Newbie 2025 | Lilies | Game Over

[shellyc]

Redados is doing this really odd thing I am not fond of, where he repeatedly makes offhanded references to how town he is. Incessantly. It's more like it's for his own sake than for anyone else's. "Ah, yes, my confidence in being town is such that I do not crack under pressure!" Repeat until you believe. It's a bad look.

I don't know whether it's LAMIST or anything, but yes, I did notice this.

My prefered lynchpool today is Redados / Fredrick / Frogster. A loz replacement is on their way.

[Fredrick A Campbell]

Hey Frederick, I just thought of a couple of questions for you! Mainly because you replaced in recently and I noticed you had just finished moderating a game.

1) Have you noticed anything telling about lobbies on this site where all of the scum players became among the top 5 most active players in the game on D1?

...

No, I have not noticed that. I have compiled the following table from the game I moderated on the number of posts made by the players and their replacements added together at the end of Day 1.

Initial Player and their Replacements in the Order in which they enter the Game	Number of Posts	Alignment
bob3141	40	Town
notscience	174	Town
geraintm	59	Town
UnaBombaH	102	Mafia
Sujimichi, Replacement for Sujimichi	30	Mafia
Klick, Porkens (Porkens' first post on Day 2)	96	Town
Bellaphant	63	Town
Emperor flippyNips, Not_Mafia (Not_Mafia's first post on Day 2)	23	Town
Galron	62	Town
Hoopla	88	Mafia
popopopopopopo	22	Town
Isis	120	Town
Dunnstral	128	Town

To ascertain if the data suggests a correlation that is better than random chance, we will establish what is the chance that you would select all the three mafioso should you select 5 players at random. To do so, add up the probability of all possible scenarios in which selecting 5 at random will give you 3 specific players.

Let x be the probability that all 3 mafioso are in 5 random players.

x = 10/13*9/12*3/11*2/10*1/9 + 10/13*3/12*9/11*2/10*1/9* + 10/13*3/12*2/11*9/10*1/9 + 10/13*3/12*2/11*1/10*9/9 + 3/13*10/12*9/11*2/10*1/9 + 3/13*10/12*2/11*9/10*1/9 + 3/13*10/12*2/11*1/10*9/9 + 3/13*2/12*10/11*9/10*1/9 + 3/13*2/12*10/11*1/10*9/9 + 3/13*2/12*1/11*10/10*9/9
= 10 ((10*9*3*2*1)/(13*12*11*10*9))
= 5/143 ≈ 3.50%

If there is no correlation, investigating 143 games with 13 players and 3 mafia within them should only have approximately 5 games in which what you are suggesting is the case. I have not collected enough data to ascertain if what you are suggesting is true.

Assuming that there is a correlation, the game I moderated is an outlier as the players with the most posts at the end of day 1 are notscience, Dunnstral, Isis, UnaBombaH, and Klick. Only one of these players were a mafioso.

...

and

2) Have you noticed anything telling about lobbies on this site where all of the scum players became among the top 5 most townread players in the game on D1?

I have not noticed that either. I have not collected enough data to ascertain if this is true either.

[MagikHorse]

I wanna see more from Frederick before I make any call there. There's a lot of posts and a lot of fancy words and info, but I'm not actually seeing much there to sort him with yet.

Shelly, could you elaborate on Frogster? Last I knew you had him as null, and I don't really understand this scumread unless it's solely on his stated playstyle.

[MUSHSHAGANA]

I imagine random chance doesn't hold here, since people aren't truly random. Some players are hyper-active, some are not. I imagine the chances are probably a bit higher in general (though seeing that I'd not say much more than double) since being active increases town cred by a certain amount. It might be higher, but there's confounding variables in the extra side-channel Mafia have to manage and the fact that being highly active takes actual work, and I don't feel comfortable speculating that the slight town cred overwhelms the risk of information leakage, the extra effort, and the distraction of a side channel.

Regardless, I feel this only helps us a little bit with D1 probabilities (hunt among the inactives, maybe, if this really rough n-of-1 overview holds in real life) and is ultimately a /distraction/ from scumhunting.

[MUSHSHAGANA]

To be clear, I'm more critical of Frogster for this than of Frederick, though Frederick putting so much effort into this mostly pointless exercise is not great either.

