for her it was pre-emptive upon the realization that she was probably not savable, not simply from the beginning.
Let's look at it this way, what are essentially ranom votes are thrown out. If there's 4 scum out of 19 to begin with, there's 97.2% chance that one of the town's votes was on scum. If there's 5 scum that's 98.6% that one of the town's votes was on scum. At this point, the scum have the luxury of evaluating each vote as it comes in and seeing which ones look like they'll stick and which ones won't. I would theorize that after as few as 1-2 votes they can estimate, if one of those potentially sticky candidates is a scum, whether or not those votes are a threat and how to react.
That is, if the initial vote is non-scum, and looks like it might stick, especially with daytime communication, I'm much more inclined to believe that any scum on the drainbead lynch wagon are likely to jump on earlier and spread out more, rather than what tends to look like late clustering.
Similarly, if the initial vote is non-scum, they have to be VERY careful with the manner in which they vote. Obviously it's nice for them to have votes on record against eachother, but if they make too convincing of a case, they either get them lynched (bad for them) or they look like they have too much information (also bad for them). Obviously looking like a proponent on a scum lynch is very good, but does a first day final vote (not a whole lot different from true random, IMO) really make someone look THAT confirmed town?
Let's say you're correct, and Storyteller is scum. Do you really think that he'd think it'd be a fair trade of 20-25% of your force (depending on whether there was 4 or 5 scum to begin with) is a fair trade for people to think you did a good job of drawing together from a minimum of information on Day One while running a major risk of displaying symptoms of perfect information syndrome?
IMO, your conspiracy theory is FAR FAR more convoluted and far riskier than a simple early recognition of her being a likely lynchee, and trying to find ways to jump on, spread out, and look good. This fails on the principles of Occum's Razor and simple Risk vs. Reward.
Now, what does this mean? As far as Storyteller, it means he could have just done a good job of gleaning through the information and making as decent of an informed decision as he could and then scum followed suit sometime thereafter. Or, it could mean he's scum, he was trying to get a convincing one-off vote against a fellow scum, hoping the points would be written off as "newbie mistakes", and it blew up in his face when a couple of townies latched on.
Can you explain to me why you think your conspiracy theory is more likely than either of the above scenarios? No I can't...but its easy to come up with a plan and not realize what the outcome will be...dissecting a plan after the plan is revealed or put into action is much easier than trying to think of all the things that may go wrong or seeing flaws ahead of time. When I played scum we certainly didn't get that in depth over our plans...and AFAIK no one did really in the games I have played.I think its high time they did. I may be totaly wrong, I realize that...but I am thinking the theory has some sorta truth in it. I've put it ou there,and for the most part it was flung on the floor and peed on,so for now I will hold off a vote and look around something more...or different. I do have somone in mind I wanna look at harder. That person is Greedy Smurf, but I can't do it til tomorrow.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Aug 8, 2007 12:47:41 GMT -5
it's official. I'll be gone till sunday. So therefore I shall vote:
Null vote. Vote Abstinence.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Aug 8, 2007 13:18:39 GMT -5
Wow, I'd rather you abstain than vote abstinence, but, it is your vote. More from me in a bit. (No, not more abstinence!)
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Aug 8, 2007 15:41:37 GMT -5
Mal brings Greedy to within one vote of the lead. At this point there are two confirmed town and one confirmed scum voting for him (okay confirmed later). dnooman, who is this "him" you're referring to here? I'm afraid I'm not following your logic.
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Aug 8, 2007 15:49:32 GMT -5
Mal brings Greedy to within one vote of the lead. At this point there are two confirmed town and one confirmed scum voting for him (okay confirmed later). dnooman, who is this "him" you're referring to here? I'm afraid I'm not following your logic. I think 'him'=Mal. Hockey and Cowgirl; and Drain. Ok. Where the Hell is everyone? Does anyone want to help out today?
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Aug 8, 2007 16:20:59 GMT -5
Floundering.
I'm going to reread Today and go through some of Yesterday's posts, and hopefully acquire a suspicion.
|
|
|
Post by Malacandra on Aug 8, 2007 16:32:10 GMT -5
Can someone find out why JSexton thinks I'd be waving the white flag and saying "Okay, it's a fair cop, well played, you got me" at this stage? I've seen dnooman run on his sword way back in M1, but the circumstances were a little different then, and I put it to my learned friend and the jury that it is more likely that my adversary is wilfully misconstruing my words.
|
|
|
Post by JSexton on Aug 8, 2007 17:24:59 GMT -5
Can someone find out why JSexton thinks I'd be waving the white flag and saying "Okay, it's a fair cop, well played, you got me" at this stage? I've seen dnooman run on his sword way back in M1, but the circumstances were a little different then, and I put it to my learned friend and the jury that it is more likely that my adversary is wilfully misconstruing my words. no u Seriously, I'm not saying you intentionally said that. I'm saying that particular tell, like so many tells, is subconscious. And, no, there's not much to argue about it. I post it, you deny it, and everyone else can decide whether to believe your veracity or my read.
