It’s not that gambits aren’t looked upon well here, it’s just that you can’t expect to go off half-cocked with no information on another player, have that gambit fail, and expect no repercussions.
Town wins a lot more with our mindset than they do on mafia-scum, too.
Okay, this makes me a little more suspicious. It seems like a gambit wouldn’t be something you’d do unless it was a significant enough hunch. I know you said there wasn’t anything specific, but could you try and find the posts that gave you the “nagging feeling”?
Also, from before:
And for that matter, what would have been the -wrong- answer?
I’m still puzzled by this whole thing, since you’re right, gambits are nearly unheard of at this point (though Santo tried to pull a hilarious one on the FB site, and failed), so I’m just trying to figure out your reasoning.
If you unvoted because you realized that you misread Hero, why did you not say “I misread Hero” in your unvote post, rather than:
?
In other news, I’d like to see JSexton explain in further detail why ok11 was chosen to be the “gambit target”
Eh, having read through the thread JSexton linked to–it’s funny as hell watching him spin the target in knots all on the strength of a random full-throttle accusation.
Except this: the entire trap in the linked thread seems to boil down to the fact that JSexton was targeted on Night 0–an inherently scummy act. ok11 has not claimed any abilities, and JSexton has not claimed this is a lie. In addition, it is not Night 0.
So that example, from my point of view, is basically meaningless for proving the towniness of the tactic. That is, from a reading of the link, it’s not at all apparent that you took a shot in the dark at your target, you had at least a plausible reason to believe he was scum given that he eventually confessed to roleblocking you. Seems very serendipitous for you to just pick that name out of a hat.
So I’m not sure what you’re playing at but I’m sure it doesn’t make as much sense to us as you seem to think it ought.
Anyone who thinks we get upset about gambits here didn’t watch Roosh’s masterwork in Serenity, either.
We punish bad or incomprehensible gambits, certainly. This one smells like the latter.
I want to unvote ok11, but I don’t want to do so without an idea of where to put my vote, and I want JSexton to say something about his hunch first–like where he got it and why it was enough to pursue it in this fashion.
I guess I’m having a hard time understanding this. I’ve pulled “impersonate the power-role” gambits myself, but only to draw scum fire, not to try and out one.
See, I’m looking at a player that oviously is sure enough of his instincts to pull something like this off, and I’m having difficulty divesting myself of the thought that a scum-aligned player with equal confidence in his instincts might attempt this to out (and hopefully get lynched) a Town power role.
I’m certainly unable to comprehend the thought of using this particular gambit on a hunch so weak that you’re unable to articulate the particulars of your suspicion.
31 hours have passed in the Day. We’ve left you for long enough without a Vote Count.
JSexton : 4 (BS PI, Zsofia, Santo Rugger, Rapier42)
Zeriel : 2 (Kat, amrussell)
ok11 : 2 (Zeriel, Hal Briston)
Blaster Master : 1 (Pedescribe)
Hal Briston : 1 (Oredigger77)
I tried to read the link, but I didn’t even notice that. Yeah, that doesn’t mean a whit, then.
I am going to Unvote BlaM
Ban JSexton, because he seems the most suspicious at the moment. Perhaps this will change when he answers my questions, but then again perhaps not.
Let’s see. The reaction in post 233 to Santo’s claim was odd. Why call it 'cool"?
Post 422 was intriguing. I don’t generally think of townies as the ones hunting for breadcrumbs.
Post 459 was strangely wishy-washy. I don’t get being against lurker hunting, nor why you’d want to overturn that belief for this game.
I didn’t like pushing for Diggit’s info in post 555. It felt unreasoned.
In general, the focus on who voted when felt like it might be a way to post content without necessarily stating firm opinions.
I know, it’s not terribly convincing, which is why I felt that a gambit was a better idea than building a case.
The tone was that of someone honestly perplexed. She wasn’t defensive or evasive. She didn’t leap straight to a counter-accusation. She was slightly annoyed, whereas I’d expect scum to either be very conciliatory or very counter-aggressive.
Voting someone because you disagree with their playstyle is not a good way to find scum. Voting scomeone because you can demonstrate a scum motivation for their actions is a much better idea.
Town wins a lot more with our mindset than they do on mafia-scum, too.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t play on mafiascum much. Four games, I think, and it’s been a while.
While I guessed that I’d been roleblocked, I didn’t know it for certain, and certainly didn’t know who had done it. Much of the speculation in that thread was incorrect, and I encouraged that speculation in order ot keep the scum guessing.
Pretty sure I also did it in GIPTYVM during day one as well.
Bwuh? I get that there are little things adding up, but…why would it work better to send a gambit than build a case. That seems mystifying. But, not scummy.
Okay…I guess that makes sense.
Unvote JSexton
Ban BlasterMaster because I still think his lurkerness has gotten extremely suspicious.
I disagree, but whatever.
How can you lambaste Boozaholic when you made exactly the same mistake?
I’m still kind of irked of the way JSexton is saying, “look at all these games where I was town and I did this”. Almost as if he had them in his pocket so he could pull them out when ok11 didn’t confess because he knew he was town in the first place?
I’m briefly checking in, mainly to cast a vote. For now,
Ban BlasterMaster
because if he doesn’t post soon and the Day ends at 48 hours, he might be Mod killed, and at least this way we’ll get his info. If he makes a post, I’ll unvote him in the morning, because other than him not participating/voting, he didn’t do anything ban-worthy.
