This would seem to indict scene only as without scene at 2 votes both ZFR and SPF would be lynched. So scene at 2 is actually better odds for ZFR and SPF survival. As I've said before I'm not convinced scene is scum yet. Perhaps scene was a convenient wagon that never quite took off.

However if you think it starts off with agent voting scene then you have.

Agent votes scene (scene at 2 bler, agent)
flub votes Joe (joe at 1 flub)
ZFR votes Joe (joe at 2 flub, ZFR)
Ixam votes joe (joe at 3, flub, ZFR, Ixam)
bler and agent both lament scene wagon not talking off and vote joe to 5 instead

Viewed like this is seems like joe's joking posting style gets him some attention from flub, ZFR, and Ixam and then bler and agent hop on the new wagon.

Possible but I think its probably a little too transparent for 2 scum to be the only players on someone's wagon even someone as polarizing as scene.

I'm not sold on bler one way or the other.
Agent feels a little scummy to me. I haven't liked the non answers regarding flub. There was something else that I don't quite remember but then he mentioned some meta tactics in post 176 that I had in the back of my mind and I started leaning a little town on him. Not the scum sniping part but the fact that town can lynch each other all day without scum involvement due to not needing an absolute majority.

For what its worth I don't like lynching Joe here. He seems too loud and too obvious to be mafia. Maybe neutral as some have suggested.

All of this sounded much better and made more since in my head.

Yes post 104 from Joe:

Seems to me like if Joe thought ZFR was a little touchy he should have poked ZFR not SPF.

And in my prior post it was supposed to say sense not since.

This is my last post of the night and I won't be around before end of day tomorrow. I'm leaving my vote on ZFR and I don't think Joe is a good target right now, just seems convenient for some.

Finally made it back, if anyone is here and wants to chat, shout out. Now to catch up...

lol

Well, I probably shouldn't give you too much crap for that since I did roughly the same thing. Fair enough.

Hard no. Other than maybe HSL (though maybe he doesn't feel this way anymore, but he used to) I think I read her as well as anyone. She plays close to the chest D1 always (for various reasons) and her game is easily underestimated. But no red pings at all.

Plus, I'd put money that - other than myself - she's the one player that I would wager would play as pro-town if they drew neutral. And that has value.

Don't get me wrong - I'm reading zfr pinging green slightly, but if magically somehow today's vote came down to the two of them hypothetically...I'd save her, probably. No offense to ZFR.

The short version is at various points I've thought all those things trying to sort the response. I started with maf, and then it started to feel like a true believer. But no, I don't really have faith he'll self-resolve, but barring a major change of heart that will likely not be my problem one way or the other - so have fun with that.

I don't think seriously re-opening this can of tunnel worms right now is wise, and I'm a bit surprised you do.

1. Noted
2. well, it's a highly secret code.

To crack it, you start by taking the first letter in the word.

Then replace it, by shifting one letter backwards. Triple-check to make sure it's been done correctly.

Take the second letter, and shift 26 letters (take care to use the English alphabet) in either direction. Insert that letter into the second spot.

Read the result, then assume the poster either doesn't edit their posts carefully (or at all), or that they intentionally misspelled a single word hoping you'd find it and ask about it later ;)

Though I suppose in #53 I did intentionally misspell in a post or two to breadcrumb. So if that's your motive, fair enough. This is not a breadcrumb. Just a typo.

I think I could, yes.

Agreed. Definitely don't claim dishonestly.

Would you hear it if I did? It is a long distance...unless you're BUGGING MY COMPUTER!

That's not true. The decision bell marks the transition from phase 1 to phase 2 and the only thing that happens then is non-voting players voting for themselves. The player(s) with the most votes getting lynched happens when the day ends.
That situation would have to have persisted for at least a day and a half after the bell for it to result in a lynch.

Apologies if that's all obvious, but earlier on P1na seemed to misunderstand this aspect and I wasn't sure if you were too.

All that aside, it's an interesting point. I find ZFR's hopping around to be particularly interesting.

I've mostly lost track of who has what opinion on meta. agent and HSL both seem overly fixated on it imo. Of course people are going to be inconsistent about what they like/don't like about how OTHER people use meta, while perfectly comfortable with all the times we all use it to the extent it suits us.

