Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:19 am
What the fuck do you mean? You must be thinking worse of her game that I suspected.
What the fuck do you mean? You must be thinking worse of her game that I suspected.
Page 35 of 65
What the fuck do you mean? You must be thinking worse of her game that I suspected.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:19 am
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:20 am
I'm trying to think of a town motivation for misrepresenting the content in that manner and I really can't.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:20 am
If this is honest, then you have no idea what the parameters of my scum game are.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:23 am
I didn't misrepresent them IMO. I found them and linked them for players to read and make up their own minds if your advice to me was in line with your prior discussions.
So, should I have taken your earlier advice about self-hammering? Or should I have done what I said I would and you said I wouldn't - self hammer if orc agreed I should go?
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:24 am
About this, I think contacting me on gchat to get me to post in this game while you can still post is not okay even though you're lynched. That being said, I'm going to assume that everything you've written has been honest and can be used tomorrow. If you want to change your mind on something specifically, or want to point out that you didn't mean what you wrote in any particular posts at the time you wrote them, please do so.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:25 am
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:26 am
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:30 am
Given that you can be reasonably sure now that you are talking to town-me, is there anything about the game from this point forward that you want to talk about?
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:31 am
Okay I am going to point out that you indeed did misrepresent them in my subsequent post.↑ fferyllt wrote:
I didn't misrepresent them IMO. I found them and linked them for players to read and make up their own minds if your advice to me was in line with your prior discussions.
So, should I have taken your earlier advice about self-hammering? Or should I have done what I said I would and you said I wouldn't - self hammer if orc agreed I should go?
I think that because you're VT and because I wasn't going to seriously look into the possibility of lynching anyone else it is a close call. If you put an orc-gun to my head, I'd have to say that you shouldn't have done it, even if you would have gotten lynched anyway, because we would have gotten one more vote on you to do bandwagon analysis from. And in the case that we somehow didn't, lynching someone else who actually has a possibility of being scum (as oppose to you since you're town), wouldn't have been that bad either. Worst case would be a no-lynch followed by lynching you on day 2, but that's pretty unlikely.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:33 am
I'm still flabbergasted and incredulous that town-you could misread me this badly, to the point that nothing I've posted since I put a vote on you struck you as coming from a town PoV.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:34 am
Read this quote carefully in addition to the one below from the same game:
Do you really think I am arguing that there is a place for self-voting?↑ buldermar wrote:
Your statement entails self-voting being optimal under certain circumstances. Since this is wrong for this setup, me neglecting pointing it out would lead to a net utility loss from the town perspective relative to if I do point it out. I sincerely disagree that pointing something out that would lead to a decreasement in the odds of town winning if omitted qualifies as corner case theory talk.
As for the lack of vote, that's a simple one: I'm convinced that I can obtain more information during this day and thus make a more qualified estimate of peoples alignment before voting. The difference between voting person A before voting person B who gets lynchedandnot voting person A before voting person B who gets lynched is negligible when voting person A is unreasoned (as is the case with random votes). In other words, I simply prefer to postpone voting until I have preferences regarding who to lynch (i.e. until I have some information to base my vote on).
You might object that the random votes themselves is a valid method to obtain such information, and that's in my opinion reasonable. However, I think that discussion without the random votes is an equally valid and viable method.
FWIW I'd like to be proven wrong as the general consensus seems to be that RVS is a necessity.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:37 am
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:38 am
I don't know, I kind of build up my perception of this game on the premise that you'd flip scum - at least since the last couple of pages. I'm going to have to thoroughly reread the game either today or, if I'm not nk'ed, tomorrow.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:39 am
↑ buldermar wrote:Read this quote carefully in addition to the one below from the same game:
Do you really think I am arguing that there is a place for self-voting?↑ buldermar wrote:
Your statement entails self-voting being optimal under certain circumstances. Since this is wrong for this setup, me neglecting pointing it out would lead to a net utility loss from the town perspective relative to if I do point it out. I sincerely disagree that pointing something out that would lead to a decreasement in the odds of town winning if omitted qualifies as corner case theory talk.
As for the lack of vote, that's a simple one: I'm convinced that I can obtain more information during this day and thus make a more qualified estimate of peoples alignment before voting. The difference between voting person A before voting person B who gets lynchedandnot voting person A before voting person B who gets lynched is negligible when voting person A is unreasoned (as is the case with random votes). In other words, I simply prefer to postpone voting until I have preferences regarding who to lynch (i.e. until I have some information to base my vote on).
You might object that the random votes themselves is a valid method to obtain such information, and that's in my opinion reasonable. However, I think that discussion without the random votes is an equally valid and viable method.
FWIW I'd like to be proven wrong as the general consensus seems to be that RVS is a necessity.
