Assassination Classroom [ENDGAME]

[Dyslexicon]

How can there be vote analysis without a result? There’s nothing to analyze for control.

I think he means he's trying to analyze who is voting who and for what reason. As in "this player voted for a bad reason and I think that is scummy".

[Scotty]

Marmot asked a single question in his eight posts of pertinence to making reads (about INH potentially voting Scotty). That's a civilian ratio for Marmot.

JaggedJimmyJay called me a civilian for the most minimal of content ever offered in the history of Marmots.

Lynch this bear.

The fight for mountain dominance. I saw both of you backpacking, and I woild far rather see a cute bear than a
thieving marmot

[Scotty]

How can there be vote analysis without a result? There’s nothing to analyze for control.

I think he means he's trying to analyze who is voting who and for what reason. As in "this player voted for a bad reason and I think that is scummy".

Ah, gotcha, didn’t even think of that

[Marmot]

Marmot asked a single question in his eight posts of pertinence to making reads (about INH potentially voting Scotty). That's a civilian ratio for Marmot.

JaggedJimmyJay called me a civilian for the most minimal of content ever offered in the history of Marmots.

Lynch this bear.

You always lament your lack of credit, but when you get it you get scared.

Your response made me laugh.

Damn, and I already voted for you and everything.

[VOTE: JaggedJimmyJay] aubergine

[Dyslexicon]

Not typically. I think it tends to work like this though for highly active players:

Civilian - highly active 90+% of the time.
Mafia - highly active > 60% (or some moderate number) of the time

It's not a "tell", but it's a concern.

Alright. I guess I could see that, but I've only experienced loud!Jack as either alignment. I can't track a lack of Jack, you give him flack and I want him to attack (the thread). Poetry.

[sprityo]

How can there be vote analysis without a result? There’s nothing to analyze for control.

I think he means he's trying to analyze who is voting who and for what reason. As in "this player voted for a bad reason and I think that is scummy".

Spot on

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I used a greater-than symbol where I wanted a less-than symbol. These are the errors that haunt us decades later.

[Long Con]

Marmot asked a single question in his eight posts of pertinence to making reads (about INH potentially voting Scotty). That's a civilian ratio for Marmot.

JaggedJimmyJay called me a civilian for the most minimal of content ever offered in the history of Marmots.

Lynch this bear.

You always lament your lack of credit, but when you get it you get scared.

Your response made me laugh.

Damn, and I already voted for you and everything.

[VOTE: JaggedJimmyJay] aubergine

What a waste of time. This looks suspicious. Is this a joke vote? JJJ isn't getting lynched Day 1, what world do you think we're in?

[Dyslexicon]

Ah, gotcha, didn’t even think of that

That's what I gathered from what he said to me. What's your read on Sprit then, if you were forced to give one (and I am forcing you :3)

[Long Con]

I used a greater-than symbol where I wanted a less-than symbol. These are the errors that haunt us decades later.

The alligator wants to eat the bigger meal.

[Dyslexicon]

How can there be vote analysis without a result? There’s nothing to analyze for control.

I think he means he's trying to analyze who is voting who and for what reason. As in "this player voted for a bad reason and I think that is scummy".

Spot on

Any comment on how I think this is a bad way to try and find scum on D1? I mean, you are free to disagree

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Your response made me laugh.

Damn, and I already voted for you and everything.

[VOTE: JaggedJimmyJay] aubergine

Anyway, your responses to me here are a more conclusive town look than the inquiry about INH's vote. So it's only going to get worse, Marmot. You're a civilian read. So scary.

[Long Con]

How can there be vote analysis without a result? There’s nothing to analyze for control.

I think he means he's trying to analyze who is voting who and for what reason. As in "this player voted for a bad reason and I think that is scummy".

Spot on

Any comment on how I think this is a bad way to try and find scum on D1? I mean, you are free to disagree

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

[Marmot]

What a waste of time. This looks suspicious. Is this a joke vote? JJJ isn't getting lynched Day 1, what world do you think we're in?

[Dyslexicon]

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

Yeah, intensions. I think scum is more likely to feel they need a "good enough reason" to vote, while I know for my part when I'm town I just want to make things happen. Especially if I feel I have little to work with.

[Long Con]

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

Yeah, intensions. I think scum is more likely to feel they need a "good enough reason" to vote, while I know for my part when I'm town I just want to make things happen. Especially if I feel I have little to work with.

Do you think scum will try to evoke false suspicion on Civs intentionally, or is that just a simplistic fairy tale I should forget about?

[Dyslexicon]

I remember why I took that mafia break. I fully intended to "play light and not post too much" this game.

