Mafia: Simpletown

The Game Room
1041

Well, everyone has posted since NAF1138 claimed with no counter claim so he truly is the Detecive, which I believe, or the ballsiest scum ever.

If I am reading people correctly then I also assume that we are 7-3. Is there danger in that assumption? What if it’s 6-4, say? I have read that the number of scum should approximate the square root of the number of players, ergo 4 for this game. I totally understand what you are saying Blaster Master and agree with ShadowFacts that regardless we still need to be talking. Please help me understand a little better how a RyJaye lynch makes less sense. If he comes back scum, or better yet Miller (because we then know that that there has to be a Detective - otherwise what’s the point) it takes away a potential ballsy scum move while also giving breathing room in the case of there having been 5 scum to start with. Both being very low probability but at least somewhhere north of zero.

1042

Oh and to, at least at the 30k level on the remaing four.

MindWanderer Not much of a read either way - under the radar approach. Mild suspicion. However, if the traffic doesn’t increase this will be ratcheted up a notch.

bufftabby She was helpful to me in being able to use my BB to play this game. She does “snuggle” a lot, however. I take this more along the lines of a newb trying not to irk rather than having any nefarious motives. Moderate suspicion.

RoOsh Not nearly as prolific as I would have thought (maybe Batman is heating up). Still I would have expected more input. Moderate suspicion.

Nanook of the North Shore Very defensive on the WF Tomba math thingy. I knew he was FOS but since I knew it would break down in my case I didn’t get overly worked up about it. Secondly the zuma vote. I had a vote on for lurking reasons but certainly was not seeing anything “erratic”. When I first read it I was thinking gosh that sounds canned. Finally the whole Mad thing just totally blows. I think we saw a newbie scum try to bail their leader and at least gain the scum one more day. Heaviest suspicion.

My two cents…

1043

[Quote=peekercpa]

bufftabby She was helpful to me in being able to use my BB to play this game. She does “snuggle” a lot, however. I take this more along the lines of a newb trying not to irk rather than having any nefarious motives. Moderate suspicion.
[/quote]

Close, but reality is more along the lines of “buff is supermellow and doesn’t really get worked up about much” and “buff’s gonna do what buff’s gonna do; can’t be a scumtell if she aint scum”, all of which really fits in line with my real buff tabby’s attitude.

<goofball moment>power of…blackberry…Engage!</gbm>:wink:

1044

I’ve read enough.

Vote RyJaye.

I will continue to listen to other discussion (and participate freely) but for now that’s where it sits. Bird in hand and all that …

1045

[QUOTE=peekercpa]

RoOsh Not nearly as prolific as I would have thought (maybe Batman is heating up). Still I would have expected more input. Moderate suspicion.

[/QUOTE]

Wow, really? This isn’t enough? Here i am trying to be nice and not post like crazy every little thing, and you say you want MORE? O_o Sheesh.
And it’s just that I tend to Ramble on in my posts, creating longer posts than most players- that’s why it’s bigger at times. As i originally used to use LOTS of little posts with 2-3 lines in them and that’d be it, but that started to really piss off people. I don’t wanna be a dick and all, ya know? This isn’t some off board site, THIS is the Dope. (But Batman currently is AWESOME! Totally worth a read- it’s like the antiChrist to Sach’s game)

1046

[QUOTE=bufftabby]
Well, yeah. You asked what I disagreed with, I answered. Why don’t you enlighten me on the problematic aspect of these mini-trains?

[/QUOTE]

Okay, here’s what i’m not getting with this train/mini-train stuff.
IN post 981 of yours you analyze Nanook’s posts. You say he creates a Mini-train.
*
533. Apparently decides to continue this “mini-train” by casting suspicions on BlaM.* -You. Quoted from 981.

Then Nanook brings up the point in 991:

  • Which I explained, that the train was not based on the number of votes, but on the way the discussion was going. A train doesn’t need votes to be a train.*-Nanook.

