Newbie 1987 | Game Over

[Karnage]

Vote Count 1.6

Phi Kappa Phi (3) ~

OldMapleNostalgia, JacksonVirgo, ObviousScum,

clidd (1) ~

Phi Kappa Phi,

GeneralWu (1) ~

72offsuit,

Maduisha (1) ~

clidd,

Not voting (3) ~

Maduisha, GeneralWu, ceejayvinoya,

With 9 alive it's 5 to lynch

Deadline: (expired on 2020-03-01 19:00:00)

V/LA: none

[ObviousScum]

VOTE: clidd

Wait i liked this tho
Hmm

[ObviousScum]

Eh phi more null than scum but don't anything better

[GeneralWu]

I made a comparison with three other games, which he was town. I noticed that his pattern consists of a game start characterized by an expressive claim or announcement, marked by the use of wifom as a tool of persuasion to, at the same time that he is attracting attention, repelling suspicions due to the strong image of exalted self-confidence. Posts 18, 31, 46 show concern to help inexperienced players, being in coherence with the SE position established in post 8. Assimilation to past experiences in posts 45, 55, 56 and 85 demonstrate transparency in relation to the opinions formed, indicating progressive reasoning in order to develop the game forward, strengthened by the suggestion in post 97. In general, there is no bias in his lines, and his actions are motivated to progress in the team-game proactively. This is enough to consider him as lock-town, under the condition of BoP depending on how the first day and second day occur. If he is not killed within two days, however, I will regard his presence in the game as suspicious, unless there is a PR that has rescue (Doctor) helping him.

what's BoP

I agree that OS is pretty transparent and willing to help and move the game forward. But why would you say he is suspicious if he is not killed within two days?
I can see where you're heading, since towny players tend to be killed by mafia so that the mafia can conceal themselves better. So, if there's a towny player who somehow survives for a long time, he could be regarded as suspicious.
But, supposing that the mafia are townread by everyone in the game, they could also choose to kill scummy people, so that they don't get suspected for being "overly towny" or "so towny they're scummy" or something like that. I remember that happened in a game I played a long time ago on a different website.

[clidd]

As I said before, I believe lurkers aren't inherently scummy during the first day. And in your case, I thought it was a matter of real life constraints, since the game master was speaking about grabbing a substitute for you. Hence wanting to wait to see if you appeared, instead of trying to lynch someone that hadn't posted yet, for no other reasons. Inactivity is a good indicator of how scummy someone is, if you're trying not to get noticed by others, but in this case nobody thought of that because of it being the first day and what I already said. If later on, someone were to try to post small messages with no real substance and try to disappear for as long as they could, I'd agree with wanting to pressure them or vote them, but I was talking about the game state as of right now.

Ok, you believe it would be more "fair", in theory, to wait for me to return before voting. I understand that. Now, what do you think of the scenario I come back to and see that several people are voting on me? wouldn't it be interesting, if i were scum, to see how i would react to the pressure ?

What pressure would you feel, independent of alignment, if you already know people were voting you out of getting afk warnings instead of people thinking you're scum? I'm sorry, I can't follow. Do you think a mafia member would post differently instead of shrugging it, or...?

I think I'm either misunderstanding something, or you are.

Didn't you just say that pushing lurkers to contribute is scummy? Because bringing up that idea so early in the game sounds to me like an attempt to... push lurkers to contribute. Ah, well. I have nothing against lynching lurkers when the game moves a bit and there's more incentive to contribute (so, when there's actual information to work with, but people still choose not to post). Right now, I don't feel like lurkers are inherently scummy, because day 1 has been pretty clueless as to which direction to take, aside from gut feelings, and now I'm going to get to mine:

If I were forced to vote, I'd vote OS or PKP, because the clidd vote bandwagon was so weird, and because I think OS has only posted meme-y stuff, which is okay because it's the first day, but all of his posts are still of that nature and I'd like to see him talk a bit more. Although, a part of me thinks scum would rather get talkative townies lynched rather than lurkers, because that would increase their chances of winning, so I'm not exactly sure if my read of people is rather shitty. For now, I'll still abstain from voting, because I'd like to see more interaction.

