As a general rule, I love data and look down on gut feel - particularly as it relates to things like sports and politics. In WW games though, data is so imperfect before the game is largely decided that it is often hard to use. I think PB makes a pretty compelling data-argument on where the scum is, even if I don't really agree with the concept of analyzing day one voting at all.
I think part of the trick is in a smaller game, each day of voting means a bit more. By the same token, each nightkill is more important. That's why I tried to analyze the nightkill. Do I think I have it figured out? No. But I think there's more information in there than normal. The good player to inexperienced player ratio is a little higher here as well.
To me the best argument against Ryan voters is that a strong player could really see the fail there. Unfortunately, I think that's also the best argument against the Ryan non-voters. I buy Serdoa and uber both thinking we need to send a message on policy lynching non-contributors. I just find the lack of pressure anywhere else to be pretty peculiar. Its incredibly lazy to watch Ryan exhibit hoof-in-mouth disease, park your vote there and be done with it. Even if I had wanted to lyncrh Ryan, I would have been talking about other players in the thread in the hopes of generating some information for later.
I agree with PB that uberfish is probably the best information lynch. If he flips scum, then it is almost certain that the 2nd scum is among the non-uberfish voters on day one. If he flips village, then I'd say its almost certain there is no more than one scum on the Ryan voters. I'm not sure any other candidate is as strong a litmus test for future information.
That said, I prefer lynching players because they seem scummy. I have no conviction on that front at the moment, however. I like my thoughts on uber but I also thought his defense seemed decent. Mattimeo is playing the same game Mattimeo always plays, with a lazy day one vote and then I'm a good target whichever side of the fence you're on. Bigger's a tough read for me - he's so confrontational that he always seems like aggrieved scum to me but I give him points for trying to keep active on an exceptionally quiet day one.
Of the non-Ryan voters, I could talk myself into Lewwyn or zakalwe (but probably not PB, simply due to wanting more information from him because I have less of a baseline on him than the others) but both of them probably have at least something to do with the fact that I always feel like those two are guilty. I'm trying to metagame myself a bit by looking elsewhere. Though I would really like to see something other than uberfish-Gaspar hopscotch from zak and a bit too much roleplay come to life from Lewwyn.
For now, the combination of meta and non-meta circumstantial evidence is strongest on uber and hence where I'm staying. But I'm not locked in by any means.
I think part of the trick is in a smaller game, each day of voting means a bit more. By the same token, each nightkill is more important. That's why I tried to analyze the nightkill. Do I think I have it figured out? No. But I think there's more information in there than normal. The good player to inexperienced player ratio is a little higher here as well.
To me the best argument against Ryan voters is that a strong player could really see the fail there. Unfortunately, I think that's also the best argument against the Ryan non-voters. I buy Serdoa and uber both thinking we need to send a message on policy lynching non-contributors. I just find the lack of pressure anywhere else to be pretty peculiar. Its incredibly lazy to watch Ryan exhibit hoof-in-mouth disease, park your vote there and be done with it. Even if I had wanted to lyncrh Ryan, I would have been talking about other players in the thread in the hopes of generating some information for later.
I agree with PB that uberfish is probably the best information lynch. If he flips scum, then it is almost certain that the 2nd scum is among the non-uberfish voters on day one. If he flips village, then I'd say its almost certain there is no more than one scum on the Ryan voters. I'm not sure any other candidate is as strong a litmus test for future information.
That said, I prefer lynching players because they seem scummy. I have no conviction on that front at the moment, however. I like my thoughts on uber but I also thought his defense seemed decent. Mattimeo is playing the same game Mattimeo always plays, with a lazy day one vote and then I'm a good target whichever side of the fence you're on. Bigger's a tough read for me - he's so confrontational that he always seems like aggrieved scum to me but I give him points for trying to keep active on an exceptionally quiet day one.
Of the non-Ryan voters, I could talk myself into Lewwyn or zakalwe (but probably not PB, simply due to wanting more information from him because I have less of a baseline on him than the others) but both of them probably have at least something to do with the fact that I always feel like those two are guilty. I'm trying to metagame myself a bit by looking elsewhere. Though I would really like to see something other than uberfish-Gaspar hopscotch from zak and a bit too much roleplay come to life from Lewwyn.
For now, the combination of meta and non-meta circumstantial evidence is strongest on uber and hence where I'm staying. But I'm not locked in by any means.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?