Newbie 680: In this town of Cookieland... Over!

[Moratorium]

/facepalm

First, I'll start with this.

So again. Here we are. If you lynch Barros, town is way ahead. If you lynch me, town is slightly ahead. If you lynch someone else, you're taking a shot in the dark, and most likely you'll be LYLO Day 3. The risk in choosing between myself and Barros to lynch is EQUAL, because whoever you pick, if it was a mistake, the other guy goes next. So why not pick the one with the best case, and take a shot at town going way ahead? Who do you think has made the best case, me or Barros?

So looking at your analysis, jersey:

We lynch Moratorium and if he flips town, then going with Barros is a no-brainer. We immediately eliminate 50% of the scum and have another day to ferret out the other.

We lynch Barros based on Moratoriums claim and he flips town. So we whack Moratorium, with the same final result. The only thing here is if we lynch Moratorium and believe Barros, we take advantage of the first investigation and it puts us ahead of the game as we KNOW that pops is innocent.

That entire quote boils down to "I consider both claims of equal value, but Barros's (fake) potential confirmed innocent makes his claim better".

- Nevermind that I give strong supporting arguments to my claim.
- Nevermind the self-sacrificial reasoning.
- Nevermind that Barros's claims look like they came off a Fruit Loops box.
- Nevermind that Barros's central theme is "Hey, let's just see what happens"
- Nevermind the empirical statistical evidence.
- Nevermind that Barros's fakeclaiming a confirmed innocent is the obvious counterplay when you just got called out by the cop as guilty.

I feel that Moratoriums appeal to a doc (which we aren't even sure there is one) is simply a red herring being used to prop up his whole claim.

So you feel that having a 50% chance at a doc isn't enough of an incentive for me to risk the sacrifice? Why not? Can you explain the math away instead of telling us about your feelings?

One last scenario which gives me the heebie-jeebies is that Moratorium AND Barros are both cupcakes. Barros agrees to take one for the team and puts up a halfhearted counterclaim and defense. Now, we whack Barros who flips cupcake, and the town puts itself at the mercy of the "proven" cop, Moratorium. A risky ploy, but feasible, and it could possibly work, especially in a game full of newbies.

The only thing I can do to respond to this (because I actually think this is a clever game strategy) is to say, have a look at Barros's posting. Does that, to you, look like someone who is purposefully looking like a bumbling fool, or just a bumbling fool? Is it genuine, or contrived?

So, that being said, I think the least of the evils is to lynch Moratorium. If he flips cupcake, hooray! We are -1 SCUM and +1 TOWN. It has its risks, but we can always lynch Barros the next day and take our chances.

Hooray, it's the same situation by lynching Barros! This quote has zero value? Can I refer you to the original quote again?

So again. Here we are. If you lynch Barros, town is way ahead. If you lynch me, town is slightly ahead. If you lynch someone else, you're taking a shot in the dark, and most likely you'll be LYLO Day 3. The risk in choosing between myself and Barros to lynch is EQUAL, because whoever you pick, if it was a mistake, the other guy goes next. So why not pick the one with the best case, and take a shot at town going way ahead? Who do you think has made the best case, me or Barros?

[Moratorium]

Hm, i don't know Barros. I found YOUNG ERIC's response towny enough.

Lynching the more suspicious one helps the town more, that's what you should care about.

I encourage everyone to read this quote of me defending ERIC in context. It's a kneejerked reaction to Barros aggressive vote on ERIC, in a tone that sounds pretty much ready to drop a hammer.

I agree with most of what you said about Barros.

He's exhibited some scum tells, but I'm not sure if i'm being fair any more. He isn't any fishier then Barros

And Moratorium's case earlier on Barros seems equally convincing

Anywhoo, i felt like Eric was really suspicious and so was Barros,

Hmm. So worst case scenario for falsely believing Moratorium is the same as the worst case scenario for correctly believing Moratorium.

I think he (Barros) was projecting, espionage and deception was on his mind because he is scum.

Based on his post history, I do really think he'd (Barros) be a good lynch.

I'm leaning towards a Barros lynch more and more.