I’ve reread posts by Boozahol Squid, P.I and Hero From Sector 7G, and didn’t find them doing anything suspicious toDay. Yesterday, both of them got some heat, but as a whole, they are no more suspicious than the rest of you.
YesterDay, I said I liked Kat’s case against Zeriel, and toDay amrussell added nicely to it. I don’t want to vote for Zeriel yet, because I can’t tell how much of my suspicion is rational, and how much is emotional (because he voted for me). For a similar reason, I won’t be voting for JSexton.
So, if I unvote BlasterMaster, I don’t know for whom I’ll vote instead. Hopefully, I’ll have an epiphany overnight.
If you look at the sig line of any of my posts on those forums, you’ll see that I maintain a spreadsheet of all games played there, and alignments. That made it pretty easy to look them up later.
Yeah, it is a bit of the pot calling the kettle black. However, it’s slightly different, as I was mixing up two somewhat similar names, whereas Boozaholic has simply forgotten that Oredigger was a claimed mason. Doesn’t Diomedes/Boozaholic usually take copious notes as town? Or am I mistaken about that?
I can’t see your sig line, but when I said you had them in your pocket, I didn’t mean you had researched them specifically to be able to recall them. I meant that you had them in your back pocket, in your toolbox, in your bag of tricks. Things that you’d done before as town that worked that you can now do as scum and say, “Hey, look, I did this as Town!”
I’m pretty sure you knew that’s what I meant, though.
It’s not really that different, because when you mixed up the somewhat similar names (only in that they both start with the same letter and have some numbers at the end) you still typed in Oredigger’s name, therefore forgetting he was a claimed Mason. You did the exact same thing, and yet still tried to smudge somebody else for it. I have no idea about Boozaholic’s habits, but he could claim to have “misread” his notes just as easily as you did.
I am inclined to agree with this reasoning, and he still needs more votes to put him in the lead, so for now:
Ban Blaster Master
That said, I haven’t a clue about BlaM’s alignment, but I think the other horse in the race, JSexton, is probably town, because I can’t see scum tossing out a random gambit based on a hunch – knowing, as scum would have to know, that the person targeted will almost certainly turn out to be town and they will then be called upon to explain that hunch. (Pretty much the only way that move makes sense is if the scum have more than a hunch that the target is PFK – and we do not, as yet, have any reason to think that they have some sort of investigative role.) Townies have less to lose by calling attention to themselves, and a far greater probability that their hunches will actually turn out to be useful.
I’ve been doing a review of yesterday, so as I post this, I am not caught up (just in case I missed a claim or something). What I’ve been doing is reviewing the voting for NBC, our lynchee from yesterDay. Here’s the replay (without bolding names, as it would take too much time):
#323 - Santo puts the first vote on him for what he said was deliberately ignoring JSexton’s correction of himself. At the time I thought this was a lame vote, because it was so obviously catchable (as Santo “caught” it)
#329 - Nanook votes for NBC in the same post that he role claims, based primarily from my reading on a “feeling” that NBC is acting like he has in previous games where NBC was scum
#330 - Rapier42 votes for NBC, repeating Santo’s justification. This is an interesting post, because earlier he had praised Santo’s “catch,” saying that NBC had been pinging him. In this post, however, he says that after reviewing NBC’s posts he was not sure why he was pinging him. Then he follows Santo anyway.
pedescribe then hops on for vote #4, but unvotes later. At the vote count in post 498, Nanook has the lead with 7 votes, and NBC has only 3.
Then, the turnaround:
#508 - Hal votes NBC for extremely flimsy reasoning (something about NBC setting himself up for a role claim later - you read it and try to figure it out).
#510 - Rapier42 unvotes (NBC down to 3 again)
#518 - pedescribe jumps on again.
At this point, Diggit and Nanook are tied at 6 votes each. Nanook unvotes NBC to vote for Diggit, claiming self-preservation.
#549 - Zeriel votes NBC to get him to 4 again
#570 - JSexton votes for NBC after Diggit claims a confirmable role
#577 - amrussell votes NBC to get him to 6
#588 - Nanook votes NBC, claiming he can’t leave a vote on a confirmable power role (making no mention of self-preservation, as this now puts NBC in the lead).
NBC is banned.
Nanook’s record is interesting, voting for NBC early, then unvoting, then voting him again at the very end to put him over the top. This could plausibly be someone who knows he is town just voting to save himself from the Ban Stick, though. It smells slightly fishy to me, though, and I am on board for the Nanook “test” toNight.
To me, the vote that sticks out is Hal Briston at 508. Enough that I’m going to post the relevant portion in it’s entirety here:
The part that sticks out to me is that he defends NBC from role claiming, then votes him for soft claiming (“very casually saying you have a power, and leaving it at that”). And all of that based on NBC’s “as is mine.”
Good enough for me for now to
Ban Hal Briston
I still think ok11 has enough to be suspicious of, but at this point the evasions and gambitry of JSexton is catching my eye as well–frankly, I don’t know how he expects us to verify that his example applies, since we can’t see what he saw at the time. I also think he’s getting entirely too defensive regarding Santo’s line of inquiry around the mistaken Mason discussion.
Although, frankly, I think he should feel good he’s not getting turbolynched for a mason-related mistake–I should know. =P
There’s also some stuff trying to gel around the initial reactions to JSexton’s attack this morning, but I’m going to have to let that mentally simmer before I decide what I want to do about it.
Fretful, townies in this game have their life to lose quite frequently by sticking their neck out with strong suspicions or gambits–we almost ALWAYS jump on the people who are talking a lot as much as we do on the lurkers on the first day.
NETA: first few days, I meant.