Open 421-Pamplona II: Electric Bullgaloo! Game over

[JohnnyFarrar]

D2 mass claiming is fine with me. There's only one really bad scenario that could come from it, but I'll address that if it happens.

[DLG]

Alright, I'm back.

The hypothetical hider target thing is obivously good. My target is UberNinja.

Seems like mass-claim is gonna happen. We'll deal with any information revealed, then. No matter what, we still lynch the scummiest player that isn't confirmed Town. If there's solid reason from mass-claim to identify someone as scum, great.

@ Near
What happened? No answers? Just because it's kind of dated, and there's now a big dust-cloud of mass-claim debate, doesn't make your play earlier any less scummy. Ignoring it, hoping it just gets lost in the shuffle is scummy.

How is arguing the theory of whether, or not, to mass-claim helping catch scum? I mean, I understand how scum love the camouflage of Townieness that arguing theory provides.

If I'm wrong, set me straight.

I don't even know how to process Bitmap. The accumulation of scummy looking mistakes, topped off by the mislynch potential slip is overwhelming.

I believe Near is scum, but scum!Bitmap virtually confirms Near as Town. Scum!Near doesn't say much with respect to Bitmap. Near's conclusion of "mebbe Greywing and Bitmap are buddies" looks very weird. If Near is scum, Greywing or Bitmap come under scrutiny from a connection standpoint.

[Near]

What?? DLG, I didn't provide ANY reason why I was voting for bitmap. I just said Bitmap or Greywing..........

Discuss what you are talking about.

That was in response to your post here:

Spoiler:

I want answers from Near because I think the espoused reason for voting Bitmap doesn't make sense. It feels like a scummy attempt to provide "original reasoning" and not be accused of sheeping.

Basically, I was asking: What do you mean by original reasoning, when I didn't provide any reasoning for my suspicions for Bitmap and Greywing being scums. Although, reading the rest of the post I guess you were referring to my "non-chalant" post.

This is SO scummy. So nonchalant. So non-townie.

That was your supposed reason for voting Bitmap. I'll ask again.

What was scummy about Bitmap's question of Greywing for unvoting him?
Is nonchalant scummy? How?
Why'd you rate the Bitmap wagon as better?

Townies tend to be uninhibited in expressing their emotions. Scums tend to control their emotions.

At the time, Bitmap was being pressured by many players, including Gerywing. So when Greywing unvoted for him, Bitmap's question asking why Greywing unvoted seemed liked Bitmap was controlling his emotions. Both scums and townies obviously would be relieved to see people unvoting them, but scums would be inhibited to express their relief. Instead, they are likely to use the "unvoting" event to further establish their "pro-townness" by flaunting their fake suspicions of exact players who unvoted them.

But most of it was whatever. Significant motivation behind my troll voting was to incite some responses from players. As for choosing Bitmap over Greywing, probably because Bitmap had more votes = easier to pressure? I don't even remember why I said Greywing's scummy LOL

[Near]

How is arguing the theory of whether, or not, to mass-claim helping catch scum? I mean, I understand how scum love the camouflage of Townieness that arguing theory provides.

If I'm wrong, set me straight.

I don't even know how to process Bitmap. The accumulation of scummy looking mistakes, topped off by the mislynch potential slip is overwhelming.

I believe Near is scum, but scum!Bitmap virtually confirms Near as Town. Scum!Near doesn't say much with respect to Bitmap. Near's conclusion of "mebbe Greywing and Bitmap are buddies" looks very weird. If Near is scum, Greywing or Bitmap come under scrutiny from a connection standpoint.

This mass claiming would be scum's gateway to victory. As I expressed earlier, while I am genuinely interested in witnessing the panic, finger-pointing, and the disaster that is going to be mass claiming in this set-up, I also want to win. And mass claiming ain't going to help me win. But whatever. LOL. Let's see what happens.

[DoubleJD]

I dont buy it, simply becasue you failed to act on the responses you 'incited'.

VOTE: near

[Rainbowdash]

@Near - Trust me on this is far more complex than it looks on the surface. There are a lot of small traps that scum can trigger and I think im one of the only ones here that knows it enough to the point they would be able to coach partners around it. Take a look at this dead QT (game crash lost) you can see me break the entire game from the QT. I got every scum read right and even pegged the SK through breaking down the claims. It works WONDERS and if scum doesnt know how to handle a massclaim this setup is heavily town slanted.

Bit is probably scum, they are just clinging to the "mislynch but scum" wagon of Near without really giving any sort of reasoning. Almost all of their discussion is about massclaim, but they are using it as a reason to skirt actually justifying their positioning on the wagon or really giving much of a read at all. The case on Near from bit is "Forgot why they voted me". Im thinking Bit is scum who managed to panic react into hitting town tells when they got put at L-1.

Also incase its not obvious, Bit-scum means Near-town and DJD probably is scum.

[Greywing]

Near's posts over the past couple of pages have been absolutely terrible. I can see Nearscum now. My preference is still Bit or Rach, but I'm good now with a Near lynch if that's what you guys want.

I don't see the Rach wagon gaining any traction today, so Bitmap it is!