I should probably re-read it, but my gut sense of your Joe post was that you said a lot of things I had basically said, just in a superior, smarter fashion. Is that unfair? I wasn't going to call you on it since it legit felt like we were agreeing on the general substance, but I'm curious why you're picking this particular nit.

Would I put money on it, no. By D1 standards, I feel reasonably good about it, compared to firing randomly in completely chaotic fashion or worse (I'm pretty much consistently not a fire drill fan), and definitely compared to other current options.

We're roughly...12ish hours to deadline, maybe, and I don't expect to be around tomorrow until afternoon PST, at the earliest, by which point the day will almost certainly be closed. I'm not voting ZFR. Probably won't know til post-game, but I'm curious right now how many of the people voting him would say they actually read him closely AND are town.


I don't follow - where does my play time vs. Ix's come in to this segment of the discussion?

As for the rest, same issue as above - when I voted you, here's what I see:

~36 hours to deadline (I think, but definitely <2 days). No viable wagon even STARted yet for later analysis, much less to build meaningfully / in any organized fashion that would allow people to assess who jumped on/off over a natural wagon lifespan.

I did manage to sneak online very briefly this morning which I hadn't expected, but I knew I likely wouldn't be online for the final stretch to vote-jockey. If it ends up taking you to claim Friday, or another wagon takes off, great, because then I have Friday night to make a final assessment/decision.

So, why am I restricted only to the players with multiple votes? Because starting a new wagon is so beyond sound strategy at that point in the game day, EEEEVEN if I were a player with great charisma who people naturally piled on every wagon I ever started. (Guess if that's so)

To what great mecca of organized wagon-making are you proposing I toga up and lead my people out of the great sand desert of D1?

No one besides agent/I is eyeballing scene that I can see. It's not even worth re-reading agent to see if it's worth weighing rejoining cristi at that point because no one else besides the two of us seemed to be eyeballing him at that point (ok, well, and scene, but that appears to be 100% OMGUS I want no part of), unless I missed it. I'd be moving from one going-nowhere 2 vote wagon to another. In regards to D1 vote, flub IS flub even if I were inclined to vote him which I'm not I don't see him getting numbers. I'm not voting cristi, or ZFR. Ix is a non-presence. Mud I was liking, though the vote / explanation doesn't thrill me. Etc.

I know you probably won't, but go back and look at the argument I had with Vitek in game #53 where I was pushing for consolidating wagons 4 DAYS before deadline so there would be time to, you know, work with them. No one agreed with me, and everyone pissed around and waited to make any real move until the last 24 hours and SPF skated with a late fake claim, that might well have been talked out if we'd had time to consider the options instead of jamming a decision into the end.

No fire drills. No standing on the sidelines if you aren't happy with the options. They are the options. Even if sometimes, yeah, that means you/me end up biting it.

Sick child interruption...brb.


I'm sorry, I'd really prefer to spend this time making jokes and having fun. But...

1. Okay, all that analysis is fine logically/theoretically. Nice work. Very sound. Statistically significant.

The practical problem, though, is that all the logic/theory seems to rest entirely on the underlying, unspoken, premise that D1 would ever, under any circumstances, end with the leading wagon(s) having 2 votes.

That's just not realistic.

And again, we waited til fricking phase 2 (<48 hours, semi-ambiguous deadline) to make ANY WAGON AT ALL, in a game with 3 factions, and where maj is not required (see: ZFR vote on Joe). Which blows a number of our standard assumptions (even ignoring the frequency with which we've no lynched of late), and waiting like we always do was probably not, you know, going to result in ideal, normal game activity. I mean, you could end up being completely right (though I'm not sure what the conclusion was, exactly).

It could be everyone looked at the field, and decided in their calmest towniest fashion that, hey, this IS our last chance to make a good wagon - let's band together! All town on the Joe wagon! It could be mafia protecting a teammate (ZFR/SPF/scene?). Meh. It could be town/neutral looking and thinking, holy shit - the leading wagon has 2-3 votes! If I don't help consolidate the lynch could quickly shift to me, and I could be in that random draw to be lynched with 3 bleeping votes worst-case!

I guess I'm not clear now if this is real concern on your part (you are the reluctant voter, after all) or if this is trying to look deeply concerned while justifying not getting taking sides on any of the leading wagons (as maf or neutral) since you have nothing actually riding on the outcome.

pre-post edit: Huh. Well, SPF made the same argument in 10% of the verbiage. Well done him.

