I thought posting more WAS the response. (And that point has more or less become moot anyway since the game ended.) Like I said before, posting for the sake of posting doesn’t seem to be that useful.
As Drain stated, it doesn’t matter if the cops investigated different people. Four cops investigating on the same night have a 80% failure rate. Five cops (which I think is possible if the Chief already spent his recruitment) have a 100% failure rate!
Still, I should point out that I think the witnessing is indepent of the general investigation. And that’s always 50%. Still not worth the risk and the tradeoff of the cops witnessing activity for players other than themselves, IMHO.
Next Hal Briston
1, N0, F
2, N0, F
2, N0, F
2, N0, F
2, N0, Squotes Pleos reasons for no lynche on D1 and agrees, no extra analysis
4, D1, F Jumps on the no lynch band wagon with no analysis, substance credit given for post above
5, D1, SAsks Fluid why extra night time is needed if we only have a Godfather. Pleo’s favorite post.
5, D1, F
6, N1, F
7, D2, F
7, D2, F
10, D2, F
12, D2, S Votes CaptPitt will almost no analysis, amost a drive by see below [1]
12, D2, SDefends his vote to CaptPitt. Says he is not lurking and points to his posts last week.[2]
13, D2, F
13, N2, F
14, N2, F
14, D3, F
14, D3, F
14, D3, S
14, D3, F
[1]
[2]
Substance to Fluff Ratio: 5/16. And there wasn’t much substance in the substance.
Also note that when Hal responded to CaptPitt about his many posts and non-lurkyness only 2/12 of his previous posts were not completely Fluffy.
And then MHaye
1, N0, F (/in post)
4, D1, S
7, N1, F
8, D2, S
11, D2, S
11, D2, S
11, D2, S
12, D2, S
12, D2, S
12, D2, S
13, D2, S
13, N2, F
14, N2, F
Substance to Fluff ratio: 9/4
Ok, sorry got way-laid. So I looked at three of the lowest posters (DrainBead not included because she just got on board. If you are going to include her you should add in Idle’s posts) To summarize we have this:
Dotchan: 9 total posts, 5 with substance
MHaye: 13 posts, 9 with substance
Hal: 21 posts, 5 with substance
If you just went by the numbers posted by NAF you would be under the impression that Hal was contributing way more to the discussion than either MHaye or Dotchan.
FOS NAF for posting information with no critical analysis. This has been done by scum before.
FOS Hal for lurking day 1 and 2 and his disengenuous response about his unlurkyness to CaptPitt on Day 2.
fluiddrid, does the 20% cumulative failure rate mean each Beat Cop has a 20% * # of Cops investigating chance of getting no result?
Upon rereading the ruleset, I’m pretty sure this is the case, but it’s always nice to make sure.
<sound of insect legs rubbing together, tempo determined by temperature>
If not for **Dot **I would feel like the ultimate thread killer.
Exactly. And, to elaborate, Police Chiefs count as Beat Cops, and Capo Beat Cops investigating counts towards the global failure as well (and they are subject to it). This failure rate is figured for each Beat Cop, so some may succeed while others fail. Please note that this does not affect the chances of witnessing a recruitment.
That’s a horrible and anti town reason to distrust someone. Notice, I say anti town, because I don’t actually think it is scummy by itself. But continuing to post arguments base on false premises will fall on my “even if they are town, we are better off without them” list, right next to the lurkers. (and yes, mhaye, I **am ** looking at you. I will get to that in my next post)
In case you haven’t guessed:
Just because scum have done things before, doesn’t make an action scummy. It is a false premise that anything scum have done before is scummy. Town has done the same thing in previous games, and scum usually don’t use the same tricks twice.
Also, I thought that I was admitting that I hadn’t done any analysis in my initial post and my resonse to drainbead’s post. It shouldn’t have come as a surprise to anyone.
We need to start poking someone new to see how he/she responds to pressure. This thread is dying, and I have a feeling that it’s because what we’ve been doing is getting us nowhere. Props to sinjin for posting some analysis, though.