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Aug 8, 2007 17:39:34 GMT -5
Mmm. Hard to say, Mal. Hey, JSexton! Mal wants to know. . .
But really, I think JSexton's statement there is a little dodgy as well. We could also say something like,
"As Jsexton says, 'I've been caught out as scum on similar statements, and I've learned from that.' Or, in other words, 'Oh no, I've been caught with pants off crawling in through the cat door and there is a tarsier nibbling at the mint jelly I have smeared on my bottom!'"
It was a pretty liberal and rhetorically tendentious 'translation'. Even, of course, if you were scum.
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Aug 8, 2007 17:40:53 GMT -5
Ah, did not preview! Well, I liked writing about the tarsier anyway. And I got to use 'tendentious' and it made me happy.
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Aug 8, 2007 18:16:59 GMT -5
I see storyteller has finally checked in, so un-FOS storyteller. dnooman, yesterDay I got your vote for voting Mal, and before that you found mhaye to be scummier (you lay out your case here). ToDay I FoS you for being on the cowgirl bandwagon, and you FoS me right back, but then you pretty much vote Mal for the same reason. re-FoS dnoomanAnd is it just me, or does the JSexton/Mal spat sound a little...manufactured? FoS JSexton, MalI also wish Roosh would have bitten the bullet and voted for somebody, but I'll take him at his word that he won't be online to defend himself and not actually vote him. FoS RooshPost analysis/voting to come next.
|
|
|
Post by dnooman on Aug 8, 2007 18:34:22 GMT -5
I voted for Mal more for his day one actions than his day two actions. How was that not clear in my post?
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Aug 8, 2007 18:53:18 GMT -5
re: dnooman - I guess I tend to take more stock in the last few sentences of your post, and you did bring up the cowgirl bandwagon. The FoS stays for the time being, though, because I'm still not buying the whole "drain bead knew dnooman to be town" thing. Anyway, time to vote. mhaye analyzes the case against GreedySmurf (alignment unknown) here and against drainbead (confirmed scum) here. Both posts sounds like he's basing his decisions on the other players' opinions rather than the suspects themselves. (Later he does analyze his actual voting targets' actions more in-depth--did he modify his playstyle on his own volition, or...?--but he still liked to drop a lot of other players' names in his posts for whatever reason.) This post could be interpreted either way, I suppose. But it is a touch overdefensive for a light suspicion. And then his last post: Floundering. I'm going to reread Today and go through some of Yesterday's posts, and hopefully acquire a suspicion. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but when I gave too many people the benefit of the doubt on Day One I ended up not voting. vote mhaye
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Aug 8, 2007 19:04:56 GMT -5
Mad the Swine (2) - Blaster Master, capybara Malacandra (2) - JSexton, dnooman JSexton (1) - nesta mhaye (1) - dotchan Abstain - Roosh
Remember, Day ends tomorrow at four PM CST.
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Aug 8, 2007 20:06:59 GMT -5
it's official. I'll be gone till sunday. So therefore I shall vote: Null vote. Vote Abstinence
I wish you had taken a stand and voted, even if it was for me. Surely you're most suspicious of someone. This has made me a little more suspicious of you since it leaves no trail and if we started to accept non-votes as valid it would make it a very easy way for scum to hide.
|
|
|
Post by Greedy Smurf on Aug 8, 2007 21:40:38 GMT -5
So much for giving the thread a solid read last night. First day back at work after a bad flu and by the end of the day I was knackered.
So after getting some stuff of my desk this morning, I've had to chance for a light read through. Hmm. Noone has stuck their foot in it so far, so back to overanalysing langauge nuances and gut feels.
Of the current vote getters - MTS - I just don't know, I can't say as how the arguments mounted against him are entirely compelling to me. But I don't have a read from him myself.
Malacandra - had a qustion mark for me after day 1, but dropped down my list during day 2.
Given that these two are the vote leaders, I am going to go back and solidly reread the case against them so I can place my vote before the day is up.
As to the others -
JSexton - I was suspicious here, but if he is scum, why be highly visible by starting a new bandwagon on day 1, when there were at least 2 other viable targets with a vote already?
Mhaye - I keep thinking that the last minute vote on day 1 would be stupid for a scum to do. Was he betting on people thinking no scum would ever do something this obvious?
The worst thing is my suspicions are based largely on Day 1 stuff, nothing in the voting or other activity twigged my radar on Day 2. Maybe a full days worth of reread is in order.