You argued that it was "wrong for this setup", not that it was wrong, period. But, I'll grant that my label overstated what I'd gathered from this discussion.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:40 am
There was at least one post that struck me as coming from town and I know I perhaps should have mentioned it but I was still sufficiently convinced that you were town and I didn't want to risk being mislynched over also reading a post as town while insisting on your lynch.↑ fferyllt wrote:
I'm still flabbergasted and incredulous that town-you could misread me this badly, to the point that nothing I've posted since I put a vote on you struck you as coming from a town PoV.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:42 am
Well especially that part made me think that you could not possibly be misrepresenting me like this as town - especially not since you at the time didn't even think i was scum. I think there is in particular one post that I misread...↑ fferyllt wrote:↑ buldermar wrote:Read this quote carefully in addition to the one below from the same game:
Do you really think I am arguing that there is a place for self-voting?↑ buldermar wrote:
Your statement entails self-voting being optimal under certain circumstances. Since this is wrong for this setup, me neglecting pointing it out would lead to a net utility loss from the town perspective relative to if I do point it out. I sincerely disagree that pointing something out that would lead to a decreasement in the odds of town winning if omitted qualifies as corner case theory talk.
As for the lack of vote, that's a simple one: I'm convinced that I can obtain more information during this day and thus make a more qualified estimate of peoples alignment before voting. The difference between voting person A before voting person B who gets lynchedandnot voting person A before voting person B who gets lynched is negligible when voting person A is unreasoned (as is the case with random votes). In other words, I simply prefer to postpone voting until I have preferences regarding who to lynch (i.e. until I have some information to base my vote on).
You might object that the random votes themselves is a valid method to obtain such information, and that's in my opinion reasonable. However, I think that discussion without the random votes is an equally valid and viable method.
FWIW I'd like to be proven wrong as the general consensus seems to be that RVS is a necessity.
You argued that it was "wrong for this setup", not that it was wrong, period. But, I'll grant that my label overstated what I'd gathered from this discussion.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:44 am
Fery, were there any connections between players that you picked up on that'd be good to check tomorrow? Anything from subtle to blatant
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:45 am
↑ buldermar wrote:LOL you pretty much confirmed yourself as scum in this post. If you were town and actually considered me scum you'd think that succesfully getting me lynched would close to confirm you as being town. However, if you're scum who pretends to be thinking that I'm scum but actually knows that I'm not you'd make↑ fferyllt wrote:↑ pitoli wrote:I'm very apprehensive of how quickly we got to L-1 on ffery. The last few pages have been weird honestly and hard for me to read a la ffery's and buldermar's new cases. I like that buldermar at least unvoted whilst not backing down from his position, that makes him seem more town to me than anything else he's done.
Lurker and Nero just seem opportunistic to me, I'd be willing to lynch either of them until they become more open with their reads/reactions to the last couple of pages.
@Sryrana - what made you change your vote so quickly?
@Ffery - I feel like town should fight harder against their own mislynch since you're at least confirmed to yourself, no matter how great your doubts are on another town-looking mislynch. Do you think your lynch would provide the town with the most information?
Never watched BSG so I really don't get the references/significance of claiming Kara, I think that particular point is moot.
I think in general you are right about fighting mislynch. If I am all but certain to be mislynched sooner or later, then sooner may be better, especially if there's something worthwhile to be learned from the bandwagon.exactlythis kind of slip, knowing thateven ifyou get me lynched, you'll be up next once I flip.
Please attempt to explain yourself out of this one.
VOTE: ff
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:46 am
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:47 am
↑ buldermar wrote:↑ buldermar wrote:LOL you pretty much confirmed yourself as scum in this post. If you were town and actually considered me scum you'd think that succesfully getting me lynched would close to confirm you as being town. However, if you're scum who pretends to be thinking that I'm scum but actually knows that I'm not you'd make↑ fferyllt wrote:↑ pitoli wrote:I'm very apprehensive of how quickly we got to L-1 on ffery. The last few pages have been weird honestly and hard for me to read a la ffery's and buldermar's new cases. I like that buldermar at least unvoted whilst not backing down from his position, that makes him seem more town to me than anything else he's done.
Lurker and Nero just seem opportunistic to me, I'd be willing to lynch either of them until they become more open with their reads/reactions to the last couple of pages.
@Sryrana - what made you change your vote so quickly?
@Ffery - I feel like town should fight harder against their own mislynch since you're at least confirmed to yourself, no matter how great your doubts are on another town-looking mislynch. Do you think your lynch would provide the town with the most information?
Never watched BSG so I really don't get the references/significance of claiming Kara, I think that particular point is moot.
I think in general you are right about fighting mislynch. If I am all but certain to be mislynched sooner or later, then sooner may be better, especially if there's something worthwhile to be learned from the bandwagon.exactlythis kind of slip, knowing thateven ifyou get me lynched, you'll be up next once I flip.
Please attempt to explain yourself out of this one.
VOTE: ff
Yep, I wrote that in the middle of my first "what if I'm wrong?" brainstorm.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:49 am
The main thing I picked up was that neither you nor SD had a scum read on me. It looked like distancing.
You could argue that Lurker also distanced but he's completely disconnected from the game afaict.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:50 am
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:53 am
pitoli, orc & buld are town
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:53 am
In truth I thought your paranoia always made you look rather town...