Ok, so I suspect TDS. I'm going to go back and look at all his stuff, and put together something...
Jack: Why did you kill the High Priest?
OSG: What do you think of the closed setup?
spruce: How do you expect this game to go?
Toonyman: What differences do you expect in this game as opposed to a more normal game?
All:
In a single word, describe what you believe what the most important aspect of Mafia is. Expound if you wish.
First word: Voting. If people don't do it, the town tends to lose.
Another word: Dying.
To All:
How many of you have played in earlier Supernatural series of games here, and how have those generally played out? Have they all been run by the same GM? Did they feature the same type of roles (not characters)?
This is my first one.
Darkstar: This makes me curious. Why Dying in particular?
Because it's one of the main things that drives a mafia game. Even with a cult, lynching still occurs.
Jack: Why did you kill the High Priest?
TDS: I didn't. What were you expecting to learn with this question?
Not much, but I generally vote in my first post if I remember to post questions. At the very least, it drives some discussion and helps get the game out of RVS. Unvote.
TheDarkStar: What importance do classic scum tells hold for you? What is the most important scum tell to look for? Or, would answering this question change the answer?
A significant amount, since some of them depend on the fact that the scum generally have insider knowledge. As you've pointed out, listing the most important scumtell would be counterproductive because it would tell the scum what to avoid doing. Why do you ask if you think that it can't be answered?
TheDarkStar: You're the first person to jump the gun and blame someone. Eager beaver?
Indeed.
So... so. I think I missed a question to me. I'll check and answer in the morning.
I can't find a missed question this morning. I guess it was just me responding to the answers gained from TDS and Persus that I needed to do still.
Persus: You were given the town-tell side of the question, and went with talking about the actual tell. The tell you gave is one that's almost impossible to fake; it revolves around knowing something that the scum couldn't know. It's also a late-game tell. You also talked about how town-tells are harder to fake in general.
TDS: You were given the scum-tell side of the question, and chose to go for the fact that answering would change the answer. You also mentioned that scum-tells revolve around people knowing stuff that others don't know; this time the scum knowing things, as opposed to scum NOT knowing things.
Between these two answers you both agree that the most important part of a tell is revealing, either accidentally or on purpose, information that you know that others do not. What I glean from them is WHEN the tell takes place and more importantly who ELSE knows that information is what separates a town-tell from a scum-tell.
Do you agree or disagree?
I agree. A jailor telling who their jail target was essentially confirms the jailor. Scum tend to be less direct, but their actions are often influenced by knowing in advance who's on their side and who isn't.
EBWOP:
Everyone: At what point in the game do you think that you personally are most likely going to be lynched or killed?
If it's day, then today. If it's night, then tonight.
Well, it looks like Day 1 isn't actually over because it got extended. I guess I'll go through the things I missed.
flabort:
That leaves a couple people with zero-to-no activity, EPenguin and OSG coming readily to mind.
In fact, Oragami has been even worse than spruce when it comes to being serious and answering questions straight. His two highest content posts are here and here: "I'm not going to base any arguments of of flavor text" and "My posts will be sparse", though up to that point they already were very sparse. There are a large number of questions directed at OSG which he hasn't answered, at least one of which are mine, and out of six posts four of them were completely shitposts.
Why do you think that a less active person (and one who has life getting in the way) should be lynched? You list your suspicions, but then you vote for someone completely unrelated. Why?
Been busy, just popping in for a bit. From what I read, I don't think that Cheesekake is guilty, but that is mainly a gut feeling. I am getting the
...what?
Two consecutive posts by Peradon and Deus::
Wait a second....
The opening post mentioned Rot. Doesnt rod spread? Wouldnt that imply that this actually is a cult?
And if it is a cult, that would make cheesecake much more suspicious, wouldnt it? Because if he had picked up on that, why didnt he tell us? And if he hadnt, then he got it from his role PM. Or, he could just have been reading the Cult game like he said...
Still, assuming that I'm right about the rot part, that's two-thirds chance that Cheesecake is scum. Thoughts on this theory?
It assumes that each scenario where cheese thinks there is a cult is equally likely, which I wouldn't say is true. On the other hand, I'd likely be voting for anyone else who made that kind of slip, so cheese
Peradon: That logic doesn't make sense. However, it does seem like you're trying to push a lynch on someone who is easily lynchable.
Deus Asmoth: Why would you vote for anyone who made that kind of slip? You voted for someone with three(?) votes on them already, and it's a short post that seems kind of lazy.
Another two consecutive posts:
I'm most suspicious of Teneb right now.
