Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ehunt]

Phone post. I'm behind. Will computer post in an hour.

[theorel]

Right, sorry.  Looking at the post, I think you actually said you would vote Eevee at 6:55 if necessary.  I just read it as a willingness to "hammer at deadline".  Add in that I keep not paying attention to who was actually voting Lekkit.

Okay, so as far as I know the situation was actually: I said I would "finish a lynch if possible" the following morning, and Voltgloss expressed that he would support a Lekkit lynch.  Lekkit was at L-2 when Insomniac and Galzria weighed in.  The analysis of the situation still holds up, I think.  Am I missing anything?

[theorel]

Previous post responding to Frisk.  Don't let the page-break confuse you.

[Voltgloss]

Okay, so as far as I know the situation was actually: I said I would "finish a lynch if possible" the following morning, and Voltgloss expressed that he would support a Lekkit lynch.  Lekkit was at L-2 when Insomniac and Galzria weighed in.  The analysis of the situation still holds up, I think.  Am I missing anything?

Yeah, I think you're right.  With both you and me ready to finish the Lekkit lynch after everyone had weighed in (Insom, Galz) there wasn't a need for any more Lekkit votes.

Frustratingly, the final reason the Lekkit lynch got derailed and we wound up at no-lynch was because cayvie switched to voting Insomniac.  cayvie - the one player we KNOW was Town!

[Eevee]

First of all, sorry for not posting. I honestly didn't realize I went two full days without saying anything, almost scary.

At the time, I was wondering Insomniac's vote on me, but I thought since everyone found me scummy, maybe his reasons weren't as flimsy as I felt they were. However, what he did was claiming to have reread, saying I look super scummyyy without providing any reasons why he thought that, and joining my wagon when it very much looked like it was going to result in me getting lynched. I think that is pretty bad, as was his nolynch-vote (which I can believe to be a town mistake though).

However, Vote: Insomniac, maybe this time I'm on it early enough.

[ehunt]

OK, first, I apologize for getting behind. I sort of lost interest in the game, which is not like me. I'm also a little behind on the analytical aspects of the game; I still don't totally follow what went down in the wee hours of night one.

My feeling remains that the most suspicious thing that happened was the deflection from Lekkit/Eevee wagons. I think day two "reads" are a lot weaker than day one actions.

My willingness-to-vote goes something like this:
top tier: lekkit/eevee
next tier: o/galzria
next tier: frisk (because Cayvie suspected him). Was there a third Cayvie suspect?
next: any non-ehunt accused of lurking in theorel's big post, especially timchen


@Theorel - the argument "mafia won't deflect away from a lynch at the last minute to protect a town" could mean two things, depending on your definition of deflect. I'm not saying mafia wouldn't, say, fail to appear online at a crucial time. What I'm saying is that specifically O and/or Galzria would not have actively worked hard to prevent the lynch if either of them were mafia and both potential lynchees were town. Briefly, I'm saying (O mafia ==> eevee or lekkit mafia) and same for Galzria.

I don't think your two insomniac quotes contradict each other. I would describe those quotes as generally hedging on whether he supports lynch-on-reasonably-likely-townie over no lynch, which is a little scummy, but not scummy on the level of self-contradiction.

[Galzria]

OK, first, I apologize for getting behind. I sort of lost interest in the game, which is not like me. I'm also a little behind on the analytical aspects of the game; I still don't totally follow what went down in the wee hours of night one.

My feeling remains that the most suspicious thing that happened was the deflection from Lekkit/Eevee wagons. I think day two "reads" are a lot weaker than day one actions.

My willingness-to-vote goes something like this:
top tier: lekkit/eevee
next tier: o/galzria
next tier: frisk (because Cayvie suspected him). Was there a third Cayvie suspect?
next: any non-ehunt accused of lurking in theorel's big post, especially timchen


@Theorel - the argument "mafia won't deflect away from a lynch at the last minute to protect a town" could mean two things, depending on your definition of deflect. I'm not saying mafia wouldn't, say, fail to appear online at a crucial time. What I'm saying is that specifically O and/or Galzria would not have actively worked hard to prevent the lynch if either of them were mafia and both potential lynchees were town. Briefly, I'm saying (O mafia ==> eevee or lekkit mafia) and same for Galzria.

I don't think your two insomniac quotes contradict each other. I would describe those quotes as generally hedging on whether he supports lynch-on-reasonably-likely-townie over no lynch, which is a little scummy, but not scummy on the level of self-contradiction.

Your misconception is that you seem to believe that town would NOT wish to avoid lynching somebody they believe is town.