Then you in 993: just post “I disagree” after quoting the above by him-You, 993.

This is where I have to step in and go "what the hell?"
You explain in 1022 as quoted: *NETA: RoOsh, my disagreement is with the characterization of that situation as a "mini-train". In my mind, a train is constituted by votes.*
So now I'm just confused at you. You seemed to be citing the Mini-train thing at first as a point AGAINST Nanook when you're going through his posts and summarizing them.
He then comes back and argues with you about Trains vs. Mini-trains.
Then you just simply post "I disagree" -this is the part where I'm just like... lost.

You then clarify, a Mini-train isn't the same as a Train.... So is a mini-train less suspicious than a train? Are you defending Nanook all of a sudden? Because you're calling him out at first for what you called "a mini train" and now you're saying "a mini-train isn't so bad as a train?" -and I'm totally lost over that. Mainly because of that annoying "I disagree" where you just say that and Post NOTHING else to really back it up- that was frustrating.

So can you explain your Train/Mini-train case better vs. **Nanook**?
  -As i have no idea if you're smudging him or defending him or saying its a bad thing. As I don't now know if you even consider Mini-trains to be as suspicious as trains.  ((this is what spurred my it's semantics point- that shouldn't the ACTIONS be considered scummy/townie, not just calling something a mini version of an action?))

Like this thing between you and Nanook on trains vs. Mini-trains: WHAT are you trying to say about him?? Why did you mention the Mini-train if you felt it wasn't as important of a deal as a train to you (since you disagreed with Nanook's assertions)?

I'm just really puzzled by the way you come across, Buffy. It's very hard to understand what you're doing intentionally and what you're just doing as fluffy Buffy chaff- as it's clouding my Scumdar and thusly setting it off in your direction. As you're just confusing me and making me paranoid towards you. So please. Explain yourself. Help me understand you. Help me help you as Dr. Cox would say.
1047

[Dr. Cox]Weh-eh-eh-eh-eh-ell,[/Dr. Cox] RoOsh, perhaps I should offer additional explanation. You see, it’s not NNS’s use of this suddenly-controversial term mini-train, but more the juxtapostion of these two posts:

[Quote=Nanook of the North Shore, post 522]

I’m worried that this mini-train on Blam and, to a lesser extent, MtS is a case of lynch the loud. There’s been a bit of history along those lines in. games on this board that I’ve read, where the town lynches the people talking and scum skate by simply by not posting much. With only a few people posting at the moment and all the early vote leaders in that situation, I’m a little worried.
I would like to point out that after regularly posting and tossing around votes and suspicions, peekercpa hasn’t posted much since the day began. This strikes me as scum being told to tone it down by fellow scum overNight, since that was their first chance to communicate. Am I the only one feeling this at all? Any thoughts?
[/quote]

[Quote=Nanook, post 532]
Thinking about this some more, [eta:BlaM’s] last post feels more and more scummy to me. I know you don’t take notes, and that you are pretty active in the other game, so it’s possible you missed what I outlined prior. But I also reiterated my suspicion against the person I voted for in the post you quoted. This makes me think you’re scum trying to start up a bandwagon on me. Perhaps trying to deflect suspicion from peeker while also bandwagoning a townie? I’m not willing to switch my vote at this point, since I don’t 100% trust my instincts on this one and don’t want to fall into an OMGUS trap, but it’s something I’m going to consider.
[/quote]

That’s an awfully quick jump between “oh no, not blam! or MadtheSwine!” and “hey blam[pretty much confirmed townie], why are you protecting [pretty much confirmed townie] peekercpa with your bandwagon against me?” 11 posts. I don’t even wishywash that hard, not in your wildest scum-huntin’ dreams.

Now, as evidenced by the rest of my post 981, that’s not the only piece in my case against NNS, so don’t even try any “that’s not enough to build a case on, what’re ya thinkin”. That’s just a piece of my delicious scum-crushing pie.