[MUSHSHAGANA]

Especially since, just realized, the numbers used for this purpose have no actual relationship at all to this game! That assumes a 13 player game, this is a 9 player game. This is just about as bad as you can get in leading people down a pointless side path.

[shellyc]

Shelly, could you elaborate on Frogster? Last I knew you had him as null, and I don't really understand this scumread unless it's solely on his stated playstyle.

Someone has to get limmed today. I will not lim my townreads Mush and Italiano. rocknil has said nothing of substance. There is a replacement on their way. So my null read gets in the lynchpool. Apologies if this logic is wrong.

[MagikHorse]

Nah, that logic is fine. It just sounded like it might've turned into a scumread somewhere along the line and I was wondering if I missed something.

[Fredrick A Campbell]

To be clear, I'm more critical of Frogster for this than of Frederick, though Frederick putting so much effort into this mostly pointless exercise is not great either.

I didn't think it was pointless until I was done with it. By then, I thought I might as well just publish the results, or rather the lack of it.

[Fredrick A Campbell]

...

Frederick is adamantly against categorization, in a game where town wins by categorizing actions, intent and motivations. He sees no utility in the play-style categories of "anti-town townie" and "scum". The other two agree these have meaning, even if they think they're either too overlapped to draw a line between or that they're essentially in separate domains.

...

Town wins by deducing intent and motivations from actions. Categorization reduces the possible intents and motivations one can deduce from observed actions to the number of categories you have.

...

His playstyle seems accommodating to a fault. Rock the boat? Not our Frederick, never him. He's unfocused in play thus far, and reactive rather than proactive -- he rarely (a quick skim suggests "never" might be more accurate) initiates questioning or interaction, though he readily responds to it. At 20 posts, he's past the point where every other player in the game had started making moves rather than passively reacting to others moving around them -- and he has not.

(A quick note that almost all of our active players and one of our inactives had started making moves and asking pointed questions before their 15th post. Redados is the only truly active player who I think may have had 15 posts before getting serious at all, though I'm insufficiently caffeinated to double-check at the moment.)

This isn't a scumread (yet), but it is a note of peculiar behavior. Time to raise the pressure a little, I think.

I simply have yet to observe anything of note.

[Fredrick A Campbell]

Hey Frederick, I just thought of a couple of questions for you! Mainly because you replaced in recently and I noticed you had just finished moderating a game.

1) Have you noticed anything telling about lobbies on this site where all of the scum players became among the top 5 most active players in the game on D1?

and

2) Have you noticed anything telling about lobbies on this site where all of the scum players became among the top 5 most townread players in the game on D1?

After going through all that trouble of answering one of you questions, I have got to know what was the point of these questions?

[MUSHSHAGANA]

Considering you didn't even use the right numbers for the generalized probability and you could have used https://www.dcode.fr/picking-probabilities or a similar selection probability calculator to easily re-calculate something at least distantly tangentially useful, I'm not pleased with this by any means.

(That generalized probability for a 7/2 setup, for the record, comes out to roughly a 27.7777...% chance of both scum being in a random given selection of five players. Which means your mistake was genuinely dangerous, potentially risking town deciding not to scum-hunt among actives.)

My vote stays on you.

[Fredrick A Campbell]

Considering you didn't even use the right numbers for the generalized probability and you could have used https://www.dcode.fr/picking-probabilities or a similar selection probability calculator to easily re-calculate something at least distantly tangentially useful, I'm not pleased with this by any means.

(That generalized probability for a 7/2 setup, for the record, comes out to roughly a 27.7777...% chance of both scum being in a random given selection of five players. Which means your mistake was genuinely dangerous, potentially risking town deciding not to scum-hunt among actives.)

My vote stays on you.

I don't understand why would town decide not to scum-hunt among actives because of what I did. If anyone were to read the post, they would have clearly seen I was talking about 13 players with 3 mafioso without bothering to see my calculation.

[MUSHSHAGANA]

If you don't point out that it's inapplicable, the less mathematically inclined are likely to presume that the probability carries over to this. I'm fairly mathematically inclined, and I still nearly got caught by it -- I saw it was about a different number, but it took some cogitating before it struck me that 3/13 is a vastly different ratio from 2/9.