[ehunt]

@Galzria,

The thing is, town playing correctly will not support no-lynch over likely-town-lynch given an odd parity. But I think at least one of you and O were town playing incorrectly, not scum (it seems unlikely that you're both scum).

[Galzria]

@Galzria,

The thing is, town playing correctly will not support no-lynch over likely-town-lynch given an odd parity. But I think at least one of you and O were town playing incorrectly, not scum (it seems unlikely that you're both scum).

Town playing incorrectly will lynch people they have pro-town reads from because it reduces the number of pro-town voices. Odd Parity be damned. Early game there is NO reason to lynch somebody you have more faith in being town over someone you have more faith in being scum. And if a no-lynch results from it, so be it.

[Voltgloss]

Wait, wait, wait.

Town playing incorrectly will lynch people they have pro-town reads from because it reduces the number of pro-town voices. Odd Parity be damned. Early game there is NO reason to lynch somebody you have more faith in being town over someone you have more faith in being scum. And if a no-lynch results from it, so be it.

This is Galzria talking?  The Galzria who, in M-III where he was town (and town won), had all of the below to say on the subject of no-lynch?

Now, I know that a bad lynch IS better than a no lynch because, well, the only person I KNOW is town is myself. So even if I don't believe someone is Mafia, they will still have a higher chance to be than I do.

So I will not rule out switching my vote at the deadline if I can't convince people to think backwards. I want to make sure we lynch SOMEBODY, but I would prefer it to be the person that I suspect. Alas, the troubles of being a team when you don't know who your teammates are!

The "certainty" thing is just who I am. I can't explain it better. But I will respond to well made thoughts, and will change my mind. Circumstances dictate I do so. I would rather lynch town Robz than no lynch, so right or wrong if it brings town together, I'm good with this.

In this case, Dsell has made an interesting point to me, and it's one I'm willing to flesh out. I'm also actually and genuinely interested in town winning, so have changed my vote to bring town together. I could write a giant post on why I believe what I do, but it'll just get torn down and disregarded as "that's what he did last game and was Mafia".

I've explained my thoughts on J. If (at this deadline), I can't convince town, I will rally around where I think I think we can being the town together: Robz. Because lynching IS better than No lynching.

Here's why lynching a town is better than no lynch. I'll use smaller numbers to make it easier:

If we start with an odd number of players (7) and (for this case) 2 Mafia, if we no lynch a townie dies at night leaving 6. There are now 4 town and 2 Mafia, and all 4 town must vote together to reach a majority. If they mislynch again, 2 town die, and the game ends.

If we start with an odd number of players (7) and (for this case) 2 Mafia, if we lynch a townie
and one dies at night, 5 remain. There are now 3 town and 2 Mafia, and all 3 town must vie together to reach a majority. If they mislynch, Mafia wins.

Both situations end with a Mafia win, but it is EASIER to get 3 town to vote together than 4. This argument holds true for any situation where there starts an odd number of people in the town. If we have an even number (first example after no lynch), it is better to no lynch again, to allow for the fewest number of town votes to lynch Mafia.

But we have 13. Lynching a town is better than not lynching. Today we need 7 of 10 (maybe 9). No lynch means we need 7 of 9 (as 12 players remaining, it takes 7 to reach majority).

So do I think Robz is Mafia? Not really. Could he be? Ehh, maybe. Does it MAKE SENSE for me to leave my vote where my convictions are, resulting in a no lynch? No. If I could get people to vote J today, then yes. But with the deadline approaching it's apparent I can't. I would be hurting the town more to just "let" a no lynch happen because of my convictions and stubbornness.

Like I pointed out above, it's better I die as town than no lynch.

My switch to you, I explained. I DO believe that any lynch  (outside roles) is better than no lynch. And while I listed 3 situations for J to be, I still believe him Mafia. And I STILL have not seen a defense about not lynching him because of the claim outside of "he claimed, so he must be telling the truth", which could be done as both the role, and as a Mafia.

No, no, no.  I do not buy town-Galz making such a vehement 180. 

Here's what I buy:

- Galz logs in with only a couple of hours to deadline, sees Lekkit at L-2, sees me and theorel saying we'll hammer
- Galz also sees Insom recently made a post that cayvie (one of the Lekkit voters) seemed to think was a scumslip
- Galz argues for an Insom lynch based on that slip, hoping to draw cayvie's vote off the Lekkit lynch
- which she does

This all suggests Galz didn't want to see Lekkit lynched.  Yes.  But town-Galz would never do that.  He would rather see Lekkit lynched than no-lynch - even if he thought Lekkit was town.

