WW 103? - 42 Attempts (Game Over - Conspirators Win)

[Chief Rum]

Okay, one last, because I just realized how tactless I came off on something up above. I called the move of that someone that resulted in GE's removal as "boneheaded", and I thought after, you know, that's just piling on and making someone feel bad who probably already feels a ton bad about it.

So to that person, whoever you are, I apologize for running at the "mouth" here as it were. It was just stream of consciousness typing, and I am certain you feel awful about it. It was a completely understandable mistake that any of us could have done. I suppose you would admit it was boneheaded, but that doesn't mean I should say it. I should have used a better choice of words, such as a momentary lapse of concentration (I have several such moments at my job every hour, I suspect).

So apologies, didn't mean to insult (whoever you are).

[Danny]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Is it metagaming that something has occurred to me that might make someone a more likely wolf if I came to that conclusion via the events surrounding GE's removal from the game?

I suspect it is, so I will not speak of this and as long as I am in the game, I will try to keep any conclusions I have drawn from that from influencing my choices.

We don't have to say it, but it's not hard to see who might be more likely to miss send a PM based on play experience.

Also, overall good analysis. I actually don't have a wolfy vibe to you for once, so if we can have another viable candidate I am not stuck on voting you.

[Danny]

My class was cancelled today, so I actually will be able to be on for a few couple hours before deadline.

[PurdueBrad]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

So, I think it's fairly likely that Telle, KWhit or PB is a conspirator, and a possibility that if we find the one, the other two will actually look slightly better for it. For obvious reasons, I think Telle stands out in that group, but I suspect all of them at some level (probably Telle then KWhit then PB, in that order).

So there you go. Make of it what you will.

CR- terrific analysis and I have no problem with that group of three actually. I would like to see us vote one of us off, scan another, and then go from there because I agree with your work (well, sort of, I think you have a 1 in 2 chance of hitting a wolf as opposed to 1 in 3).

So I have Telle who always draws my suspicion and KWhit who I voted D1. I think I'll get the party started with

[b]vote KWhit[b/]

[PurdueBrad]

OR I can try and vote correctly instead:

vote KWhit

[Telle]

As I already explained to KWhit earlier in the thread, but from what I knew at the time my Day 1 vote was NOT a throwaway vote. I hadn't caught up with the voting and from what I saw, Darth was the second leading vote getter with three votes at the time.

[KWhit]

I don't get why CR suggests I am suspicious.

I know that I am not a wolf, and it appears that the only thing in CR's analysis at all about me is that I missed the vote day 1 and that I was at the meeting.

Being at the meeting should be a slight indicator in my favor, since the odds would suggest that the meeting members are less likely to be wolves since the meeting was a success.

In fact, I think it is a mistake to go wolf-hunting from among the people in the meeting, unless there is a real reason to do so. The meeting was a success. That means that there are probably more wolves in the group that DIDN'T attend the meeting than there are in the group that was AT the meeting.

I wonder if CR is intentionally trying to break up the meeting group who found success?

[Danny]

I think I am going to move away from a CR vote. Knowing his allegiance would certainly help the voting record analysis, but I actually think there is a decent chance no wolves have been on the lynch cusp yet. I also would think CR is a great scan choice.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by KWhit

I don't get why CR suggests I am suspicious.

I know that I am not a wolf, and it appears that the only thing in CR's analysis at all about me is that I missed the vote day 1 and that I was at the meeting.

Being at the meeting should be a slight indicator in my favor, since the odds would suggest that the meeting members are less likely to be wolves since the meeting was a success.

In fact, I think it is a mistake to go wolf-hunting from among the people in the meeting, unless there is a real reason to do so. The meeting was a success. That means that there are probably more wolves in the group that DIDN'T attend the meeting than there are in the group that was AT the meeting.

I wonder if CR is intentionally trying to break up the meeting group who found success?

Actually, that's interesting too. If there was only 1 wolf at the meeting like CR suggests then that means there were 3 not at the meeting.

[Danny]

Danny
Telle
GE
JAG
J23
KWhit
PB

at meeting

1. Lathum
2. The Jackal
3. Schmidty
6. Autumn
11. Abe Sargent
12. Chief Rum
14. ntndeacon
17. bulletsponge

Players not at meeting. You'd have to think at least three wolves are on the second list since the meeting was a success.

