WW 19 Game Thread - Mobster Mayhem - GAME OVER

[Serdoa]

Sweeks, novice is right, you over analyze posts - you did it to me last game and to selrahc today.
So what if you were right sometimes - if I random vote I will sometimes be right (by the way this is why I hated being evil last game you had no case on ne but you'd think the tactic was right because I happened to be scum)

Yeah exactly. Thats why you were called out in your scum-quicktopic as well as soon as you made the post that made me suspect you...

Btw: That I am right or wrong sometimes was not once an argument I made. I never said believe me I am right because I am always right or some such. novice told me I overanalyze and I asked what his point is. And his point seemingly was that I am sometimes wrong and sometimes right. I am still not sure why that needed to be pointed out as it seems to be true for everyone, but whatever.

Lets look at ubers. scenario - if novice. passes it to a evil, then every time the were get a guilty result it is correct. (If he passes it to a village then they should claim it) however every time it gets a innocent result it isn't. accurate -hence the 90/100% figures.
The point that is being. argued is if evil novice passes it to. another scum then they are connected and under scrutiny.

The exception we're missing, that Serdoa mentioned, is if I'm village and I pass the card to scum. So a scan of the person I pass the card to will be unreliable. No big deal, I can keep the card or pass it to someone we don't want to scan. I'm open to suggestions. And as Lewwyn said, we just keep track of who has the card, and all other scans will be reliable. Or someone gets caught in a lie.

I am just saying that this playing with percentages does not help us. Great in 95% of the cases the result we get is the truth. That means 19 of 20 results are right, one is wrong. But we do not know which one is the wrong result. So please explain me how that helps us or does not prevent us from using our scan-results with certainty. Basically our seer scans 3 nights around and when he reveals on Day 4 and gives us the result we sit there and will start the discussion if we now believe in them or not.

First the item seer clean't scan alignment, second a violated would claim it so only a scum would lie about it and therefore anyone who flips guilty under the seer will be scum.
The sake doesn't apply for innocent, but the point of seers in a Jo pm game is primarily to.catch scum. Not confirm innocents

Yeah, because clearly, getting 4 players who are certainly village when there are only 11 players left would be really bad, thats not the seers job. He should have catched scum... oh, wait, he indirectly did.

First off I said the fallacy was Rowain painting today's outcomes as only being two-fold: he was arguing that we would either hit a random villager or remove the card by lynching novice. He's dismissing the possibility that we hit a snitch, so he's trying to color the argument in his favor.

Again, when did he do that. You know, I'm not even sure that Rowain is not scum, but this argument was not true the first time it was brought and it still is not true. Rowain already quoted his post with the 6 possibilities so I won't requote it, but I can't understand why you all argue that he said lynch a random villager or novice when he never did.

[pindicator]

Bigger has been quieter than usual; last time he was quiet on day 1 he was scum.

This is how I play day 1 now, regardless of alignment :P. Every day 1, unless I start getting lynched for it, then I'll just refuse to make any post on day 1, including votes. so neener.

Nooooo!
I like brusque Bigger, especially because i don't understand him.
I hope you reconsider. Or if you're scum again then keep fitting to the pattern, please


Serdoa, i'm going to find that rowain post next. He's done it several times, so it shouldn't be hard to find

[Ryan]

We need to remmber the vigi shot that can be moved on, the seer moves on etc. This will be a fun night.

[Qgqqqqq]

Serdoa

Serdoa

Serdoa

The vig SHOULD NOT shoot.

[Serdoa]

I consider novice less likely to be 1/2/3 then I consider others to be 1/3,

And Rowain considers it more likely. I don't see your point. You both don't know if you are right or not, so both stances are completely viable at this point in the game and can be pursued from villagers and wolves alike. But somehow it seems that different opinion Rowain has is really bad, not that anyone can explain it. Well, apart from putting forth their "impression" of his play, which they are not able to back-up with quotes or anything. Which in itself is imo telling enough.

Ah, I did miss that post.
Well, I disagree with your ranking the scum with card. We've played a couple games in a row now here with no scanner and we've been able to find scum just fine. I don't think we should use the Ouija as a crutch for our decision making anyway; what if that gets in the hands of scum later on? I find it better to hunt scum the old fashioned way: by what they post.

Um, and because we found scum that fine it was discussed in all the last games how to actually help village out because they lose so often?

you are myopic, Serdoa.

I actually are. Well, basically blind on one eye, but what has that to do with this game?

you hunt diligantly for a scum tell on day 1, and when you find a tiny clue you latch onto it, so everything that person says you interpret in a way that makes him seem scummy to you. I know first hand how frustrating it is to be on the blunt end of your attack - from ww12 where you spearheaded my mislynch on day two because I spelled your name wrong!

Yes you had an impressive run last game. But if you remove yourself and the three masons that were easily able to verify their innocence, that leaves 7 out of 12 players in the game as scum! so it really doesnt mean much, you miss just as often as you hit.

Well, I stated it already, I never brought the argument that I am more often right then wrong. I just didn't see novices point by pointing that out. Or to ask what I asked him: "If my argument is bad, why do you not attack my argument instead of me?" What you at least do below, kinda nice, thanks.

In this case, Selrahc is giving his impression of Rowain. Thats what WW is about - intuition, not science. You keep throwing around the "lie" word, but I'm not sure you know what it means. An impression is, BY DEFINITION, not a lie. Its an impression that I am finding more and more plausible as th day passes, tbh.

I'm having troubles phrasing that in English, but imo when you read Selrahcs posts you will have a hard time finding him phrasing something as impression. He phrased it in a way as if it was a fact. And that is my reason to vote for him. And that is why I called it lies, because imo he did that on purpose. Of course you can have a different opinon on that matter, but thats my opinion on it and my reason to vote for him.

[Qgqqqqq]

I don't care what you say - your entire case on me was based on that one post.
Heck that one phrasing.
As I have said MANY times, it was the EXACT same thing I would've said as village.
The fact that I was scum has nothing to do with it.
/48 hours of fun memories

[novice]

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

Serdoa, my point was that everybody uses hyperbole, so it's a null tell. It should be irrelevant for your assessment of Selrahc's guilt.

Also, Serdoa, are you seriously saying that a 90% reliable seer is useless? You can weigh his evidence against other sources, you know.

[uberfish]

This is how I play day 1 now, regardless of alignment :P. Every day 1, unless I start getting lynched for it, then I'll just refuse to make any post on day 1, including votes. so neener.

How about novice passes you the fool card and we lynch you tomorrow?

[Qgqqqqq]

Sorry x-post with 375.
I'm explaining my reasoning.
Yes I do find Rowain suspicious but its no because I don't agree with him, its because of the way he is driveing his train - not for the sake of catching wolves but a veritable policy lynch where he basically says "we have to lose a villager, why not this one."

[Ryan]

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

Serdoa, my point was that everybody uses hyperbole, so it's a null tell. It should be irrelevant for your assessment of Selrahc's guilt.

Also, Serdoa, are you seriously saying that a 90% reliable seer is useless? You can weigh his evidence against other sources, you know.

That is if the seer stays down mafia after tonight. He is gonna have to make a pretty good choise and let it fall to the scum