[shellyc]

This whole interaction feels off to me. Mush is scumreading Fredrick for doing pointless things?

Doing that table is NAI

in my opinion. I don't understand why that table would make Mush vote Fredrick.

This is not a maths discussion. It isn't AI if he got the numbers wrong.

[Nahdia]

van replaces loz.

[Nahdia]

Vote Count 1.03

Redados (2):

Frederick A Campbell, shellyc

Frederick A Campbell (2):

Frogsterking, MUSHSHAGANA

shellyc (1):

ItalianoVD

, Redados

ItalianoVD (1):

MagikHorse

Frogsterking (0):

MagikHorse

,

MUSHSHAGANA

MUSHSHAGANA (0):

rocknil

Not Voting (3):

van,

MUSHSHAGANA

, ItalianoVD,

MUSHSHAGANA

, rocknil

Deadline is in

(expired on 2020-08-25 15:51:33)

, at which point we will default to no elimination.

With nine players alive, it takes

five

to reach majority.

[van]

I don't like 41, for a couple of reasons:

• 1. There are many better ways to get information other than voting randomly. The statement made about "
  voting is the only way for town to make any headway
  " is both a stretch and an overreaction to a non-issue.
  
  2. SE or not, RVS depends on the type of player you are, it has very little to do with experience itself. There's a good amount of shade being thrown here with the "
  as an SE, he should know that
  " statement, and I don't feel like it's warranted. Statements like that should be made based on the player itself (and his/her play style), and not their experience with the game as a whole without any context.

Redados dodged MagikHorse's simple question in 128. While both the original post (81) and the question (105) aren't great, I find it odd that both Redados dodged the question and that MagikHorse never followed up on it. Why ask something if you're going to drop it without an answer? It's not a reactionary question in any shape or form, so there's little reason to drop it regardless of if you think you know the answer or not. This is especially true when you consider what MagikHorse said in 76 about pressure.

The initial vote was weak, and was dropped without any pressure being thrown from MagikHorse's side.

• If MagikHorse's vote on Frogsterking was (semi-)RVS, then he would've done a reactionary play that caused some amount of pressure onto Frogsterking. This not only would've strengthened everyone's read on Frogsterking, it would've allowed every players in the pool to create discussions and build opinions at a much faster rate. I say this because it's one of the sole reason why you RVS someone. RVS by itself doesn't help anyone, but the reactions and interactions you can create from it can. I'm not saying every (or any) other player in this game did this, however MagikHorse voted Frogsterking with weak reasoning which I would consider a semi-RVS and applicable to everything I just said.
  
  If MagikHorse's vote itself was genuine, then he wouldn't have dropped it so easily. There was very little content from Frogsterking before that unvote that could've caused MagikHorse to vote swap. Because of this, MagikHorse could've caused a lot more pressure onto Frogsterking to solidify his read before potentially voting someone else regardless of if he still scum read Frogsterking or not.

VOTE: MagikHorse.

[shellyc]

Hey Van! Welcome to the thread.

What did you mean by "better ways to get info than voting randomly"? In this site, we usually start by throwing around random votes. In a low information stage,

what else can we do to get info

? I respect any suggestions you may propose.

I will agree with your push of MagikHorse dropping the question - good townies would follow up on posts. But that might just be an accident.

[shellyc]

What other reads do you have on the active players? Do you only have a scumread on MagikHorse?

[ItalianoVD]

All you've seen is a scumgame.

Exactly. All I’ve seen is a scumgame which means that’s all I have to go by.

You claim an action is scummy because they did it while scum. You have no clue if they do this as town because you've never seen them be town, and yet assume you must be correct.

Again, yes.

This looks like a classic case of confirmation bias, and so I have to ask: What about this action specifically are they unable or unlikely to do as town? Is it reasonably possible that this is just part of their ordinary behavior?

Is confirmation bias alignment indicative? Because scum have information the townies don’t have, can they have confirmation bias? I’m genuinely asking because I don’t know. And yes it is reasonably possible this is shelly’s ordinary behavior and I’ve said I wasn’t disregarding it as a possibility in 177, but as I said I don’t have a town game to formulate a different conclusion.

