Dan's blanket defence of Serela,
#232. Sorry, I didn't realise your name was Serela, Dan.
I disagree with about everything he concludes or otherwise even says.
Naturally.
I think his town worth system is flawed and a useless exercise.
I'll be interested to see post-game if this is so. I do agree it is flawed and inaccurate. It's just a paper based version, after all. I'll keep working on the software.
It's way more believable that Serela voted for you due to his stated reason of looking at Dormio's #139 and perceiving a contradiction in what Dormio highlighted in your post.
I categorically disagree, because Serela explicitly stated in her
143 that;
re-looking over the part of SkyPal's post Bard Dormio just singled out is, yeah, just from that it's way better of a lynch than NNR or CF7
We know that Serela made her wagon hop/vote switch because of one of those two points.
Those points are:
Point 1 -
I would policy lynch Serela for being useless and also for tunneling Dormio most of the game. The vote was the laziest and she has done nothing to improve her vote except argue with Dormio. //Voting me because I have stated an intent to lynch her for being useless and tunneling Dormio.
Point 2 -
I think Dormio is bad for focusing largely only on Serela's vote, when he could (and should) have drilled CF7 and ActionDan for their shitvotes. //Voting me because I am attacking a person who is attacking her?
Unlikely.Perhaps Serela can clarify.
Dan's point 2;
Concerning the 'I thought Sky might turn into a viable wagon,' that's in response to my post #152 which directly challenges the viability of your wagon D1. It's like an addendum instead of what it looks like when you present it in juxtaposition with the above, which is an entirely different reason. Of course your complaint is 'evidence for scum vote hopper' which is a complete non-issue.
You said this;
"It kinda sucks that Sky/Serela are still sticking to their own thing."
Serela said this:
"Dan:I thought Sky might suddenly turn into a viable wagon as a change of events, but if it doesn't then, yeah, I'm going to have to make my mind up about one of those three."
I cut it down to the relevant section, which is:
"I thought Sky might suddenly turn into a viable wagon as a change of events."
Please explain how I presented it in any light other than it actually appeared, which was a deliberate attempt to purely wagon unrelated to scum hunting.
Firstly you have labeled a section "Scummy defends" which is obvious from your point value system but the key is why do you have defense as scummy?
I believe certain types of defends are scummy, e.g. mutual defends, blanket defends, excessively targeted defends, wifom defends ("I think player xyz is town because (wifom)) etc etc. I covered this in better detail in
#235.Second at least for my case it seems the math is wrong since you have me as "pressuring" NNR and Zak once each but defending Dormio 5 times Serela once, so it should be 2-6 = -4 instead of -1
Pressuring is a towny action because it invites investigation of both the pressed player and the player applying the pressure.
Third, what makes you think scum wouldn't apply "attacks" or "pressure" or in equal measure as any townie, they have an agenda to mislynch people which necessitates both these things.
Scum can and should do it, but town also can and should do it. It's harder for scum to do it. Therefore, if we consistently see certain players making pressure, we may question if those players are scum.
Forth, despite defending Dormio 5 times which apparently stunned you, the most crucial "defense" I have made was yours at the end of D1 which basically led to you not getting lynched. Was it scummy of me to defend you? You tell me.
Yes. It was scummy to defend me (and Dormio). However, since the lynch was apparently going to be you unless you did something, anything you did to get out of it is excusable.
One of the best indicators is the amalgamation of the RVS votes which indeed are trivial and a waste of space.
A trivial analysis of past Shrine Maiden games shows that scum often vote for each other, or players who voted for their scumbuddies. The last five games -
Choose your own mafia RVS:
Pictures of Birds (scum) countervotes Balanced (town), who is voting for Townest (scum).
Urist (scum) countervotes Balanced (town), who is voting for Townest (scum).
When Balanced votes for Mirai Nikki (town), Birds votes elsewhere.
Doctor Wars Mafia RVS:
Serela (scum) voted for Sky_Paladin (scum).
Puzzle and Dragon Mafia RVS:
Action Dan (scum) voted for CF7 (scum).
Medaka Box Mafia RVS:
Scums didn't vote for each other or countervote anybody.
Omerta Mafia RVS:
NNR (scum) countervotes Sky_Paladin for voting Serela (scum).
Therefore, I feel the RVS analysis is actually valuable, although now that I've pointed out these trends, less so for the next few games.
Scum know who their buddies are, so their votes are never truly 'random'. That's the point of the analysis.
Nothing really about me or Zak despite stating that you're leaning Zak as scum and the cliffs notes in 191 don't stand for much since their purpose is limited to tabulation.
I'd already run up quite a few walls and I got tired. I will still sheep Bard's day 1 case, it's just I feel what I have on you and Serela (at this stage) is better.
On to the next post o/
