Mafiascum.net

Statistically, it was proven that town who no-lynch on Day One lost about twice as much as town who did not.

I'll see if I can find the thread.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Someone claimed a PR, they were lynched, they flipped said PR. Town is it's own worst enemy sometimes.

Show me where this happened on D1. Incresingly scum read on you for trying to sell such an anti-town logic as "No-lynch is better on D1".

I voted no lynch because I have no clue who scum is. This isn't anti-town, straw man. This is a legitimate tactic. Meta me.

This isn't the thread I was looking for, but it does show that twice there was a Day One no-lynch and both times Mafia won: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?t=13224

Stats mean nothing to me, as they are rarely 100% accurate, and you're basing stats off 2 games, when thousands of games have been on this site.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:I voted no lynch because I have no clue who scum is. This isn't anti-town, straw man. This is a legitimate tactic. Meta me.

This is even worse. If you don't know who scum is then try to find them, don't just wait for them to come out and say "hi, I am mafia". It is anti town cause you tried to sell the idea. If you don't know who to vote you can always unvote and let your vote rest till you have clearer reads. If you are asking me to meta you, means you are aware of your own playstyle and therefore can change it easily. Also you didn't said you had only 1 game in the site before this?

Imo, having your vote on nothing is worse than having your vote on town, if you are town, or likewise if you're scum. It doesn't help forward the game any.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:I voted no lynch because I have no clue who scum is. This isn't anti-town, straw man. This is a legitimate tactic. Meta me.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=13969

try again.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Imo, having your vote on nothing is worse than having your vote on town, if you are town, or likewise if you're scum. It doesn't help forward the game any.

no, it does. having your vote on no one and refusing to give stances is much, much worse.

try again.

Again, stats mean nothing to me.

that's a sample size of 867 games.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Imo, having your vote on nothing is worse than having your vote on town, if you are town, or likewise if you're scum. It doesn't help forward the game any.

This directly contradicts your vote.

Are you just arguing to argue?

I have my vote on a no lynch. That's something. I mean literally not voting.

I equate no lynch with a non-vote.

And totally ignoring statistics is dumb.

no lynch is a non vote because we aren't no lynching today and you are using it as an excuse not to participate in the game. who are your suspects and why? what do you find scummy and why?

How is it dumb? I believe all stats are rigged in one way or another, and therefor choose experience over anything. Nacho, did you not read my reason for a voting no lynch? I explained my reads there. I'm currently ISOing, but finding nothing.

from my experience, no lynch has never ever ever been a good idea. stats back that up.
and yes, i did. you won't always find something amazing. so ask other people who have reads to explain theirs more, find someone town and sheep them, vote someone in order to get a reaction.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Are we positive we have scum in this game?

Why are you trying to derail Town from scumhunting? Obviously, there's Scum. In fact, there are two of them.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Not necessarily. Wanna see some games where it happened? Meta me.

You have been in four or five games. In my opinion, that's not enough for building a meta case of somebody — and, unless you have literally hundreds of games to work with, and the player you're reading is somewhat predictable, you can kiss goodbye to that sweet meta case defending your status as Town.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Someone claimed a PR, they were lynched, they flipped said PR. Town is it's own worst enemy sometimes.

I am interpreting this as you further wanting to seed plants of confusion in Town's mind. Why would you state that "Town is its worst enemy sometimes"?

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:*shrug* it's worked before, that's all I'm saying.

Please give me links to at least one hundred games that it has worked without anyone whining about the massive WIFOM status that analysing NKs has. Yeah, you won't find that many of those.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Stats mean nothing to me, as they are rarely 100% accurate, and you're basing stats off 2 games, when thousands of games have been on this site.

The statistics that are being talked about are based off of more than 850 games. They indeed have some merits.

↑ fuzzybutternut wrote:Again, stats mean nothing to me.

Things based in facts mean nothing to you? What is this bullshit?

UNVOTE: Approximately Normal Guy
VOTE: fuzzybutternut

Just read over all this no-lynch nonsense and I'll agree with the majority here.

Nolynch lets Mafia sit back and kill town without any participation.

What I think is the -real- reason that fuzzy suggested a no-lynch is to see how other people would respond to that suggestion, so that he could get better reads.
That would work if he was a noob like me, but he's been in plenty of games, so it is way more suspicious.

Either way, I think lynching someone, or, at the very least, the discussion of lynching someone, will give us way more info then something as disengaging and non-confrontational as a no-lynch.

For the record, Nacho's 207 is an obvious Town post, so he's a strong townread of mine.

Why is it an obvious town post?

↑ Varsoon wrote:What I think is the -real- reason that fuzzy suggested a no-lynch is to see how other people would respond to that suggestion, so that he could get better reads.

Maybe. But if that's what his purpose was, I don't see why he would suggest people look at his meta. That seems more like scum showing that it's an established pattern and thus doesn't actually make him scum, which wouldn't make me even a little bit happy.

Ugh, I keep wanting to clear Yoshi of suspicion I have of him, but he keeps buddying with "X is town" and slamming votes against whoever we're against, like he's trying to get a wagon started.

Keeping my vote on him,
Fuzzy is my second choice for scum. His last play is either a bold, but obvious scumtell, or what I described above.

@Nacho:
It's combating the main issue with voting no lynch: there is no votee to react to being voted, which gives Town less things to work with. Sure, Scum could also do that, but with your recent posts it doesn't make much sense to call it a scummy post.

↑ Nachomamma8 wrote:

↑ Varsoon wrote:What I think is the -real- reason that fuzzy suggested a no-lynch is to see how other people would respond to that suggestion, so that he could get better reads.

Maybe. But if that's what his purpose was, I don't see why he would suggest people look at his meta. That seems more like scum showing that it's an established pattern and thus doesn't actually make him scum, which wouldn't make me even a little bit happy.

You're right, he's being really defensive of that move.

It falls in line with an earlier assessment that I made of him being scummy.

↑ Varsoon wrote:Ugh, I keep wanting to clear Yoshi of suspicion I have of him, but he keeps buddying with "X is town" and slamming votes against whoever we're against, like he's trying to get a wagon started.

yeah, i see this too.
do you think he'd be more cautious of sheeping as scum if he was already called out for it once?