1048

[QUOTE=pedescribe]
Alright. RyJae, if you are the miller, who did you block? Why?

Sach, if you were to mod an open game, say Mafia: EasyTown, would you give your millers extra powers? Or would they just be a PITN for town?
[/QUOTE]

Oh that’s an easy one. EasyTown would consist of all Townies making the game stupid easy.

1049

[QUOTE=bufftabby]
That’s an awfully quick jump between “oh no, not blam! or MadtheSwine!” and “hey blam[pretty much confirmed townie], why are you protecting [pretty much confirmed townie] peekercpa with your bandwagon against me?” 11 posts. I don’t even wishywash that hard, not in your wildest scum-huntin’ dreams.

Now, as evidenced by the rest of my post 981, that’s not the only piece in my case against NNS, so don’t even try any “that’s not enough to build a case on, what’re ya thinkin”. That’s just a piece of my delicious scum-crushing pie.
[/QUOTE]

I see what you did there. Yes, it was 11 posts. But within that 11 posts was 3 seperate posts by Blaster. Including post 526, which is the post that I couldn’t find earlier when I made my case against him. I thought at the time it was a very scummy post, and still did as of this Morning. Of course, Blam has since explained that it was intentional, that he was executing a specific strategy to try and catch scum.

And when I’m dead, which at this point I’ve given up on stopping, that “scum-crushing pie” is going to taste a lot like crow.

1050

Oh and I wanted to mention something that isn’t strictly game related, but is at the same time. I can totally understand why there have been several new players that never came back, that came out of the game with a bad taste in their mouth. Look at the way things went with fluid. Look at the way things are going with me. The level of confirmation bias involved in them is vaguely ridiculous. I vote for a townie? Scummy. I don’t vote for a townie? Scummy. Blaster asked me a couple questions, and then ignored my responses. I’m still his #1 scum target. Bufftabby pretty much has decided that I’m scum, and nothing else seems to matter. Roosh is the only one who seems to actually be reading what I’m writing, as opposed to seeing what they want to see, and who the heck knows what his agenda is. I’m not going to flame out and quit or disappear, but goddamn it’s frustrating.

1051

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
Oh and I wanted to mention something that isn’t strictly game related, but is at the same time. I can totally understand why there have been several new players that never came back, that came out of the game with a bad taste in their mouth. Look at the way things went with fluid. Look at the way things are going with me. The level of confirmation bias involved in them is vaguely ridiculous. I vote for a townie? Scummy. I don’t vote for a townie? Scummy. Blaster asked me a couple questions, and then ignored my responses. I’m still his #1 scum target. Bufftabby pretty much has decided that I’m scum, and nothing else seems to matter. Roosh is the only one who seems to actually be reading what I’m writing, as opposed to seeing what they want to see, and who the heck knows what his agenda is. I’m not going to flame out and quit or disappear, but goddamn it’s frustrating.
[/QUOTE]

Such is mafia. Sad but true. Look at fluid’s bandwagon.

1052

Nanook, don’t get frustrated. Nobody’s vote is set in stone, except maybe scum, ya know? Hell, don’t just defend yourself. Make a case for somebody you think is scum. Make a case against me if you’re really feeling it.

What was it about those posts in between 522 and 533 that made you change your mind? If I’m full of shit on any of my points against you, say so; explain how. I’m really not full of confirmation bias and whatnot; I’m just currently convinced of your scumminess, and those are two totally different beasts.

1053

[QUOTE=bufftabby]
Nanook, don’t get frustrated. Nobody’s vote is set in stone, except maybe scum, ya know? Hell, don’t just defend yourself. Make a case for somebody you think is scum. Make a case against me if you’re really feeling it.
[/quote]

Kinda funny. I have made cases. Admittedly, one was against Blam, which is a non-starter for obvious reasons. I also made one against Mindwanderer, and offered to go over it again. The silence in response was deafening. I won’t make a case against you, since I’m finding it difficult to seperate “That is scummy” from “They voted/attacked me, I’m town, therefore they must be scum.”

