Mafiascum.net

Espeonage, renaissance, PranaDevil
Emperor flippyNips, CooLDoG, Hiraki
Gypyx, AGar
notscience, LicketyQuickety
gobbledygook
Hoopla
UnaBombaH

Emperor flippyNips has been prodded.

In post 368, AGar wrote:

In post 359, CooLDoG wrote:

In post 344, AGar wrote:Yeah with your "scumhunting" style, I'm not gonna really buy into your hype. This looks a lot like trying to start up a bus.

This is the only reason given for voting for him. This is obviously an association tell. So, yeah. dumb or scumb. you decide.

Yeah, no I told you to re-read because I don't think Gobble is trying to bus gypyx you stain.

P-Edit:

We agree on at least one member of the scumteam. Gratz. Almost like I've even said that before responding to YOUR QUESTION.

So you go from hard scumreading Gypyx to voting with Gypyx, right...

In post 309, LicketyQuickety wrote:VOTE: Gypyx

Could you provide any explainations for that vote though?

In post 259, renaissance wrote:I like Gypyx because he's been proactively giving reads and engaging for the most part. It helps that he's a newbie too.

On the traitor thing: I think it's probably fine and some cosmic brain paranoia, but Gypyx, have you ever played with traitors before? Where did you learn about them?

I haven't played with traitors before, but I played with a lot of traitor-like roles, and even a playstyle often leading to stuff similar to traitor signals on minecraft (don't judge me)
I learned about the MS traitor while i was going through every single role in the wiki

great job dude. Keep up the good work hiraki.

Also, gyphix, sheep with us and vote hoopla.

Also, gobbles, stop worrying about agar, start scum hunting more. Vote for hoopla also. We can vote for espe later.

I am scumhunting lol. Agar’s play makes no sense. I think he was trying to distance from Espeonage when he called him out for the ??? inclusion of notscience in that “night prep talk”

Now Agar is doing everything in his power to not vote Espeonage, including voting with his second strongest scumread. That’s totally town.

It puzzles me why you two agree on the same read then.

In post 310, Hoopla wrote:the town bloc is starting to formulate. gobbledygook has earned himself an invitation. gypyx is clearly town.

current members:

hoopla (president)
gobbledygook
notscience
renaissance
gypyx

~~

listening to the advice of fellow board members, it appears agar's name was being tossed around. i agree, he has potential and has been showing some promising signs. but can a peaceful organisation like the honorable town bloc contain his abrasive energy? too early to tell in this humble observer's opinion. lets consider him an affiliated member for the time being while things unfold. we still have plenty of good lynching options:

flippy nips
lickety quickety
hiraki
prana
una
espeonage
cooldog

^is my current vision for the lynching pool. in my upcoming posts i expect to narrow the pool once more and close in on these scumbags. i hope the esteemed town bloc members are on the same page.

So hoopla, your lynch list is basically the player list, and i don't really like gooble and renaissance being in your townbloc
Gooble, i'm still uncomfortable on him, even though i'd need to re-read his ISO
And Renaissance, i don't really see where you're pulling the townread from

gyphx. It's a hoopla, espe renassance scum read. Vote for hoopla. You know that list is scummy as hell. She says she is town hunting, but doesn't really provide reasons for it. AND her lynch pool is basically the entire town so she can wagon hop. Vote hoopla. You know this is the correct choice.

In post 372, UnaBombaH wrote:

In post 347, renaissance wrote:@Umbreon: You're right about the wiki layout, but why do you think knowing traitors are normal is the same thing as knowing "how common they are"? Something might be normal, but that doesn't tell you how often they're included by mods.

I'm not sure what more I can say on this, and I honestly do not feel like doing it anymore either. But.
WHY did he feel the need to ask how common they are?
He can see it from the Normal Guidelines that they EXIST, that is all the relevant information.
If they are ultra-rare - so what?
If they are in almost any game - so what?
Instead of immediately coming out with their "theory" on scum!Espe (it was Espe right?) based on an assumption of a Traitor, they felt the need to ask how common they are first.
So, why?

They felt like making a post with the sole purpose of mentioning a "traitor"?
Or they DIDN'T check the wiki at all - which raises the question why so many already assumed they had checked the role there and therefore mentioning it isn't scummy at all...

Well, frequence of a traitor kinda matters for the priority at which a traitor read should be treated right?
And where are you pulling the theory of me not checking the wiki? Looks like you're just going for easy suspicion

^100% correct about frequency dictating how you should play around it.

Stop defending yourself, start scum hunting. Or more importantly, vote for hoopla.