The only plausible explanation, from where I sit, is that scum-Galz was preventing a scum-Lekkit lynch.

OMIGOD YOU'RE CALLING A SCUMPAIR - yes, yes I am.  I cannot reconcile Galz's actions otherwise. 

The answer:  either lynch Lekkit or lynch Galz.  If one flips scum, go after the other next.

[Galzria]

Wait, wait, wait.

Town playing incorrectly will lynch people they have pro-town reads from because it reduces the number of pro-town voices. Odd Parity be damned. Early game there is NO reason to lynch somebody you have more faith in being town over someone you have more faith in being scum. And if a no-lynch results from it, so be it.

This is Galzria talking?  The Galzria who, in M-III where he was town (and town won), had all of the below to say on the subject of no-lynch?

Now, I know that a bad lynch IS better than a no lynch because, well, the only person I KNOW is town is myself. So even if I don't believe someone is Mafia, they will still have a higher chance to be than I do.

So I will not rule out switching my vote at the deadline if I can't convince people to think backwards. I want to make sure we lynch SOMEBODY, but I would prefer it to be the person that I suspect. Alas, the troubles of being a team when you don't know who your teammates are!

The "certainty" thing is just who I am. I can't explain it better. But I will respond to well made thoughts, and will change my mind. Circumstances dictate I do so. I would rather lynch town Robz than no lynch, so right or wrong if it brings town together, I'm good with this.

In this case, Dsell has made an interesting point to me, and it's one I'm willing to flesh out. I'm also actually and genuinely interested in town winning, so have changed my vote to bring town together. I could write a giant post on why I believe what I do, but it'll just get torn down and disregarded as "that's what he did last game and was Mafia".

I've explained my thoughts on J. If (at this deadline), I can't convince town, I will rally around where I think I think we can being the town together: Robz. Because lynching IS better than No lynching.

Here's why lynching a town is better than no lynch. I'll use smaller numbers to make it easier:

If we start with an odd number of players (7) and (for this case) 2 Mafia, if we no lynch a townie dies at night leaving 6. There are now 4 town and 2 Mafia, and all 4 town must vote together to reach a majority. If they mislynch again, 2 town die, and the game ends.

If we start with an odd number of players (7) and (for this case) 2 Mafia, if we lynch a townie
and one dies at night, 5 remain. There are now 3 town and 2 Mafia, and all 3 town must vie together to reach a majority. If they mislynch, Mafia wins.

Both situations end with a Mafia win, but it is EASIER to get 3 town to vote together than 4. This argument holds true for any situation where there starts an odd number of people in the town. If we have an even number (first example after no lynch), it is better to no lynch again, to allow for the fewest number of town votes to lynch Mafia.

But we have 13. Lynching a town is better than not lynching. Today we need 7 of 10 (maybe 9). No lynch means we need 7 of 9 (as 12 players remaining, it takes 7 to reach majority).

So do I think Robz is Mafia? Not really. Could he be? Ehh, maybe. Does it MAKE SENSE for me to leave my vote where my convictions are, resulting in a no lynch? No. If I could get people to vote J today, then yes. But with the deadline approaching it's apparent I can't. I would be hurting the town more to just "let" a no lynch happen because of my convictions and stubbornness.

Like I pointed out above, it's better I die as town than no lynch.

My switch to you, I explained. I DO believe that any lynch  (outside roles) is better than no lynch. And while I listed 3 situations for J to be, I still believe him Mafia. And I STILL have not seen a defense about not lynching him because of the claim outside of "he claimed, so he must be telling the truth", which could be done as both the role, and as a Mafia.

No, no, no.  I do not buy town-Galz making such a vehement 180. 

Here's what I buy:

- Galz logs in with only a couple of hours to deadline, sees Lekkit at L-2, sees me and theorel saying we'll hammer
- Galz also sees Insom recently made a post that cayvie (one of the Lekkit voters) seemed to think was a scumslip
- Galz argues for an Insom lynch based on that slip, hoping to draw cayvie's vote off the Lekkit lynch
- which she does

This all suggests Galz didn't want to see Lekkit lynched.  Yes.  But town-Galz would never do that.  He would rather see Lekkit lynched than no-lynch - even if he thought Lekkit was town.

The only plausible explanation, from where I sit, is that scum-Galz was preventing a scum-Lekkit lynch.

OMIGOD YOU'RE CALLING A SCUMPAIR - yes, yes I am.  I cannot reconcile Galz's actions otherwise. 

The answer:  either lynch Lekkit or lynch Galz.  If one flips scum, go after the other next.