Take a look at 526. That was the one that set me off more than any other.

A reasonable request yes? Except that the post he was quoting, 522, I did exactly that. I stated why I was hesitant, and I stated who I was suspicious of. If it was a seperate post, you could chalk it up to getting crossed in the submission or similar, but it was in the SAME POST that was quoted. That said to me that he was looking for a reason to send the the discussion in a different direction, against me in this case, and was ignoring anything that was contrary to the plan he had in mind. That is scummy behavior.

1054

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
I also made one against Mindwanderer, and offered to go over it again. The silence in response was deafening.
[/QUOTE]

I’m sorry, I would like you to restate that case. I misread, I didn’t realize you were asking our opinion, I thought you were just going to do it. I had been waiting actually.

1055

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
Kinda funny. I have made cases. Admittedly, one was against Blam, which is a non-starter for obvious reasons. I also made one against Mindwanderer, and offered to go over it again. The silence in response was deafening. I won’t make a case against you, since I’m finding it difficult to seperate “That is scummy” from “They voted/attacked me, I’m town, therefore they must be scum.”

Take a look at 526. That was the one that set me off more than any other.

A reasonable request yes? Except that the post he was quoting, 522, I did exactly that. I stated why I was hesitant, and I stated who I was suspicious of. If it was a seperate post, you could chalk it up to getting crossed in the submission or similar, but it was in the SAME POST that was quoted. That said to me that he was looking for a reason to send the the discussion in a different direction, against me in this case, and was ignoring anything that was contrary to the plan he had in mind. That is scummy behavior.
[/QUOTE]

I can see where you’re coming from on that. And ditto what NAF just said. We haven’t heard from MW in a bit. I’m no lurker-lyncher, but lurking does set off my bells of suspicion. I’d be interested to see what you observed about him. Maybe I’ve missed some things because I initially agreed with him about you, and so perhaps have glossed over some scummy behavior of his. I have a history of townie-on-townie violence. Just see the last game, where I voted for every single lynch, and all but one was town!

1056

[QUOTE=NAF1138]
I’m sorry, I would like you to restate that case. I misread, I didn’t realize you were asking our opinion, I thought you were just going to do it. I had been waiting actually.
[/QUOTE]

I apologize for not being clearer then. I direct your attention to post 853 by me, and 742 by fluiddruid. 742 is a summary of his posts up to that point. The gist of the original argument is that he’s using the classic coast along, don’t make waves scum strategy.

Then look at post 746. He’s makes some attacks on me, which I refute and ask for clarification. It’s ignored.

He comes back in post 786 and argues with fluid some more. Another stretch of silence, and then some comments on the Mason claim(post 841). Notice still no response to my defense or requests for clarification.

Finally in post 854 he responds to me, promising to vote for me the next day. The only comment on my original post however is that my defense of my actions vis a vis Mad was weak. No response to my questions, nothing else.

Post 889, he reiterates his reasoning for voting fluid and states he would rather vote me. His vote for fluid has an element of confirmation bias, in that he states that part of the reason is she voted for a townie on Day 1. Of course, the vast majority of people voted for a townie Day 1, so that doesn’t really tell us anything.

Finally, and I mean it this time, we come to Today. He has 2 posts. One is a vote for Ryjae, strictly based on NAF’s investigation. A reasonable position actually, but doesn’t say anything. Then he later unvotes Ryjae on the basis of the miller claim, but doesn’t say why he believes it, nor does he vote for me as he promised.

The original argument stands. He’s making the minimum number of posts per day, and really isn’t going out on any limbs. He attacks fluid, who was a target from the start of the day. He attacks me, who has gotten plenty of heat from others. He votes Ryjae, which was an obvious move.

All that said, I would still rather take the bird in the hand of Ryjae. I can understand the arguments for doing otherwise however, so I’m willing to change if the situation warrents.