I’m going to have to agree that Hal hasn’t said much of substance all along. I don’t like the way it looks. SO…
Vote Hal Briston
My mind is, by no means, made up. But people who aren’t talking aren’t helping, and we need to see some more action!
First off, it isn’t a system. I was hoping someone else would do my leg work for me, because I don’t get any info out of doing the work myself. If that selfish of me, sure, but the more people we have working on a sigle problem, the more information we get out of the solution to that problem. Again, posting that list of post counts generated conversation and information.
It is actually your play in the last couple of games that was the inspiration for my latest lynch the lurker concept. The reason is, in the last 2 games you were scum once and town once…and your play was identicle. This was mostly because you posted so infrequently that you were impossible to read! You don’t have to post fluff to post more. Your posts are usually high content, but you don’t vote a lot and you don’t post enough that I can ever get a handle on where you are. You never make your voice heard. That really all I want you to do, stop hiding in the back and speak up.
If all you post is fluff, you will probably get lynched. I really believe this. But every game we have a bit of a conversation about lynchhing vs. giving a pass to low post players and the argument in favor of giving them a pass is alway “but it rewards players who post fluff.”
I will come out and say right now, I would rather players post fluff than have players NOT POST ENOUGH. It is then easy to just lynch the people who are obviously avoiding conversation. Avoiding conversation is OBVIOUSLY SCUMMY. Not posting tells us nothing!
Sinjin has taken up that mantle, and is a better person than I am for doing so.
[qutoe=mHaye}We’ve had this argument before, and I suspect we’ll have it again. I don’t dispute that monitoring activity level will be a useful tool, primarily because quieter posters will find it easier to hide changes in role. I just think your initial proposition needs refining.
Time to reread Day 2 thoroughly.
[/QUOTE]
See diatribe above. Enjoy Day 2. 
Part of the problem with voting Hal for lurkiness is that he’s always quiet the first couple Days, and tends to ramp up his participation when there’s more to talk about. Like all of these games, we’re flying blind here in the beginning, and there are players that tend not to want to speak unless they have something useful to say (whether they’re scum or not). We’ve had two pages of discussion on how to properly classify lurkerdom, for heavens sake!
Just sayin’ is all.
Reading the Day’s post, this stuck with me, mostly because it reminded me of past games where I played scum and made the same mistake (i.e., “skimming”). Just wanted to make a note of that.
The other thing that stuck with me is that this Day has been rather quiet. It’s weird because Day 2 was pretty much rife with paranoia and accusations. I’m really not sure what I have to add to toDay’s conversation, other than that I think any kind of role-claim is not ideal at this point, and that I agree with Dio in that semi-lurkers are more suspicious than outright lurkers at this point. I keep meaning to go back to Day 2, but haven’t had the time yet. Tomorrow I have a half-day off, so I promise I’ll do that then and post a summary of my thoughts afterwards. But right now I needs must go bed.
That’s fine, I just want some proper discussion to happen before we get down to the wire and lynch in a hurry again. Also, just because he has a posting style doesn’t mean he’s not scum! If I were scum, I’d try to act just like I usually do (I’ve only played pro-Town so far) and hope people brush it off as well.
But that doesn’t excuse it. If he’s scum now then this kind of thing just helps him.
And that’s why we need people to post. Saying nothing and coasting through the first days sounds like a good way for scum to survive.
Good. It needs to be talked about, for the newbies if for nothing else. The more discussion we do the more information we have to go on.
Ah, a debate. 
It did.
As I said, I don’t have objections to looking at people’s activity levels, especially in this game where a change might be indicative of a change in role.
You did propose a system. A systematic hunt of people with low postcounts. I dislike that system, in part because it’s easy to avoid being a low postcount player by posting fluff, which means I have more posts to wade through on a reread, and in part because the data you were basing it on included Nights, and someone wanting to hide from your hunt only has to post the minimum to keep above Fluiddruid’s scythe in the Days, and boost postcount by bartending or something at Night.
Sinjin’s effort in weeding out the Night posts makes this idea much more viable because now we can see those who are posting infrequently in the Day. (I tried to do something of the sort for Cult of Sekham, but it took me too long.)
