Night was a whopping 35 posts. Here is what we have ::
And I believe these two are all that Tom Scud said “last night”.
I find the use of the word ““Thread”” to be weird as well. From what context is he speaking on “Thread” ? The context of the SDMB, or of a Pro Board?
Why does Jimmy bring it up?
Seems like an over explanation, IMHO. Seems like it is damage control, by perhaps un-coordinated scummies each trying to clean up the entire mess. It’s like a big sign saying “There is no Secret Here”. Alternately It’s equivalent to “These are not the Scums you want.” – Complete with hand gesture.
I find this hard to tackle. Not because I lack the thoughts on it, but because I am in a near similar situation, I feel, regarding Freudian’s vote on me.
In a weird sense, I feel I can’t touch it, with out adding complication to the ““Case”” on me.
Both arguments seemingly bypass Logic, and Decision making, and fast forward to absolutes. – That may or may not be true.
I’ve been told, that even if you learn a new language, and spend the rest of your life exclusively speaking and reading that language, you will always count in your native tounge. Even if only in private.
I think there are certain things here that can not be argued. Simply because they are like numbers in my example above. Certain things, right or wrong, can not be changed.
No vote here.
But, lets look at Tom AND Drain. If this is a slip, let’s not forget that Drain was named.
Whether or not the mis spellings originally meant anything, the fact that they are there, and have been noticed and discussed means they mean something now
scenario Naf = town Meeko = scum. Both have a misspelling completely randomly and unintentionally.
I stomp in and attribute it as being scum. Most people disagree with me at least one follows along with me. Anyway it is now something on the radar.
Scum team (knowing that NAF isn’t scum) decide to kill NAF to prove misspelling <> scum, thus removing the shadow from Scum Meeko.
Now this is all pure conjecture, but NAF was targeted for some reason, and I feel it is in town’s interests to think about who was targeted why.
I don’t. I’ve never seen this turn out well for town. Take Cecil Pond. We scum killed Freudian one Night, and it turned out that she was an unclaimed mason. This surprised the Town because there were two claimed masons still alive. One player posted an analysis of the voting patterns of the known masons and showed that if you assumed that the masons wouldn’t vote for fellow masons, then the last mason was in a pool of three players: Freudian, Oredigger and Alka Seltzer. He then pointed out that if there were scum in that pool, then the scum could have gotten it down to a one-in-two chance of hitting a mason. The thing was, we scum didn’t do that analysis. We killed Freudian because we suspected that she might be a cop, not a mason.
Now, as it happens, both Oredigger and Alka were scum. But that was pure luck: the reasoning was invalid, so the conclusion was flawed even if it happened to be true.
You yourself have given a list of what, five or six reasons why NAF might have been killed? Never assume that you can work out what the scum is thinking.
That’s a primary reason why I’m suspicious of such “slips”. I make those kind of mistakes all the time, whether I’m town or scum. I once almost posted “but I know that I’m scum” in a game, and I was town.
YMMV, man, I see these things catch scum far more often than they bite townies in the ass, and hell I’ve been caught in one or two as town myself (my crowning achievement was getting speed-lynched (as the vig/roleblocker, with a successful scum kill) because I brain-farted and voted for a confirmed, out mason. =P
Since it was my list, I’m going to comment on it. Any reasoning based only on that list would have been 100% invalid (As I said at the time, it was just data and could have been coincidental). Just like anyone basing a vote solely on their opinion about why someone was killed is equally invalid, although possibly subject to confirmation bias.
On to Kelly/Meeko/Freudian. NAF’s original case against kelly was weak, it looks to me like someone playing rashly. If you want to attribute rashness as a scum play, you’ll have to convince me since I just don’t buy it on face value. If I have Meeko’s argument correct, he is arguing that Kelly is being bussed so that he will be lynched and Freudian would get town credit for it. This doesn’t add up for me since a 1 for 1 trade rarely benefits scum. Not that it’s not possible, but it’s not the first thing I think of.
@Zeriel: I’m a little confused, are you voting for Drain because of the “overnight thread” or is it a continuation of your case against her yesterday regarding everyone=zeriel?
I have read it fully and followed actively, but I agree it’s hard to remember every detail. I’m willing to be more than one person feels like I do right now, so I’ll just flat out ask.
What was Drain’s alleged slip? I see the “overnight thread” slip by Tom, but I totally see what he meant there. What did Drain say that is somewhat “slippy”? What post was it in?
Was your first response to think that probably NAF was killed in order to throw up a smokescreen and protect the rest of a “Brotherhood” of people with misspelled posts? Is it helpful to the search for answers to obliquely suggest that this unidentified class of people (which upon 30 seconds’ investigation is revealed as a class of one: Meeko) will benefit from the kill, and thus are scum, and that’s the most likely explanation?
And you’re bothered both by my bringing it up and asking for clarification, and not voting, and by me allowing that it’s hard for me to believe scum would be that bold about it? What do you want me to do in the future when I see something weird that I want other people to look at, and that I want to hear more about? Either vote right away or just not say anything at all, those are the options?
That “everyone” was really only Zeriel, and he doesn’t like the fact that Drain couched an FOS of a single player in terms that appeared to be general.
The first word is “scenario,” and you say yourself it’s pure conjecture; in other words, you’ve made up a set of assumptions, and then based on those assumptions you’re giving us an explanation of why it happened that way.
The question is, why that particular conjecture? It’s all well and good that within the constraints you’ve created, you can give us reasons why the logic is consistent. That doesn’t tell the rest of us anything about why you created the scenario in the first place. I mean, hey, scenario: NAF town, Meeko town. In this universe, you’re being ridiculous and scummy. See how easy that was for me to do?