I thought notscience’s opening posts about Hoopla and her preferences were super contrived too. Then when notscience started hard townreading Agar for an over aggressive stance on Gypyx’s traitor stuff I started to get suspicious of them.

I think I am most confident in my Agar scumread. I will support your Hoopla wagon in spirit be ca use the points you brought up about town hunting are valid. I would imagine that it’s easier to fake town hunting than scumhunting as scum.

In post 384, CooLDoG wrote:gyphx. It's a hoopla, espe renassance scum read. Vote for hoopla. You know that list is scummy as hell. She says she is town hunting, but doesn't really provide reasons for it. AND her lynch pool is basically the entire town so she can wagon hop. Vote hoopla. You know this is the correct choice.

Idk, i kinda think hoopla is just trying to builld a towncore, but doesn't find the correct material to build one so just does it with trash arguments, which could be due to her playstyle

it seems everyone's a critic these days!

that's ok. please allow me, dear reader, a post of navel-gazing contemplation. this will be an attempt to illuminate my thought processes, and hopefully restore some faith in my posting brand.

~~

the crux of my disagreements with players like cooldog is that we value different things on day 1. cooldog seems to think the purpose of day 1 is lynching scum. this a classical view. i'd say most players agree with this view.

unfortunately, the grim reality of day 1's is they are a largely random affair. it's true! historically, the day 1 lynch hits scum little more than random. so, why the objective posturing from players like cooldog, who think they've nailed scum in a gamestate devoid of any information? does he actually believe with conviction he has scum pinned at a much higher rate than random? the fact that i am town calls into question his surety.

is he merely exaggerating his suspicion on me? is he reading too much into things aren't alignment-indicative and passing it off as useful scumhunting? is he scum? or is he perhaps just incompetent? we don't know yet.

we don't know, because we don't have much information in the game yet. i refuse to pretend my suspicions are much better than random before we've had any roleclaims, flips, or substantial wagons. these events are the beginning of information. do i have my intuitions? yes, of course. but they are just that. and my intuition is honed from large scale data collection and attempting to look at broad trends.

~~

this leads me to my opinions on day 1 and what view its purpose is. in my observations, towns often struggle with organising a lynch before deadline. 30% of day 1's end with a lynch on an unclaimed player. this occurs because town's wait until the 11th hour to organise a lynch, then when a roleclaim comes, all of a sudden things change. the gamestate has changed. information - real information - has finally come into the game, and they now only have 24 hours to organise a new lynch, and lo and behold it lands on some random townie, as any vote can be justified in a deadline panic.

this is an all too familiar pattern of how day 1's often go. town's don't actually realise what real information is. they spend the day in petty arguments over their favourite behavioural tells, proudly proclaiming XYZ is an oh so objective tell, and not merely flavour of the month.

this is all well and good. we do need players engaging in these little dances. we even need players to mistakenly believe their reads on day 1 are better than random. you simply have to "fake it til you make it", so to speak, with day 1 scumreads. then, once you've said them enough, they crystalise.

but...

i refuse to participate in this charade. i know my biases too well, and dislike pretending i am much better than random. on day 1, i see my role more as the "benevolent head of content curation". i prefer to engage lurkers, and ensure they can't skirt by. a balance of voices is crucial to producing a readable, yet informative day 1 for future rereading. i prefer to push wagons and accelerate the game, and readily encourage others to do the same. in my eyes, we should have the first L-1 wagon organised before the halfway point of day 1. that way, we have enough time to assess the claim and deal with the fallout.

i focus on these things because they are +EV. this is my way of trying to achieve my win condition. it's probably not best if everyone played like me, but every town needs one of me. a functioning town takes all types. i'm not asking anyone to change their ways, but i'm asking others to consider mine.

you'll get more a focused approach to scumhunting in the traditional sense from me post-claims and flips. until then, to me it is all one big hoopla.

I’ll be back tomorrow I need the night off to recover

I understand cooldog a question now

I see what you’re saying, but I wasn’t really a fan of the wagon on you or the wagon on hoopla.

I have a tinfoil theory in my head that this is the only way hoopla can keep herself interested as scum but I’m not sure how crazy it is. And I just don’t have the urge to lynch you. I didn’t really feel like you were town at that point like I kinda do now but I just got the heebie jeebies from that wagon

And at least that way there was a leading wagon on someone I think should be dead

yeah, we should basically lynch hoopla. Her post is, in essence, "yeah, d1 is garbage, lynch whoever". scumy, scumy, scumy. Not even trying to scum hunt. Terrible.

Not scum hunting and rolling the dice is ev negative for sure dude. If you think your gut is 1% better than random, you should go with your gut.