Laterz.

[Dyslexicon]

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

Yeah, intensions. I think scum is more likely to feel they need a "good enough reason" to vote, while I know for my part when I'm town I just want to make things happen. Especially if I feel I have little to work with.

Do you think scum will try to evoke false suspicion on Civs intentionally, or is that just a simplistic fairy tale I should forget about?

Since you ask, it's a bit simplistic. If anything I feel, especially day 1, that scum are more likely to sit back and not stick their neck too far out, as town are usually quite good at suspecting each other and getting into arguments on their own as well. Since scum is conscious that their suspicions are fake, they would generally be more conscious of constructing reasons that sounds believable. Whether or not they succeed is a different thing. But it's not inherently scummy to form wagons or pressure players with light reasoning or even no reasoning on D1, or vote a lot and start exploring. The exploring is the towny thing to do imo, as scum doesn't need to explore. Or do you disagree with this?

[Long Con]

I do agree. I think that describes a common basic playstyle, which most players add their own level of flair to. I think the flair - or personality, I guess - can be what is hard to cut through, and what makes up the majority of what scum hides behind. There's a lot of crossover between personality and genuine explorative scumhunting though. I don't want this conversation to continue because, interesting as it is, it's not catching any scum.

I just asked because sometimes I suspect people with the reasoning of "I could see a really good and beneficial reason to do this as scum" and I've never done any research to see how often it works out.

[Scotty]

Ah, gotcha, didn’t even think of that

That's what I gathered from what he said to me. What's your read on Sprit then, if you were forced to give one (and I am forcing you :3)

As I was reading through I was still pinged by sprit’s decree of not lynching low posters- when he first came in he said jack only had 3 votes and that he wouldn’t vote him- my sirens went off.

But I do think I’m trapping him in a specific viewpoint because it’s different than my own. His D1 technique seems to be diametrically opposed to mine, and I just don’t know how to cope with that.

Anyhow, I read him as a light town right now after some thought.

I could vote jack tho

[VOTE: jackofhearts] aubergine

[Marmot]

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

Yeah, intensions. I think scum is more likely to feel they need a "good enough reason" to vote, while I know for my part when I'm town I just want to make things happen. Especially if I feel I have little to work with.

Do you think scum will try to evoke false suspicion on Civs intentionally, or is that just a simplistic fairy tale I should forget about?

Since you ask, it's a bit simplistic. If anything I feel, especially day 1, that scum are more likely to sit back and not stick their neck too far out, as town are usually quite good at suspecting each other and getting into arguments on their own as well. Since scum is conscious that their suspicions are fake, they would generally be more conscious of constructing reasons that sounds believable. Whether or not they succeed is a different thing. But it's not inherently scummy to form wagons or pressure players with light reasoning or even no reasoning on D1, or vote a lot and start exploring. The exploring is the towny thing to do imo, as scum doesn't need to explore. Or do you disagree with this?

I sincerely consciously suspect you truly for sincere real constructed reasons k

[Long Con]

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

Yeah, intensions. I think scum is more likely to feel they need a "good enough reason" to vote, while I know for my part when I'm town I just want to make things happen. Especially if I feel I have little to work with.

Do you think scum will try to evoke false suspicion on Civs intentionally, or is that just a simplistic fairy tale I should forget about?

Since you ask, it's a bit simplistic. If anything I feel, especially day 1, that scum are more likely to sit back and not stick their neck too far out, as town are usually quite good at suspecting each other and getting into arguments on their own as well. Since scum is conscious that their suspicions are fake, they would generally be more conscious of constructing reasons that sounds believable. Whether or not they succeed is a different thing. But it's not inherently scummy to form wagons or pressure players with light reasoning or even no reasoning on D1, or vote a lot and start exploring. The exploring is the towny thing to do imo, as scum doesn't need to explore. Or do you disagree with this?

I sincerely consciously suspect you truly for sincere real constructed reasons k

Dude you're supposed to put the new word after the crossed-out word, it doesn't make sense this way.

[Marmot]

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

Yeah, intensions. I think scum is more likely to feel they need a "good enough reason" to vote, while I know for my part when I'm town I just want to make things happen. Especially if I feel I have little to work with.

Do you think scum will try to evoke false suspicion on Civs intentionally, or is that just a simplistic fairy tale I should forget about?

