Mini 1634 - English Premier League Mafia (Game over)

[BROseidon]

Read his stuff from today. He was like "one of BRO/RA is scum, VOTE RA," then you replace into the RA slot, put suspicion on me, and then immediately jumps onto me with a blank vote. That pings super hard.

[goodmorning]

None of which strikes me as very unusual from Guy.


In other news, I got bored circa page 21, so if anything I need to know about happened between then and ~p44, someone should tell me.

[Mario Balotelli]

Votecount 5.2:

BROseidon (1)-

Guyett

No Lynch (2)-

theelkspeaks, BROseidon

Not voting (3):

Red Arrow, massive, Whiskers,

With 6 alive, it takes 4 to lynch. Deadline is in 10 days, at 8pm GMT on Thursday 19th February 2015

Whiskers has been prodded.

[Guyett]

I think its RA

or

Whiskers and Bro is the other scum

.

[massive]

Still think no-lynch is probably correct. Was hoping the sub would spur more convo but apparently even she got apathetic on Day 3-4.

Also, Guy claimed he could post-restrict someone once, did he post-restrict himself or?

Assumption is he got bus-driver'ed. Seems I was a popular target for deathfisaro.

Come to think of it Whiskers-BRO team would make Flavour Cop (and flavour) make sense.

I assume you mean because Liverpool and Man U are easy to see as scum roles. Does this jibe with being forced to be announced as Liverpool each day? And how is Southampton the third member of this club? (Over Man C, Chelsea, both not appearing in this game based on claims, or even Arsenal?)

[BROseidon]

I think its RA

or

Whiskers and Bro is the other scum

.

I misremembered.

Then your original RA vote doesn't make any sense.

Also, why are you the only one who's adamantly against a NL here?

[theelkspeaks]

I think its RA

or

Whiskers and Bro is the other scum

.

I misremembered.

Then your original RA vote doesn't make any sense.

Also, why are you the only one who's adamantly against a NL here?

Is it just me or does that sound like buddy-coaching?

[Guyett]

I HATE no lynching when there is no need to.
we dont have any investigative roles so we wont learn anything new. We're just delaying an enviable lynch but just with the added bonus of WIFOM heavy NKA or even a no kill gambit.
The game has gone on long enough, grow some balls, make a decision and fucking stick to it.

[BROseidon]

The point is that the NK IS information. Just because you hate WIFOM/NKA doesn't make you the arbiter of whether we use it.

The only time you don't NL in MyLo is when you have someone who you KNOW is going to get shot (IC, etc). We don't have that.

[goodmorning]

Still think no-lynch is probably correct. Was hoping the sub would spur more convo but apparently even she got apathetic on Day 3-4.

I mean, we can still have quite a lot of conversation. I just happen to not have read 40% of the game. It doesn't seem to have been very important.

Also, Guy claimed he could post-restrict someone once, did he post-restrict himself or?

Assumption is he got bus-driver'ed. Seems I was a popular target for deathfisaro.

ahhhhh ok

Come to think of it Whiskers-BRO team would make Flavour Cop (and flavour) make sense.

I assume you mean because Liverpool and Man U are easy to see as scum roles. Does this jibe with being forced to be announced as Liverpool each day? And how is Southampton the third member of this club? (Over Man C, Chelsea, both not appearing in this game based on claims, or even Arsenal?)

Given that I don't follow the Premier League, the fact that I've heard of Man U and Liverpool in a "these are FCs with a large fanbase" is interesting. There have been so many slightly unusual roles/combos in this game, why not have a Flavour-Announced Child or whatever it's called? After all, we can't know that the flavour is relevant or that the Mod so hates Liverpool that it must be Scum or whatever. I don't know why not Man C or Chelsea (incidentally, the Bus Driver) or Arsenal (though there is reference in my role PM to it being a team that's been a bridesmaid rather than a bride for some time now). Southampton could just fit in though; I find the "Weaknesses" section of Ollie's PM to be somewhat interesting in that regard.

Again, though, this is just an afterthought and not really a good reason to vote anyone.

I think its RA

or

Whiskers and Bro is the other scum

.

I misremembered.

Then your original RA vote doesn't make any sense.

Also, why are you the only one who's adamantly against a NL here?

Is it just me or does that sound like buddy-coaching?

I think it's just you.

I HATE no lynching when there is no need to.
we dont have any investigative roles so we wont learn anything new. We're just delaying an enviable lynch but just with the added bonus of WIFOM heavy NKA or even a no kill gambit.
The game has gone on long enough, grow some balls, make a decision and fucking stick to it.

To some extent I agree with you, but otoh everyone has been scummy enough that the eventual NK would probably be illuminating to some extent.

[massive]

VOTE: No Lynch

Having me be the hammer on that one doesn't really make any sense so let's avoid it right here.

[goodmorning]

Is there any more conversation you wanted to have or did you just want to point it out and then fuck off?

[massive]

Well, I asked a bunch of questions that no one seems to be bothered to answer (BRO, Whiskers) so what would you like me to do? I can't make everyone else play today.