Do you really think that if both were scum, they would vote together at the same time? wouldn't that be suspicious? if you abstain from voting and expect more interaction, why only others who have to interact and you don't have to ?

They can play with your line of thought too and just have multiple mafia members vote the same person so that you won't suspect they're both red, just saying. I'm not calling them both scum, by the way, I'm just saying those are the only two ticking me off as suspicious. And by interaction I meant more people speaking their mind and talking to others, not just voting. I thought I was interacting with you, at least.

Hum, ok.

[clidd]

I made a comparison with three other games, which he was town. I noticed that his pattern consists of a game start characterized by an expressive claim or announcement, marked by the use of wifom as a tool of persuasion to, at the same time that he is attracting attention, repelling suspicions due to the strong image of exalted self-confidence. Posts 18, 31, 46 show concern to help inexperienced players, being in coherence with the SE position established in post 8. Assimilation to past experiences in posts 45, 55, 56 and 85 demonstrate transparency in relation to the opinions formed, indicating progressive reasoning in order to develop the game forward, strengthened by the suggestion in post 97. In general, there is no bias in his lines, and his actions are motivated to progress in the team-game proactively. This is enough to consider him as lock-town, under the condition of BoP depending on how the first day and second day occur. If he is not killed within two days, however, I will regard his presence in the game as suspicious, unless there is a PR that has rescue (Doctor) helping him.

what's BoP

I agree that OS is pretty transparent and willing to help and move the game forward. But why would you say he is suspicious if he is not killed within two days?
I can see where you're heading, since towny players tend to be killed by mafia so that the mafia can conceal themselves better. So, if there's a towny player who somehow survives for a long time, he could be regarded as suspicious.
But, supposing that the mafia are townread by everyone in the game, they could also choose to kill scummy people, so that they don't get suspected for being "overly towny" or "so towny they're scummy" or something like that. I remember that happened in a game I played a long time ago on a different website.

Burden of Proficiency

->

'' Asserts that because the player in question has not yet found (enough) scum, they themselves are more likely to be scum ''

so, if he didn't find scum, or contribute to more than one misslynch, there is a high chance that he is mafia (as I am assuming that he has enough experience to be able to correctly find out who is scum or not). If he is helping the game to ''walk'', and is seen as TR by most, the mafia will not want him to stay in the game. Therefore: they will kill him, because he presents a threat. It is difficult for players like that to survive long.

[clidd]

And in the situation we are in, there are many potential misslynchs. If he is scum, it is very likely that he will be able to direct votes that, in theory, seem justified by some scummy action by the player being accused, but are errors due to the difference in experience between one player and another. The line that separates

newbie!Scum

from

newbie!Town

is very tenuous. So I will make sure to treat him carefully as the game continues. The same goes for the other two SEs, but not as intensely (since I put BoP only in the O.S).

[GeneralWu]

I made a comparison with 5 past games, 3 as town and 2 as scum. Chronologically, I can see that from the 1968 game, the expression '' howdy '' was created, which was repeated in the 1982 game, in an attempt to establish a meta favorable to their read as town. However, later, it was also applied in bad faith in both 1974 and 1976 games (scums), mischaracterizing the expression's link with their alignment, and making it a null standard. While reading both scum games, especially 1974 (which has more content), I noticed that their behavior is much more centered and neutral, with semi-premeditated lines and placements, as they maintain their posture and education. Something that is opposite to the extroverted and more incisive stance seen in the three games as town, where the "fear" is much less, with bolder premises and sporadically genuine acts. In this game, precisely in the posts post 68 and 79, I notice, respectively, a very premature consideration, without the development of a justification (guts), and a spontaneously early reaction, with no previous communication channel. Both examples seem to agree with their town pattern, as well as the suggestively emotional error (rush / lack of attention) in the transition between posts 112 and 113, and in the SR statement in post 119, which was done without structuring of a table of previous reads (something I noted in their scum pattern).

