Print

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

[Galzria]

I find 5 and 6 to be hilariously opposing so I am in fact looking forward to those posts

I found that amusing as well.

[Eevee]

I find 5 and 6 to be hilariously opposing so I am in fact looking forward to those posts

Nah. I already kind of said that too.

[ehunt]

For example, if I logically deduce "there cannot be a tracker" but mafia knows that there is a tracker, then mafia will realize that the tracker isn't me, and it will make their hunt for power-roles either.

ehunt, what makes you think scum would have that kind of information?  As far as we all know, this isn't Pick Your Poison-styled.  And if it were, only scum would know.

A couple posts yesterday seemed like straight-up rolefishing.

ehunt, why didn't you identify those rolefishing posts?  If you think someone is scum rolefishing for town power roles, shouldn't you voice your suspicions up-front so the town can weigh and discuss them?  I don't see how this veiled, vague reference is helpful to town.

This is post 1a. The "tracker" was a poorly veiled reference to MXIII. At the start of MXIII town assumed it was a good idea to speculate about what roles the mafia puts in. But then when you're the town tracker, you're in an awkward situation where if you say "i don't think there's a tracker" you're a lying townie. So anyone who says "i don't think there's a tracker" is almost certainly not tracker, and this makes mafia's night kill easier. Anyway, I agree, it's not directly relevant to this game, but analogous things are; I was trying to give a theoretical example of when it's a bad idea to speculate about roles.

As to your other question, the post that particularly annoyed me was eevee's where eevee argued that galzria almost certainly had a power role. I more or less indirectly quoted this post.

I should have used the word role-speculating rather than rolefishing. I don't think role-speculating is a scumtell, I just think it's a mistake (because it does the rolefishing for the scum without making the scum do it). I didn't want to call out eevee by name because I didn't want to start a wagon.

[ehunt]

I tend to agree - I've been generally against goofy claiming (side / seat / suit), but I've also never had a role that made use of that information in a meaningful way.  However - your specific stance made me nervous.  What makes you think that scum have more card related information than town does? 

Mod Question: ## Will cards be revealed on death? ##

I guess I just don't see enough information out there that would lead me to believe that card claiming at L-1 should be avoided - and yet eHunt is out there discouraging it.

This is my post 1b. If the size of the scumteam is x, then the scumteam knows about x cards, whereas each townie knows only about 1 card. Therefore, they are more likely to be able to guess what the connection between cards and everything else is. Therefore, information helps them more than it helps town. See my post from yesterday for a speculative, but concrete, example of how this could go down.

[ehunt]

This is my post 2.

There are two primary components to mafia. One is psychological, and the other is mathematical/strategic. The presence of special roles highly accentuates the second aspect of the game. I will abbreviate the mathematical component as "theory."

F.DS is really bad at theory, and towns lose over and over because of it. I have no problem with being bossy on theory issues. For example, it's mathematically completely straightforward that the parity of the total population should be odd. Town does better with n town and m mafia than with n+1 town and m mafia when n + m is odd. You can easily check this with a computer if you don't believe me. Despite this basic fact, town lost MXI exclusively because a vigilante caused an even parity at LyLo, and lost MVIII at least partially for this reason (though town was in bad shape by that point in MVIII). This mistake is akin to something like opening mint/pearl diver. I have no problem being blunt about theory issues.

Now, if I've been bossy in a manner that people find rude, I sincerely apologize (and please call me out on it). I can't stand playing with people who call everyone an "idiot" over minor things. I certainly also make theory mistakes. I'm also not good at all at the psychological component of the game. But when I'm right about something theoretical, I'm going to be bold about it.

If the "bossiness" refers to my suggestion that others post infrequently but with more substance, see my answer below.

[jotheonah]

I have no problem with you being bossy about math.

[ehunt]

This is my post 3, about my "one-post-a-day" technique. While I appreciate yuma coming to my side, actually everyone else's reading of what I said was what I meant; what I meant was that it really would be best if people posted less often but more substantively. The pace of one good post a day works for me; do what works best for you, I guess what it means is just don't fill the forum with noise, which drowns out sound and makes the discussion harder to follow. For instance, jotheonah says in between my post 0 and my post 1a of today that "this should be interesting." How does that help the town? It doesn't give us any more of a read on jotheonah. It just gives us noise.