1057

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
I apologize for not being clearer then. I direct your attention to post 853 by me, and 742 by fluiddruid. 742 is a summary of his posts up to that point. The gist of the original argument is that he’s using the classic coast along, don’t make waves scum strategy.

Then look at post 746. He’s makes some attacks on me, which I refute and ask for clarification. It’s ignored.

He comes back in post 786 and argues with fluid some more. Another stretch of silence, and then some comments on the Mason claim(post 841). Notice still no response to my defense or requests for clarification.

Finally in post 854 he responds to me, promising to vote for me the next day. The only comment on my original post however is that my defense of my actions vis a vis Mad was weak. No response to my questions, nothing else.

Post 889, he reiterates his reasoning for voting fluid and states he would rather vote me. His vote for fluid has an element of confirmation bias, in that he states that part of the reason is she voted for a townie on Day 1. Of course, the vast majority of people voted for a townie Day 1, so that doesn’t really tell us anything.

Finally, and I mean it this time, we come to Today. He has 2 posts. One is a vote for Ryjae, strictly based on NAF’s investigation. A reasonable position actually, but doesn’t say anything. Then he later unvotes Ryjae on the basis of the miller claim, but doesn’t say why he believes it, nor does he vote for me as he promised.

The original argument stands. He’s making the minimum number of posts per day, and really isn’t going out on any limbs. He attacks fluid, who was a target from the start of the day. He attacks me, who has gotten plenty of heat from others. He votes Ryjae, which was an obvious move.

All that said, I would still rather take the bird in the hand of Ryjae. I can understand the arguments for doing otherwise however, so I’m willing to change if the situation warrents.
[/QUOTE]

My original plan was to vote for you today based on your manipulation of the MTS vote on Day two. The timing of that continues to be very suspicious. However with NAF coming out, the situation was changed. I’m still trying to get my bearings and figure out what needs to be done. Is miller something to be trusted or no, and the bird in hand bird in bush thing everyone seems to be mentioning.

I’m not a big poster, normally I wouldn’t post more than maybe 4 posts a week on the dope as a whole. I have to remind myself to post more in this thread, and so far this week I haven’t, so I apologize for being lurky.

I think the game is nearing its end for the following reasons.

  1. I trust NAF to be detective.

  2. Look at the unknown/known townie/known scum list

5 Townie
4 Unknown
1 Scum or Miller

There are either 3 or 2 scum left according to arguments that have already been brought up.

The theory I’ve been reading is that if there is a miller then thhere were three scum and now 2 left amongst the 4 unknowns. If there is not a miller left then there were 4 and thus now 3, and 2 left again amongst the 4 unknowns. So in both cases, only 2 more mislynches are possible. Therefore the only way we can lose is in the worst possible case were we pick precisely the two townies out of the 4 unknowns. Therefore I think things are going very well.

1058

I’d like to run through some scenarios to see how we end up after each (similar to what I did previously, but with a body-count focus this time). I’m starting with a slightly modified version of Blaster’s player list:

**Probable Town: **
ShadowFacts (claimed Mason)
Peekercpa (claimed Mason)
NAF1138 (claimed Detective)
Blaster Master (investigated as Town by NAF)
Pedescribe (investigated as Town by NAF)

**Unknown: **
Bufftabby
RoOsh
Nanook
Mindwanderer
**
Scum or Miller: **
RyJae

10 Players
7 Town (operating assumption)
3 Scum (operating assumption)

Scenario 1
Lynch RyJae (result: scum), scum kill Probable Town (almost certainly NAF)
Result:
8 Players
6 Town (4 confirmed)
2 Scum
This is a very good outcome for Town, as it pretty well confirms NAF and his reads, as well as bags one more scum. There would then be 2 scum left among 4 unknowns, with 4 confirmed Townies.