Since you ask, it's a bit simplistic. If anything I feel, especially day 1, that scum are more likely to sit back and not stick their neck too far out, as town are usually quite good at suspecting each other and getting into arguments on their own as well. Since scum is conscious that their suspicions are fake, they would generally be more conscious of constructing reasons that sounds believable. Whether or not they succeed is a different thing. But it's not inherently scummy to form wagons or pressure players with light reasoning or even no reasoning on D1, or vote a lot and start exploring. The exploring is the towny thing to do imo, as scum doesn't need to explore. Or do you disagree with this?

I sincerely consciously suspect you truly for sincere real constructed reasons k

Dude you're supposed to put the new word after the crossed-out word, it doesn't make sense this way.

but I wasnt replacing words, I was just removing the ones that Dizzy said r bad

[Marmot]

What are the reasons for voting Avito? I read his iso. He comes across as brusque, and hasn't posted anything on topic, aaaaand that's all I've got.

[Marmot]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?



But I feel good that the votes are on players with minimal to no content, rather than someone with high content who made one "disgusting" post.

[Long Con]

I don't think it's bad. All we have right now is the reading of intentions.

Yeah, intensions. I think scum is more likely to feel they need a "good enough reason" to vote, while I know for my part when I'm town I just want to make things happen. Especially if I feel I have little to work with.

Do you think scum will try to evoke false suspicion on Civs intentionally, or is that just a simplistic fairy tale I should forget about?

Since you ask, it's a bit simplistic. If anything I feel, especially day 1, that scum are more likely to sit back and not stick their neck too far out, as town are usually quite good at suspecting each other and getting into arguments on their own as well. Since scum is conscious that their suspicions are fake, they would generally be more conscious of constructing reasons that sounds believable. Whether or not they succeed is a different thing. But it's not inherently scummy to form wagons or pressure players with light reasoning or even no reasoning on D1, or vote a lot and start exploring. The exploring is the towny thing to do imo, as scum doesn't need to explore. Or do you disagree with this?

I sincerely consciously suspect you truly for sincere real constructed reasons k

Dude you're supposed to put the new word after the crossed-out word, it doesn't make sense this way.

but I wasnt replacing words, I was just removing the ones that Dizzy said r bad

Excuse me? Sorry, I don't speak Marmot.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?

Of the people I designated as having no civilian credit, he's the one I'd least expect to see there.

[juliets]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?

Of the people I designated as having no civilian credit, he's the one I'd least expect to see there.

I agree with this, I would expect Jack to be all over things.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?

Of the people I designated as having no civilian credit, he's the one I'd least expect to see there.

I agree with this, I would expect Jack to be all over things.

Where are you leaning with your vote, juliets?

[Long Con]

It could be just that Jack is more focused on Ancient Greece Mafia and forgot this game started, but I looked at his posts there. While there are a bunch in the other game since his last post here, they're not novels or anything.

[Marmot]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?

Of the people I designated as having no civilian credit, he's the one I'd least expect to see there.

Sure.

Comparatively, I don't understand why I received civilian credit from you when I did. If you were flavored skittle, you'd be a mandarin right about now. It feels like you're handing out credit rather carelessly.

[Marmot]

I'll bite though.

[VOTE: JackofHearts2005] aubergine

[Marmot]

Spoiler: show

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?

Of the people I designated as having no civilian credit, he's the one I'd least expect to see there.

Sure.

Comparatively, I don't understand why I received civilian credit from you when I did. If you were flavored skittle, you'd be a mandarin right about now. It feels like you're handing out credit rather carelessly.

Being careful on Day 1 is pointless.

[Marmot]

I'll bear that in mind.

[Turnip Head]

hi what is this?

[juliets]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?

Of the people I designated as having no civilian credit, he's the one I'd least expect to see there.

I agree with this, I would expect Jack to be all over things.

Where are you leaning with your vote, juliets?

Jack's absence from the thread is the most suspicious thing I see at the moment. I'll wait for his reaction and then decide whether to vote for him. That said, there's plenty of time for something else more suspicious to crop up before the lynch.

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Avito's posts are not game-relevant. I have no reason to give Avito civilian credit. I do know that Naruto Forums games are known for getting off to fluffy starts, so I am hesitant to call it "suspicious". Dragon D. Luffy, whaddya think of your NF mates so far?

Alright... I don't know Avito that much. He's not originally from NF, he's from Oro Jackson, another anime site (which I also think is nova's home site). I think I played two games with him. In the first game I played people were trying to launch a campaign to get him policy lynched on day 1 for accumulated crappy civ play on Oro Jackson. He doesn't strike me as particularly lazy compared to some people I know, and I've seen him actually making reads a couple times games, but I guess there is something about him that pisses people off. Insulting out smileys doesn't help.