[Whiskers]

Thank

goodness

Um.
1. What the hell post are you reading? Whiskers didn't say anything about who does NKA.
2. There are a few things I don't like:
A. The analysis itself is really simplistic - according to Whiskers Scum only kill people they perceive as threats, would never kill a lurker, why does it matter whether he was a universal townread, etc. Why is that a problem? Scum strategy is far more sophisticated than that, which I'd expect Whiskers to know as a player who's been around the block before.
B. What does that oversimplification mean? Well, there's a motive behind everything we say. I see Whiskers trying to manipulate people's thoughts about the kill, I ask why. I think: Whiskers was trying to suggest a push on Scripten's scumreads without bringing the subject up himself. Perhaps so as to look less complicit when 4burner flipped Town? (Whiskers and Kaboose were Scripten's other 2 scumreads.)
C. Whiskers specifically refers to Scripten as "a good scumhunter." Scripten's highest scumread had already flipped Town at this point, and his second scumread was Whiskers (though the hammer made him think Whiskers could be Town or 3p). His third was 4burner. Admittedly I have the bias of hindsight here, but 4burner was literally the towniest motherfucker in this game. The scumread Scripten brought in to replace Whiskers on the list was "prolly one of them lurkers, iunno" which also doesn't make a point for good scumhunting. 2/3 were Town. Did Whiskers feel threatened? Or was that "he's a good scumhunter" statement just another misdirect?

In summary: bad theory, bad motivations, paranoia.

P.S. it really worries me that BRO didn't say anything about it, given that BRO is good at Scum strategy.

Ok. Let's look at the analysis, since everything stems from that.

Scum wouldn't never kill a lurker, but there is very little reason to. It's foolish to say "X

never

does Y" or "X

always

does Y." But the time that scum has reason to kill a lurker are:
Weird Misdirection, such as to create more confusion in LyLo or cause WIFOM
The Lurker is discovered to be a PR
The Lurker is Conftown

stuff like that. They're outliers. It doesn't happen usually.

Also, let's look at the actual kill. Scripten was the towniest motherfucker in this game, IMO. Iirc, his scumhunting was sound, even if his results were incorrect. Your assertion that bad flips means bad scumhunting... bothers me. I'll remember that.

So in my mind, there's no reason for scum to kill a lurker over someone very townie. There were, presumably, no PRs, there were no conftown players. There was not an outted PR who needed to be framed. The person who was doing some of the best scumhunting was the player who was killed and died. Why go for the sub-optimal route of NKing a lurker? Why let Scripten keep scumhunting and give him the chance to catch scum? Why kill a lurker who is doing nothing, and will just

keep

doing nothing, if allowed to live.

Scum strategy is to eliminate their enemies and cause confusion. I don't see what's wrong with that analysis, even if it is simplistic.

Now, if you want to talk about simplicity: You suggesting I'm trying to do anything subtly is silly-- at least to me. Subtlety is not my forte. I want to be straightforward and clear, for the most part, because everyone can understand me better that way. Good communication is pro-town.

Welcome, goodmorning.

[massive]

Also, I don't see anyway scum-Whiskers allows the scum team to kill Scripten when Scripten is the ONLY person willing to townread Whiskers following the hammer (184-189) and where Whiskers is guaranteed to be the starting wagon on D2.

[goodmorning]

Well, I asked a bunch of questions that no one seems to be bothered to answer (BRO, Whiskers) so what would you like me to do? I can't make everyone else play today.

I did expect at least some acknowledgement of our conversation about the flavour, even so much as a "meh" or "no, that still doesn't make sense."

Scum wouldn't never kill a lurker, but there is very little reason to. It's foolish to say "X

never

does Y" or "X

always

does Y." But the time that scum has reason to kill a lurker are:
Weird Misdirection, such as to create more confusion in LyLo or cause WIFOM
The Lurker is discovered to be a PR
The Lurker is Conftown

stuff like that. They're outliers. It doesn't happen usually.

I don't disagree, though I think you've missed out the most common one - Scum like how the game is going (perhaps they are UT) and don't wish to provide Town with a high-info kill.
Regardless, that's not so much the point, as I'll address in a little bit.

Also, let's look at the actual kill. Scripten was the towniest motherfucker in this game, IMO. Iirc, his scumhunting was sound, even if his results were incorrect. Your assertion that bad flips means bad scumhunting... bothers me. I'll remember that.

I can definitely agree to the term "sound scumhunting" as a good descriptor of Scripten's play. "Good scumhunting," however, does inherently imply good results.
I don't agree that Scripten was the towniest, but I wasn't here so I can't say for sure how I'd have felt in the moment.

So in my mind, there's no reason for scum to kill a lurker over someone very townie. There were, presumably, no PRs, there were no conftown players. There was not an outted PR who needed to be framed. The person who was doing some of the best scumhunting was the player who was killed and died. Why go for the sub-optimal route of NKing a lurker? Why let Scripten keep scumhunting and give him the chance to catch scum? Why kill a lurker who is doing nothing, and will just

keep

doing nothing, if allowed to live.