[Danny]

So basically the top list we have a 1/5 chance if there is one wolf and the bottom list we have 3/8 chance. I think we're better off going with the bottom list.

[Danny]

Vote Chief Rum

I was off the bandwagon there for a short time, but after looking over it more, his analysis could very well have been leading us down a bad path. In fact, even if is right, it's still not as good a path as the second list.

[ntndeacon]

ok. are we thinking there are 3 wolves or 4 wolves at the moment?

[Danny]

I would think there would be 4 wolves. There are only 3 wolf roles listed, but that seems too little if they never get the convert.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Danny

So basically the top list we have a 1/5 chance if there is one wolf and the bottom list we have 3/8 chance. I think we're better off going with the bottom list.

What is the typical number of wolves in a game this size? 4 plus a possible convert? Even if it's just 3 total wolves currently, that would still mean the bottom list would be a 2/8 chance - still better than looking at the top list. And if we have 4 wolves, the odds are really stacked against the players who weren't at the meeting.

I was actually thinking about moving away from CR with my vote today, but I feel that his analysis is off. The question is, was it intentionally so?

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Danny

I would think there would be 4 wolves. There are only 3 wolf roles listed, but that seems too little if they never get the convert.

And since the convert is only one person that can be converted, it is very likely that they never get him converted.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by KWhit

What is the typical number of wolves in a game this size? 4 plus a possible convert? Even if it's just 3 total wolves currently, that would still mean the bottom list would be a 2/8 chance - still better than looking at the top list. And if we have 4 wolves, the odds are really stacked against the players who weren't at the meeting.

I was actually thinking about moving away from CR with my vote today, but I feel that his analysis is off. The question is, was it intentionally so?

Typical number would definitely be 4+ convert. That doesn't guarantee EF went typical though.

the second part is true, I may still unvote. I also want to look at NTN and BulletSponge myself, I think there is a good chance one of the two is a wolf.

[Danny]

I am going to change my vote here.

Unvote CR
Vote Bulletsponge

He has had two early second votes and never moved on either day. If CR is in fact not a wolf, I think his votes definitely look like a wolf never needing to change.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Danny

Typical number would definitely be 4+ convert. That doesn't guarantee EF went typical though.

the second part is true, I may still unvote. I also want to look at NTN and BulletSponge myself, I think there is a good chance one of the two is a wolf.

I was thinking about both those guys myself - only because I am currently going through a big "be suspicious of UTR guys" phase right now. But honestly I don't have any real read on either of them.

[ntndeacon]

well good, Bulletsponge has been pinging my radar too. I do not have a firm reason why. several moves seem off to me. I want to think a bit longer about it today so probably wot vote until later...
And today like Monday, I shall be a little quiet during much of the work day as I have 4 classes today.

[Autumn]

Wow, a lot of interesting work Chief. As others have said, it may be a lot of work to get our attention off of you, and to lead us down the wrong path, but I'm not sure. It's really well thought out.

I see the point about a higher number of wolves being in the non-meeting group. But 3/8 or 2/8 are still just odds. Hopefully we can do better than hoping to randomly hit a wolf out of 8 targets. I think Chief's analysis gives us lists of suspects for a variety of reasons, and we can compare them, not just take one on its own.

That said, I'm going to look through it again and see what i think. Telle certainly stands out glaringly there, and would be the natural pick from the meeting list. I'll see who stands out for me from the other list.

[Danny]

My vote is saying on Bullet. I will be back around 7:30 eastern. I think he has an excellent candidate for today.

[DaddyTorgo]

disclaimer: i have no idea who the wolves are, but you guys sure are failing so far

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Autumn

I see the point about a higher number of wolves being in the non-meeting group. But 3/8 or 2/8 are still just odds. Hopefully we can do better than hoping to randomly hit a wolf out of 8 targets.

Well, obviously.

We should analyze and determine who makes the most sense out of the non-meeting group - not just guess at random. I haven't had time to do that analysis, but plan to in a bit.

But my point is that CR's basic premise of "we know one wolf was at the meeting so let's look there" is deeply flawed.

[DaddyTorgo]

and by "you guys" i mean my fellow nazis

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Well, obviously.

We should analyze and determine who makes the most sense out of the non-meeting group - not just guess at random. I haven't had time to do that analysis, but plan to in a bit.