So far he has been pretty much useless, but I wouldn't lynch him Day 1, first because I want to be diplomatic to new players, and second because Avito is the ultimate bait and I'm not falling for it, which also explains why I said before that I suspect nova for falling for it.

As for Pennywise... where do I start. He's a mafia veteran who played for years before I started. I think I've played at least 20 games with him, and hosted another 10 that he played. I think the best comparison I can make is that he's NFs answer to Marmot. He fluffs a lot, he doesn't really like to scumhunt most of the time, and you usually have to press him to get actual reads. But that doesn't mean he isn't playing: he's always paying attention to everything, the rules, the roles, the posts, and he'll sometimes show up to correct some contradiction someone made, or make a snarky remark at a player for not reading a post from the host. He always makes a vote at the end of the day, usually explaining it with only a smiley. He will always use his role, and the one time in a game I hosted where he didn't send abilities he actually came to apologize (I mean, it wasn't a role that civs wanted used every night, so he didn't need to ). So he's not a civ protagonist, but he's usually useful in some way. His playstyle isn't super pro-civ but it's amazing for a mafioso, though, because no one wants to lynch him. He has this aura of innocence and likability (plus he's usually the one who does the vote counts and we don't wanna lose that no sir). Usually at the end of the game, assuming he hasn't been NK'd yet, someone will bring him up and ask what to do with him.

Anyway, I've been trying to make him sign up for a game for like a year. He's one of the best friends I have in the internet, so it's great to have him here too.

Now for this game, if you read the above, you should guess I haven't the faintest idea of how to read Pennywise.

[Scotty]

Sounds like pennywise has gotten good at lasting long into games

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Marmot asked a single question in his eight posts of pertinence to making reads (about INH potentially voting Scotty). That's a civilian ratio for Marmot.

JaggedJimmyJay called me a civilian for the most minimal of content ever offered in the history of Marmots.

Lynch this bear.

You always lament your lack of credit, but when you get it you get scared.

Your response made me laugh.

Damn, and I already voted for you and everything.

[VOTE: JaggedJimmyJay] aubergine

What a waste of time. This looks suspicious. Is this a joke vote? JJJ isn't getting lynched Day 1, what world do you think we're in?

He's not self-voting, so I think that's an improvement

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I agree that lynching a Syndicate first-timer on Day 1 is lame. I don't have many Mafia ethics, but that's one of them -- I'll do it only if it's obvious.

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Sounds like pennywise has gotten good at lasting long into games

Lately I think I've seen him lynched early more often, but it's because people have become increasingly aware of that tendency.

[sig]

Sounds like pennywise has gotten good at lasting long into games

[Jackofhearts2005]

Blurb blurp.

Why am I being voted for? I’m always town, haven’t you heard?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Avito
Dom
Dragon D. Luffy
Dyslexicon
Epignosis
insertnamehere
Jackofhearts2005
JaggedJimmyJay
juliets
Kylemii
lapluie
Long Con
MacDougall
Marmot
novaselinenever
Pennywise
Scotty
sig
sprityo
wolbre04

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Blurb blurp.

Why am I being voted for? I’m always town, haven’t you heard?

Why d'ya think?

[Jackofhearts2005]

I see a similar thing from JackofHearts2005. Why are your votes on him?

Of the people I designated as having no civilian credit, he's the one I'd least expect to see there.

I agree with this, I would expect Jack to be all over things.

Where are you leaning with your vote, juliets?

Jack's absence from the thread is the most suspicious thing I see at the moment. I'll wait for his reaction and then decide whether to vote for him. That said, there's plenty of time for something else more suspicious to crop up before the lynch.

Oh this? Fuckin please. I’m in three games and haven’t gotten a full nights sleep in a couple months.

Was I quiet in Mass Effect or Blue vs Red?

Nai. Duh.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Oh this? Fuckin please. I’m in three games and haven’t gotten a full nights sleep in a couple months.

Was I quiet in Mass Effect or Blue vs Red?

Nai. Duh.

People love to call things NAI that are AI.

[sig]

Sounds like pennywise has gotten good at lasting long into games

[mention]Pennywise[/mention] Teach me your ways of survival.

Oh and FYI I'm taking a more GoC approach to this one.

Also smilies aren't mafiaish at all, whoever said that is mean.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Blurb blurp.

Why am I being voted for? I’m always town, haven’t you heard?

Why d'ya think?

Combination of laziness, badness and trolling Jack “I don’t get lynched” of Hearts.

Can’t be something I’ve actually said cause I haven’t said much or gotten notifications since the day started.

Only read Juliet’s reasoning so far.