Also, note what her strat is: Let's run someone up to l-1, then pivot to the alt wagon. Get them to claim, repeat until time runs out and lynch someone. Let's just try and out all the power roles d1. terrible.

In post 382, CooLDoG wrote:It puzzles me why you two agree on the same read then.

What do you mean by this?

In post 394, CooLDoG wrote:Not scum hunting and rolling the dice is ev negative for sure dude. If you think your gut is 1% better than random, you should go with your gut.

i'm not dice rolling. i just base my day 1 decision making process on a wider range of factors. a special blend of intuition, pseudo-PoE formulations, assessments of players utility (value if town, scumhunting ability, lurking frequency, expected transparency post-d1 etc), and data-based observations using my patented system of "Holistic Abstracts and Heuristic Analytics" (or H.A.H.A for short). these are all factors that i believe offer greater +EV boosts on D1 than pure scumhunting. at least, that is, until we transition to a post-claim game.

here is a fun example:

from the last two years of 3:10 mini normals, i've recorded the alignment of every post made on D1 to assess the lurking frequency of scum. the ratio of scum in 3:10 games is a shade over 23%, so we'd expect that scum would post 23% of the time if lurking was a neutral factor. across 48,000 D1 posts, only 18% were scum's. and of the 50 games i surveyed, only 11 had games where scum had a higher posting average than 23%. if we lynched based on just that factor alone, and lynched a lurker in the bottom half or bottom third of the playerlist, we're doing much better than random. there is likely a much higher density of scum. it wouldn't surprise me if two or three scum were here:



of course, this is just one factor of many. it's not always about pure scumhunting. sometimes its about pruning the town in a wholesome way. ensuring a balance of voices. making sure we don't end up waffling for 50+ pages before choosing a lynch. this can make day 1 unreadable for future analysis, and create less accurate lynches later. carrying negative utility players like lurkers, spammers, thoughtless memers past D1 carries risk too, as it makes future days less productive. if d1 lynches are close to random (and they are), why not use the day 1 lynch as a form of utility lynch and drop some deadwood, and improve future days' odds? or at least factor in such things with your scumhunting.

can we please start building some fun wagons?

cooldog, for all his naive posturing is at least active, and will likely appear quite easy to read on future days. he is a suboptimal utility lynch.
gypyx is likely only scum there is a traitor. his alignment could sort itself out without us guessing, if one were to flip at some point. he is also active and fairly transparent.
gobbledygook is a solid contributor with thoughtful posts.
and my wagon? perhaps the worst of all.


i am signalling a seachange. please consider a flippy vote. the only time he really participated was when he was under pressure from an earlier wagon. he somehow memed his way out of contention and his slipped into active-lurking. it's time.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: flippy

In post 397, Hoopla wrote:

In post 394, CooLDoG wrote:Not scum hunting and rolling the dice is ev negative for sure dude. If you think your gut is 1% better than random, you should go with your gut.

i'm not dice rolling. i just base my day 1 decision making process on a wider range of factors. a special blend of intuition, pseudo-PoE formulations, assessments of players utility (value if town, scumhunting ability, lurking frequency, expected transparency post-d1 etc), and data-based observations using my patented system of "Holistic Abstracts and Heuristic Analytics" (or H.A.H.A for short). these are all factors that i believe offer greater +EV boosts on D1 than pure scumhunting. at least, that is, until we transition to a post-claim game.

here is a fun example:

from the last two years of 3:10 mini normals, i've recorded the alignment of every post made on D1 to assess the lurking frequency of scum. the ratio of scum in 3:10 games is a shade over 23%, so we'd expect that scum would post 23% of the time if lurking was a neutral factor. across 48,000 D1 posts, only 18% were scum's. and of the 50 games i surveyed, only 11 had games where scum had a higher posting average than 23%. if we lynched based on just that factor alone, and lynched a lurker in the bottom half or bottom third of the playerlist, we're doing much better than random. there is likely a much higher density of scum. it wouldn't surprise me if two or three scum were here:



of course, this is just one factor of many. it's not always about pure scumhunting. sometimes its about pruning the town in a wholesome way. ensuring a balance of voices. making sure we don't end up waffling for 50+ pages before choosing a lynch. this can make day 1 unreadable for future analysis, and create less accurate lynches later. carrying negative utility players like lurkers, spammers, thoughtless memers past D1 carries risk too, as it makes future days less productive. if d1 lynches are close to random (and they are), why not use the day 1 lynch as a form of utility lynch and drop some deadwood, and improve future days' odds? or at least factor in such things with your scumhunting.

Hoopla for madame President

VOTE: Hoopla