But my point is that CR's basic premise of "we know one wolf was at the meeting so let's look there" is deeply flawed.

But then again, Telle was flagged in almost every criteria Chief ran through, and then was also at the meeting. But I definitely agree, other candidates are good also. It seems we have a good chance of a strong runoff today.

I'm not sure we should stray too far from Chief though, just because he put a ton of work into an analysis. It's a prudent move from a wolf on the block, makes him look villagerish and lets him lead the village too.

I'd say I'm considering between Telle, Chief and someone from the non-meeting list. Bullet didn't jump out at me, but I was considering NTN. However, if we think Chief is trying to keep us off of the non-meeting list that makes it pretty clear he's the one to vote on that list. I just talked myself into Telle or Chief. I'm supposed to do this in my head, and then write, aren't I?

[J23]

Vote The Jackal

He's the one that I have the worst feeling about from the non-meeting folks, where I think we have the best odds of hitting a wolf.

I'll be in and out today if this needs to move for some reason.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by KWhit

But my point is that CR's basic premise of "we know one wolf was at the meeting so let's look there" is deeply flawed.

I would agree with that. Due to the outcome of the meeting, it seems likely the bulk of the wolves were not at the meeting, so by simple math our odds are better at hitting a wolf in the group that wasn't at the meeting, even in my case when I can eliminate another meeting member from the calculation (myself), that gives me 1/4 vs. 3/8 (I doubt there would've only been 3 total wolves out of 19 starting players with Hitler having a variety of powers and with one wolf unable to communicate with the others assuming the bomber is in the game). That's not to say we can't use other evidence to sway the odds one way or another, but if you really aren't sure about anything, your odds are better voting a non-meeting participant.

I'm still working through Chief's analysis and my own and I won't really be able to tackle it until later this morning.

[Abe Sargent]

Morning all

[Lathum]

I am not so sold on the whole concept of " since the meeting was a success we need to lynch all the non meeting folks."

It is way to simple. I would hope EF has more imagination than to come up with a mechanic that basically narrows down the vote choices so much on the second day of the game.

I imagine there are other mechanics at play that allow us to be successful at meetings. I have some ideas what one may be, but don't want to reveal it yet because it may clue the conspiritors into something they haven't realized.

[Lathum]

dola- I am uber busy today and won't have much time to look things over. First test of the quarter is tomorrow, plus 150 pages to read for other classes.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I am not so sold on the whole concept of " since the meeting was a success we need to lynch all the non meeting folks."

It is way to simple. I would hope EF has more imagination than to come up with a mechanic that basically narrows down the vote choices so much on the second day of the game.

I imagine there are other mechanics at play that allow us to be successful at meetings. I have some ideas what one may be, but don't want to reveal it yet because it may clue the conspiritors into something they haven't realized.

This makes sense.

[Abe Sargent]

CR is historically the best villager, in my opinion, at breaking down a game. I'm willing to follow his lead, and use his analysis.

vote telle

[Lathum]

I won't be voting for CR today. IMO he has been scanned and his alligience will be known at some point.

[Autumn]

This is one benefit of going with Chief's analysis, it at least would keep us from being spread so thin. Interesting to me that Chief has gone from being likely lynch target to not even a vote, with four other targets getting shots. It makes me loathe to add another target to the list, which may be the point.

Telle and Jackal are the ones with votes so far that I would vote for. But I'm going to go ahead and vote Chief, as I'd like him to remain a viable candidate. I should be around plenty today to move my vote as seems appropriate.

VOTE CHIEF RUM

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Autumn

This is one benefit of going with Chief's analysis, it at least would keep us from being spread so thin. Interesting to me that Chief has gone from being likely lynch target to not even a vote, with four other targets getting shots. It makes me loathe to add another target to the list, which may be the point.

Telle and Jackal are the ones with votes so far that I would vote for. But I'm going to go ahead and vote Chief, as I'd like him to remain a viable candidate. I should be around plenty today to move my vote as seems appropriate.

VOTE CHIEF RUM

I just don't like this vote. He's been under the gun too long, either shit or get off the pot. We need to get some choices like telle or jackal, ntndeacon or schmiditity, - whatever. However, we need to get new names for more analysis. We need to move on.

