**Vote Count:
Idle(1): Cookies
Cookies(1): Idle
**
I agree. I plan to vote for the person that I think is most likely to be Scum Today.
At the moment, **Cookies **is not at the top of that list; however, I need to go back and do a full reread on her. After her role was revealed, I sort of mentally placed her on the back burner, figuring that she would probably need to be dealt with simply because of her unknown status before the game reached this point. The loss of Day 4 kind of threw a wrench into things, and she is the one player left that I haven’t gone back to read up on.
Once I’m done with a reread, I’ll be ready to place a vote with the intent being to nab Scum Today (be that Cookies or someone else), rather than to guarantee an extension of the game.
OK, so I crunched through the numbers on the two plans, either leave Cookies for last, or lynch her now. I assumed that we lynch at random (aside from avoiding Red Skeezix, and Cookies in the wait-and-see strategy) and that Scum always NKs a confirmed, if there is one. Random lynching isn’t a perfect assumption, since we do of course have information, but then again, the Scum are also doing their part to interfere. It’s just the best assumption I can make, mathematically.
Currently (Day 6): 4 Town (1 confirmed), 2 Scum, 1 Cookie. Define C = probability that Cookies chose Town.
If we take "lynch Cookies now" strategy:
100% chance that we lynch Cookies now
100% of Day 7 = 3 Town (no confirmed), 2 Scum
60% chance that we lynch Town -> Day 8 = 1 Town, 2 Scum = Town loss
40% chance that we lynch Scum -> Day 8 = 2 Town, 1 Scum
40%*67% chance that we lynch Town -> Town loss
40%*33% chance that we lynch Scum -> Town win
Net chance of winning with "lynch Cookies now" strategy: 40%*33% = 13.3%
If we take "wait and see about Cookies, hunt original Scum first" strategy:
40% chance that we lynch Scum -> Day 7 = 3 Town, 1 Scum, 1 Cookie
40%*25% chance that we lynch Scum -> Night 7 = 3 Town, 1 Cookie
40%*25%*C chance that Cookies is Town -> Day 8 = 3 Town, 1 Town Cookie = Town win
40%*25%*(1-C) chance that Cookies is Scum -> Day 8 = 2 Town, 1 Scum Cookie, Cookie outed = Town win
40%*75% chance that we lynch Town -> Night 7 = 2 Town, 1 Scum, 1 Cookie
40%*75%*(1-C) chance that Cookies is Scum -> Night 7 = 2 Town, 1 Scum, 1 Scum Cookie -> Town Loss
40%*75%*C chance that Cookies is Town -> Lack of loss confirms Cookies -> Day 8 = 2 Town, 1 Scum
40%*75%*C*33% chance of lynching Scum -> Town win
40%*75%*C*67% chance of lynching Town -> Town loss
60% that we lynch Town -> Night 6 = 3 Town (1 confirmed), 2 Scum, 1 Cookie
60%*(1-C) that Cookies is Scum -> Town loss
60%*C that Cookies is Town -> Cookies confirmed by lack of loss -> Day 7 = 3 Town (1 confirmed), 2 Scum
60%*C*50% that we lynch Scum -> Day 8 = 2 Town, 1 Scum
60%*C*50%*33% that we lynch Scum -> Town win
60%*C*50%*67% that we lynch Town -> Town loss
60%*C*50% that we lynch Town -> Town loss
Net chance of winning with "wait and see" strategy: 40%*25%*C + 40%*25%*(1-C) + 40%*75%*C*33% + 60%*C*50%*33% = 10% + 20%*C
If C > 16.7%, then the wait and see strategy is better, but if C < 16.7%, then it’s better to kill Cookies now. So basically, our decision is, was Cookies more or less likely than 1 chance in 6 to have chosen Town?
There is also the potential benefit to the wait and see. Mainly if we lynch town, and the game doesn’t end, cookies is confirmed town. (Assuming that we started with 4 scum, which I am assuming).
If we lynch town and the game doesn’t end, it’s 3-2 tomorrow with one confirmed. If we lynch scum it’s 4-1 or 3-2 tomorrow with zero confirmed. I’m starting to sell myself on the wait and see for cookies.
Chronos, I *think *you have an error starting here:
60% that we lynch Town -> Night 6 = 3 Town (1 confirmed), 2 Scum, 1 Cookie
In this case, Cookies is the “1 confirmed” so after that it should be 50/50 as to whether we lynch Scum or Town, rather than 60/40.
Also, in the next line
60%*(1-C) that Cookies is Scum -> Town loss
shouldn’t C=0, and in all of the lines following, C=1, because if we lynch non-Cookies Town Today, then Cookies alignment will be known with 100% certainty tomorrow?
The more I think about it, all of the calculations don’t really matter (I couldn’t help myself; I was a math major :)), because there’s really only one way to play this.
We shouldn’t take a “wait and see” approach, but we shouldn’t take a “lynch **Cookies **to confirm her/force a Day 7” approach either.
What we should do is treat **Cookies **exactly like what we *know *she is: an unknown. In that, she’s just like (almost) all the rest of us. Whatever the numbers are, we should play Today just like any other day and lynch whomever we think is most likely to be Scum.
Are you still trying? We have a new scum death to analyze, interactions between known scum and unknown living players to investigate, and you’re making a snap vote for the same reasons as yesterday?