Well, wouldn't "premature considerations without the development of a justification" be considered a scummy act? It's something I've seen either bad town or mafia do.
Pulling arguments out of nowhere and not providing explanations for them isn't good for town.
In addition, I don't quite get your argument about JV not making a table of reads. Why does not making one make Jackson look towny?
Like, even though it may fit their scum pattern, doesn't gameplay depend more on situation than trying to match meta?
Like, I'm just very used to seeing a table of reads as NAI since people just do it when they have time.

[GeneralWu]

I have scum-reads on GeneralWu and Kappa

I understand suspecting PKP because of the random clidd vote and saying it's weird not to vote, but why GW?

Overly serious, pings me as someone who wants to act like they're trying to solve the game when they're not.

Eh not as strong a read as Kappa but it's what I see aorn

so how am i "acting like i'm trying to solve the game when i'm not"?
Also how is being serious a bad thing?

This is why sometimes in the right context being serious is scummy, Straight from the wiki:

It's the so-called LAMIST - (Look At ME Im So Town!) tell and it's still relevant enough to have its own acronym! Newbscum usually are very concerned with 'looking good' to avoid falling under suspicion, but don't know how to fake-scumhunt. Instead, they will do things like pushing the lurkers to contribute, trying to "resuscitate" them by voting them, asking for reads on themselves, talking a lot about the game itself (this is called IIoA), claiming they are doing anything in their power to get information.

Your post fits the LAMIST tell in my eyes, therefore i think you are scummy

uhh if I remember correctly jackson was the one who thought I was being overly serious
Also how am I "pushing the lurkers to contribute"? Did I even say anything that was to push a lurker to say something?
In addition, I how have I "tried to 'resuscitate'" any lurkers by voting them? I never voted a lurker this whole game.
I may have asked for

reasons

for reads on myself, since no one can say "I think so and so is towny" or "I think so and so is scummy" and expect us to agree with him if he doesn't provide some good reasons.
I also didn't ask for the reads themselves.
And where am I "talking a lot about the game itself"?

seriously wtmoo where did this random accusation come from?
I'll have to take a closer look at 72offsuit's posts since they're striking me as weird.

[clidd]

I made a comparison with 5 past games, 3 as town and 2 as scum. Chronologically, I can see that from the 1968 game, the expression '' howdy '' was created, which was repeated in the 1982 game, in an attempt to establish a meta favorable to their read as town. However, later, it was also applied in bad faith in both 1974 and 1976 games (scums), mischaracterizing the expression's link with their alignment, and making it a null standard. While reading both scum games, especially 1974 (which has more content), I noticed that their behavior is much more centered and neutral, with semi-premeditated lines and placements, as they maintain their posture and education. Something that is opposite to the extroverted and more incisive stance seen in the three games as town, where the "fear" is much less, with bolder premises and sporadically genuine acts. In this game, precisely in the posts post 68 and 79, I notice, respectively, a very premature consideration, without the development of a justification (guts), and a spontaneously early reaction, with no previous communication channel. Both examples seem to agree with their town pattern, as well as the suggestively emotional error (rush / lack of attention) in the transition between posts 112 and 113, and in the SR statement in post 119, which was done without structuring of a table of previous reads (something I noted in their scum pattern).

Well, wouldn't "premature considerations without the development of a justification" be considered a scummy act? It's something I've seen either bad town or mafia do.
Pulling arguments out of nowhere and not providing explanations for them isn't good for town.
In addition, I don't quite get your argument about JV not making a table of reads. Why does not making one make Jackson look towny?
Like, even though it may fit their scum pattern, doesn't gameplay depend more on situation than trying to match meta?
Like, I'm just very used to seeing a table of reads as NAI since people just do it when they have time.

1° For now, it's fitting into their standard as town.

Scum!Jackson

usually assumes less careless instances and plans better what they are going to say.