Re: Tom and the slip, or not-slip, I’m with Zeriel in that I pointed it out because I do think that following up on those kinds of accidental references will help you find scum more often than it’ll prevent you from doing it. It’s far from an ironclad case – of course it’s possible that an innocent townie might just use the wrong combination of words – and I don’t think this is foolproof, but I think that the other kind, the capital-s Slip kind, happens fairly regularly.
Even though, sure, there are other games with multiple threads, there aren’t really that many, and it seems highly worthy of notice when a player acknowledges (inadvertently) thinking about even the existence of another thread somewhere. It seems hard to believe that it would ever occur to my fingers to type “overnight thread” because it’s just a fact to me that there’s only one thread, and there’s nothing special about discussions overnight for me. You have to admit, in a game where the scum can talk, in a separate place for discussion, and only at night, that is a particularly unfortunate coincidental way to refer to something. Over time, I’ll take my chances that that signifies something important more often than it happens just by random inattention or incorrect phrasing. I plan to keep it in mind, is all.
OK, so I’ve thought about it and I actually think Zeriel makes a pretty good case about Drain’s attempt to rope a bunch of people into a FOS when it was only him.
I see very little case for the whole “overnight thread” thing Tom said, though. It never occurred to me that he meant some other thread on another board and Drain did comment in this thread.
So, Drain definitely looks odd with that statement, but not enough to get a vote from me, at least not yet.
However, shouldn’t we have more talking by Monday of a Day? Things are oddly calm aside from Meeko and Ed’s continuing hilarity, so to speak.
My first reaction was to create a list of reasons why NAF was killed which OAOW did. Umm . . . or not. I went to quote the post where OAOW listed the reasons for the scum killing NAF turns out it was by Guiri right after the posts by OAOW pointing out the ‘brotherhood of the misspellings’. I screwed up.
And you’re bothered both by my bringing it up and asking for clarification, and not voting, and by me allowing that it’s hard for me to believe scum would be that bold about it? What do you want me to do in the future when I see something weird that I want other people to look at, and that I want to hear more about? Either vote right away or just not say anything at all, those are the options?
[/QUOTE]
I still don’t like the way you brought it up. Your post felt like it was building a case against OAOW and then at the last second you decided you were pushing too hard and tried to pull the punch with a single tacked on sentence. But now that I’ve gone back and straightened myself out I’m going to withdraw my vote. I don’t like you’re presentation but you are right only coming up with one reason for the scum to kill last Night is a bad play since it’s WIFOM.
I’m going to ask this question to you too, but it’s really to zeriel, since zeriel is the only one voting me for it…
If I’m Scum, what’s my motivation for hiding zeriel in what is ostensibly a larger group of people? The only way it makes sense to me is if zeriel is also Scum! Then I might have the motivation of trying to look pro-Town by coming up with a nice Townie argument defending peeker for something he does every game, but I don’t have to smear my Scum teammate by name to do it.
There’s also the opposite–throw out something plausible that generates heat for a single known townie (if you’re scum, you know I’m townie) while allowing you to pretend you’re making a general statement.
Well, here’s the thing. If it’s true that nobody else voting for peeker made comments regarding his joke vote (and I’m not sure of that, as I don’t have the time right now to go through 19 pages searching for it) then the strategy fails miserably. All it does is end up getting me in trouble, because it’s something that’s clearly untrue. So that doesn’t make sense to me. And look at my other option. I could have simply said FOS zeriel, and why, and had there been someone else who made similar comments, it then becomes “Why are you protecting so-and-so”? Better to hedge one’s bets, especially since I’m pretty sure I saw other people refer to the joke post when smudging peeker.
If people think it’s a Scumfight, that’s one thing. But if you’re Scum, you know I’m Town, and if you’re Town, the motivation behind my actions makes no sense as Scum, when you parse it out. So your vote for me pretty much boils down to ill-supported OMGUS.
Final thing to bring up. Had I simply said FOS zeriel, what would your response have been? Because this whole thing is a distraction from my initial point in making the FOS in the first place, and you’ve never really answered the substance of it that I can see.
Basically trying to stir disorder up by taking what one individual did and try to spread it out and make it sound like there is some kind of negative trend occurring. Perhaps trying to get us talking about that and distract us from more productive talk.
Having said this, I don’t think it is that big of a deal.
A bigger deal is how little active conversation is going on. Perhaps my perception is wrong, but this Day Two seems very slow.
Catching up here, since I didn’t look in much on the thread over the weekend: The first thing I can say is that I don’t think it’s profitable to speculate about Scum’s reason for killing NAF. If, say, we had some claimed power roles on the table and NAF got killed over them, then, yeah, it might be interesting to speculate about (though, of course, the Scum might kill someone else in that situation just to keep Town confused, so it still isn’t all that helpful to Town). And if it were a later Night, and the deceased turned out to be a valuable power role, we might consider the possibility that the Scum have an investigator (though frankly, I’ve seen a lot of Scum lucky shots on power roles). But on Night 1, with no power claims, Scum are probably just going to pick at random from the set of skilled Town players. NAF is a skilled player, and apparently Town, so his death is consistent with this simplest hypothesis.
The second thing I’m wondering about: Is there some easy way to check the history of the games at Idle and Giraffe? I’m wondering just how many games Tom Scud has played in where each Day/Night has a separate thread. If he’s played a lot of them, then it makes his “slip” much more plausible, but if he’s only played a few, then it’s more suspicious.
I’ll probably have more to say after I’ve had a chance to go through and update my notes.