EBWOP: And now, somewhat delightfully, we are set up to have a meta conversation about meta. Nice work all - we did it! Whoo!

[Game out]
FWIW, I will ponder, and chat with Lift overnight on his view, and make a firm commitment to suck it up and play through/around the issue, or bow out one way or the other - assuming a sub were to be available in the latter case, and that my slot is alive at that point. I don't think subs are great for games (even when the beat the alternative), esp. if you start ending up needing multiple slots replaced.

I don't think the current conflict is good for this game, and the whole non-game stuff blurring into the game is definitely bad for the game full stop.

thanks, and again, very sorry for my part in the distraction.

Sorry, sorry everyone. I neglected to respond to one thing I really wanted to address but forgot to. Last post of the night (and potential the Day), I swear.

2. I agree. And actually, I probably wouldn't read that as wolfy from you specifically compared to others anyway even if you were ringing that bell. It would suit your personality. Metaaaaaaaa! Whoo!

1. So, I do truly hesitate to open this can of worms after saying I didn't want to get back into scene. But since I'm voting you partly on it I think you probably deserve a chance to respond.

When I posted this, the insinuation was that I find it interesting in this case for two reasons:
I) Unless I missed it (which I certainly may've), you've never said really anything specifically about why you wolf read me in that instance. Sure, a bit of OMGUS probably, but, you know, it's pretty hard to assess "why" you are wrong without any explanation of what your actual argument was. Thus...motivation?

II) I'm not saying this is a lock, but it did occur to me when you made the play you could well:
(a) be w/w with scene stepping in to defend, or perhaps now seeming more likely(?)
(b) be w/t (or w/n) with scene, trying to pocket/buddy him initially.

He RVS voted you (67/68) just as you RVS voted him. Though...despite that coincidence, eh...gutcheck probably not w/w. But if you flip wolf I'll one of the guests vocalists from Stylo revisit.

@bler - I hope you stay with us. I don't think Hyper was intending to re-stir the pot. I don't think he does that regardless. My impressions is things have settled down and can move forward. Whatever you decide, best wishes for you.


After nodding off a few times, I am caught up. Let's see if I can make sense of my thoughts.

What? You mean the sentence 'if all of them die in the process?' No, that's not a typo. That's just the attitude of the nice villagers that locked you in. But rules-wise you are correct. If two tie both die. If three or more tie I throw a die and only one dies.

Correct.

Nah. Don't worry. I haven't bugged your computer. I just have an agreement with the NSA. ;-)

Here are my impressions so far...

muddy - a new player who is doing a good job of getting their footing. Short of a major slip, I won't vote a new player day 1. And in this case, I don't see cause anyway. Leaning town.

Ixam - I gave Ixam too much credit in #117. I had just read post #113 which felt more townie than what I remember from Ixam. I often have a hard time following Ixam, but #113 just felt natural. He hasn't posted much but I don't get any sense of a scum agenda so far. Would like to hear more from him. Leaning town.

bler - I don't know if this is accurate, but as bler can read me, I probably have the easiest time reading him. I read bler as town. There is a slight chance he is playing pro-town neutral, but I'm not sure how he would approach neutral. I can say that if bler was Lyncher, bler would never be as obvious as scene seems to think. I'd wager bler is simply town.

@bler - have you ever played neutral? You are right that if I was neutral, I would be playing for town. You can scum hunt without needing to lie - nothing has to feel forced. I am town this game, but I would enjoy being neutral.

Hyper - has confused me a little in his post today (the vote count analysis) for much the same reason that bler and SPF stated. But I don't think it's AI. Hyper can play scum as competently as town on D1. I have not been able to distinguish the two until a later Day. For that reason, I have him squarely null.

@Hyper - did you expect the votes to stay at 2 a piece? While this observation is true:
"If that status remained, one of the three would be randomly lynched."
It is highly unlikely. I can see something potentially going on in the vote shifting, but I have no conclusions.
Are you looking at voting anyone besides P1na?
Have you played neutral before?

Let's get this part posted.

Oh, she did? I don't remember that at all. And you're right, I was killed and I just moved away and didn't bother checking how the game ended at all, so I don't know how things turned out.

