|
I propose that we lynch all players that have a tag:
Reasoning:
RebirthOfLegend (4)
BloodyC0bbler
Fishball
RaGe
IntoTheWow
Falcynn
Judging from the past few mafia games, either the third person or fourth person on a bandwagon is scum. Just pointing this out.
|
Actually, I feel such a vibe of suspicion towards Rage from that last post. I have no idea why but that entire post sounds like something I would write when I'm scum. Instead of using words like "us" and "me" he's using very neutral words like "town." This is something I always do in order to avoid sounding scummy. Not to mention he's framing his "let's not discuss" nonsense as a contribution to the town. How is this different from a politer version of "shut the copulation<courtesy of flamewheel and qatol> up?" It's not at all, and all it serves to do is give inactives a further reason to escape. He's also playing the whole "voice of reason" card, which is something I try to do as mafia because it's so easy to seem so pro-town by doing so, even if you're doing jackhumansolidwaste<courtesy of flamewheel and qatol> in the process.
##FOS: Rage
|
On April 20 2010 04:43 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 04:41 Bill Murray wrote:On April 20 2010 04:36 CynanMachae wrote:
Oh I also forgot to point out that I'm hesitating putting my vote on RoL right now because 3 of those voting for him are among the players I find likely red (IntoTheWow, Rage and TheLardyLooser) On April 20 2010 04:21 Bill Murray wrote:On April 20 2010 04:20 Caller wrote:I propose that we lynch all players that have a tag: Reasoning:
RebirthOfLegend (4)
BloodyC0bbler
Fishball
RaGe
IntoTheWow
Falcynn
Judging from the past few mafia games, either the third person or fourth person on a bandwagon is scum. Just pointing this out. I do feel like the RoL wagon probably has scum on it looks like we're agreeing Makes sense, your making sense this game.
what, BM making sense? definitely scum
|
where the hell did this rage bandwagon come from?
Congratulations meeple and Infundibulum, you just earned yourself a place on my suspect list as 3rd and 4th voters.
|
On April 20 2010 06:23 Radfield wrote:Where did this Rage bandwagon come from!? Was his post really that suspicious? Show nested quote +
We really need a change of attitude here imo.
I propose a town-wide ban (with lynching if not lived by) on accusations/analysis of previous posts until Day 2, and a lynch of the currently least active, most voted person RebirthOfLegend
Because let's face it, we're not going to be able to have enough of us agree on an already suspicious person to be able to lynch him on day 1, and we're only helping mafia decide which townies to snipe atm.
This would help us focus on getting a decent plan together for the rest of the game.
As far as I can tell, this post helps to focus the town down a road towards a lynch. Voting towards the "least active, most voted person" seems like a sound plan to get a lynch done. Perhaps you folks voting for Rage could elaborate a little more. I realize Caller's already posted a reason, but were that many people suddenly convinced? Caller's argument seemed a bit thin to me.
On April 20 2010 04:07 RaGe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 03:38 Bill Murray wrote:On April 20 2010 02:59 RaGe wrote:
We really need a change of attitude here imo.
I propose a town-wide ban (with lynching if not lived by) on accusations/analysis of previous posts until Day 2, and a lynch of the currently least active, most voted person RebirthOfLegend
Because let's face it, we're not going to be able to have enough of us agree on an already suspicious person to be able to lynch him on day 1, and we're only helping mafia decide which townies to snipe atm.
This would help us focus on getting a decent plan together for the rest of the game. you are so red .. thanks? Way to continue your spree of just spreading confusion. If you come up with a reason why this would hurt town I'll happily listen. But you just continue the problem I addressed. Is this really what you're going to do all mafia game? Call people out, offer no reasoning and when people call you out you either whine about being always accused or go "yeah just lynch me i'll be green". Town, we must unite. If my proposition doesn't suit you, shoot it down with reasoning. If we're going to allow any idea to be shot down with 'you are so red' I have no idea how people want to achieve something. If behavior inherently disrupts the town's chances of winning we should not hesitate to banish it.
|
On April 20 2010 07:47 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 07:42 Bill Murray wrote:On April 20 2010 07:35 meeple wrote:
Sweet... $120 bucks...
