MINI MAFIA III - NEWBIE GAME - GAME THREAD

[DrCJG]

@sheep - Ahh, ok... so if you had another slight townlean it would be on the same line as teacher.

And I think you have explained some of your reads (especially now that you have specified your nulls are indeed just that), but I think it can be easier to look back when thoughts are a little more consolidated.... so I hope you will at least do a more indepth summary occasionally.

[phil_a_s]

Second, thinking it over, with only two nights where we'll really need to plausibly pretend to be cop, and with roleblocks being known information, I think the cop fake-out strategy could work fine. We do still need a commitment from everyone (well, uh, 7 people) here that they will indeed do their best to make their cop-posts look cop-ish.
I will commit to read lists once a phase, and would very much appreciate if everyone else did. I am not going to compose full reads for this phase until tomorrow (real time), since it would be a very long-winded set of "null" and "would be a policy lynch if I thought we could afford to".

Some commentary on recent events:
Here's a "fun" thing. Bancroft was on this thread like two hours ago or so (I noticed a lot of people, like worcej and teacher2 seemed to be reading and was curious to see who would also write), and has not posted anything since. Not shady in itself, sometimes you don't have the time to compose a post, but I would quite like an explanation all the same.

[phil_a_s]

xy4, while in theory, DrCJG could be running a long game on us by adopting an entirely different playstyle, just to avoid meta identification (uh, I guess watch for DrCJG slipping into old habits as time goes on?), and it is also possible that DrCJG has just improved at playing (as scum), the change in behavior seems far more likely to indicate a null result (say, that DrCJG has improved at playing in general), or indicate that DrCJG is not scum in this game. Not having actually seen DrCJG play before, I assign rather little value to this particular indicator, in any case. If you think there is something artificial or fake about this new style, please indicate it.

I would like to reiterate that it would be great if we all posted at least a short indication of why we are voting a particular person. If it can't be helped, make it entirely subjective, if you like, though it would of course be rather nice if you could make it an accusation that we have some way of logically following.

[Jamiet99uk]

GM NOTE

Marneus_Calgar still has well over 24hrs to participate. There is a sub if needed. There is no need to be too concerned yet.

[teacher2]

I would like to reiterate that it would be great if we all posted at least a short indication of why we are voting a particular person. If it can't be helped, make it entirely subjective, if you like, though it would of course be rather nice if you could make it an accusation that we have some way of logically following.

I like you, I do, but this struck me as weird. Weird to the point that I did a control F of all votes, and players making the votes. Who do you think is not explaining themselves? And again, you are only really discussing the same players. Do you have any thoughts on, randomly, Worcej? Sheep?

[Jamiet99uk]

VOTE COUNT 1.3

Damo666 (3) - Sheepsaysmeep, phil_a_s, Worcej
DrCJG (2) - Damo666, xy4
Marneus_Calgar (2) - DrCJG, BancroftS
Worcej (1) - Teacher 2

Currently Damo666 is set to be lynched. You have slightly less than 29 hours remaining in Day 1.

[phil_a_s]

I like you, I do, but this struck me as weird. Weird to the point that I did a control F of all votes, and players making the votes. Who do you think is not explaining themselves? And again, you are only really discussing the same players. Do you have any thoughts on, randomly, Worcej? Sheep?

I was mostly attacking xy4 there. Could have been a bit clearer about that, I suppose.

Worcej is tough to grade, gotta admit. Participating, but not heavily, hasn't done anything I found scummy or towny IIRC.

I'm still trying to get used to sheep's posting style. Rather stream-of-consciousness, which is hard to follow. Hasn't done anything that struck me as scummy so far as I remember.

I suppose I am tunneling a bit. I'll read through the thread from the beginning again, see what I get.

[worcej]

Teacher’s Reads and Questions List 1.0
To remind myself how players felt in real time. Embedded questions for Worcej, Damo, the GM, and XY below. Quick board poll:

• Cop hypo: yea, nay, questions?
• Commitment to post full-board readslist 1X+ per phase: yea, nay

Also one request for the board – if answering a question or conversating with someone, will you all kindly quote the originating post/part? Without the Peterbot, following threads is a bit hard.

