Lost Mafia/Werewolf/Psychopath

[Telcontar]

@Scuba_Ben

As my evenings are full for the rest of the Day and my day job actually wants me to work, I’ll post my latest analysis and simply hope I can check in each of the next three days. It sucks when RL interferes with proper game playing, don’t it?

In #401, Zeriel says that Ichini and Telcontar seem to be better prospects for Scum than the at-that-time vote leaders Meeko and pedescribe, “simply because they’ve done something tangible.” Doing nothing tangible is anti-Town, but not automatically pro-Scum, as there can be a number of good and bad reasons for doing nothing tangible. So for what it’s worth, Zeriel is my current best-guess. (And I openly admit that my best guesses historically turn out to be plain Town.)

Unvote ShadowFacts
Vote Zeriel

Telconcar cast the oh-so-red-herring 3rd vote on IF, “in part to force a reply to Tom’s case.” Tom has since been night-killed and turned up plain Town. So I would appreciate veteran guidance on assessing IF in the light of this information. As well as assessing Telcontar, of course. And assessing the people who help me assess – in my first game, I trusted Idle Thoughts for his detailed analysis, and he turned out to be one of the most clever Cultists.

On page 10, Jimmy Chitwood and storyteller0910 made some errors in vote counting. Was this a simple mistake or a fatal slip? I smell more herring.

And in reply to Jimmy:
It seems to me that Jimmy and pedescribe spent much of the end of Yesterday arguing with each other. I would appreciate it if you two also put other people under the spotlight; the more people who face pressure, the better the likelihood that someone will burst. (See: Me going silent in my first game and coming up Town; zuma freaking out in the same game and coming up Avatar; and someone else false-confessing as Scum in my second game a few months ago. Oh well, bursting doesn’t always help.)

Couple things:

1.) I don’t get your explanation of your Zeriel vote. I’m not saying I disagree with it, I just don’t understand it.
2.) I was the second vote against IF, not the third. And once again, I really have no idea what you’re implying. In light of the information that tom was town we know…very little new about IF. We also know that the real third IF vote, Nanook, was town. Perhaps I should be worried that IF voters are dropping like flies :-P.
3.) Jimmy and story spent much of the end of the day arguing with each other, jimmy and** pedescribe** was much earlier. Which do you mean?

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

I wasn’t really arguing, you know. Or not trying to, at least. I asked a question in earnest – was a claim really the smart move by the numbers at that exact point in the game (when Ichini wasn’t the vote leader)?

I didn’t think it was going to be read as an accusation, and it certainly wasn’t intended as one.

For what it’s worth.

[Chronos]

You’re right, the connection’s weak. It’s the best case I’ve got on anybody at the moment, and I’m aware that that’s not saying much. But it’s all I’ve got for now.

It’s not just weak, it’s negative. As in, less than zero connection. You’re agreeing with Zeriel not doing something tangible can be indicative of Scum or Town.

[Zeriel]

I was gonna say, Scuba, what’s up with that? I said the at-the-time vote leaders were providing null content, whereas the two guys I was looking at did things that were tangibly a scum tell (namely, trying to play both sides of the fence on their potential vote targets).

So since we’re in agreement that meaningless non-tells are in fact meaningless, why the vote again?

In other news, I don’t think we’ve got a lot of scum-finding potential in the switching votes at the end of yesterDay–at least until IF dies. You can’t find scum who switched around votes to save scum until you find some scum they were ostensibly saving. It’s a dumb line of inquiry.

Allwalker, in your post #640, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that A) you failed to include me in the suspicious pool despite being on both of your lists, and B) I am not your buddy in any sense of the word, so don’t feel the need to make me look bad by omitting my name. I HATE inconsistency in lists.

vote AllWalker

[Meeko]

@Telcontar

2.) I was the second vote against IF, not the third. And once again, I really have no idea what you’re implying. In light of the information that tom was town we know…very little new about IF. We also know that the real third IF vote, Nanook, was town. Perhaps I should be worried that IF voters are dropping like flies :-P.