[PurdueBrad]

I'm not a big vote changer but I appreciate the newer line of thinking and the possibility of 3/8 vs. 1/5.

unvote KWhit

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

I just don't like this vote. He's been under the gun too long, either shit or get off the pot. We need to get some choices like telle or jackal, ntndeacon or schmiditity, - whatever. However, we need to get new names for more analysis. We need to move on.

I agree with Abe here.

I have been employing a new strategy lately.

Basically there are a group of people who will be scanned early, either through reputation or gameplay. I prefer to NOT go after those people early, because their alligience will be known once the seer comes forward.

CR definantly fits that bill this game, especially based on gameplay. I see no reason to vote him today, at some point that mystery will be solved.

[Lathum]

dola- I will be VERY untrusting of people who jump on the whole 3/8 bandwagon.

Like I said earlier, no way IMO EF makes it that easy and it would be an extremely convenient place for a wolf to hide than claim it was the most logical strategy and they were just going along with the crowd.

[Autumn]

Hey, I'm not telling anyone to change their vote. I just think it's worth having Chief in the runoff, not forgotten simply because he wrote up a lot of analysis. If he's a wolf, coming out this morning with a lot of good stuff, and then having people say "hey, let's give Chief a break" sounds like a great way to get out from under the ax.

As I said, I may very well vote elsewhere, but I wanted him in the mix of names. Given that I'm the only one who's voted for him, Abe, I don't think there's much concern about "no new names " coming out.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Hey, I'm not telling anyone to change their vote. I just think it's worth having Chief in the runoff, not forgotten simply because he wrote up a lot of analysis. If he's a wolf, coming out this morning with a lot of good stuff, and then having people say "hey, let's give Chief a break" sounds like a great way to get out from under the ax.

As I said, I may very well vote elsewhere, but I wanted him in the mix of names. Given that I'm the only one who's voted for him, Abe, I don't think there's much concern about "no new names " coming out.

and my point is let him do that, we will find out where he stands anyway.

I actually think having him in the run off hurts.

If he is a wolf, the other wolves know that he has probably been outed and can make themselves look good with a well timed vote on CR, thus muddling up the voting records more.

At this point if he is a wolf, no way the other wolves try and save him, they would cut him loose before they save him, so having him in the run off means nothing.

[J23]

Originally Posted by Lathum

dola- I will be VERY untrusting of people who jump on the whole 3/8 bandwagon.

Like I said earlier, no way IMO EF makes it that easy and it would be an extremely convenient place for a wolf to hide than claim it was the most logical strategy and they were just going along with the crowd.

I am not counting on it being a simplee mechanic, but given that it was a success, I'd rather look at those not in attendence.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by Lathum

and my point is let him do that, we will find out where he stands anyway.

I actually think having him in the run off hurts.

If he is a wolf, the other wolves know that he has probably been outed and can make themselves look good with a well timed vote on CR, thus muddling up the voting records more.

At this point if he is a wolf, no way the other wolves try and save him, they would cut him loose before they save him, so having him in the run off means nothing.

I can see that point, true. Then again, if he's a wolf the idea is to lynch a wolf, not just get vote results.

My goal is to make sure he doesn't just disappear back into the woodwork, just in case.

[The Jackal]

Since there is some suspicion being cast my way - my day one vote on DT was late and made because I didn't want there to be a tie, which I said in the thread at least once.

And my day two vote is on someone who very well may be a wolf. I appreciate the work CR put into that analysis on the last page, so I'm not going to jump on him at this point, going to look at other candidates as well.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by J23

I am not counting on it being a simplee mechanic, but given that it was a success, I'd rather look at those not in attendence.

well if you are saying you want to look at those in attendance than you are saying you think it is that simple.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Autumn

.

My goal is to make sure he doesn't just disappear back into the woodwork, just in case.

I think you need to trust that the seer will do his job.

[J23]

Originally Posted by Lathum

well if you are saying you want to look at those in attendance than you are saying you think it is that simple.

I am assuming that those in attendence influence the result, which I don't think is too big of a leap.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Lathum

and my point is let him do that, we will find out where he stands anyway.

I actually think having him in the run off hurts.

If he is a wolf, the other wolves know that he has probably been outed and can make themselves look good with a well timed vote on CR, thus muddling up the voting records more.

At this point if he is a wolf, no way the other wolves try and save him, they would cut him loose before they save him, so having him in the run off means nothing.