I must admit here. Barros looks really really bad right now. The way he claimed didn't sound totally clean, and a counter cop claim is infinitely suspicious.

At this point, i want to redeclare that i currently favor Moratorium is cop right now.

After reading this post over again, Barros's messy cop claim looks a lot like his earlier stupidities/aggression

But I'm becoming more and more certain that Moratorium is telling the truth (most of my issues have been believing Moratorium, because i def. think Barros is suspicious and cupcakable)

the complete breaks in logic (from Barros) are starting to get sad

..........

Really.. not liking what i'm seeing from moratorium.

You give me such a headache.

[guy0]

/facepalm


So looking at your analysis, jersey:

1

That entire quote boils down to "I consider both claims of equal value, but Barros's (fake) potential confirmed innocent makes his claim better".

- Nevermind that I give strong supporting arguments to my claim.
- Nevermind the self-sacrificial reasoning.
- Nevermind that Barros's claims look like they came off a Fruit Loops box.
-

2

Nevermind that Barros's central theme is "Hey, let's just see what happens"
- Nevermind the empirical statistical evidence.
-

3

Nevermind that Barros's fakeclaiming a confirmed innocent is the obvious counterplay when you just got called out by the cop as guilty.

I feel that Moratoriums appeal to a doc (which we aren't even sure there is one) is simply a red herring being used to prop up his whole claim.

4

So you feel that having a 50% chance at a doc isn't enough of an incentive for me to risk the sacrifice? Why not? Can you explain the math away instead of telling us about your feelings?

One last scenario which gives me the heebie-jeebies is that Moratorium AND Barros are both cupcakes. Barros agrees to take one for the team and puts up a halfhearted counterclaim and defense. Now, we whack Barros who flips cupcake, and the town puts itself at the mercy of the "proven" cop, Moratorium. A risky ploy, but feasible, and it could possibly work, especially in a game full of newbies.

5

The only thing I can do to respond to this (because I actually think this is a clever game strategy) is to say, have a look at Barros's posting. Does that, to you, look like someone who is purposefully looking like a bumbling fool, or just a bumbling fool? Is it genuine, or contrived?

So, that being said, I think the least of the evils is to lynch Moratorium. If he flips cupcake, hooray! We are -1 SCUM and +1 TOWN. It has its risks, but we can always lynch Barros the next day and take our chances.

6

Hooray, it's the same situation by lynching Barros! This quote has zero value? Can I refer you to the original quote again?

Now as you can see I numbered parts of the quote so i could easily refer to them.

1. You are essentially correct in saying this.

2. It's not completely this, but hypothetically, if moratorium is scum, there is little barros can do at this point given his "investigation result"

3. You say it's the obvious counter to claim someone else is innocent, but you ignore the large possibility of it being true, considering it's the logical choice for investigation.

4. I think he meant the whole appeal to emotion thing with the doc, and by saying "oh doc, please save me" you are gaining crowd support.

5. you could WIFOM this thing forever

6. I agree with you on this one


Anything I didn't number generally means i sorta agree with moratorium a little

[Capricious]

Wow

So there are four scenarios here:

M + B both scum
M scum B town
M town B town
M town B scum
Let us assume Moratorium + Barros are both scum. Then they have pinned

all hope on the 50% chance of there being no cop in this game.

If there exists a cop, then he counterclaims them both with absolute

authority. The cop then proceeds to allow himself to be lynched for

the clear benefit of the town, revealing M + B as the frauds they are.

Town wins after lynching M + B on subsequent days 3 and 4.

If there does not exist a cop, then after lynching one of M + B, the other

scum is practically confirmed as the cop. Though, sometimes miracles do

happen, and therefore we cannot give the full other 50% to the scum

team of M +B.

Based on this, the M + B team has reneged on their situation anteclaim to

accept a coin flip, of which the probability for them to win the game is

somewhat <50% out of the fruitbasket of win.

However, what was the position of M + B team anteclaim? They were 2

scum out of 7 players, and this, in itself, already grants a win probability

of somewhat >50%. Moreover, since they decided to claim, this means

they felt that there was no cop in the game, which pushes the anteclaim

position of the Barrotorium team past 50% win chance even more.