2° Yes, it isn't good in general. But in the discriminated context, it is valid according to the

town!Jackson

playstyle.

3° It would be more for the purpose in the formulation of the SR. Normally, they would be more careful in this regard, and avoid making comments like "lock-scum" without first providing a more concrete table of reads (as they normally do as scum).

4° Meta is important to distinguish patterns of play, which usually manifest itselves more intensely on the first day. Evidently, it is not an absolute information, but complementary to draw possible alignments attributed to that behavior. Very few players are able to successfully change their standards from one game to the other. Assuming that the majority follows a specific line, statistically, it is interesting to make initial deductions based on this behavioral information. Obviously, as interactions arise, it will be possible to rethink whether these considerations do, in fact, reflect the alignment I suggested to them.

5° Hum, it depends. In particular, I believe that the composition of the table reveals the effort applied to it. Depending on how it is posted, either in isolation (where the intention is to emphasize), or accompanied by an analysis (where the intention is to make a reflection), it is possible to assimilate some inferences about them. So very simple tables, which indicate more objective traits, or tables accompanied by phrases like '' ok, this is a summary '' that indicate insecurity in the representativeness of thought. Even so, because it is a difficult factor to measure, partly due to its subjective / interpretive characteristic, I agree that it is NAI, but it is still valid to associate it with behavior patterns.

[GeneralWu]

Given the lack of posting, what are people's stance on the policy Lynch All Lurkers?

I disagree
I don't think we even know

who

the lurkers even are.
The game's just started, and after stuff happens there will definitely be fewer lurkers.
After all, someone could post only a little during the start of the game but post a lot later in the game. Like, clidd posted nothing till he got prodded, and now he's making a normal quantity of posts.
Similarly, someone could post a lot during the early stages of the game but end up lurking for the rest of the game.

Even determining

who

is a lurker requires time to pass.

[clidd]

I agree with the idle lynch policy.

[clidd]

Pool:

OldMapleNostalgia

and

Phi Kappa Phi

. I liked Maduisha's responses, so I don't intend to lynch her yet.

UNVOTE: Maduisha

[clidd]

Thus: VOTE: Phi Kappa Phi

[clidd]

This is L-1.

[72offsuit]

Didn't you just say that pushing lurkers to contribute is scummy? Because bringing up that idea so early in the game sounds to me like an attempt to... push lurkers to contribute. Ah, well. I have nothing against lynching lurkers when the game moves a bit and there's more incentive to contribute (so, when there's actual information to work with, but people still choose not to post). Right now, I don't feel like lurkers are inherently scummy, because day 1 has been pretty clueless as to which direction to take, aside from gut feelings, and now I'm going to get to mine:

If I were forced to vote, I'd vote OS or PKP, because the clidd vote bandwagon was so weird, and because I think OS has only posted meme-y stuff, which is okay because it's the first day, but all of his posts are still of that nature and I'd like to see him talk a bit more. Although, a part of me thinks scum would rather get talkative townies lynched rather than lurkers, because that would increase their chances of winning, so I'm not exactly sure if my read of people is rather shitty. For now, I'll still abstain from voting, because I'd like to see more interaction.

Can you quote what you are referring to?
Is this directed at me or someone else?

Please be more specific.
Will help a lot, otherwise your posts will probably get ignored to be perfectly honest

[GeneralWu]

This is L-1.

what the actual moo are you guys doing
why are you putting someone at L-1 when less than half the day has passed

[72offsuit]

I made a comparison with three other games, which he was town. I noticed that his pattern consists of a game start characterized by an expressive claim or announcement, marked by the use of wifom as a tool of persuasion to, at the same time that he is attracting attention, repelling suspicions due to the strong image of exalted self-confidence. Posts 18, 31, 46 show concern to help inexperienced players, being in coherence with the SE position established in post 8. Assimilation to past experiences in posts 45, 55, 56 and 85 demonstrate transparency in relation to the opinions formed, indicating progressive reasoning in order to develop the game forward, strengthened by the suggestion in post 97. In general, there is no bias in his lines, and his actions are motivated to progress in the team-game proactively. This is enough to consider him as lock-town, under the condition of BoP depending on how the first day and second day occur. If he is not killed within two days, however, I will regard his presence in the game as suspicious, unless there is a PR that has rescue (Doctor) helping him.