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Aug 8, 2007 22:13:10 GMT -5
1. He voted for GreedySmurf at a time that the scum would have liked heat taken off drainbead, but does so without stating reasons other than a gut feeling, and only elaborates when prompted. It wasn't gut, ever. I had the explanation post mostly made up already. I was curious to see how Greedy would react to a "gut" vote, but he didn't come in for a while. I ended up just posting the case. Even with the case you laid out against GreedySmurf it still seems like it was "gut" since it was based on scum tells that a townie could easily make. I guess we have different definitions of what a gut feeling is. My point wasn't that you based the vote on a gut feeling but that you didn't elaborate further. I accept that trying to manipulate those you feel are scum into responding by making your case against them one way or another is valid, but goading them by making no case against them at all seems like a bad idea to me. Perhaps you were genuine in trying to trap scum with your original vote, but I think these types of moves are generally anti-town. It's not quite to the lynch-all-liars level, but deception of any kind doesn't sit well with me since scum are much more likely to employ it. At best you are an experienced townie who has different ideas than I do about how to find scum, but at worst you are just making excuses for trying to keep your head down with weak votes while trying to save fellow scum. And many of the points brought up against him day one by other folks. That's a little vague. Care to elaborate what points made by others you find compelling? You didn't respond to this point: I think the dnooman bandwagon wasn't destined to go anywhere since the only reason for it was because of dnooman's lurking (or lack of activity) and lynching lurkers on Day 1 has never been popular. This seems to me like JSexton was trying to shift the blame of trying to derail the drainbead bandwagon to someone else. I also thought Malacandra's third vote for dnooman was very odd, but after thinking about it I don't think it had any hope of derailing the drainbead bandwagon. There was no case there because dnooman hadn't posted at all, or very little, so it was basically a vote for a lurker. If Malacandra is scum I think he probably voted there as a safe vote for an easy target, or maybe dnooman is also scum and it was to establish a scum voting record when dnooman really wasn't in any danger. Right now (and unless GreedySmurf turns out to be scum) I think those voting on the GreedySmurf bandwagon are much more likely to be trying to divert attention from the drainbead bandwagon than those on the dnooman bandwagon. So far this has held true since two of those that voted for dnooman are now dead and confirmed town. What I find odd is that as far as I can see his third vote for dnooman is the only real case you've made against Malacandra and I don't think that holds up. I didn't mention him on day on, true. I was focused elsewhere. After re-reading day one with the knowledge of some alignments, that's when my suspicion of Greedy eased and Mal's went up. In contrast, nothing about the events of day 2's lynch and night 2's kill made me less suspicious of Mal. I can understand changing suspicions on a dime because it happens to me all the time. I do think scum take advantage of this, though, to parrot the suspicions of the rest of the town without having to go out on a limb. I guess there's been a bunch of conversation about this "tell" in recent games that I've missed. So be it, but in my experience, it's been surprisingly accurate when no one is talking about it. Obviously, if everyone is hyper-aware of it, it loses any value, but when it's not on anyone's mind, it's remarkable in retrospect. It's not something I lynch over, but when I'm building a case on someone, it makes me happy to see them popping up on bandwagons in the three-spot, because it reassurs me that I'm right. If you haven't been following the games on the SDMB I can understand you still thinking the third vote is a valid tell. There has been a lot of discussion about it in other games, though. I think you should be flattered that a scum tell you brought to the SDMB has garnered so much discussion. Anyone who has followed the SDMB games though is very aware of it, so as someone pointed out it has gone from a scum tell, to a scum tell to even bring it up, to a scum tell to bring up bringing it up. There may still be some validity to this tell, but now it's so WIFOMed that it has basically become useless, as known scum tells are destined to be. You've never seen me as scum, correct? Not that I know of, but the jury's still out. That's because I was expecting that. Due to my experience, I was immediately hailed as the town's savior, and while I don't think I deserved that rep, I figured that the scum might be buying it a off me. Therefore, I played aggressively, trying to generate as much as I could before I died. Since my godawful performance in M2, I think that rep is lessened, and I can be more laidback. I can appreciate you not wanting to have the "savior of the town" mantle, and I don't expect that of you. With your experience, though, I do expect you to bring that a little more to bear. I am a little suspicious that you aren't a little more worried about being night-killed. Wanting to have a more laidback game is understandable, and I don't expect you to be aggressive, but I do expect you to make a solid case against those you think are scum. Unless you are scum yourself. I'm a much better analyst in later days. Right now, I'm putting my vote on the person I think is likeliest to be scum. Admittedly, the case is weak, but most cases are for the first couple days. No one's made any real slips, at least not that I saw. I was blindsided by drainbead. I didn't see her as scum. I would be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on thinking GreedySmurf was more likely scum than drainbead on Day 1. Day 1 is always (in my very limited experience) a crap-shoot. What I'm having a hard time giving you the benefit of the doubt on is that you have been relying on others' cases against Malacandra, which seems to be playing it too safe. I didn't "forget" about them. I explicitly changed my mind about Greedy. Fair enough. I worded that poorly. You didn't forget about GreedySmurf and specifically said that his recent posts made you change your mind. I apologize for misrepresenting your actions. What I meant was that it seemed a little convenient that you were leaning that GreedySmurf was town at a time when suspicion was going to fall on those who drove his bandwagon. I found it strange you were willing to throw out the scumtells that convinced you to vote for him on Day 1 based on less than a Day's worth of posting. As I said above, though, I've done it myself and wouldn't suspect you based on just this, but it is one more data point that makes me suspicious of you. I admit that I found your reply to my case against you good enough that my suspicion of you has lessened just a little, but not below the threshold that it would take me to unvote you. I still think you are likely scum. Unfortunately your experience works against you a little because you must know how to defend yourself against anything but a slam-dunk case against you, so I have to read your responses with a pile of salt. If you'll indulge me, though, would you please state your case against Malacandra? I find him scummy as well, and if he is scum I think you are much less likely to be, but so far I'm not really understanding the case against him, but I do know why I find you scummy. On preview: sorry everyone for the second level line-by-line reply. I'll try to be more concise in the future.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Aug 9, 2007 2:41:56 GMT -5
Much to my surprise, I find myself looking suspiciously at JSexton. My notes show several points his posts have raised, but the one bothering me is in D2.167. He's dissecting a post by Storyteller0910. The part that raised my eyebrows a bit was this. 2. The railroading process means that you not only lose the chance to lynch a townie, you lose the chance to do something a lot more useful from the scum perspective: force a role claim. Even a day that ends in a scum lynch can be a hugely successful one from the scum standpoint if you manage to force two or three town power roles to claim. Bandwagoning one of your own right from the start - or even just deciding from the start that one of your own dies today - dramatically reduces the chances that one or more townies will be pushed against the wall and possibly forced to claim. That's some fairly advanced thinking. Depending on the composition of the scum group, they may not realize that aspect. I think this suggestion would have a tendency (coming as it does from a respected figure) to steer the town (consciously or not) into underestimating the Psychopaths. It's actively dangerous because the Psychos were able to discuss things from the beginning of the game; thus if any of them did work it out then they all knew. And underestimating the enemy is just what they want you to do. I was also looking askance at the first point made in D2.170. The simplest explanation for GreedySmurf saying he was "forced" to vote DrainBead was that it was a him-or-her choice, and he chose to live. I don't think that we need invoke supposed pressure to follow the Psycho party line. It's slender. But the people here are much sharper than where I used to play, and mistakes, when they come, are unlikely to be more than slender twigs on which to base the hanging. And one must take more risks (something which I'm unwilling to do). So I'll bite the bullet and Vote JSexton. (Link-testing reveals I still haven't mastered the art of having my link go to the post I want - just the top of the page. Sorry about forcing you to scroll down.) Now a little bit on Dotchan. You can't understand that post of mine? The simplest meaning is the correct one. I don't know who to suspect so I'm going to look for evidence. Or would you rather I roll a die to decide who to vote for? Voting without evidence is bad. I think this Town is in a bad enough position already, having lost the Therapist and an extra person in one strike. We might have no more than 3 days now before losing (that assumes there were 5 Psychos to start - not unreasonable IMO). Regarding my last two posts in Day 1, remember that I had already placed a vote (for Malacandra). What I was doing in those last two posts was "auditing" the cases against the two vote leaders to see if either of them were stronger than the case against Mal, and more worthy of being voted for. I chose (this time) to set my working out or all to see. And for this transparency I get called a psycho. As for the "overly defensive" post, I think PR simply ignoring the question and repeating what I saw as a baseless accusation set my teeth on edge a bit, and affected the tone of my post.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Aug 9, 2007 9:26:22 GMT -5
Hello, again -
I am working on a substantive post, but first I want to float a theory. It concerns Day 2 voting.
Ordinarily, I assume that scum will make no particularly urgent effort to keep other scum off the lynching block, or to push a townie lynch, in order to avoid drawing attention to themselves. I think other players have been making the same assumption, yes?
Here's the thing: I'm not sure this would apply to Day 2. Having lost one scum on Day 1, I think the bad guys might have been ever so slightly more inclined than usual to push hard for a townie lynch during the Day - losing two of their own very early in the game would have hurt their chances pretty badly. They might do this, counting on the assumption described above to protect them - they can push a little harder for a townie lynch, trusting that they won't fall under suspicion for it because we're assuming scum won't do such a thing.
Does this reasoning make any sense?
|
|