Based on the above, the Barrotorium team is a ridiculous notion, and we

may disregard it as a scenario out of the four.

[Capricious]

Let us assume Moratorium is scum while Barros is the town cop.

The actions of Moratorium conveys that he, like in the above example, will

benefit from claiming cop, specifically with a guilty investigation. In this, he is

hoping that:

Case 1: there is no cop

Case 2: the person he is accusing is the cop or the doctor









Why? for in the only remaining case



Case 3 (30%): the person he is accusing is not the cop, but the cop

exists.

In this situation, Moratorium accuses Barros of being scum, whilst Barros,

being the vanilla he is and a sensible townie, claims townie. Along comes

the real cop, who counterclaims Moratorium with absolute power. For,

should the person counterclaiming Moratorium be scum, Moratorium the

cop must allow himself to be lynched to win at once for the town.

Therefore, Moratorium cannot be the town cop, for if he was, the

counterclaimer of cop would never have acted.

This Case 3 is ruinous for Moratoriumscum, for he will have given his life

away, while only exposing the cop ( not guaranteeing the death of the cop

with the possibility of the doctor ) when the trade 1 for 1 of scum for town

is a catastrophic exchange rate.

So Moratoriumscum is making a gamble on Cases 1 and 2.

In Case 1 (50%), Moratorium is hoping to sacrifice himself for a townie

when this is already clearly a bad exchange. And yet, we must also

include the chance that the townie defends himself effectively and

Moratoriumscum ends up lynched in turn.

That leaves Case 2 (20%) as the only semi-viable goal of Moratorium

claiming cop as scum. In this case, he has Barros practically pinned down

as a town power role because he is willing to forego probability to make

the gamble, yet did not try to kill him in the night. Non Sequitur.

[Capricious]

M and B are both town.

lol

I half expect some people here to make this argument, given the state of arguments they have already put forth.

[Capricious]

In a twist of Holmes,

"when you have eliminated the unlikely, what remains must be the truth."

The other possibility is M town and B scum, and I hold this to be the truth.

[popsofctown]

Moratorium, what was that? You ignored my underlined question, and everything i said after "not liking what i'm seeing from moratorium", and instead put up a wall of quotes for me. Why did you put up a bunch of uncontexted quotes from me, and why didn't you answer my question?

Capricious, your math is undeniably convincing, and would make it really hard for me to vote Moratorium. I still think his behavior looks horrible. "Oh, when i'm under pressure, it is very important that everyone get a chance to say something. But when i'm not under pressure or scrutiny and can get away with it, i'll accelerate the bloodshed under a thin excuse"

[Moratorium]

If you go back and read the quotes in order, the point that I am trying to make is how much of a fence-sitter you are. You've stated six ways to sunday how "convinced" you are about Barros' guilt, but you refuse to actually vote. Hell, you INVENTED a voting style (I cupcake you!) just so you wouldn't have to vote anyone.

And the truly baffling part about this, the part that just makes me shake my head, is that normally, fence-sitting is just a massive scumtell. Normally, I'd be all over your ridiculousness in this game, your refusal to commit to anything, your insane theories, your wishy-washyness, all of it. But, *groan*, I think you're town! From everything you've posted, I don't read any of it as deceipt, just as a new player who can't put his thoughts together constructively.

I also agree with Capricious about this:

I want to point out the "input" Barros has given us was his pseudo-investigation of pops. I am 95% sure pops is town solely based on Barros declaring him town. Scum just do not play like that - fake-claiming cop and declaring their partner innocent as per investigate.

I don't think Barros would bring any attention to his scumbuddy in this situation by targetting him with his counterclaim, so this actually supports you as being town.

And knowing that I'm going to have to deal with this for as long as I survive in this game gives me an acute pain between the eyes.

---

Now, about your little argument about me re-voting Barros and how amazingly suspicious it is. You are completely forgetting YOUR OWN ARGUMENT about why we were unvoting in the first place.

PREVENT QUICKLYNCHES SO WE CAN DISCUSS MORE.

The point that's being ignored is, no one was talking. This game was dead until I re-voted. But worse than that:

IF THE POINT WAS TO QUICKLYNCH, WHERE'S THE QUICKLYNCH????