Now, there's one answer to this argument which I think bears a specific rebuttal. Cayvie says that people who talk spontaneously give us better reads. I don't know. I know that I got absolutely brutalized in MIX for reflexive phone-posting, causing town to lynch a doctor. Now, some of my wagon was scum, and obviously scum, and my death dragged them out, but I don't think it was worth it. Something similar happened in MVI. I thought that if I just posted all my thoughts without editing at all, it would be clear that I wasn't keeping any information from the town. Instead, my every typo became a "scumslip" and I said something foolish about a hypothetical Frisk proposed about which order theorel and I should be lynched in which caused an L - 1 wagon on me. If that wagon hadn't been boosted along by a bogus investirole-claim by ozle which was discovered to be fake due to it contradicting an earlier post of his, it would have been toodles for ehunt (and theorel would have gotten bogus town-cred out of it).

[Voltgloss]

Despite this basic fact, town lost MXI exclusively because a vigilante caused an even parity at LyLo, and lost MVIII at least partially for this reason (though town was in bad shape by that point in MVIII).

ehunt, this game is M-XI.  Which game are you thinking of?

[ehunt]

post number 2.5, answering voltgloss since it's a typo, i should have said IX. If Morgrim hadn't killed Galzria, you'd be presumably end-gamed. Am I wrong? I didn't read the endgame carefully. Anyway, just an example of theory-errors.

[jotheonah]

This is my post 3, about my "one-post-a-day" technique. While I appreciate yuma coming to my side, actually everyone else's reading of what I said was what I meant; what I meant was that it really would be best if people posted less often but more substantively. The pace of one good post a day works for me; do what works best for you, I guess what it means is just don't fill the forum with noise, which drowns out sound and makes the discussion harder to follow. For instance, jotheonah says in between my post 0 and my post 1a of today that "this should be interesting." How does that help the town? It doesn't give us any more of a read on jotheonah. It just gives us noise.

Now, there's one answer to this argument which I think bears a specific rebuttal. Cayvie says that people who talk spontaneously give us better reads. I don't know. I know that I got absolutely brutalized in MIX for reflexive phone-posting, causing town to lynch a doctor. Now, some of my wagon was scum, and obviously scum, and my death dragged them out, but I don't think it was worth it. Something similar happened in MVI. I thought that if I just posted all my thoughts without editing at all, it would be clear that I wasn't keeping any information from the town. Instead, my every typo became a "scumslip" and I said something foolish about a hypothetical Frisk proposed about which order theorel and I should be lynched in which caused an L - 1 wagon on me. If that wagon hadn't been boosted along by a bogus investirole-claim by ozle which was discovered to be fake due to it contradicting an earlier post of his, it would have been toodles for ehunt (and theorel would have gotten bogus town-cred out of it).

This is what we mean when we say you're bossy, actually.

Also, kinda sounds like you're worried about making a scumslip.

[ehunt]

Post number 4. What's with the ehunt wagon? jo votes me because I don't want the town to talk about anything. How is that possibly a better vote than the lurkers who are actually not talking?

There is plenty to talk about. There was the DSell wagon. Now there's the shraeye wagon and the ehunt wagon. The thing not to talk about is roles, cards, "theory" aspects of the game, because of the asymmetric situation; the scumteams have x role PMs to read (where x is the number on the scumteam) and a townie has 1. I consider this to be a theory issue, and I don't want to talk about it. I didn't want to talk about the double-vote before, but the cat is out of the bag; more on that later.

I believe the second ehunt vote is this:

Vote: ehunt

I have to say I was initially on board with ehunts idea; with such a large number of players I was smitten with the idea of less clutter more content.  But as people actually started to refute this as being a bad idea it made me reevaluate my initial thoughts.  Maybe its good in theory, bad in practice?  Id rather encourage people to give themselves plenty of opportunities (through posting often) to produce inconsistent ideas which can be evaluated by the group.  There might be more "junk" to sift through but all in all talking is good.

I don't get it. We disagree about an idea (how much signal-to-noise ratio should there be), therefore you vote for me? I am giving you a pass because you are new, but "we disagree on a theoretical issue" is not in and of itself a reason to vote. "We disagree on a theoretical issue and I think you know that I am right about the theoretical issue but you are intentionally trying to mislead the town into going the wrong way on the theoretical issue" - that would be a reason to vote for me. Is that why you voted for me? If so, you need to say it.

eevee says I assume stuff only scum could know. I don't think I do this, I think I've answered this argument already; let me know if you want more explanation.

galzria (who is not on the wagon) says he has bad feelings about me. I don't know how to answer that argument.

[ehunt]

my post 5. the shraeye wagon: I don't get it. His statement about "I got caught" is immediately preceded by a hypothetical sarcastic remark in which he implies he's mafia. It is obviously sarcastic. I don't see how this is still up for debate. I certainly don't see how it merits the number of votes that it got. The person who quoted this out of context (cayvie) almost immediately corrected herself, and yet it has gotten replicated over and over. Morgrim seems to think shraeye made two scumsclips, which I don't understand at all.