I've already addressed this. M-III was a looooong time ago. And we've since had... all of... how much success with our D1 lynches? We're consistently playing from a hole, and I'm tired of it. I will vote for my scum reads D1, period. If a player doesn't read scum (or something above a moderate chance at being so), I won't vote for them, period.

[O]

@Galzria,

The thing is, town playing correctly will not support no-lynch over likely-town-lynch given an odd parity. But I think at least one of you and O were town playing incorrectly, not scum (it seems unlikely that you're both scum).

Once again, this meta is bullshit. Parity doesn't mean anything at the start of a large game, with lovely things such as possible:

Jailkeepers (save for a night)
Vigilantes (no, even-shot doesn't matter as it strictly contains 1-shot, they can also target the same as mafia)
Mafia-forced tiebreaker (I assume we have this at it's mafiascum standard I believe)

Mainly: Lekkit (and to a lesser extent Eevee) were obvtown, with a terrible wagon on him.

9 town and 3 mafia and IS better than 8 town and 3 mafia, regardless of how many times you guys whine about parity.

[Robz888]

I love that we've been arguing about No Lynch since MII. And here we are in MVIII, and we still don't agree! I'm not even sure I know what I think about it anymore.

But onto business. So, I think theorel's post #645 "Scum want to avoid town wagons if possible" is the missing link to explain why we got No Lynch. I mean, this is something we've always been aware of--paradoxically, scum want a wagon on non-scum to always succeed, but they don't want to be voting for it if they can avoid it. The extreme case of scum pushing a wagon through is MVI, where I believe all 3 members of the Mafia team (Frisk I think, Ehal, and Ozle) and my werewolf cohort Theorel ALL contributed to the lynch of town Eevee. Obviously, that's not ideal for scum. Because when a townie flips, we look at who was on their wagon. So to be clear, scum want to avoid this, it's usually bad for them.

Now, why did we get No Lynch? No Lynch has never happened before in a regular mafia game. And the things that I think could make a No Lynch happen--power role claims that cause uncertainty, for instance--didn't occur. Really, there's no normal excuse for No Lynch here. We had two wagons going against players that I at least thought were scummy, Lekkit and Eevee. Instead, we got a last minute third wagon, and No Lynch all around. Why?

Theorel's explanation is the best one. Let's say that the Lekkit lynch looked inevitable--I sure thought it was! Well then of course the scum don't bother voting for it. They don't want to help lynch a townie, they want to watch as a townie gets lynched (of course Lekkit may not be a townie).

So this puts Insomniac, Galzria, and to a lesser extent O and Eevee under suspicion (I'm just sheeping Theorel's work here). Now, Insomniac is the one person I'm getting a town-read from, but I definitely have an Insomniac-is-town bias that I need to deal with (I also have an Eevee-is-mafia bias). So I do think he comes off looking the worst here. And hey, maybe I didn't suspect him because he's scum doing the best job of fooling me. Sort of in line with the "we never lynch scum, so lynch someone you would never want to lynch" theory.

Galzria also looks bad, although I will defend him from Volt's charge that he has changed his mind about No Lynch. I called him out on it too, and he said he changed his mind... and that's fine. Really, I'm not sure where I stand on it either. So I don't fault him for that.

I also want to throw Timchen's name in here. I don't think lurking is a scumtell necessarily... but Timchen has flown so far under my radar that it's a little scary. Really, I barely knew he was in this game. And he certainly didn't contribute to any lynches.

So anyway, I'm changing where I stand on who I want to lynch today. I find theorel's case fairly compelling, and I see there's some agreement that it's a good move (oh, from Eevee, great...), so I will Vote: Insomniac

People I'm also willing to discuss lynching: Timchen, Eevee
Maybe: Lekkit, Galzria, O
No: Volt, Frisk, ehunt, theorel, yuma

[Eevee]

@Robz, try to look at this objectively. I didn't want Lekkit gone. It could mean

a) I'm scum and he is scum
b) I'm town, and have sort of a town read on his behavior.

Any other scenario (me being scum and him being town or me being town who thinks he is scummy), I will just post nothing / vote for him myself, and likely seem him lynched.

Now, which do you think is more likely, a) or b)? Because to me it's pretty ridiculous you accuse me of voting for Insomniac, when my options were myself or Lekkit. It's not like I went out of my way to prevent a lynch, I just didn't want to contribute on mine and felt Lekkit looked towny.

[Robz888]

@Robz, try to look at this objectively. I didn't want Lekkit gone. It could mean

a) I'm scum and he is scum
b) I'm town, and have sort of a town read on his behavior.