I agree with this and what Abe said earlier. I think the seer would have scanned him already based on how the past two days played out or else will likely scan him tonight, so at some point we will have final clarification on the main candidates of the D1 voting. Meanwhile we need to learn about some unknowns.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I won't be voting for CR today. IMO he has been scanned and his alligience will be known at some point.

I agree with this. I think it likely that he has been scanned already. I think his analysis was flawed and makes me suspicious of him. I mean the entire premise of his final suggested voting strategy is based based on this:

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

So 1 out of 7 is the only clear success that is not zero. Not only would Hitler have been incredibly lucky to not have a conspirator in the meeting, but he mentions the traitor among us. That tells me there has to be a conspirator in the meeting. And it's unlikely there are two.

His analysis states that it is very likely that there was exactly one wolf at the meeting. I don't necessarily agree with this, but that is his premise. If in fact that is true, why does he focus on those of us that had success at the meeting when we would be much more likely to find a wolf on those that were NOT at the meeting.

It makes no sense, and usually CR is better at analysis than that. I find that to be suspicious, but I will be placing my vote elsewhere today as I think it very likely he has been scanned already. The truth will come out eventually. And worst case, if the seer is nightkilled before revealing anything, I will come back and re-assess CR at that time.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by JAG

D1 voting:

(32) Schmidty votes Jackal - Jackal 1
(49) Danny votes GE - Jackal 1 GE 1
(80) Darth votes KWhit - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1
(86) Abe votes Lathum - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1 Lathum 1
(87) Lathum votes Schmidty - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1 Lathum 1 Schmidty 1
(89) JAG votes Darth - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1 Lathum 1 Schmidty 1 Darth 1
(91) Autumn votes Darth - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1 Lathum 1 Schmidty 1 Darth 2
(92) ntn votes Chief - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1 Lathum 1 Schmidty 1 Darth 2 Chief 1
(96) DT votes Lathum - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1 Lathum 2 Schmidty 1 Darth 2 Chief 1
(102) Lathum unvotes Schmidty, votes DT - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 1 Lathum 2 Darth 2 Chief 1 DT 1
(105) PB votes KWhit - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 2 Darth 2 Chief 1 DT 1
(106) J23 votes DT - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 2 Darth 2 Chief 1 DT 2
(108)LSG votes Autumn - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 2 Darth 2 Chief 1 DT 2 Autumn 1
(110) bulletspong votes Chief - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 2 Darth 2 Chief 2 DT 2 Autumn 1
(113) hoopsguy votes DT - Jackal 1 GE 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 2 Darth 2 Chief 2 DT 3 Autumn 1
(122) Danny unvotes GE - Jackal 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 2 Darth 2 Chief 2 DT 3 Autumn 1
(125) Abe unvotes Lathum, votes DT - Jackal 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 2 Chief 2 DT 4 Autumn 1
(129) Chief votes Darth - Jackal 1 KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 3 Chief 2 DT 4 Autumn 1
(153) Schmidty unvotes Jackal, votes DT - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 3 Chief 2 DT 5 Autumn 1
(163) Jackal votes DT - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 3 Chief 2 DT 6 Autumn 1
(179) Danny votes LSG - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 3 Chief 2 DT 6 Autumn 1 LSG 1
(188) Chief unvotes Darth, votes LSG - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 2 Chief 2 DT 6 Autumn 1 LSG 2
(193) JAG unvotes Darth, votes LSG - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 1 Chief 2 DT 6 Autumn 1 LSG 3
(213) GE votes Chief - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 1 Chief 3 DT 6 Autumn 1 LSG 3
(219) Telle votes Darth - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 2 Chief 3 DT 6 Autumn 1 LSG 3
(221) LSG unvotes Autumn, votes Chief - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 2 Chief 4 DT 6 LSG 3
(223) Danny unvotes LSG, votes Chief - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 2 Chief 5 DT 6 LSG 2
(230) Chief unvotes LSG, votes DT - KWhit 2 Lathum 1 Darth 2 Chief 5 DT 7 LSG 1

Something else about Chief that is keeping me from voting for him. Take a look at his day one voting record. It seems unlikely that a wolf would bounce around changing his vote so much between villagers. Now that we know Darth is good, his vote switch to LSG seems odd of character for a wolf to make.