Barros has posted since I re-voted. Anyone see Barros voting for himself yet? If the idea was to allow conversation to flow and not be interrupted by the quicklynch, well hell, I've generated more useful conversation by revoting.

Also:

I took a shower, and made a decision. I'm going to take this entire game and turn it into a logical puzzle instead of a mash of psychology and failed motive guesses. I've been running the numbers in my head, and the various possibilities that could occur. The worst case scenario as I can see it now is that this post will give town a 33% chance of winning, but chances are good that those odds will be mitigated by other events.

Psychology and failed motive guesses. Joke's on me! That'll teach me to think that people can be convinced with math.

I understand your point of view here, pops. You don't know who's innocent and who's guilty, you're probably doing what you can to figure it out, I get it. I'm trying my best, I truly am, to keep the personal attacks and out-of-bounds anger out of my post, because that stuff isn't necessary. But I'm very frustrated. Maybe I'm not doing a good enough job at expressing my points. I'll conceed that, if everyone's having difficulty with what I'm saying. But I also feel that your fence-sitting on...

everything

... is detrimental to town.

One thing I do know, I probably would have had an easier time just not claiming my role, and just move on normally in the game. I'll think it over several times before doing a Day 2 claim as cop ever again.

So. Pretty-please. With sugar on top. Vote Barros.

[popsofctown]

Your revote could have caused a quicklynch. If jerseygoomba had come in just as sure about Barros being scum as he actually was about you being scum, then Barros could have selfhammered before we heard from the other sub. You've said before you want to hear from both subs, haven't you? I think you should have not done that revote, don't you want to hear from both subs? It's a moot point now as long as -


@jerseygoomb- don't vote barros until we hear from the other sub


-jerseygoomba doesn't switch around on us.

This is the second time you've done something that i don't think is good town play, called you on it, and then been convinced that you actually think it's good town play. I still don't think/see how your D2 cop claim was good play, but when you gave a long post re-iterating the same arguments i disagreed with, i realize you really think it was good play. Here, it seems you really don't think we need to hear from every player (or maybe you aren't thinking about it and have missed the point).

So anyway, i no longer think that your vote was suspicious, i was really 9 parts ticked and 1 parts suspicious in the first place. Since i'm still ticked though, i will be certain to use the flavor you hate so much and

Cupcake: Barros

To answer "if the point was to quicklynch, where's the quicklynch", the quicklynch is where jerseygoomba walks in and votes barros instead of you, which didn't happen, but could quite plausibly have ended the game in about 2 posts.

Your bold line up there isn't the reason that i had for the unvoting, btw. My reason for the unvoting was "hear from every player before lynching".


On me fence sitting in general... i don't think fence-sitting is detrimental to town, otherwise i wouldn't do it. If we contrast a fence-sitting play style with a tunnel-vision-lynching play style, we can see that we all would have, at the least, gotten more discussion out of the day if we hadn't immediately lynched the most suspicious player (not quite immediately, but far too quickly).



It's really funny and ironic that i'm so popularly considered to be innocent today, after "having an F- on the scum test" yesterday. If it seems magical that i can waffle between positions without seeming suspicious, keep in mind that that is probably because i don't waffle under pressure. I waffle out of my own changing ideas. Scum waffle because they come up with something fake, and someone says "hey, that sounds a lot like 'i'm scum and i want to lynch person A'" so scum waffles and says they don't want to lynch person A anymore. I.... just don't know who in the sam hill i want to vote for sometimes. I just keep switching between reasons that were all actually derived from a desire to find scum. Ultimately, it seems my game strategy did work after all. As i said... somewhere on page 3 or so... i got my role PM and decided i was going to talk as much as possible the whole game, and be totally transparent so people could tell i was town. And then try to find scum.
I'm worried that now i will get metagamed out the wazoo my next game if anyone knows me, and i get a scum pm, any ideas for how to avoid that?

@Jerseygoomba: can you explain more why you think Moratorium is scum?