Scenario 2
Lynch RyJae (result: Miller), scum kill Probable Town (almost certainly NAF)
Result:
8 Players
5 Town (4 confirmed)
3 Scum
This is not as good an outcome as Scenario 1, but not terrible in that it would confirm the presence of a Detective, and since there has been no counterclaim, that means NAF and his reads would be confirmed. That would mean we would have 3 scum in a pool of 4 unknowns, with 4 confirmed Townies.

Scenario 3
Lynch one from Unknown (result: scum), scum kill Probable Town (not NAF)
Result:
8 Players
6 Town (2 or 3 confirmed)
2 Scum (maybe one found)
This is a good outcome for Town numbers-wise, but less so information-wise. If NAF is the Detective, he would reveal his latest investigation, either confirming one more Town or bagging one more Scum. If the latter, we would be obliged to lynch that person, which would confirm NAF. If the former, we would be hunting for 2 scum among 3 unknowns. If NAF is bold scum, we definitely have the potential to be misled here, but we’re not in lynch-or-lose, so there is time to recover.

Scenario 4
Lynch one from Unknown (result: scum), scum kill NAF
Result:
8 Players
6 Town (4 confirmed)
2 Scum
This is a decent outcome for Town, as we’d have 50% chance for scum at the top with 4 confirmed players to lead.

Scenario 5
Lynch one from Unknown (result: Town), scum kill Probable Town (not NAF)
Result:
8 Players
5 Town (2 or 3 confirmed)
3 Scum (maybe one found)
This is probably the worst outcome for Town, as we lynch one more of our own and don’t get NAF and his reads fully confirmed. Again, if NAF reports a scum read here we would lynch that person, thus confirming him and his other reads (or not). If not, we would obviously lynch NAF next, but scum could vote as a block then (3 vs. 3) for at least a 50/50 shot at the win.

Scenario 6
Lynch one from Unknown (result: Town), scum kill NAF
Result:
8 Players
5 Town (4 confirmed)
3 Scum
This is both good and bad for Town, as we get NAF and his reads confirmed, but we’re not in great shape numbers-wise. The good news is that we would be looking for 3 scum in a pool of 4, so the odds are really good.
This post is long enough as it is, so I will follow up separately with my thoughts on what this tells me. Feel free to comment before I do so, however. (Lunch, here I come).

1059

Alright much better with the 'splaining and all.
But one note:

[QUOTE=bufftabby]
That’s an awfully quick jump between “oh no, not blam! or MadtheSwine!” and “hey blam[pretty much confirmed townie], why are you protecting [pretty much confirmed townie] peekercpa with your bandwagon against me?” 11 posts.

[/QUOTE]
A Caveat: with the “pretty much confirmed Townie” business that you’re doing there. Remember, we don’t/didn’t know that BlaM was a confirmed Townie until NaF’s revelation. So although it is a case in point to point out BlaM’s alignment, you can’t let that play into account of suspicious behavior- as I’ll admit it- he was pretty damn suspicious up to the point of pretty much a cop coming out and saying he isn’t. Do they call that “ad hoc reasoning?” I’m not sure what that one is, but it might be used in this case? Someone else wiser in those Latin naming things will have to point out the correct term.

So its all nice and well to point out yeah a player was suspicious of a Townie, but keep in mind that shouldn’t be damning evidence, ESPECIALLY when a Townie has acted so suspiciously up until a later point of the game. Otherwise, it comes across as the author trying to smudge the person (ie: you to Nanook).
The jury in my head is still out on that one. But at least I understand your train business a bit better.

1060

[QUOTE=RoOsh]
So although it is a case in point to point out BlaM’s alignment, you can’t let that play into account of suspicious behavior- as I’ll admit it- he was pretty damn suspicious up to the point of pretty much a cop coming out and saying he isn’t. Do they call that “ad hoc reasoning?” I’m not sure what that one is, but it might be used in this case? Someone else wiser in those Latin naming things will have to point out the correct term.

[/QUOTE]

Post hoc is the one you are looking for I think.