I'll give you some credit for 149, but that's the first thing you've said so far against Shelly that actually has any real substance. Even then I find her aggression to be townie, and actually would put her as my highest townread thus far. The only thing that gives me pause is 134, which comes across a lot more stilted and unnatural to me than the rest of her aggressive posts.

Okay, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

Especially since, just realized, the numbers used for this purpose have no actual relationship at all to this game! That assumes a 13 player game, this is a 9 player game. This is just about as bad as you can get in leading people down a pointless side path.

Considering you didn't even use the right numbers for the generalized probability and you could have used https://www.dcode.fr/picking-probabilities or a similar selection probability calculator to easily re-calculate something at least distantly tangentially useful, I'm not pleased with this by any means.

(That generalized probability for a 7/2 setup, for the record, comes out to roughly a 27.7777...% chance of both scum being in a random given selection of five players. Which means your mistake was genuinely dangerous, potentially risking town deciding not to scum-hunt among actives.)

My vote stays on you.

If you don't point out that it's inapplicable, the less mathematically inclined are likely to presume that the probability carries over to this. I'm fairly mathematically inclined, and I still nearly got caught by it -- I saw it was about a different number, but it took some cogitating before it struck me that 3/13 is a vastly different ratio from 2/9.

I‘m not liking your push on Frederick. It started with him not thinking a certain way about alignment and drawing the line between anti-town and scummy behavior. Frogster and Magik agreed with you and you just wrote them in as town, but because Frederick didn’t agree or didn’t see it the way you did, you vote for him.

And then the bad framing of why he did the player analysis count probability, whether you understood it or not seems very reachy and kinda pointless. I feel like you are underhandedly calling us dumb: both to understand the mathematics and to think we’d all be led astray by something like the mathematics. And as Shelly pointed out in 214 it’s not an alignment indicative action.

I think your reasoning for pushing/scumreading Frederick is just as empty as you say my read for shelly is.

I don't like 41, for a couple of reasons:

• 1. There are many better ways to get information other than voting randomly. The statement made about "
  voting is the only way for town to make any headway
  " is both a stretch and an overreaction to a non-issue.
  
  2. SE or not, RVS depends on the type of player you are, it has very little to do with experience itself. There's a good amount of shade being thrown here with the "
  as an SE, he should know that
  " statement, and I don't feel like it's warranted. Statements like that should be made based on the player itself (and his/her play style), and not their experience with the game as a whole without any context.

Redados dodged MagikHorse's simple question in 128. While both the original post (81) and the question (105) aren't great, I find it odd that both Redados dodged the question and that MagikHorse never followed up on it. Why ask something if you're going to drop it without an answer? It's not a reactionary question in any shape or form, so there's little reason to drop it regardless of if you think you know the answer or not. This is especially true when you consider what MagikHorse said in 76 about pressure.

The initial vote was weak, and was dropped without any pressure being thrown from MagikHorse's side.

• If MagikHorse's vote on Frogsterking was (semi-)RVS, then he would've done a reactionary play that caused some amount of pressure onto Frogsterking. This not only would've strengthened everyone's read on Frogsterking, it would've allowed every players in the pool to create discussions and build opinions at a much faster rate. I say this because it's one of the sole reason why you RVS someone. RVS by itself doesn't help anyone, but the reactions and interactions you can create from it can. I'm not saying every (or any) other player in this game did this, however MagikHorse voted Frogsterking with weak reasoning which I would consider a semi-RVS and applicable to everything I just said.
  
  If MagikHorse's vote itself was genuine, then he wouldn't have dropped it so easily. There was very little content from Frogsterking before that unvote that could've caused MagikHorse to vote swap. Because of this, MagikHorse could've caused a lot more pressure onto Frogsterking to solidify his read before potentially voting someone else regardless of if he still scum read Frogsterking or not.

VOTE: MagikHorse.

All fair points imo, but do you know for certain that Magik’s vote was a serious one? You didn’t ask him. I think it’s always better to interact with a player before just voting on them, even more so because this was your very first post. I don’t disagree with you, but I don’t know that’s what I’ve seen and it’s something seemingly frowned on by the town. I did that in my first game here and it wasn’t responded to well. Interact more, ask more questions and try to get more involved with the other players.