what's BoP

I agree that OS is pretty transparent and willing to help and move the game forward. But why would you say he is suspicious if he is not killed within two days?
I can see where you're heading, since towny players tend to be killed by mafia so that the mafia can conceal themselves better. So, if there's a towny player who somehow survives for a long time, he could be regarded as suspicious.
But, supposing that the mafia are townread by everyone in the game, they could also choose to kill scummy people, so that they don't get suspected for being "overly towny" or "so towny they're scummy" or something like that. I remember that happened in a game I played a long time ago on a different website.

This post pings me in a bad way.Very WIFOMY, doesnt further analyse a particular player, very general, general mafia theory, barely ties back to this game.

Someone jump on the GW wagon. Get on it!

[clidd]

To pass the message:

'' you must come back and communicate with us, otherwise you will be lynched ''

[clidd]

I don't understand your posts, 72offsuit. Could you be clearer ?

[72offsuit]

Clidd, can you summarize what you see from OS and 72 that you don't think they'd be doing as scum? I read the post but I'm still confused why you townread them exactly

Clidd, can you summarize what you see from OS and 72 that you don't think they'd be doing as scum? I read the post but I'm still confused why you townread them exactly

Scummy
VOTE: phi

How is this scummy? I don't even know why both of us are TRs from Clidd's post.

[72offsuit]

To pass the message:

'' you must come back and communicate with us, otherwise you will be lynched ''

I don't understand your posts, 72offsuit. Could you be clearer ?

Which post or posts? All of them?

[clidd]

I made a comparison with three other games, which he was town. I noticed that his pattern consists of a game start characterized by an expressive claim or announcement, marked by the use of wifom as a tool of persuasion to, at the same time that he is attracting attention, repelling suspicions due to the strong image of exalted self-confidence. Posts 18, 31, 46 show concern to help inexperienced players, being in coherence with the SE position established in post 8. Assimilation to past experiences in posts 45, 55, 56 and 85 demonstrate transparency in relation to the opinions formed, indicating progressive reasoning in order to develop the game forward, strengthened by the suggestion in post 97. In general, there is no bias in his lines, and his actions are motivated to progress in the team-game proactively. This is enough to consider him as lock-town, under the condition of BoP depending on how the first day and second day occur. If he is not killed within two days, however, I will regard his presence in the game as suspicious, unless there is a PR that has rescue (Doctor) helping him.

what's BoP

I agree that OS is pretty transparent and willing to help and move the game forward. But why would you say he is suspicious if he is not killed within two days?
I can see where you're heading, since towny players tend to be killed by mafia so that the mafia can conceal themselves better. So, if there's a towny player who somehow survives for a long time, he could be regarded as suspicious.
But, supposing that the mafia are townread by everyone in the game, they could also choose to kill scummy people, so that they don't get suspected for being "overly towny" or "so towny they're scummy" or something like that. I remember that happened in a game I played a long time ago on a different website.

This post pings me in a bad way.Very WIFOMY, doesnt further analyse a particular player, very general, general mafia theory, barely ties back to this game.

Someone jump on the GW wagon. Get on it!

Post*, this one.

[72offsuit]

AS for my lynch all lurkers policy, I'm not prepared to hammer any lurkers just yet, but I'm more than happy to pressure, FoS and Vote for Lurkers. Lurking only helps scum.
So if you are town, don't lurk. If you are scum, lurk to your hearts content.

[72offsuit]

AS for my lynch all lurkers policy, I'm not prepared to hammer any lurkers just yet, but I'm more than happy to pressure, FoS and Vote for Lurkers. Lurking only helps scum.
So if you are town, don't lurk. If you are scum, lurk to your hearts content.