Any other scenario (me being scum and him being town or me being town who thinks he is scummy), I will just post nothing / vote for him myself, and likely seem him lynched.

Now, which do you think is more likely, a) or b)? Because to me it's pretty ridiculous you accuse me of voting for Insomniac, when my options were myself or Lekkit. It's not like I went out of my way to prevent a lynch, I just didn't want to contribute on mine and felt Lekkit looked towny.

Eevee, yeah I get that. And I'm not voting for you.

However, for one thing: You and Lekkit both pointedly did not and would not vote for each other, and you two were the wagons. So, that's kind of interesting and weird. Because if I were a townie (or if I were scum really) I would probably vote for the other wagon, assuming that one of them was going to go off, because I don't want to be the one that does go off. That's just a self-preservation thing. Now, the reason iw ouldn't do that is if the other person was my scumbuddy. And it was mutual between you two. You both ended up on this third wagon that was absolutely coming together too late to make any difference.

That said, I'm not so optimistic that we've found a scum pair right here. Although lynching one of you is probably quite informational, I do think Theorel's explanation against Insomniac is a better argument.

Does that make sense? I admit I have a bias against you being town and in favor of Insomniac. So right now I'm deliberately going against my bias, because I recognize its existence.

[Eevee]

I've been town in every (finished) game but one this far though, I don't understand why you'd feel biased.

I do see what you are saying though.

[Robz888]

I've been town in every (finished) game but one this far though, I don't understand why you'd feel biased.

I do see what you are saying though.

It has to do with how you act. I called you as mafia in the first game you played, almost immediately, and you were mafia. So that's impacted my Forum Games relationship with you.

Insomniac has been town in absolutely every regular game, he often dies immediately which makes me pity him, and in the one game he got to the end in, I was mafia and he was the one person with things most figured out. These things just stick with you.

[Voltgloss]

I blame you for the everlasting no-lynch debate, Robz.  If you hadn't spoken so eloquently about it in M-II - while scum - none of us would be this confused today. 

But blargh, ok, I am willing to look past my reaction to Galz and accept - for now! - that he has legitimately changed his stance there. 

Insomniac, huh.  Well.  What are my thoughts on Insomniac.

1.  End of Day 1, he voted no-lynch with the Lekkit wagon at L-2.
2.  Day 2, he votes Eevee as super scummy.
3.  He also votes O for the supposed scumslip of mixing up Lekkit and theorel.

Hmm.

- If he thought Eevee was super scummy why didn't he just vote Eevee on Day 1?

- The "scumslip" by O was clearly just a mistake.  Heck, not two posts before O first mixes up Lekkit and theorel, O specifically refers to a wagon having been on Lekkit.  Seizing on that to park a vote feels really flimsy.

...hmm.  I'm not convinced his "I'll analyze on Day 2" comment was in fact a scumslip.  But the above questions have me more than a bit concerned.

What's the current votecount?

Insom, let's hear your responses.

[Insomniac]

Yesterday was m girlfriends birthday and dark ages leaked and goko didnt launch. Anyways I still feel good about my vote on O. It wasn't just the mixup. And eevee I didn see as super scummy until day 2. Day 1 he seemed ok but on the new light of who was mod and where eevee was on wagons I thought he looked scummy

[Robz888]

Yesterday was m girlfriends birthday and dark ages leaked and goko didnt launch. Anyways I still feel good about my vote on O. It wasn't just the mixup. And eevee I didn see as super scummy until day 2. Day 1 he seemed ok but on the new light of who was mod and where eevee was on wagons I thought he looked scummy

He seemed "ok" in terms of scummy but you preferred No Lynch?

[Voltgloss]

Insom, I don't know what you mean by "on the new light of who was mod."  Phonepost typo?

[theorel]

I didn't do a full vote-count.  But based on a quick search Insomniac is at 4 votes.

[Grujah]

Voltgloss(2): yuma, Lekkit
O(1): Insomniac
Eevee(1): Captain_Frisk
Lekkit(1): Voltgloss
Insomniac(4): Galzria theorel, Eevee, Robz888

Not voting(3): timchen, ehunt, O

with 12 alive, it takes 7 votes to lynch.
Deadline is Thursday, I think around noon.

[Voltgloss]

Thanks theo/Gruj.

I think everyone needs to publicly weigh in on the Insomniac question.   

[Insomniac]

Insom, I don't know what you mean by "on the new light of who was mod."  Phonepost typo?

Should read "on the new light of who was nkd" but my phone changed it to mod