[jerseygoomba]

Pops,

Before I start, could you please do me a favor and cut that quasi-vote

cupcake

crap out. Its driving me bananas. Either poop or get off the pot. Reading your posts sometimes reminds me of a kid with ADD who forgot to take his Ritalin. I needed to get that off my chest. Don't take it personally, but I zone out trying to grasp your logic since it was all over the place. That being said, I agree with Barros' investigation of you being town.

My biggest reason for voting for Moratorium wasn't so much the doc plea (still feel that was merely a well-used prop) as the fact that he just seemed to randomly choose Barros for his investigation. VERY scummy. The whole thread to that point was a big decision...do we whack Eric or do we whack Pops. When the town decided to whack Eric, why the hell WOULDN'T he investigate you? If nothing else, to validate the allegations of you being F- scum (or whatever you were called out for). So, Moratorium calls out Barros hoping we as a town would knock out one of our own. Ugh, that is pretty clear to me.

On another note, I'm still trying to make sense of Capricious' post (math isnt my strong suit), but his backing of Moratorium by wrapping it in a wall of math-based logic all of a sudden makes me think maybe Capricious and Moratorium are in cahoots.

So, that being said I stand by my vote of Moratorium. IF I am wrong, and Moratorium flips town, and I survive the NK, then I will drag Barros' cupcake ass through town until all that is left are a few random sprinkles.

[popsofctown]

i've clearly explained what it means. It means it turns into a vote once everyone has chimed in.

[Barros]

On another note, I'm still trying to make sense of Capricious' post (math isnt my strong suit), but his backing of Moratorium by wrapping it in a wall of math-based logic all of a sudden makes me think maybe Capricious and Moratorium are in cahoots.

I was thinking about making a post about this, but you did first

Since the beginning of this day (at least) capricious always, ALWAYS, agreeed with moratorium. If moratorium says something, for capricious it is the absolute truth and the person who says it is not, he will vote you. The bigger post he made was the post where he talks about probabilities.. This is not a math game.

FoS: Capricious

[popsofctown]

All on pops wagon: Point out case to me

WIFOM - NOT good case, everything is WIFOM reduced to purest forms

"Link with Young Eric" - Seriously? Links are 95% of the time (made-up stat) more subtle than that. Am I linked to Barros and pops because I didn't have a hammer-good reason to vote for them?

You and he were the only active players not on the pops bandwagon, a personal creation of Moratorium's.

Well, crap. This is what happens when I am too busy to play mafia.

I will admit that at one point, I was considering YE to be scum, but he explained himself that he was pressed for time, and was using a iphone, so his posts come off having a different flavor than if he had enough time to construct more intelligible posts.

The lynch on Young Eric was horrible; he had obviously dropped from the site for inexplicable reasons, and needed replacement. (This is the only game he has ever posted in on mafiascum, and last post was Oct 1.) People joined his wagon with excuses that he was lurking, and not providing a defense.

I am inclined to believe both scum were on YE's wagon. I do not like Moratorium's little jump-in at all.

Moratorium states in his hammer post that he realized YE was absent, as such, wouldn't it be in the benefit of the town to replace him and let the successor defend him for the good of the town?

Moratorium also says: "we all collectively think you're guilty". This is of course, untrue. But, this also indicates that Moratorium is afraid to take blame for the lynch of Young Eric, which one should never be if one is town.

In conjuction, Moratorium, to use his own words, was very "wishy-washy" in events preceding the lynch. He switched wagons between pops and YE quite a few times, as though he does not care which one dies, which is always a bad sign.

Vote: Moratorium

Also let it be known that yes, I feel pops is town, and was arguing against his lynch. I am unafraid to disclose this.

And here he launches an attack on Moratorium at the beginning of D2, before the cop claim, and furthermore asserts that his "F-" scum candidate is innocent.


All Capricious has done is bought his cop claim, which by math you have to do unless you think Moratorium is reaching pretty far across the table for his wine (which is possible), and then supported that same cop claim. He doesn't even agree with the same reasons on why you should buy the cop claim, Capricious generally reads you as possibly being naive and impulsive, Moratorium tends to read anything resembling intelligence as a ploy to further the scum's aims (picking me as innocent)

[Capricious]

Throughout the game, I have felt pops is town. I have never called anyone pops "F- scum" Moratorium did that.