• Worcej: Intro fluff posts, then disappears. Are you European? (knowing rough timezones will help me generally). One interesting note, says that this game is “light on townies compared to the mafia count,” but in signups said that mafia is “usually about 25% of the total # of players to start.” By that logic this game (though a little scum-sided to me based on powers) is average to heavy on town, at 78% rather than 75%. Nully-scum.

......

Time for me to take my Joke vote off. ##Vote Worcej.

To respond, yes I am PST and I did provide two fluff posts because the game started @ 3:00 PM. Why I didn’t continue to post was due to RL commitments – I get off work @ 5:00 PM and then I play DnD on Monday nights at someone’s house, which starts at 5:30 PM, so I was gone until this morning because that went late and I also don’t want to try to post content on a cellphone. That is why I posted my reads/content as you posted this earlier (effectively I cross posted).

To add, I did make a comment regarding the count vs mafia, but the intent was to identify that I felt like we have only 2, maybe 3, chances to get one (hopefully both) of the mafia. Your analysis/information confirmed my suspicions on that. Keep in mind, this is my first mafia game ever, so I wanted to communicate that feeling somehow.

@Warcej - I appreciate the post, and I think your reads generally seem genuine... but your town read on teacher2 seems off... you state that although he has provided a lot of information you don't see it as being "too helpful to read into" which I take to mean you don't think he is town because of he provided useful information.
Can you provide any more insight on why you read Teacher2 as town? why its different than your read on Sheep? and why its different than Sheep town reading me?

Furthermore, where do you stand on the polls Teacher posted?
Finally, you asked why you shouldn't suspect me... but I think you should suspect everyone (including me). I believe tunneling is a major detriment to us being able to find scum.

My read on teacher2 was that, considering this is a newby game, I feel like he provided a lot of good information that is helpful to everyone, including scum. I think the fact that is wasn’t only focused on town as a sign that he isn’t trying to hide potential mafia strategy, only he wanted to highlight it.

The biggest thing to me, and this is where my analysis might go ‘too deep’: considering it’s a newb game, it is a smart play to try to get a mafia person to potentially commit/bite at the strategy – I think he is subtly hunting for the mafia. This is the difference I find between teacher2 and sheep. I think sheep is being helpful without trying to investigate, he is protecting.

Sheep’s read of you is different to me because he is pulling your previous game into this one, which is wise, but you can still look at it as intentional with malice or good intent behind it, that’s why I put you as a null because both sides are equally plausible.

In regards to the polls, I am yay on both – the cop hypo will be good to assist any cop we may have and posting reads and then being able to analyze them from phase to phase is critical. If someone changes there opinion without much justification, it would make me lean towards them coordinating with someone else at night – AKA they are mafia.

Overall maybe my analysis is a heavy stretch, but if I had to hard lean on someone as town, my money would be on teacher2 so far, regardless of his vote against me. I still stand by my Damo666 read because there is zero content there to justify the wagon and especially the call to get someone else to change their vote. It just wreaks of suspicious activity to me.

[phil_a_s]

Well this is hilarious,

if people could regularly post readlists with reasoning next to each read that would be great

from sheep, way back on page 1. That said, sheep repeatedly does shake things up, which is not behavior I would expect from scum.

considering my newbness, I wanted to say I appreciate your posts from yesterday. They were full of good knowledge (I will have to get better with the shorthand acronyms) and confirmed my sneaking suspicion that this game is going to go quickly.

from worcej is, uh, an odd thing to say at the very least, now that I'm reading it again. Especially with the context that it's about teacher2, who also happened to be the one vote on worcej. DrCJG notes that this read is odd in that it is a townread, for no apparent reason. Well, buddying up to teacher2 to take the heat off would be a reason, I suppose. Quite dodgy behavior. As I write this, I find he has started talking again, and mentions the read, though I still don't really understand the actual reasoning.

Otherwise, well, DrCJG continues to look town even after the reread, and teacher has been active and, in my opinion, helpful.

[worcej]

considering my newbness, I wanted to say I appreciate your posts from yesterday. They were full of good knowledge (I will have to get better with the shorthand acronyms) and confirmed my sneaking suspicion that this game is going to go quickly.

from worcej is, uh, an odd thing to say at the very least, now that I'm reading it again. Especially with the context that it's about teacher2, who also happened to be the one vote on worcej. DrCJG notes that this read is odd in that it is a townread, for no apparent reason. Well, buddying up to teacher2 to take the heat off would be a reason, I suppose. Quite dodgy behavior. As I write this, I find he has started talking again, and mentions the read, though I still don't really understand the actual reasoning.