Either scum is jumping on his wagon because they are too lazy to read the case, or town is getting drowned out by the noise and doesn't notice factual things (he was being sarcastic and the person who called him out on it has admitted as much). This is yet another reason why I dislike when people post every thought that comes to their minds without considering the implications.

[ehunt]

Post number 7. Shraeye.

Shraeye's behavior has become noticeably ruder. You can just say "I don't know what actilurking means, can you explain?" There's no reason to say "I looked it up and, oh wait, it wasn't in the dictionary" (that's not a direct quote). This is totally out of character for Shraeye. In MIX Shraeye was very polite and, moreover, was a big believer in "everyone calm down and take a breather; we can argue later," (not a direct quote) a position that I have come around to. So this is a sea change in personality. Now I'm not sure that rudeness is a scumtell (although I have found that scum are ruder in f.ds games than town, in general), but change in personality is weird. It merits explanation.

[ehunt]

I seem to have missed a post, because I wanted to talk about the double-vote a little more.

Post number . The cat is out of the bag on the double-vote. We don't get the mechanics, but it is what it is. There's no use trying to hide it from the mafia. Earlier, I speculated that the double-vote made DSell look townier. I retract that claim. I thought that DSell might be equipped with the role "hated" (which means it takes one fewer person to lynch you) and that hated seemed like a better role for a townie than for scum. Now that we know this isn't true I don't mind being more vocal about it; sorry that my earlier post was so cryptic.

[jotheonah]

Post number 7. Shraeye.

Shraeye's behavior has become noticeably ruder. You can just say "I don't know what actilurking means, can you explain?" There's no reason to say "I looked it up and, oh wait, it wasn't in the dictionary" (that's not a direct quote). This is totally out of character for Shraeye. In MIX Shraeye was very polite and, moreover, was a big believer in "everyone calm down and take a breather; we can argue later," (not a direct quote) a position that I have come around to. So this is a sea change in personality. Now I'm not sure that rudeness is a scumtell (although I have found that scum are ruder in f.ds games than town, in general), but change in personality is weird. It merits explanation.

pot, kettle, etc.

[ehunt]

Post number 8. The lurkers. O has certainly been online, and he's been mod-prodded. I think in a town this big a policy-vote on a lurker is a must. However, I plan to revert my vote to DSell once we hear (substance) from O.

ibgtennis is a special case, because he's so new, like zkcvbn in MVI. I'm not happy to policy-vote for a noob just because he doesn't show up. I think he should be substituted out if he doesn't show up; the mod has encouraged patience and I will try to exhibit it (I'm not great at it).

[ehunt]

Post number 7. Shraeye.

Shraeye's behavior has become noticeably ruder. You can just say "I don't know what actilurking means, can you explain?" There's no reason to say "I looked it up and, oh wait, it wasn't in the dictionary" (that's not a direct quote). This is totally out of character for Shraeye. In MIX Shraeye was very polite and, moreover, was a big believer in "everyone calm down and take a breather; we can argue later," (not a direct quote) a position that I have come around to. So this is a sea change in personality. Now I'm not sure that rudeness is a scumtell (although I have found that scum are ruder in f.ds games than town, in general), but change in personality is weird. It merits explanation.

pot, kettle, etc.

I really don't think I have behaved rudely in this game. I would like others to comment on this. If you think I am wrong, that's one thing, and we can argue about it; if you think I am rude, tell me and I will try to change.

Jo, I called you out for making substanceless posts; that's not rudeness, that's the point of the game, to call out people who are making it harder for the town to win.

[ehunt]

point of clarification (last post for the day): I don't mean to say shraeye is rude and it's so unpleasant that I can't stand it, or that shraeye should apologize, or anything like that. I just mean to say it's weird that shraeye is being rude when shraeye was so civil in the other game.

[jotheonah]

I just mean you're playing WAAYYY different than you did in MVI. Where you were also nicer. Also, didn't you post like 27 consecutive drunk posts? And now you're saying I post too much noise?

[Dsell]

I can't believe I got caught just because I like the English language used with a modicum of accuracy...

Scumslip?

"I can't believe I got caught" vs. "I can't believe people suspect me".

I mean, you can argue that you meant the latter, but then it's kind of ironic since you're talking about using language accurately...

Amusing scumslip.  Right up there with Captain_Frisk's 0% chance of flipping town.

...although what's most interesting to me is the way yuma and Dsell immediately tried to change the subject to O.  If in the future one of those three flip scum, we should carefully reevaluate the other two.