I think pops is talking to himself in his post, am I correct?

[Moratorium]

Moratorium tends to read anything resembling intelligence as a ploy to further the scum's aims (picking me as innocent)

I'm not tending to read it that way, I know it is a ploy. I'm the cop, and I investigated him as guilty.

[jerseygoomba]

So, OK Pops...how are you feeling about things? Ready to update the cupcake? I'm kinda curious where we stand as far as who has voted and who hasn't.

[popsofctown]

i'm sorry capricious, my above post has a bunch of confusing pronouns that don't lead to eachother right. The first "you and he" is "Barros and Capricious". "Here he launches", the he refers to Capricious. "Asserts that his F- scum is innocent", that his refers to Moratorium.

And in response to Moratorium, there is more than one way to read Barros' actions, even if both of those involve him being guilty. When you read him saying I was investigated as innocent, you said that "this is an obvious attempt to make me waste tonight's investigation". I read it totally differently, more like: Barros decides to make a counter claim, he realizes he has to say he investigated someone, he picks someone he thinks he would have investigated last night if he were actually town. Not quite as sophisticated as trying to manipulate your night actions. And i

think

Capricious read it more the way i did than the way you did.

Perhaps i didn't word it correctly, but i wanted to point out to Barros that you have differences in opinions about him sometimes.

[popsofctown]

My cupcake is on Barros right now. It doesn't turn into a vote until the other sub talks, and until i'm done asking that sub questions (or anyone else's questions for that sub).

Jerseygoomba, do you think i'm town or scum?

[Capricious]

On another note, I'm still trying to make sense of Capricious' post (math isnt my strong suit), but his backing of Moratorium by wrapping it in a wall of math-based logic all of a sudden makes me think maybe Capricious and Moratorium are in cahoots.

I was thinking about making a post about this, but you did first

Since the beginning of this day (at least) capricious always, ALWAYS, agreeed with moratorium. If moratorium says something, for capricious it is the absolute truth and the person who says it is not, he will vote you. The bigger post he made was the post where he talks about probabilities.. This is not a math game.

FoS: Capricious

transcribe "person" and "you" with "Barros-scum" and you got yourself a winner.

"probabilities":
Clearly Barros's cupcake mind occludes his cognitive reasoning. I will attempt to simplify my logic, viz:

Moratorium likes to eat cookies. He sees a cookie. He cannot afford the price of the cookie. The cookie-shop owner offers Moratorium to either flip a coin or rolling a six-sided die. If the coin lands on heads, or alternatively, the die lands on a "1" or a "2", the cookie-shop owner will let Moratorium eat the cookie for free.

Barros is saying that Moratorium would rather roll the die than flip the coin to eat the cookie. By this, he is asserting that:

A) Moratorium is idiot scum
B) Moratorium is not scum

"This is not a math game" is as egregious a statement as saying "There are currently four scum alive"

I think Barros has already resigned himself to the hellish oven of death and is having a grand ole time. Do not fear, Barros. As you approach the fiery pit that is the oven to be "Baked and frosted", your fumes are pleasing to the olfactory sense.

[guy0]

On another note, I'm still trying to make sense of Capricious' post (math isnt my strong suit), but his backing of Moratorium by wrapping it in a wall of math-based logic all of a sudden makes me think maybe Capricious and Moratorium are in cahoots.

I was thinking about making a post about this, but you did first

Since the beginning of this day (at least) capricious always, ALWAYS, agreeed with moratorium. If moratorium says something, for capricious it is the absolute truth and the person who says it is not, he will vote you. The bigger post he made was the post where he talks about probabilities.. This is not a math game.

FoS: Capricious

transcribe "person" and "you" with "Barros-scum" and you got yourself a winner.

"probabilities":
Clearly Barros's cupcake mind occludes his cognitive reasoning. I will attempt to simplify my logic, viz:

Moratorium likes to eat cookies. He sees a cookie. He cannot afford the price of the cookie. The cookie-shop owner offers Moratorium to either flip a coin or rolling a six-sided die. If the coin lands on heads, or alternatively, the die lands on a "1" or a "2", the cookie-shop owner will let Moratorium eat the cookie for free.