Otherwise, well, DrCJG continues to look town even after the reread, and teacher has been active and, in my opinion, helpful.

I feel like I did mention and explain my read in my most recent post. I wanted to try to not have to say it out loud, but I was asked/questioned so I wanted to put my reasoning out there. It could be 'too deep' of thinking, but that is what stuck out to me as I was reading his posts.

[phil_a_s]

The biggest thing to me, and this is where my analysis might go ‘too deep’: considering it’s a newb game, it is a smart play to try to get a mafia person to potentially commit/bite at the strategy – I think he is subtly hunting for the mafia. This is the difference I find between teacher2 and sheep. I think sheep is being helpful without trying to investigate, he is protecting.

Assuming there was a plot, and it seems rather more likely to me that teacher was just giving background information that we can then start reasoning from, exposing it this early in the phase doesn't seem wise.

Sheep’s read of you is different to me because he is pulling your previous game into this one, which is wise, but you can still look at it as intentional with malice or good intent behind it, that’s why I put you as a null because both sides are equally plausible.

This is a rather common approach to situations that can be described as WIFOM. I disagree in this case, as it happens, since Occam's Razor does suggest to me that one possibility is more likely than another, and I don't think those are the only two ways to explain a change in behavior, either.

Overall maybe my analysis is a heavy stretch, but if I had to hard lean on someone as town, my money would be on teacher2 so far, regardless of his vote against me. I still stand by my Damo666 read because there is zero content there to justify the wagon and especially the call to get someone else to change their vote. It just wreaks of suspicious activity to me.

This may be just a process dispute, but you seem to run into WIFOM questions, like the intent behind the teacher2 background posts, or DrCJG's change of playstyle, and then sort of stop there. You decide teacher2 is good, because you have thought up a plan to entrap the mafia, but you decide DrCJG is unknowable, and thus deserves a null read, even though the rest of the stuff you have to say is nice, and also oddly, you then treat the sheep townread of DrCJG as a reason for alarm, and sheep then also gets null, even though again, you say only nice things other than that.

You seem to rely on your gut a lot, which makes it hard for us to follow your reasoning.

[damo666]

RE lack of posts/short posts

Yes, have been busy in RL. Will post more and longer in second 24 hours of day 1. PS am in UK

[worcej]

@phil - I am relying on my gut, for now, because there isn't much evidence for me to go off of to make strong reads on those people I find. That is why, for several of my nulls, there is good and bad - because I am trying to illustrate both sides I can see being possible. Teacher2 would've fallen in the null opinion based on the same logic, but I believe there was reasoning behind his descriptions and leaned that way because it would be a good way to flush out possible players.

I would counter argue that bringing out this possible strategy move now makes the most sense because mafia have yet to be able to coordinate (being D1 and all) or receive any coaching (assuming that may happen, I might have missed if that was or was not going to happen in night phases) so they are at their weakest now.

As I've stated, my only strong read against someone is Damo666 because there has been no thoughts or justification made for the vote. I would've let this go, but the added call for sheep to change is vote was unique to me. What was the purpose of doing that without providing context? Granted, he posted something now saying he will be more active and there is over 24 hours left to change, but that is where I will comfortably stay until then.

[worcej]

And also, maybe I am using the wrong term when I say 'null' - to me, those people are in the middle and could be either scum or town.

Am I wrong with that use of 'null'?

[phil_a_s]

Fair enough, Your usage of null is correct, and I suppose no-one can really have good reasons to make distinctions between townreads and nullreads. My main issue with your use of nullreads as "there is good and bad" is that in two cases, it felt like the good side had support in the form of other behavior, while the bad side was conjecture of a "what if this good behavior were actually malicious" sort.

In the meantime, it seems like we won't be getting anything out of damo for a while yet. Personally, I would like to see more activity out of Bancroft. Only two posts, both of them with no real substance, and like I said a couple hours ago, Bancroft was almost certainly reading the thread.