Snipped.

There was a conversation up thread on this page, on votes being made purely based on timing. IIRC, it dealt with making, or exceeding a tie right at the end of day 1.

In the same logic :

How is acting ON the entire “3rd Vote is a scum tell” et. al. NOT a strictly timing vote as well?

And worse, It looks like Telcontar is getting the short end here, if indeed he was the second, and not the third.

Much earlier in the game, we were talking about NOT making a random vote. I feel sorry for the townie that tries to make a legit case with his vote. He will essentiall be random voted by this stupid “3rd vote = scum” thing … I won’t even call it logic, or a thought for that matter.

Again, as I stated before with my vote for IF, There becomes situations where purely neutral information (or actions) can be manipulated by scum. Either while they are posting information, or in their commentary or actions after someone else posts information. [Is Scuba hiding here, by passing the buck to Telcontar?]

[Chronos]

Interesting, Zeriel, voting for someone for not being suspicious enough of you. I do see what you mean; I was wondering about that too, but didn’t remember to ask about it. Still, I have a hard time seeing Scum motivation, unless you (Zeriel) are Scum, too.

Remember, everyone, it’s not enough to notice that something’s weird. You have to ask if it’s weird in a way that makes more sense for Scum than for Town.

[Meeko]

@Chronos

Remember, everyone, it’s not enough to notice that something’s weird. You have to ask if it’s weird in a way that makes more sense for Scum than for Town.

@Meeko

There becomes situations where purely neutral information (or actions) can be manipulated by scum.

Admittedly, it’s a weak connection, but,

Chronos, I don’t think our comments here are that different. (I am not trying to claim “I thought it first”, not at all) Do you share this opinion on our comments?

[cardinal_fang]

Hi all – I was AFK for most of the weekend starting Friday night and am just catching up. Much to discuss, obviously. I will post my thoughts tomorrow in more detail.

Welcome ScubaBen and USCDiver.

[AllWalker]

@Zeriel

Allwalker, in your post #640, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that A) you failed to include me in the suspicious pool despite being on both of your lists, and B) I am not your buddy in any sense of the word, so don’t feel the need to make me look bad by omitting my name. I HATE inconsistency in lists.

[COLOR]vote AllWalker[/COLOR]

I didn’t include you due to accidental omission. I must have overlooked your name on one of the lists - not surprising, since I had spent 1.5 hours reading over the thread (the timestamps on my posts 639 and 640 tell you down to the minute how long I spent reading it - 1hr 35min). This was not an attempt to butter you up. Frankly I’m insulted that you think I would do something like that on purpose - if I was going to lie, I would at least lie in a way so that my post was consistant.

I get that you don’t like inconsistancies - but surely you can see this was an oversight, not a Scum-motivated strategy.

But yes, good point. The intersection of my two lists include:
Zeriel
Jimmy Chitwood
ShadowFacts
storyteller

Raw statistics tells us one of these people is likely to be Scum but if my reasoning is correct there is a stronger chance that more than one of them is.

[Meeko]

@AllWalker

I didn’t include you due to accidental omission. I must have overlooked your name on one of the lists - not surprising, since I had spent 1.5 hours reading over the thread (the timestamps on my posts 639 and 640 tell you down to the minute how long I spent reading it - 1hr 35min). This was not an attempt to butter you up. Frankly I’m insulted that you think I would do something like that on purpose - if I was going to lie, I would at least lie in a way so that my post was consistant.

I get that you don’t like inconsistancies - but surely you can see this was an oversight, not a Scum-motivated strategy.

But yes, good point. The intersection of my two lists include:
Zeriel
Jimmy Chitwood
ShadowFacts
storyteller

Raw statistics tells us one of these people is likely to be Scum but if my reasoning is correct there is a stronger chance that more than one of them is.

I am glad I am not on this list.

Because, I’m not exactly sure what the list is, what it means, or how it was created / how these people got on it.