-lengthy explanation-
Yeah, Teneb, you big meanie. Answer the guy with the terrifying avatar.
spruce: Why did you think that Teneb should be voted for, especially so close to the lynch? You posted just after Jack did without adding any additional content, and that seems like you're just trying to push a lynch on someone.
1st and 2nd posts are pretty much standard RQS. Nothing to complain about.
3rd and 4th posts are answering questions.
5th post, he complains about my logic with cheesecake, but doesnt vote on it. He also FoS's DA for putting a lazy vote on cheesecake. He also FoS's spruce for a last minute vote with no question. I find it odd that he finds spruce suspicious, because it seems clear that he was voting based on Jacks post.
Peradon: First: this is basically the classic "Well, it could happen or it could not happen, so it must be a 50% chance" error. While you don't have much information to base your guess of the chance on, you could have at least taken into account some of what we do know. There's no reason whatsoever to think every outcome in the sample space is equally likely, and some good reasons (the lower number of scum than town in any game, the historic dubiousness of 'scumslips') not to. There is information to get you beyond "eh, all outcomes have the same probability" in a Bayesian handling of scumhood chance. To not take it into account in your analysis, while making it easier to give solid numbers, will lead you to silliness and wrongness.
Second: You can easily come up with more plausible scum scenarios for anyone than town. There's usually only one really plausible scenario explaining any action as town (the guy's telling the truth and did things to catch scum), though there are a few rare exceptions, and more plausible scenarios for scum. I can easily pull together a you-style scenario analysis that shows every single player is more likely than not scum, but that would be ridiculous.
Anyway, what do you think of the arguments to lynch Cheesecake now?
I disagree. Yes, there are hidden variables that we dont know about, but thats why its chance. If we knew all hidden variables, we could figure out everything about cheesecake. But we dont, thus why its chance.
Anything that is not that straightforward that is a town action, qualifies as a Gambit in my book. I dont think that Cheesecake would be pulling a gambit, being new to the game, though that is just speculation.
On the cheesecake lynch now, I dont think its a scumslip on his part, because it doesnt look like we have a cult on our hands. If we did, I would be extremely suspicious of him, enough to warrant a vote.
For those of you who say I havent been investigating(Glares at flabort), this is how I investigate. I look at possible scenarios and motives of the person I suspect, and judge how many can be scum-motived and how many can be town-motivated. Then depending on their scumslips or other such things, I'll vote for them. So dont you say I havent been investigating, its just that I dont publicize everything thought I have, only the ones I think are worth mentioning. Combine this with the fact that I dont have as much time in the day devoted to typing up responses as you guys, you get short posts and low post count.
Peradon. The reasoning behind voting for Cheesecake still doesn't make much sense. You said that you carefully considered how scummy people were based on their actions, but your reasoning yesterday didn't argue that at all. Instead, it assumed that all scenarios were equally likely and used that to show that Cheesecake was probably scum. Why the discrepancy?
On the Birdy claim: Well, that is interesting. What makes you so sure that OSG is the Guard? I also visited you last night, so how do know it wasnt me?
Not that it was me, but I think you're being a little too trusting of OSG right now.
Why did you FOS when the question is directed to Birdy? Why did you FOS and not vote, and why is your observation a reason to vote?
Everyone: Since some people seem dead set on revealing part if not all of their and everyone else's roles, what are your thoughts on a mass claim? Personally I think it's too early since we may face a Cult, but I want to know your thoughts.
I dont think we're up against a Cult, but I dont think mass-claiming right now would be a good idea.
Why not?
9) Who else do you suspect?
Roo has been mentioned early and by a loose, loose connection to him, I am suspicious and wary of Epenguin/Tiruin.
How do you manage to get something suspicious out of Epenguin's single RVS post?
TDS's one and only post of the day, he votes for me, based on my logic not making sense in the Cheesecake affair, and for inconsistencies in what I said I do. When he said that I was inconsistent, he misquoted me, and took what he was trying to quote out of context. The following is what he was trying to quote:
Then depending on their scumslips or other such things, I'll vote for them.
In context, I meant that I took their scumslips into account and didnt vote solely on the chance-logic stuff. I thought I made that clear.
But lets just say, for hypothetical reasons, that he did quote me right. It still wasnt an inconsistency, because I voted based on a scumslip that cheesecake did.
This makes the only plausible part of his argument against me my illogical argument. In the previous day, he mentioned it, but did not deem it worthy on its own for a vote. Combine this with the fact that he voted for me after I had a vote from Persus and a vote from Flabort(though he did unvote me), it looks like he is trying to build a false argument against me, and lynch an easy target. Thus,
TDS.
