In post 30, MP5 wrote:Girls! You're both pretty! Can I go home now?
You think I'm pretty? I'm flattered. :0)
Seriously, this is cool and all that you're getting discussion going, but to continue with arguing over statistics to prove "I was right", "No, I was right" isn't going to help us, and might just scare off some newbies that don't want to get bogged down in a theory/who is right discussion. It's not alignment indicative, can we bring it back to who wants us dead and why?
I'd argue that this argument actually is going to kickstart the discussion. Sure, it's not going to go anywhere, but it forces everyone to take a stance on it. Think of it this way-- imagine we are researchers studying the indigenous species of the Everglades, and we come across a large bog where two crocodiles are fighting. Jumping into the quagmire isn't going to assist our research, but standing near the edge of it and observing everyone's reactions is.
You do get some town points in my book for trying to break it up, though.
In post 39, MP5 wrote:Starstorm, your hypothesis that they might both be Mafia *might* be true, but in all likeliness is probably not.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it's practically impossible for them both to be scum. The day typically ends with two competing bandwagons forming on the players with the most dirt on them, so the two scum going after each other like this is a lose-lose scenario for them.
It's less easy to determine if this is a town-scum argument or a town-town argument, though. From a purely statistical perspective, assuming they're not both scum, Popeyes and Founteggs of Wayne have a 60% chance of both being town... which isn't particularly reassuring.
Anyway, I do think both of their arguments have some merit.
In post 42, waynegg wrote:
I told you it would take me some time to research and put it all together, did I not? I also said just 46 minutes ago that I was just then getting to start that research. You sure are pushing hard for a wagon in my absence though. Scum tell #4 (same as slamming someone who is V/LA) According to the clock, we have many days to come to an informed decision. Why are you trying to rush the vote? Scum tell #5.
Anyhow...
90%
As Voodoo Lady pointed out, when you roll a D9 you have a 77% (77.78% actually, but yeah) chance of not hitting two specific numbers. However, we are not dice. We all have a basic human need of belonging.
http://www.saywhydoi.com/belonging-why- ... belonging/
As such, going against the tide is contrary to fulfilling that need. Once a wagon forms on a townie, scum will hop on to further their win condition and making the wagon grow. Please read the bandwagoning section here
http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?tit ... sane_Tells
Once the wagon grows to an appropriate size, the need to belong kicks in and a mislynch happens. If you need to see this in practice, go to any of the completed games forums and pole the End D1 results. It won't take you long to see that 90% may even be a bit conservative.
I was under the impression you had an actual theory post to back that figure up. Understand that when you post an estimate like that, the immediate assumption is going to be that you're pulling the figures out of your ass unless you post a link to the contrary. I will agree with you that the overwhelming majority of newbie games start with a mislynch, though.
In post 45, TheIrishPope wrote:*cough* MP5 is voting inactives *cough*
*cough* I'm rushing people because you're scum *cough*
First-- good catch. I'll discuss MP5's actions and their implications at the end of the post--
W/r/t the second point, though, I think you and Wayne are both missing something here.
In post 53, waynegg wrote: In post 46, Starstorm wrote:Wayne, it seems difficult to establish a read on TheIrishPope after he posted one line. I'd say the vote seems a little hasty. But I like your point about how party mafia is way different from forum mafia.
I work very quickly in finding accurate reads, particularly scum reads. I'm not infallible of course, but by this point I'm certain he's scum
every post he's done since I voted him has added more and more evidence against him.
I'll go through each one, starting with that first one.
Bolded for emphasis.
Maybe you and Pope haven't realized this yet. You two aren't voting for each other because you two have said the most suspicious things. You two have said the most suspicious things because you two are voting for each other. You two both have twenty posts in a game with sixty-four posts total. Of course you two have said more suspicious things.
This is what I voted on. Both of these are scum tells, but I was only jabbing at him because I know that he is tasked with trying to help brand new players. The first sentence is speaking in absolutes. "Eww." is AtE, or appeal to emotion. At this point my vote was random. Who he voted is irrelevant to me, just the tells which I didn't at that point put any real stock in.
I think you're reading a bit too deeply into an RVS vote... everyone here precedes their RVS with something along the lines of "X is totally scum."
In post 12, TheIrishPope wrote:Alright. I will point out various errors in waynegg's #10 post:
1. I always introduce myself as an SE in the manner I did.
...
Cool, a Mafia virgin. Welcome! Your IC and SEs are here to help you.
According to his wiki, this is his first SE. So 1 is a lie, thus LaL (lynch all liars)
You should also never underestimate your opponent.
You're both wrong here. O'Popey's first game as an SE was 1386, where he began the game not with an introduction, but with a contextless RVS vote.
In post 59, SuperMafiaMan wrote:waynegg wrote:I really don't want to discourage new players with a bunch of advanced scum hunting techniques and lose them. They're trying to grasp the basics and this much can be overwhelming.
Discourage? Nah. I read everything here loud and clear, and I have never played anything like this before.
What I smelled earlier seems to have dissipated (or I still can't put my finger on it). There doesn't seem to be anything unnormal about the back and forth between wayne and TIP, just two players trying to prove that he is right. I feel no need to put myself on either side of it, however, that will just be starting a wagon for others to hop on, which could lead to mislynch.
Back on TIP's proposition for an RVS vote from post 26, I think I'll do just that.
VOTE: mizsu
For being among the 3 most inactive players.
Why vote for someone who's inactive? Like, seriously-- what's your motivation here? Miszu is not suddenly going to wake up in the middle of the night and make a post here just because you voted for him.
Now then, about MP5's lurker vote.
VOTE: MP5
I'd like to ask you a few questions, if you don't mind.
1) What was the motivation behind that vote for Starstorm in your first post? There was no need for RVS by that point.
2) Why place your vote on Frequency? Voting for a lurker isn't going to help us find scum. This leads into
3) Why ignore everything that Wayne and Popey are saying about each other? If you think they're both town, wouldn't it be significantly more productive to refute the points they're both making?