This bothers me from Volt. Volt just plain knows better. Shraeye was obviously being sarcastic. I thought it was so obvious it didn't even merit comment. The fact that I was thinking the same way as yuma about something I am actually interested in does matter. I want O to come and face us, unless he knows that his many past scumbuddies will see straight through his play.

PPE: Oops ehunt, looks like you forgot to vote for me!

[Voltgloss]

(although I have found that scum are ruder in f.ds games than town, in general)

...really?  What games/players are you thinking of?  I think it vastly depends on the player (some are ruder as scum, some are ruder as town, some swing heavily between rude and not-rude in the same game (e.g., in response to heavy suspicion), some tend to maintain a pretty even keel) and therefore isn't prone to generalization. 

Ah, but I forget we're not supposed to talk about players' meta, so I guess we can't get into the evidence that may support or rebut this sweeping assertion. 

PPE:  ehunt, here's the thing:

1.  Telling other players "in the future, you can't talk about XYZ" is bossy and rude.
2.  Calling out another player "the posts you have previously made lack substance" is scumhunting.

I think people should be able to talk about whatever they want to talk about.  The more people say, the more we have to analyze.  If the result of that analysis is "person X talks and talks but never actually SAYS anything," then that person is suspicious.  But we're never going to get that read if it's acceptable - indeed, required - that person X only post once a day or somesuch.

ehunt, your "one big post a day" approach - if followed by everyone - would make the game easier to play.  There'd be less to read, less to follow, less to keep track of.  But here's the problem:  it also risks making it easier for scum to hide (and, therefore, win). 

Getting people to chatter and then analyzing that chatter is one of Town's biggest weapons.  Limiting chatter, therefore, reads to me as anti-town. 

FWIW, I agree with you that shraeye's behavior here is vastly different from M-IX (where he was town).  I also agree with jo that your behavior here is vastly different from M-VI and M-IX (where you were town).  I haven't decided yet what to take away from that.  I think what I'd like to see is you and shraeye both talk more.

[Voltgloss]

Amusing scumslip.  Right up there with Captain_Frisk's 0% chance of flipping town.

...although what's most interesting to me is the way yuma and Dsell immediately tried to change the subject to O.  If in the future one of those three flip scum, we should carefully reevaluate the other two.

This bothers me from Volt. Volt just plain knows better. Shraeye was obviously being sarcastic. I thought it was so obvious it didn't even merit comment. The fact that I was thinking the same way as yuma about something I am actually interested in does matter. I want O to come and face us, unless he knows that his many past scumbuddies will see straight through his play.

I figured shraeye was being sarcastic, yes.  That's why I called it "amusing" and didn't actually VOTE for him.

But if shraeye is scum, and you and/or yuma are his scumbuddies, you (or yuma) may have been worried that shraeye WASN'T being sarcastic, and thus searching for some way to divert the conversation elsewhere.

It doesn't paint any of the three of you as scummy.  Yet.  But if one of you flips scum in the future - it's a point to take into account when analyzing the remaining two.

[TheMunch]

Pretty sure I called out shraeye before cayvie did, even if she made it bigger than I did.  cayvie's #364 gives plenty of non-scumslip reasons for suspecting shraeye.  Making a fuss about a portmanteau is ridiculous.  English is a mess of a language anyways.  Was Shakespeare an idiot for making up a new word every 5 pages?

Making a fuss about the English language is irrelevent at best but being a similarly nitpicky person about my own set of things, I could see why someone is motivated to post regarding their opinions on the English language.  I dont think necessarily having opinions and expressing them is an attempt to derail conversation and provide a lack of content.

*******************************

What content has there been in shraeye's posts?  Sure there has been some, there's some in everyone's posts.  There hasn't been anything noteworthy enough to warrant your passionate defense.  Your first paragraph is a bit contradictory in that shraeye was the one who unnecessarily made a big deal about the word in the first place, instead of just asking about it in the first place.  Shouldn't that cause you to be more suspicious of him?

I dont intend to argue that Shraeye is full of awesome talking points, I just sad a lot of his posts had content.  I bring this up specifically to outline that people are avoiding responding to what content there is by talking about irrelevent dribble.  I dont care what content hes providing, I care that people are avoiding it.  As an example:

For clarity, I'm pretty sure ehunt's "generally confusing thing" is referencing the invisible/extra/mystery vote on DSell, right?  It was frustrating that he never actually named it in his post and just called it "the GCT."  I don't think that a secret vote on DSell is any indication of towniness one way or the other.  Totally neutral read on DSell because of that.  I agree that wild speculation on why it was there or what it means is not useful.  Here's what we townies take away from it: there is something unusual that can happen with votes, now we know about it and can account for it (hopefully).