Which reminds me, I never followed up on that myself. @MagikHorse, I feel like I gave you an out in 94, which I believe you took in 108. Why didn’t you go further if you said it was a good start to leaving RVS? You said that but never really honed in on what you were possibly feeling or reading with Frogster. 125 was the last interaction with him and there’s really nothing there that shows what you felt towards him and/or why you stopped voting for him.

Why? What has happened that is not giving you scummy vibes or triggering your ocd anymore? To go from that to “strong” town vibes is interesting.

From what I've read so far, her arguments seemed like townlean to me. To be honest, I'm fairly new at this game. I don't have any particular playstyle besides being quiet and trusting my gut feeling. Also the 'Strong' vibe might've been a hyperbole.

So are you saying your vote on her was RVS? It seemed like you were playing with the CAPS name thing, but then you mentioned your OCD. I’m just trying to understand.

Something I was thinking about. This is for MUSHSHAGANA and MagikHorse. Why are guys not questioning my townread on Redados? Redados is in the exact same category as shelly. It was his first game onsite and my first time playing with him. I’m using the exact same logic to read Redados that I am for shelly. If the premise of your argument is not to look at meta or to look at both the similarities and differences to come to my conclusion, then why not question my townread, why only the scumread? This is why I don’t necessarily like the push. I feel that if shelly is scum than one of you may be her partner.

I admit the Redados townread hardly even registered because you literally just said it once in 71 and haven't mentioned your read on Redados before or since, or any reasoning for doing so either. Even then "I want to think they're town but I don't know how they act as scum" still doesn't fly at all for the same reason the Shelly read does.

Fair enough. And no, I am still basing it on the same logic used for shelly. I’ll get some reads up soon, but we still have time. Want to hear more from rock and van.

I went over all this in 154, but I never really got a response to that either. I'd like one.

What else didn’t I respond to. You said ‘either’ as if I forgot to respond to something else. Let me know what I missed and I’ll get to it. As far as 154 goes, I’m not sure what else you want me to say. I think I’ve been pretty clear and open about the what, why, and how.

your scumread on Shelly is obsessive, your townread on Redados is throw-away. Not liking that much now that I recall that it exists... barely. And yeah, it's just as invalid, since you could be stuck on bad information and not reading correctly... permitting scum to manipulate you freely.

Interesting. Well let me ask you how you’d respond in my situation. If you played with players one time and for the first time and you saw that they were a specific alignment at the end of the game; if those same players was in your playerlist the very next game, not 2-3 games later, but the very next one, how would you react? How would you read them initially? What would need to be done to make you think differently of them? And if that thing or things are not done, does it warrant a change in how you view them?

Redados is doing this really odd thing I am not fond of, where he repeatedly makes offhanded references to how town he is. Incessantly. It's more like it's for his own sake than for anyone else's. "Ah, yes, my confidence in being town is such that I do not crack under pressure!" Repeat until you believe. It's a bad look.

How is it offhanded? And incessantly? Really? His only post from what I’ve seen that he talks about his “towniness” is in 196. This is very bad framing.

[MagikHorse]

I don't like 41, for a couple of reasons:

1. There are many better ways to get information other than voting randomly. The statement made about "

voting is the only way for town to make any headway

" is both a stretch and an overreaction to a non-issue.

Is there some reason not to use your vote? Even if its totally random you should probably be trying to do something with it. Even if it's not the most effective, doing something with it is better than doing nothing.

Even then the only way to win as Town is to eliminate the scum. The only way to eliminate scum is through voting. Therefore, voting is the only way to make headway towards victory. Though one can pressure with words one can only win through voting, and voting itself gives some pressure and force. Perhaps a bit of a stretch to attribute that to RVS voting specifically, but it is truth to the game as a whole.

2. SE or not, RVS depends on the type of player you are, it has very little to do with experience itself. There's a good amount of shade being thrown here with the "

as an SE, he should know that

" statement, and I don't feel like it's warranted. Statements like that should be made based on the player itself (and his/her play style), and not their experience with the game as a whole without any context.

You may have a point there. Even then I have never seen a non-newbie player fail to use their vote during RVS, so it came off as unusual right off the bat and worth pointing out at the time. It means a bit less knowing their claimed playstyle now, but I was unaware of that at the time.