[Meeko]

NETA:

I think, it is fair to ask, when you create a new list, you can be a tad more detailed with what the list is.

Frankly, it strikes me as “This is Allwalkers Wonder list. Wonder how you got on it? Me too!”

[AllWalker]

It’s not as if I didn’t explain where I got those names. Post 407 contains a list of people who did not claim name/alignment matching before Mahaloth fixed things. I reasoned that this list may have a higher Scum density, for reasons outlined in the post. The second list I got from Tom Scud’s analysis of the last minute vote switch, which is agreed by many to maybe have a few Scum amongst it.

My “wonder list” is the overlap of these two lists. I already posted it in the second link in this post, so it is hardly new. The list a couple of posts upstream is the same list based on the same data, with a slight oversight corrected. In other words, it’s hardly a new list without explanation.

[Meeko]

@AllWalker

My “wonder list” is the overlap of these two lists. I already posted it in the second link in this post, so it is hardly new. The list a couple of posts upstream is the same list based on the same data, with a slight oversight corrected. In other words, it’s hardly a new list without explanation.

Not that a blue 640 would mean that.

[Meeko]

As I now understand it:

1. You hold people who didn’t comment on role and allignment to be scummy.

What if they
a.Didn’t know what that Char was.
b.what if their char was changed from canon for the better
c.Knew what that Char was, but didn’t have time to post
d.Knew that posting was THAT important
e. (I think we know where I am going here, I could probably find an E if pressed, but I need to move on at some point.

And also, it is thrown against

2. People changing votes.

a.changing a vote is a scum tell?
b.Town gets votes wrong.
c.You voted for me.
Up thread someone commented on the fact that Town should not favor switching a vote, essentially, because one vote in the dark is just the same as another shot in the dark. The counter was, that this is EXACTLY why the switch should be allowed.

I hate to be Nerd here, but if Chronos can have his math, so can I. The Monty Hall problem essentially means that only AFTER you make one choice, can you re-evaluate a switch. Most times, if you receive new information, that can be trusted, you will make a BETTER choice after the switch.

Best case scenario here: your list has 1 scum, not 4. You are trying to get scum, but I think 3 townies die in the process.

Your assumptions assume the worst, and built with shaky logic to begin with.

FO…
Im not there, yet.

Someone, other than who I am looking at right now, please tell me what you think here.

---

Other than that, I will not be in for 4-6 hours or so, perhaps longer.

.
As in Crimson, as here :

Enjoy The Silence.

Words are very, unnecessary, they can only do harm.

[I know it comes off slightly scummy, but, I find it Ironic that I say it, regardless. Perhaps,

““Enjoy MY Silence””

is more to the point.

[Zeriel]

@Chronos

Interesting, Zeriel, voting for someone for not being suspicious enough of you. I do see what you mean; I was wondering about that too, but didn’t remember to ask about it. Still, I have a hard time seeing Scum motivation, unless you (Zeriel) are Scum, too.

Remember, everyone, it’s not enough to notice that something’s weird. You have to ask if it’s weird in a way that makes more sense for Scum than for Town.

I have seen before a scenario where a scum will unfairly cuddle up to a townie in order that said townie gets to be next on the lynch list when the scum is discovered.

If that were the case in this game, it’d go something like this:

1. Allwalker leaves me off of a list of suspicious people after I’m on both sub-lists in his post.
2. Allwalker, at some later time, is revealed as scum.
3. Someone, maybe another scum if we’re at Lynch-or-Lose, points out “Hey, Allwalker had a list of suspicious people that he CONSPICUOUSLY left Zeriel off of.”
4. I hang, we lose either the game or a mislynch.

So, yeah, that’s my rationale, Chronos.

@AllWalker

Frankly I’m insulted that you think I would do something like that on purpose - if I was going to lie, I would at least lie in a way so that my post was consistant.

You and NAF should start a club or something.

@AllWalker

I get that you don’t like inconsistancies - but surely you can see this was an oversight, not a Scum-motivated strategy.