Who is on the veteran team? Well, when I said that it was the people that, in my head, have been playing for long. Probably all of you have more experience than me, but some have been on this for a really long time. As in, the people I remember talking to from my games years ago, basically. That would be flubbucket, HSL, SPF (he's a lot more trustworthy now that I can see his face(s) and joe, basically. You stand out from the group as an individual because of your walls of text, and me having developed an individual opinion on you (which was I really would like you to be town, basically. I think I mentioned it before).

Really though, I don't intend to take my analysis too deep. Take your squabble with scene for instance: my first impression is that you're town, and at first I thought he was too since he felt sincere and was just misguided. But then scene seems to really push on that front, that's not so town? Which would reinforce you being town. But perhaps you're both mafia and you knowingly fight each other knowing whoever survives will look townier than ever... It's a neverending rabbit hole, and I have to pull the brakes at some point if i am to take any action.

Incorrect. You'd "heh" if you weren't dead. Also I don't really see the inconsistency but I'm happy to explain if you disagree, basically it's a person/player distinction.

Of course I'm an easy target, I'm a fruit. I don't even have my hat here.

I don't. You do. Therefore, me reading you is harder, as I have less information. It also means I don't care as much though.

Did I think it would immediately get him killed? no. Did I feel unconfortable about personally causing someone to stand out as the most voted candidate? Yes.

Regarding the double lynch thing going on: I don't think the double lynch is a good idea, if only because ideally we want more nights for the town roles to do their job. Lynch is indeed the town's main weapon, but if we just lynch randomly (which is essentially what D1 lynch is) chances are we help Mafia more. On later nights it may be useful, and certainly if we know that town's cop is dead.

aWell, now I've read it all. I have to say, this game is way more time intensive than I remember, it's taken me... over an hour? two? just to catch up with reading posts. By the end it was hard to not just skim those posts. And now my head is exhausted and I don't want to think anymore, but I really have to change my joke vote. Yet now it's almost certainly going to be final, so I have think about it.

Ugh. I think I like it better when there's a lot of players and my vote doesn't count for much, at least in the beginning.

So, what are my thoughts? My dear Flub still strikes me as barely trying. As I mentioned above, scene lately seems to be trying too hard. voting for either would be pointless at this stage. I want to get official recognition of HSL death, but that's also not very useful. I like Joe quite a bit, it feels like he jokes around just like I like to do, but he does seem to move his vote around a lot for no real reason, and nailing him seems to be the easiest. And I'm tired of thinking, plus it's D1 anyway. So sorry Joe, but I'll be going for you.Your death means I live to vote another day, which was my goal to start with. Unless I get nightkilled.

unvote ZFR , vote Joe

not sure when it's the deadline, but I'll try to check the thread before that to see if there are any new developments. And now, if you'll excuse me, I'll go play Devil May Cry and let my brain take a rest.

Part II

flubb - I have no read on flubb. Perhaps I'm flub-shy after the last game we played. I don't see whatever bler is referring to concerning flubb.

@flubb - has any of the discussion today swayed your view on Joe?

agent - I left my vote on agent in #121 because up to that point, agent's contributions had been minimal. That has obviously changed since then. He certainly stepped up his game. I mostly follow his reasoning. One point I don't understand is his high ranking of flubb. (And I like that muddy continues to press him about it). There were a couple other points that made me go hmmm...but others have addressed them and agent shifted his position as a result. I can see the style he uses leaning either way. Net result: null read.

P1na and SPF - these where both in my bottom 2 in #121 because at the time, neither had voiced notable suspicions. It was possible that either was scum that were trying to fade into the background, not cause any waves.

-P1na provided a start to a read and admitted trouble finding suspicious behavior. This could be scum struggling...but I really don't get that impression. I get more of a sense that P1na is struggling town. I think scum would force themselves to place a vote instead of continuing to waffle.
@P1na - Where are you leaning now?

-SPF proceeded to vote and provide reads. Indicates he struggles to make reads D1. I forget that he is playing, which makes me uneasy. I don't find this overtly scummy but by POE, I could vote here.

@P1na - I didn't see your post before I submitted. What kind of hat does a pineapple where?

That vote puts Joe at L-1.
@Joe - do you intend to claim?

It's not necessary, but I am willing to hammer.

Comments on remaining three players next.