Redados dodged MagikHorse's simple question in 128. While both the original post (81) and the question (105) aren't great, I find it odd that both Redados dodged the question and that MagikHorse never followed up on it. Why ask something if you're going to drop it without an answer? It's not a reactionary question in any shape or form, so there's little reason to drop it regardless of if you think you know the answer or not. This is especially true when you consider what MagikHorse said in 76 about pressure.

I more or less presumed an answer there really, as it really didn't look like he even thought about getting info from it. Doesn't help that my attention was pulled a lot more towards by Italiano by that point.

The initial vote was weak, and was dropped without any pressure being thrown from MagikHorse's side.

That's mostly because it was explained away in 74, and by then I was more using my words to push people and looking for a better vote target that was a bit more active.

If MagikHorse's vote on Frogsterking was (semi-)RVS, then he would've done a reactionary play that caused some amount of pressure onto Frogsterking. This not only would've strengthened everyone's read on Frogsterking, it would've allowed every players in the pool to create discussions and build opinions at a much faster rate. I say this because it's one of the sole reason why you RVS someone. RVS by itself doesn't help anyone, but the reactions and interactions you can create from it can. I'm not saying every (or any) other player in this game did this, however MagikHorse voted Frogsterking with weak reasoning which I would consider a semi-RVS and applicable to everything I just said.

I probably should have, but I was on medicine making me drowsy at the time and generally slowing my thoughts. It's not something that came to mind to me at the time, unlike the curiosity that spurned that vote.

If MagikHorse's vote itself was genuine, then he wouldn't have dropped it so easily. There was very little content from Frogsterking before that unvote that could've caused MagikHorse to vote swap. Because of this, MagikHorse could've caused a lot more pressure onto Frogsterking to solidify his read before potentially voting someone else regardless of if he still scum read Frogsterking or not.

This only works if it was "genuine", when it was lot more curiosity at an unusual play. even then the unvote was more because my attention was redirected elsewhere. I figured I could always return and sort Frogster later when he was more active and had more information.

[MUSHSHAGANA]

I might vote people I don't scumread, if I don't have enough information. I might scumread people I don't vote, if I want to narrow the field. Or maybe I do scumread Frederick, but I don't feel like saying so.

If you must insist that it's a scumread, I encourage you to find me saying those words: you will not.

Saying more right this moment is premature.

I will point out your defense of Frederick is hilariously, pointlessly personal. Nothing about "people who aren't enthusiastically excited about mathematics are unlikely to pour a lot of time and effort into checking the validity of a mathematical post" is calling you or anyone else dumb. Take me for example: you could not pay me to sit down and read German philosophers, that's just the beginning and the end of that discussion -- and it has nothing to do with my intelligence or lack thereof.

I went out of my way to phrase that so that the exact interpretation of my words you're laboring under would not be an easy fit: one has to PURPOSEFULLY presume that is the meaning. Your phrasing it to try and make it an insult to every player (presumably to call for backup) is even MORE interesting.

Tell me, ItalianoVD: why exactly is my push on Frederick something you're taking just so damned personally?

[Redados]

Redados dodged MagikHorse's simple question in 128. While both the original post (81) and the question (105) aren't great, I find it odd that both Redados dodged the question and that MagikHorse never followed up on it. Why ask something if you're going to drop it without an answer? It's not a reactionary question in any shape or form, so there's little reason to drop it regardless of if you think you know the answer or not. This is especially true when you consider what MagikHorse said in 76 about pressure.

I more or less presumed an answer there really, as it really didn't look like he even thought about getting info from it. Doesn't help that my attention was pulled a lot more towards by Italiano by that point.

Yeah and just to clarify, I typed it up for myself by ISOing everyone individually and then I decided to post it because I thought that if I had been curious about who was inactive that other people would to, like I said. I feel like I answered the question so maybe van is grasping a little bit.

[shellyc]

I haven't been posting as much as I would like - my work has been very busy.

I don't understand Mush's push on Fredrick as well. I don't know why you used someone's mathematical mistake to push someone.
And #222 just isn't a defense. Why wouldn't you vote your scumread, our job is to get rid of the scum. Did you just scumslip?