Bancroft, do you have any reads on anyone? Are you ready to vote on the cop fakeout question? Are you going to be doing regular readlists?

[xy4]

Phil has just reminded me of something.

I’d like to reiterate the fact that I’d like to try the cop fakeout. Just so I’m clear as it may have been lost within some other messages.

[worcej]

Phil has just reminded me of something.

I’d like to reiterate the fact that I’d like to try the cop fakeout. Just so I’m clear as it may have been lost within some other messages.

Care to indulge what he reminded you of?

[teacher2]

Im doing a catchup read since this morning, but Id love to play with either of the two online right now.

@sheep: I want to explore your nulls a bit more, since some of them at least have started to post content. What do you think of Phil/Worcej/Xy? Even if still within null/random range, do you have any reactions?

@Worcej: You have had the most posts today that I have to reflect upon -- was that simply a function of wanting to catch up or do you think you are going to be a frequent poster generally?

[teacher2]

And.....poof. Must not have worn my deodorant. FWIW, Worcej, I think Phil reminded XY to weigh/reweigh in on the cop poll.

[teacher2]

So, I do two general styles of substantive posts, a reads post (like from earlier today) and a reactions post (like the below, pulling quotes and responding). These two styles are the ones I spend time on, thinking/drafting/editing. As you will see later, I also do more freebase posts (like the one seeking reactions from Sheep and Worcej who were then online), particularly as we get close to the deadline. With that intro….

I will have to get better with the shorthand acronyms

I have to get better about them too – I have been trying to catch myself and explain them, but definitely wont catch them all. Feel free to ask. One you will definitely hear from me today is PoE – process or pool of elimination.

These are weaker reads. As an adjective, it can modify towns or scums – if a player talks about PoE!town, it means their scumreads are full, so they are treating someone as town simply by process of elimination rather than any actual individual read. But as a noun, it means the weaker reads that are not your first-choice lynch, but who you could compromise lynch to build a majority.

Starting about 1pm New York time tomorrow, town should be concentrating on coalescing around consensus lynches to minimize scum influence. Standing alone on a vanity wagon (a one vote wagon that’s not taking off – like me with Worcej right now) does not help town at end of day. I did, however, mean my question to you from earlier – do you think your post count today is going to be roughly average for you?

##unvote.

[Teacher] seems to be buddying a lot with new players... but I think it is just his personality.

You’ll remember I did the same buddying last game too, explicitly saying I didn’t want to lynch Telamor/Stressed. Basically, I like this game, and want others to start playing/enjoying it, so tend to be a bit protective of newbs. Harder to do here, but it is my instinct.

I think this change in behaviour might be intentional.
##VOTE DrCJG

I think the change is intentional too, but not malicious. Im seeing more personality this game (like the Moana reference). My read is that Dr felt like he had to conform last time, but is being more himself this time – i.e., that last time he purposefully modulated himself last time in a way he is not monitoring now.

yall are so fancy with your readlists

rereading i also sort of buy that he genuinely thinks the cop hypoclaiming strategy benefits town

These two quotes surprised me, since you were one of the people initially pushing readlists, and certainly the first to mention hypos. Do you not believe in hypo yourself? Also, as in my reactions post, I do want to figure out your PoE pool so can you explore Worcej/Phil/Xy please?

Bancroft was on this thread like two hours ago or so ... and has not posted anything since. Not shady in itself, sometimes you don't have the time to compose a post, but I would quite like an explanation all the same.

Thanks for noting this, which I had not at the time (though you say I was on). Someone else made a similar note about Damo. Since then, there has been a rise in “guests” viewing the thread. ##Vote Bancroft.

I was mostly attacking xy4 there.

I appreciate the explanation. To be honest, I both found it contradictory and townread you for it. Contradictory because you are a close reader, and XY had already explained his vote. Townread because you’ve responded to several questions from me across multiple posts without getting defensive. I disagree with you on quite a bit (e.g., I don’t think Worcej’s reads were pocketing* based on other indicators), but I do like you.

*pocketing=mafia slang for townreading someone voting you. Can be called buddying, but that term covers ingratiating yourself more broadly (without regard to votes).

******

Looks like the vast majority of the board is good with hypos, and most have agreed to do reads lists. At this point I will view those holding out to be anti-town.