Scum strategy is to eliminate their enemies and cause confusion. I don't see what's wrong with that analysis, even if it is simplistic.

Again, not really the point. The point is that you laid out very clearly one series of events, maintained that they were the only series of events, and did so in a way that would make newer players believe you were beyond question. The point is that you were being deliberately manipulative.

Now, if you want to talk about simplicity: You suggesting I'm trying to do anything subtly is silly-- at least to me. Subtlety is not my forte. I want to be straightforward and clear, for the most part, because everyone can understand me better that way.

There's nothing subtle about it. I thought I made that clear.

Good communication is pro-town.

WOOSH

Also, I don't see anyway scum-Whiskers allows the scum team to kill Scripten when Scripten is the ONLY person willing to townread Whiskers following the hammer (184-189) and where Whiskers is guaranteed to be the starting wagon on D2.

If Whiskers is going to be the starting wagon anyway then what difference would it make to kill one of the nine people who wanted to wagon him? That would still leave eight alive which would be more than enough to lynch him anyway (and if you subtract 2 Scum who theoretically wouldn't, you still have six which is a full wagon's complement for D2). Whiskers has flat-out said that he thought Scripten could become dangerous to Scum.

[Guyett]

Can we please lynch Bro?

[goodmorning]

You got anything else? Or just lamenting the fact that today's going to be a no-lynch?

[massive]

I did expect at least some acknowledgement of our conversation about the flavour, even so much as a "meh" or "no, that still doesn't make sense."

When you ended your response with "this is just an afterthought," I didn't think you wanted much further conversation. I also don't think flavor is going to be a reason to lynch someone.

If Whiskers is going to be the starting wagon anyway then what difference would it make to kill one of the nine people who wanted to wagon him? That would still leave eight alive which would be more than enough to lynch him anyway (and if you subtract 2 Scum who theoretically wouldn't, you still have six which is a full wagon's complement for D2). Whiskers has flat-out said that he thought Scripten could become dangerous to Scum.

Scripten wasn't going to be on the Whiskers wagon; Scripten was calling Whiskers town. Go back and read those posts I mentioned and tell me if you think killing Scripten wasn't done to prevent him from shouting down the eventual Whiskers wagon D2.

[Guyett]

You got anything else? Or just lamenting the fact that today's going to be a no-lynch?

Look at his posts the day where I was restricted. If he was town he would have made an effort to communicate, instead he went around shouting that I was obv scum without giving reasons and said my attempts at communication were simply scum trying to spam the thread. The was absolutely no town motivation behind those posts of his.
Also VCA makes him look like scum.

[goodmorning]

I did expect at least some acknowledgement of our conversation about the flavour, even so much as a "meh" or "no, that still doesn't make sense."

When you ended your response with "this is just an afterthought," I didn't think you wanted much further conversation. I also don't think flavor is going to be a reason to lynch someone.

Right, but there's still the point I addressed: that Ollie's role PM has "Weaknesses: Objectively none." In the hypothetical world where flavour is relevant, that strikes me as making sense. Does it strike you as making sense or making no sense?

That's the only thing I want to know.

If Whiskers is going to be the starting wagon anyway then what difference would it make to kill one of the nine people who wanted to wagon him? That would still leave eight alive which would be more than enough to lynch him anyway (and if you subtract 2 Scum who theoretically wouldn't, you still have six which is a full wagon's complement for D2). Whiskers has flat-out said that he thought Scripten could become dangerous to Scum.

Scripten wasn't going to be on the Whiskers wagon; Scripten was calling Whiskers town. Go back and read those posts I mentioned and tell me if you think killing Scripten wasn't done to prevent him from shouting down the eventual Whiskers wagon D2.

That was my point. To kill any one of the NINE (or seven, really) people who scumread Whiskers wouldn't make the wagon not happen. Scripten by himself wouldn't have been a very powerful voice in favour of Whiskers, either: his top scumread flipped Town, and no matter how many other people were in the same vote, that makes his opinion less likely to be listened to.

So, given that Scripten was thought of as dangerous by Whiskers and given that literally EVERY OTHER PLAYER was in consensus on Whiskers, there would be no good enough reason not to kill Scripten.

[goodmorning]

You got anything else? Or just lamenting the fact that today's going to be a no-lynch?

Look at his posts the day where I was restricted. If he was town he would have made an effort to communicate, instead he went around shouting that I was obv scum without giving reasons and said my attempts at communication were simply scum trying to spam the thread. The was absolutely no town motivation behind those posts of his.
Also VCA makes him look like scum.

Sorry about that, I'm in kind of a bad mood.

I agree that he's Scum. I meant more like conversation and such.

[Guyett]

If you think he's scum why are you not voting him?

[massive]

Right, but there's still the point I addressed: that Ollie's role PM has "Weaknesses: Objectively none." In the hypothetical world where flavour is relevant, that strikes me as making sense. Does it strike you as making sense or making no sense?

That's the only thing I want to know.

Are you saying that, in a flavour-relevant world, not having a cutesy weakness might be an indicator of scum? I'm confused by what you're saying here.

[Guyett]

GM what is your clubs weakness?