My argument is closer to “it harms the game by increasing the number of posts people have to wade through for little or no purpose.” Basically, I contend that large numbers of fluff posts in the Days make it harder to follow the game. There may also be a secondary effect of discouraging people from joining in future games because of the sheer number of posts in the thread.
I’ll let you into a secret about Three Kingdoms. During the days I forgot as often as possible that I was a goon. My play was indistinguishable from a Villager because except for the fact that I knew who the Shu were, I was a Villager. Not until Day 4 did I do anything inspired by my role as a scum and using my additional knowledge.
Three Kingdoms might not be the best evidence of my playstyle as a bad guy just because of the structure of the game. Conspiracy is the only game here I’ve been unadulterated Scum.
No and yes. 
I would rather have players not post fluff in Days than pad their postcount with game-irrelevant rhubarb. That way we can see who’s contributing and who is not more easily. But yes, avoiding conversation is scummy.
And now for the confession.
I got kidney-punched Saturday night (metaphorically), my ability to concentrate on anything more demanding than light fantasy went out of the window and I got nothing done.
So now I’m playing catchup with only one day to go. I’ll tie myself to my PC this evening.
Here’s where this bothers me. If you wanted someone to do your leg work for you, why didn’t you say something to that effect? Saying something like “These are just raw numbers, and I haven’t divided them into Day/Night posts because I don’t have the time or energy, but I’m hoping that someone else will” would have done a lot to take heat off of you. But you didn’t say that–in fact, you didn’t say anything to show anyone that the numbers you posted were essentially worthless. So now this statement looks to me like backpedaling. To me, it’s enough for a FOS on NAF.
Seriously, guys. Okay, props to sinjin for doing further analysis on our very lurkiest, separating the substance from the fluff. Right on. But I took like two and a half hours to go through and count everyone’s posts, by hand, no fancy spreadsheets etc. Now I’m really feeling like it was for no reason at all. No one has mentioned it; hell, I don’t think anybody even read it. I’m a very discouraged newb townie right about now. I’m also a whiner, I guess.
That is what we call me blatantly misreading the rules. Okay new math.
1 cop
.8 successful investigations a night.
2 cops
1.2 successful investigations a night.
3 cops
1.2 successful investigations a night.
4 cops
.8 successful investigation a night
So ideally we want 2 or 3 daily investigations.
I’m not sure that this kills my plan. It makes one aspect of it slower, but it still would do well at protecting new cops. Still, it was probably not enough of a good idea to take a hit.
I’ll have a vote later today. My main two candidates are Menocchio and Sinjin. I was bothered by Menocchio’s vote for me. Bad strategy is not a scum tell. Even perfect strategy would be difficult to develop a consensus on. No scum is going to convince the rest of the town to go along with a plan that has obvious flaws. For someone who suggested that the Vig role claim, it seems disingenuous for him to vote someone else for a “bad idea.”
I’m not sure I can explain well what bothers me about Sinjin. I’m kind of getting the trying to hard to seem townie vibe. Let me see if I can go over his posts again and make a better case.
I don’t have time for detailed analysis, but on reread, this post bothers me. In full:
The advice Menocchio gave is bad advice, as Drain Bead rightly explains. But I don’t think it’s scummy advice in this case. Addressing the two levels mentioned:
-
Bad advice is not always scummy. You need to make a case as to why someone’s statements are more likely to be made by scum than town. And how likely is the Vig to take such bad advice? The Vig will know their own powers and presumably not make such a clear mistake.
-
Okay, you’re making a case now. But not paying full attention isn’t a scum tell either. It’s easy to get roles confused, especially when there’s many. (See me in the Three Kingdoms game. I was even a power role.) It’s even easier to miss a single power of a role.
All I would take from Menocchio’s advice is that he is not the Vig. What do I take from Drain’s attack? Poorly reasoned, but is it scummy? Maybe. Men was getting a lot of votes YesterDay. An early vote with reasoning (even if it’s poor) could start a bandwagon. And, if a bandwagon did start, Drain could reasonably claim she wasn’t following it. Perfect way for scum to make an attack. So, for now:
vote Drain Bead