Also,

Hi all, just wanted to drop in and say I'm not acti-lurking, just doing regular weekend life stuff, and trying to keep up.

I will mention Eevee is the same ole Eevee, Morgrim a very new Morgrim (liking it!), and the rest of you are still unmolded clay.  I noticed talk of cards started and stopped very quickly; I think it's for the best to leave that to subsequent days. 

Good, I was really worried you were "acti-lurking."  Oh wait, no I wasn't, because that isn't a word.  In more serious news, "talk of cards" never actually started; ehunt said "it's not a good thing to broadcast, don't do it."  End of discussion.  I suppose if I take "stopped very quickly" to mean instantly, you are right.  Otherwise, you do not know what it means to start talking about things.

Any other noise I would account for with him just having to respond to the nonsense that is being brought up by people who are accusing him.  To reiterate, I'm not saying I agree with him or that all he says is gold.  I'm saying that I am suspicious of people who chose to continue to respond to nonsense instead of something he actually said instead of saying nothing at all and letting the nonsense die.

***************************

Which reasons from other people do you agree with that you think ehunt is suspicious?  I don't think it's been very well fleshed out at all.

ehunt is currently discussing a bunch of the talking points so I'll give a response if necessary after all that has been said.

*******************************

I get kind of a bad vibe from you, but that might just be because I've never played a game with you before this.

Yeah, I understand full well that I might be giving weird vibes to those who dont know me.  If I were to defend myself, I would say that in general I strongly dislike the fact that most of the talking points thus far are on things that I consider irrelevent.  As such I am only "defending Shraeye" to the point that we can move on.  If that makes me scum so be it.

[ehunt]

I can't help myself. I don't think I am playing differently from how I played in any of the other games, except that I am posting less frequently (which I said I would do before I received my role PM, because I don't have time/want to invest my whole life in a mafia game again).

Voltgloss: "speculating about people's metas" is OK. Saying "what role do we think Robz would give this person, given this person's meta" is what I am trying to avoid. It may be bossy to tell people what not to talk about, but it's not rude and I don't apologize. I want to stop townies from inadvertently helping scum before they do it, not after.

[ehunt]

This is my post 3, about my "one-post-a-day" technique. While I appreciate yuma coming to my side, actually everyone else's reading of what I said was what I meant; what I meant was that it really would be best if people posted less often but more substantively. The pace of one good post a day works for me; do what works best for you, I guess what it means is just don't fill the forum with noise, which drowns out sound and makes the discussion harder to follow. For instance, jotheonah says in between my post 0 and my post 1a of today that "this should be interesting." How does that help the town? It doesn't give us any more of a read on jotheonah. It just gives us noise.

Now, there's one answer to this argument which I think bears a specific rebuttal. Cayvie says that people who talk spontaneously give us better reads. I don't know. I know that I got absolutely brutalized in MIX for reflexive phone-posting, causing town to lynch a doctor. Now, some of my wagon was scum, and obviously scum, and my death dragged them out, but I don't think it was worth it. Something similar happened in MVI. I thought that if I just posted all my thoughts without editing at all, it would be clear that I wasn't keeping any information from the town. Instead, my every typo became a "scumslip" and I said something foolish about a hypothetical Frisk proposed about which order theorel and I should be lynched in which caused an L - 1 wagon on me. If that wagon hadn't been boosted along by a bogus investirole-claim by ozle which was discovered to be fake due to it contradicting an earlier post of his, it would have been toodles for ehunt (and theorel would have gotten bogus town-cred out of it).

This is what we mean when we say you're bossy, actually.

Also, kinda sounds like you're worried about making a scumslip.

I wasn't going to answer this earlier since I think it's just a snipe, but since I'm breaking my own rule anyway for voltgloss: I am worried that what I say will be misperceived as a scumslip, for certain. If I just blindly type things and one of them gets misperceived as a scumslip, that's really bad for town. Yuma pointed this out to me early Day III in MVIII when I was phone-posting and inadvertently causing an ehunt-wagon in the process. So I am trying more to think before I talk. And I find that waiting a little bit helps. If a day is too much, fine, but I posit I've posted a lot more of substance than people who have made more posts.

I also think it's unconscionable that people would vote for me before voting for someone who hasn't posted yet. It's like "oh man, f.ds meta sucks, lurking is way too OP. Therefore, vote for whoever makes posts that have controversial suggestions in them."

Volt, I have no real data to back up my argument that ruder people are scum; it was my perspective in VI, VIII, and IX (not you in IX).