In post 104, Wisdom wrote:Wisdom convinces those 4 people to sheep him and lynches B.
It's all about how able scum are.
If able scum were able to win every time, we wouldn't be playing. Why should we follow plans that make it easier for them to win?
In post 109, Wisdom wrote:Dude.
Say your pair and another pair have four town in them.
Say I am scum and I know that.
I convince people to sheep me and make those two pairs challenge each other.
Boom, instant mislynch, AND lynchfodder for future days.
Okay, I think you're missing the point I was trying to make, but this is something we can talk about.
There are, at most, three scum in this game. If we require a majority of town to elect one side of TWO different pairs and then put them against each other, sure, it's possible for a short while for scum to hide. It is, however, unlikely, and on day 1 we are likely to have 1 scum in the lynch pool.
Even if we fail in our lynch, which is fairly likely for the average day 1, our failing is not decreased by taking control of the lynch pool.
The plan is, in my opinion, better because the scum can't simply kamikaze someone. Even if they gang up, they must convince the town.
Whereas with no formal plan in place, we open ourselves up to a couple of bad options:
-Scum challenging a pair with a predictable outcome of a town lynch, only one of which is likely
-Town pair challenging a pet scum read no one agrees with
-Any pair challenging an agreed upon scum read that the town realizes (too late) must be town, and lynches suboptimally due to lack of choices.
-Scum can simply choose never to nominate, and only by getting lucky can town get scum into the lynch pool
With my plan, town must at least be convinced by scum to nominate two pairs of people. Scum can make no action without town approval.
If scum are able to successfully hoodwink the town to that extent, the plan certainly doesn't HELP them do this in any way I can see.
If you have an alternate plan, or improvements to this one, I'm sure everyone wants to hear it.
In post 115, AngryPidgeon wrote:Wisdom is town.
Amrun is scum. Off the bat strategy speculation is definitely more likely to come from scum than town and I love how she is trying to prove shes town in 94 without just saying she is. The argument with wisdom makes zero sense from a town perspective, especially since she thinks hes town.
I only got the town read on him by HAVING the argument, which is fairly obvious. So this statement makes no sense.
In post 48, Amrun wrote:We should all also agree to use the vote tags for real votes because it's a different color.
Why does this matter?
If people are reading and comprehending the thread, there is no need for overly formatted voting. That just lets people be lazy and skim crap anyways.
It's a basic thing that could aid us in our comprehension. Is it the most important thing? No. But games get long and at the end of day 5, looking back will be a lot easier if we do this.
appeal to fear. And probably not unless you think its scum just targeting town/town groups and if that is the case then just PL their scumbutts for doing stupid shit like that. Self-correcting problem.
This is valid; in hindsight, this was poor phrasing. I didn't mean it to be taken literally.
In a literal sense, what I meant was I think we can improve our chances of winning by being systematic. We could win if we don't; we could still lose if we do.
Wow, and that talk about experience is BULLSHIT and completely irrelevant. Experience does not make someone a better player and really why the hell are you arguing this? You could be scumhunting people but instead you are having a pointless argument with someone you think is town - or do you?
Oh and the quick shift of tones suggests that amrun was faking all that outrage in the first place - which she was because shes scum so.
First of all, I never said experience makes a better player. In fact, I said it DOESN'T. It's not an "appeal to authority" as you called it either. You're reprinting context in a scummy way because I know for sure you are capable of understanding the difference. I never said "I'M EXPERIENCED; LISTEN TO ME!"
I ONLY brought it up in the context of WHY I think Wisdom is town, because I think attacking a player in that way when the player is of unknown skill with an earlier join date etc. is LESS likely to come from scum. It was never a comment on my actual skill level, which is completely irrelevant to the discussion and not something I'd brag about anyway.
Like, for real, AP... We've met in real life. I've talked about feeling like a not-so-great player in your presence. I don't see how you as town can come to such a wild conclusion that is the opposite of what I was saying.
In post 122, AngryPidgeon wrote:And implies she is town for speculating on all this common sense and AtF in the first place? No.
Town typically doesn't argue bullshit with someone they think is town.
I am not at all saying I'm town for bringing up a plan. It's something I could do as any alignment. It doesn't make me scum, either.
P-edit times a million: holy shit.
Wisdom, how can you read anything that has been posted and say that I am trying to brag about myself to get people to sheep me?
For fucking real?
Ugh.
Also about this "fake outrage" stuff, I was never outraged at all. Mildly annoyed at wisdom's tone =\= outrage. And it wasn't a useless argument because i got a townread out of it.