Barros is saying that Moratorium would rather roll the die than flip the coin to eat the cookie. By this, he is asserting that:

A) Moratorium is idiot scum
B) Moratorium is not scum

"This is not a math game" is as egregious a statement as saying "There are currently four scum alive"

I think Barros has already resigned himself to the hellish oven of death and is having a grand ole time. Do not fear, Barros. As you approach the fiery pit that is the oven to be "Baked and frosted", your fumes are pleasing to the olfactory sense.

Please explain how you came to this conclusion without just stating random things that don't have proof

[popsofctown]

I tried to summarize Capricious' post for you guy0, but it didn't come out way too good. Just read this five times, it's the most important thing you should get out of the post and it's true:

I think Barros has already resigned himself to the hellish oven of death and is having a grand ole time. Do not fear, Barros. As you approach the fiery pit that is the oven to be "Baked and frosted", your fumes are pleasing to the olfactory sense.

{{{{{I think Capricious has already come to the conclusion that Barros will be baked and frosted, and that's why he shoots into an example kind of fast and makes everything a little fuzzy.

What he's saying is, Moratorium's mathematical chances of winning the game are better with the cop claim than without. His example is an example of Moratorium playing a game that clearly had a mathematical aspect, ignoring it, and failing. Barros' assertion that the number presentation earlier is suspicious/unnecessary implies that Moratorium should have likewise ignored the mathematical aspect presented at the beginning of D2. And capricious is saying, just like the example, that would be full of fail. This game does have probablility and math. The freakin first post of this thread says there is a 25% chance of setup A, 25% chance of setup B, so on, so on.

Not only is it mathematically correct for moratorium to claim cop if he's town D2 (i disagree with that math, btw, i'm resummarizing capricious), it's uber mathematically crappy for Moratorium to cop claim if he is scum. Capricious threw the numbers around for that, i agree with that, that's solid. So, Moratorium would have to be stupid to make the cop claim if scum. Since he hasn't acted very stupid, he's probably town.
}}}}

[Moratorium]

I'd like to hear who everyone thinks I should investigate next, should I survive both D2 and N2.

[popsofctown]

Personally, i think you should come up with a few cantidates and randomly select between them. I'm a fan of random processes... no one can get in your head and figure out who you are going to investigate if you use a coin or die. The loss, of course, is that there might actually be some person who is truly ideal for investigation, and you could lose the difference between what the die says and your final choice. I'm not saying you should declare that you are going to use a die, or declare your cantidates, to scare the scum from doing one of those combinations of roleblock and kill that is bad for you (like killing your investigation target, would be full of suck for us). I'm saying that even if someone here is a psychological genius, they won't follow you all the way to your final decision if you use a die or coin in there.

I would say guy0 is a good cantidate for investigation. I still think he active lurks somewhat. It's slightly suspicious, but even more so a problem for getting a read on him. Jerseygoomba is coming out with what he says, but i think he's suspicious enough to investigate in hopes of a guilty verdict. His report on what he read in the thread sounded more like a tunnel-vision read than a balanced read, like his read attitude is: "ok let me look for suspicious stuff in moratorium's claim and when i see math i will decide it is fishy math" and "why should i even read barros' post, which is full of bullcrap?" Capricious i would say is less of a cantidate, he interacts a lot and says what he thinks a lot and helps, a lot. He's a great cantidate for NK really, which makes him a bad call for investigation. And of course, he thinks i'm innocent, which is a good thing, i don't want to deny that reason factoring in for my opinion.

We haven't seen anything from the other sub, i say the other sub will probably be as good a cantidate for investigating as any. I've gone over everyone in the game so far but myself i think, and i would definitely say not to investigate me. It's not gonna get a guilty verdict, and as a confirmed innocent i wouldn't be an awesome-confirmed-innocent-of-town-leadership, it would probably be more of "wtf, i just saw a pm that says he's innocent, but he sounds even crazier than yesterday".

[popsofctown]

to be clear, the word "die" used above means "polyhedron marked with outcomes, used for probabilities and board games"