VOTE: Bitmap

That's L-2.

[Bitmap]

Eh, I guess I'm forced to claim soon. I'll claim when someone is about to hammer me.

[Greywing]

Bitmap, who are your top two scumreads?

[Bitmap]

Bitmap, who are your top two scumreads?

Near

I know I've been beating around the bush as Near but he never really got to post anything. However, he's been popping up recently after he's gotten quite some attention.

This mass claiming would be scum's gateway to victory. As I expressed earlier, while I am genuinely interested in witnessing the panic, finger-pointing, and the disaster that is going to be mass claiming in this set-up, I also want to win. And mass claiming ain't going to help me win. But whatever. LOL. Let's see what happens.

If you are town and considering you don't feel well attuned with this whole mass claiming shtick, why do you not care it gets executed? In my eyes, if a townie was really adamant about winning but didn't agree with a plan, he would speak up and object to it while listing points to why it's a bad plan.

Do I want to win or do I want to witness the dawning realization of epic failure

...... LOL I am OK either way.

I can sign on anytime from USA Central time 9 AM to 12 AM.

This is scummy. Why would a townie want to see a plan fail and back-fire? Assuming that everyone here wants to win, what's the point of going with a plan you disagree on?

RachMarie

This is more of a gut feeling than anything but it seems like whenever Rach plays less in a game than her normal games, she tends to be scum. This is because she doesn't have to try as hard to win. Also, since I've been pretty much the middle of all the attention, no one has really given focus to her. And she isn't really helping town by not participating in discussion as much.

[Bitmap]

As I said before, I'll claim when it comes time.

[Rainbowdash]

@Bit - Why doesnt scum-Near just go along with massclaim if he is convinced its a bad thing without saying its a bad thing? There has been no opposition to it, so its easy to just sheep everypony else who has agreed with it. The attitiude feel like town who doesnt like the idea but knows they cant stop it.

[Bitmap]

@Bit - Why doesnt scum-Near just go along with massclaim if he is convinced its a bad thing without saying its a bad thing? There has been no opposition to it, so its easy to just sheep everypony else who has agreed with it. The attitiude feel like town who doesnt like the idea but knows they cant stop it.

Is it wrong to go against the majority? If he really thought it was a bad idea, wouldn't it be best to say it was a bad idea and go against it?

You possibly why he wouldn't say it, it's because he's scum. See, scum are more worried about living in my opinion than going against the majority. Why would a townie care if he gets lynched unless PR?

[DLG]

Although, reading the rest of the post I guess you were referring to my "non-chalant" post.

Yep, that was right.

At the time, Bitmap was being pressured by many players, including Gerywing. So when Greywing unvoted for him, Bitmap's question asking why Greywing unvoted seemed liked Bitmap was controlling his emotions. Both scums and townies obviously would be relieved to see people unvoting them, but scums would be inhibited to express their relief. Instead, they are likely to use the "unvoting" event to further establish their "pro-townness" by flaunting their fake suspicions of exact players who unvoted them.

The big problem I have with this is that it relies on a picture of scum!Bitmap that doesn't seem realistic. The basic case for scum!Bitmap revolves around him being careless and easy to spot. It doesn't seem to me that a player that can be caught so easily is likely to intentionally react that way.

I think Rainbowdash is right, if Bitmap flips scum. Lucky reactions that looked very Townie. That single event may be the only reason Bitmap hasn't been lynched.

In regards to Greywing, it seems to me that Geywing was getting some backlash over the inte thing, and Bitmap has been a constant suspect for the bulk of the Day. For you to pop in and voice suspicion of them seemed awful convenient. I guess I don't see how posting that to generate reactions makes any sense. And, as stated by DoubleJD, there's no follow-up. Just looks like an excuse.

@ Rainbowdash
There's a difference between saying, "Bad idea, but let's do it for kicks", and taking a solid stance against the idea. The first creates a way for Near to look Townie, but not have to really fight the momentum. It's also a nice place from which to contribute while not having to do any scumhunting.

Playing for funsies isn't scummy, by itself. But, the in-between position isn't sitting right with me.

Consider Near's reasoning behind why Bitmap could be scum. That demonstrates an understanding level from Near that would make this kind of play possible, even likely.

[Near]

I did not think that I needed to literally say, "this is a bad idea. I am strongly against it" in order to communicate how I feel toward mass claiming, at least from the perspective of trying to win the game. I outlined why we shouldn't mass claim, at least not until we have more scum flips. I expected that people who read and understood my post to discern how I feel about mass claiming.

After reading my posts regarding mass claiming, if you are still OK with it, I must think that you disagree or not understand some of the points. I could have written it more clearly, I guess. Either way, RBD says I am wrong. I am willing to be proven wrong.

[Rainbowdash]

I wonder if the following exercise can change people's mind. Suppose the list of following mass claim:

Players 1, 2, 3, ... 7 claim VT

Player 9 claims Tracker
Player 10 claims Tracker
Player 11 claims Vengeful
Player 12 claims Vigilante
Player 13 claims Doctor

How much information do we get?