Your reasons might still hold water, but there’s so much game left to play. This vote is striking me as very scummy.
Since I’m on my phone, I can’t really investigate you further. That’ll come later. For now, I’m feeling the case I read above against you.
Vote Idle.
That first line you quote is Night 6, i.e., before the Scum kill. The one confirmed there is Red Skeezix, who (at that point) has not yet been killed. For the second line, the Cs that remain reflect the chance of us getting into that situation in the first place.
Idle hasn’t been back yet to respond to the rebuttals of Suburban and Chronos. I want to give him a chance but I’ve consistently thought that lynching Cookies is a bad idea. Whatever credit Idle has earned fighting with Pleonast is disappearing quickly with his attack on Cookies.
Actually, now both Pleonast and Scuba have voted for me and said I was the most suspicious (to them) in past Days. And while that doesn’t make anyone confirmed, I’d think it would be pretty stupid of scum to try to get rid of their own.
By the same token, I see Scuba was voting for Cookies at the end of yesterDay. That combined with Suburban and Chronos’ recent posts have made reconsider for now.
Unvote Cookies
vote Idle Thoughts
I think **Idle **and **Pleo **were bussing each other on Day 1 and the early part of Day 2, when it was ‘safe’ for them to do so. **Idle **did end Day 2 voting for Pleo, but note that he didn’t have a single post on Day 2 after **Pleo **made his claim.
Since then, he has voted for **ushi **(a safe vote) and **Cookies **(another safe vote), and hasn’t even really attempted to make a case against anyone else.
Today, his defense against the accusations made against him have been “I can’t be Scum because **Pleonast **and I agrued with each other, and *he *was Scum”, and most recently “I can’t be Scum because both **Pleonast **and Scuba_Ben voted for me”. Of course, all of these ‘suspicions’ on the part of known Scum took place on Day 1 and Day 2, when it’s generally pretty safe for Scum to accuse each other.
After a reread, I’m leaning slightly Town on Cookies. My biggest issue with her was her Night 2 play and the fact that I felt she had decieved the Town on Day 1, plus the fact that it seemd to me that the ‘correct’ choice for her would have been to side with Scum. But having done a reread, her story does seem consistent, and I really don’t see any other particularly scummy behavior from her.
Personally, if I had been in the same position she described at the end of Night 2, I most likely would have chosen to side with Scum, but I understand that some players prefer to side with the ‘good guys’ when they are unaligned. You see this often with PFK roles; this is a different case, but it’s plausible that **Cookies **could have decided when the game started that she wanted to be Town, and stuck with that decision out of a sense of ‘duty’.
Another point in Cookies’ favor is that, at the time she made her choice, she had just had her chances hurt significantly by Scum. I can rationally seeing someone wanting revenge (i.e., siding against Scum) after something like that.
End Day 2 voting for him?
I voted for him at the start of Day 2. My first post of Day 2, not long after Day 2 started. I kept it on him that whole Day.
Of course I wouldn’t have had anything to say about his claim…I didn’t believe him and was already voting for him.
**Vote Count:
Idle(3): Cookies, Astral, Suburban**
Yes, you started the Day by voting for him, and you ended the Day voting for him.
Your defense is based on the fact that you and **Pleonast **went after each other and voted for each other early on in the game, so you can’t both have been Scum. My point was that all of this antagonism took place when neither of you was in the slightest danger, so the idea that you were both Scum bussing each other is perfectly reasonable.
And as to the question of why you didn’t change your vote off of your Scum-buddy, there are two possibilities:
- By the time the train got rolling, you figured it would be too dangerous to change your vote, because it would expose you.
- You just never made it back into the thread after **Pleo **started picking up votes, so you didn’t have the opportunity.
You keep saying “Your defense is…”. What kind of a defense are you looking for? What do I need to defend against? Pardon me for saying so, but I don’t really see what I’ve done that’s been so suspicious or scummy-like other than the fact that the players are just dwindling and the real scum are getting more desperate to lynch a Towsperson for non-existent reasons.
I didn’t change my vote off of him because I thought he was scum, which turned out to be right.
Anyway, vote Suburban Plankton, for weak reasoning, limited thinking, and nonsensical presumptions (post #1256, in which he assumes I must be scum basically only for keeping my vote on Pleonast on Day One)
I want to make sure I understand the case against Idle Thoughts before I cast my vote.
-
He voted for Cookies based on what he believed his choice would be in that situation.
-
He has stayed focused on Cookies instead of finding the original scum. (For me, this is the biggest flag).
3a. He voted for Cookies toDay with no case explained, “for all the reasons I posted yesterDay.” This was immediately after Cookies voted for Idle first with the exact same phrase. In addition she thought the conversation between Idle and Scuba was a setup conversation designed to diffuse their own cases.
3b. After being explained with the flaws with voting Cookies toDay, he removed his vote.
- He has successfully found and fought with known scum. This apparently is a negative.
I don’t mean to be snarky, but do you have any case of your own to make? Several of us have stated our cases, and given whatever reasoning we have…which may or may not be sufficient depending on your point of view. I’d like to hear what *you *have to say at this point.
If you don’t understand the cases that have been made against Idle, then I’d suggest that you shouldn’t vote for him, unless you have a case of your own. If you just aren’t quite certain, maybe you should state your case first, before you ask the rest of us to restate ours.