We’ll see how many scum are actually on your list before we judge that, thanks. Lists make me paranoid when there are flaws in them.

[Scuba_Ben]

@Telcontar

Couple things:

1.) I don’t get your explanation of your Zeriel vote. I’m not saying I disagree with it, I just don’t understand it.
2.) I was the second vote against IF, not the third. And once again, I really have no idea what you’re implying. In light of the information that tom was town we know…very little new about IF. We also know that the real third IF vote, Nanook, was town. Perhaps I should be worried that IF voters are dropping like flies :-P.
3.) Jimmy and story spent much of the end of the day arguing with each other, jimmy and** pedescribe** was much earlier. Which do you mean?

@Jimmy_Chitwood

I wasn’t really arguing, you know. Or not trying to, at least. I asked a question in earnest – was a claim really the smart move by the numbers at that exact point in the game (when Ichini wasn’t the vote leader)?

I didn’t think it was going to be read as an accusation, and it certainly wasn’t intended as one.

For what it’s worth.

Dang. Did I get anything correct? Or should I just vote to lynch myself in shame? self-:dubious: and self-:smack:

[AllWalker]

Something tells me this whole list business is going to get me lynched. Nonetheless, I stand by my motivations for creating such a list - to find Scum. How effective they will be…

Firstly, I would like to reiterate that being on these lists is a weak tell. I myself am on one of them, yet I am Town. While the lists might help me choose between two candidates I believe could either be Scum, I will not use them as a sole, or even significant, piece of evidence. My lists are circumstantial at best.

Secondly, the people who are on the no claim alignment/character match list could have any number of reasons for not claiming. But if your character is ambiguous or you are uncertain, that in itself is a claim. cardinal_fang did that. Maybe they didn’t get to posting it, but then people were claiming for days before I called for a mass c/a claim. It is harmless information which could in no way injure Town, but gave us enough of an idea of the mechanics to prompt mod intervention.

Thirdly, no, Meeko. Changing votes is not Scummy, and I never said or meant that. Changing votes at last minute to lynch a different target who turns out to be innocent is. And the Monty Hall effect only applies when an external knowledgable agent changes the setup based on that knowledge - if we had three suspects and Mahaloth cleared one, that would be Monty Hall.

Fourthly,

@Meeko

Best case scenario here: your list has 1 scum, not 4. You are trying to get scum, but I think 3 townies die in the process.

Your assumptions assume the worst, and built with shaky logic to begin with.

Well, best case scenario is I am either lucky or clever and bag all the Scum with that list. But that aside, every time I bring up the list I try to mention at least once that it is weak and circumstantial. I will not seek to systematically cull the list until there is no one standing. All I have done is taken 2 subsets of players that I believe have a higher Scum density than the total set and seen where the overlap is.

If you think my approach is flawed, then fine. That makes our approaches intellectually distinct, but reflects in no way on either of our Towniness or Scumminess.

Fifthly,

@Zeriel

I have seen before a scenario where a scum will unfairly cuddle up to a townie in order that said townie gets to be next on the lynch list when the scum is discovered.

I get what you are saying, but I am hardly being “cuddly”. This is a mechanical approach - if my own name were spat out I would not try to conceal it, nor would I be able to. Cuddly would be defending you from accusations, not forcing a rigid set of logic to exclude you as a suspect.

[Oredigger77]

Alright, I haven’t missed as much as I feared I would but that’s a bad thing. We need to look at how we’re running these days as a town because only 100 posts with 49 hrs to go until the lynch is going to hurt us in the long run and I’d be will to bet that we’re going to have even lower posts counts over the 4th weekend. I’ll be back in a bit with a read and comments.

[Mahaloth]

**Vote Count

Imaginary Fiend(3): Pedescribe, Chronos, Meeko

Oredigger(1): Telcontar

Zeriel(1): ScubaBen

AllWalker(1): Zeriel
**

[Zeriel]

I concur with Oredigger. If you don’t have a vote out, or a reason for not voting, you are probably wrong and behaving in an anti-town manner.