If the vig is proven to exist vengeful is cleared
If venge isnt venge vig is confirmed scum
Claimed roll is: IIIKKPT
This means expected is goon, JOAT, Driver, SK
If a SK is proven to not exist one role is lying
If a SK does exist all claims are true or two are lying (or just one tracker, both trackers arent scum)

Thats a good amount of info to me.

You possibly why he wouldn't say it, it's because he's scum. See, scum are more worried about living in my opinion than going against the majority. Why would a townie care if he gets lynched unless PR?

How does going against the majority and getting into an arugement with town leader help him live? As scum I have completely just let town do stuff that as town I would have stepped in and ended. If you really think its destructive there is no reason to stop it unless mandated by meta to.

[DoubleJD]

He wasnt going against the majority. Bitmap, greywing, inte, and a few others have been questioning the validity of it and even been pushing away from a massclaim. If anything, id say being against it was the easier way to go.

[McStab]

Would a massclaim Day One have an advantage in that scum would be forced to claim before THEY know more information? e.g. the way people flip overnight and during the Day would mean that we can essentially confirm (or even disprove) some roles existence, meaning that scum would have less to go off of on what is a safer claim or an impossible claim? Sorry but I'm super unfamiliar in this territory, but I could see some advantages to a Day One massclaim.

[DoubleJD]

Day 1 is bad. Day 2 i think is good, but lets say questionable. Day 3 is good if we still have pr's.

[Rainbowdash]

Would a massclaim Day One have an advantage in that scum would be forced to claim before THEY know more information? e.g. the way people flip overnight and during the Day would mean that we can essentially confirm (or even disprove) some roles existence, meaning that scum would have less to go off of on what is a safer claim or an impossible claim? Sorry but I'm super unfamiliar in this territory, but I could see some advantages to a Day One massclaim.

There is a really small gamble im going to take and say no, because even if im wrong about how N1 pans out (I die) there still is a very decent chance that the optimum N1 resolves and results are better than what would have happened. Cryptic I know but I will explain either tomorrow or postgame. Its another one of those little things thats just better if scum dont know.

I like MS town from that post though.

D1 is better than D3 by leaps and bounds.

He wasnt going against the majority. Bitmap, greywing, inte, and a few others have been questioning the validity of it and even been pushing away from a massclaim. If anything, id say being against it was the easier way to go.

Some reluctance has shown up but its quickly been giving way. I think just agreeing and trying to get on my good side (I love it when somepony buddies to me) would be what I expect from Near-scum here.

[BK201]

Day 2 is better so if we have a cop they can at least get one clear or one guilty. Stuff like that right?

[BK201]

Would a massclaim Day One have an advantage in that scum would be forced to claim before THEY know more information? e.g. the way people flip overnight and during the Day would mean that we can essentially confirm (or even disprove) some roles existence, meaning that scum would have less to go off of on what is a safer claim or an impossible claim? Sorry but I'm super unfamiliar in this territory, but I could see some advantages to a Day One massclaim.

Call me crazy but I think we should claim now because of this.
UNVOTE:

[JohnnyFarrar]

No. Tomorrow is better, any PR's can prove or disprove their claims with what action they took the previous night. And none of this is really helping us with who we're going to lynch today.

[BK201]

I'm still on board to lynch Bitmap. Unless the massclaim changes that I would still probably be on board.

You have a point about PR's but most PR's can't prove they are who they say they are. (cop can but takes a lynch, vig can, nothing else off the top of my head)

If we claimed before scum gained possible mislynch info + NK(s) info then I think we have a better chance to catch them in a lie.

[Near]

I wonder if the following exercise can change people's mind. Suppose the list of following mass claim:

Players 1, 2, 3, ... 7 claim VT

Player 9 claims Tracker
Player 10 claims Tracker
Player 11 claims Vengeful
Player 12 claims Vigilante
Player 13 claims Doctor

How much information do we get?

If the vig is proven to exist vengeful is cleared
If venge isnt venge vig is confirmed scum
Claimed roll is: IIIKKPT
This means expected is goon, JOAT, Driver, SK
If a SK is proven to not exist one role is lying
If a SK does exist all claims are true or two are lying (or just one tracker, both trackers arent scum)

Thats a good amount of info to me.

But the problem is that we may not know whether vig exists until later in the game. And we can't exactly lynch vig just to confirm vengeful. We could try to ask vig to target a specific person, but that will allow scums to determine best course of action - whether to roleblock vig or not. Or we can ask vig to target anyone he thinks is scummy, but with vig's identity known, scums can easily roleblock him, which again foils our attempt to confirm vig.

Similar argument applies to most items on above list.

IF

vig is confirmed scum, then so is vengeful. Not only is it unlikely for both scums to claim vig and vengeful, even if they did we won't know this until we actually lynch the vig. And while claimed roll can be projected based on power claims or VT claims, the actual roll can't be determined until more information is gathered. Therefore, expected scum roles will not help us - we simply do not know how many scums claimed power.

If a SK is proven to not exist one role is lying
If a SK does exist all claims are true or two are lying (or just one tracker, both trackers arent scum)

Exactly! Except, if SK is proven to exist, technically three scums could be lying but this is very unlikely. Still, unless we know SK exists or not...