@Caller,
The Rage bandwagon started with your post about him... and it made sense to me? In any case I switched to jpak since I want a majority vote and he's got the most on him by now... do you really feel like he's scum? He could be, but I don't see it. Well... nothing's certain... I don't feel jpak's scum but I'm voting for him because I want a lynch today. I feel Rage has a better chance of being scum tha jpak does. But who knows... we might yet see red blood tonight.
ace call this player a bullshitter pls
|
oh and by the way people that are voting for jpak
i guarantee you that you're wasting your time. Just because we need a majority doesn't fucking mean lynching inactive townies is a good thing. This is a L strategy that usually ends up like this:
On February 22 2010 09:40 L wrote:
Well, I'm dead. Peace.
seriously like wtf. Even if he's mafia who cares, by lynching him we get absolutely zero information. It's better to lynch people that alternative expression for act of reproduction give themselves away, play like plural provocative term also used for organisms of the feline species instead of taking risks, and people who change votes like gerund with a subject that rhymes with an intelligence hero from DotA wildfire.
I am strongly against this lynch of jpak. Better to lynch Rage, who has been acting fishy and in line with several other fishy players, as well as #3/4 of the bandwagon, or even KF91 because he was already suspect in my book and #4 on the bandwagon. These players give us information if they turn out to be scum. We learn nothing from jpak. And why would mafia want to give us a free kill this early? They have no reason to, even if he's inactive. They have a great excuse right now to finish off jpak and waste a lynch and a possible innocent "oh its better to have a lynch than to have no lynch" which is the same kind of logic as this:
On February 22 2010 03:09 L wrote:
This just in: Caller admits to being mafia in pms.
On February 22 2010 03:11 L wrote:
So, essentially caller's trying to get the town to kill him instead of redtooth, but says he wants to help his side (why would he fucking claim mafia straight up?) and says he's not on redtooth's team (so why would he put himself up as a target?). The exact same play as when Ver tried to chump quickstriker in.
Kill redtooth tonight.
|
On April 20 2010 08:30 meeple wrote:
And when you say Rage or KF91... I support your Rage argument... but just because someone bandwagons doesn't make them mafia... in a game where majority rules bandwagons are necessary to get a lynch.
Remind me what the reasoning behind this bandwagon was, and remind me who were the 3rd and 4th voters in the bandwagon and think about why they would be the most suspicious.
|
On April 20 2010 08:54 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 08:33 Caller wrote:On April 20 2010 08:30 meeple wrote:
And when you say Rage or KF91... I support your Rage argument... but just because someone bandwagons doesn't make them mafia... in a game where majority rules bandwagons are necessary to get a lynch. Remind me what the reasoning behind this bandwagon was, and remind me who were the 3rd and 4th voters in the bandwagon and think about why they would be the most suspicious. So you state an idea with good reasoning, I agree and support it... then I'm suspicious. Please explain how that works. I dunno if spots 3 and 4 are mafia hotspots or something, since you mention it so much...
a simple check reveals that about 75% of the time either the #3 or #4 voter in any bandwagon in TL mafia is scum (day 1 and 2, that is). You're the fourth, mate, and you seem to be agreeing with me, which is ALWAYS a bad sign.
|
On April 20 2010 09:05 Jugan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 09:00 Caller wrote:On April 20 2010 08:54 meeple wrote:On April 20 2010 08:33 Caller wrote:On April 20 2010 08:30 meeple wrote:
And when you say Rage or KF91... I support your Rage argument... but just because someone bandwagons doesn't make them mafia... in a game where majority rules bandwagons are necessary to get a lynch. Remind me what the reasoning behind this bandwagon was, and remind me who were the 3rd and 4th voters in the bandwagon and think about why they would be the most suspicious. So you state an idea with good reasoning, I agree and support it... then I'm suspicious. Please explain how that works. I dunno if spots 3 and 4 are mafia hotspots or something, since you mention it so much... a simple check reveals that about 75% of the time either the #3 or #4 voter in any bandwagon in TL mafia is scum (day 1 and 2, that is). You're the fourth, mate, and you seem to be agreeing with me, which is ALWAYS a bad sign. Call has a point, only 32% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
mate go check the games yourself
i already did it
and its 92% not 32%
|
On April 20 2010 09:10 Jugan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 09:06 Caller wrote:On April 20 2010 09:05 Jugan wrote:On April 20 2010 09:00 Caller wrote:On April 20 2010 08:54 meeple wrote:On April 20 2010 08:33 Caller wrote:On April 20 2010 08:30 meeple wrote:
And when you say Rage or KF91... I support your Rage argument... but just because someone bandwagons doesn't make them mafia... in a game where majority rules bandwagons are necessary to get a lynch. Remind me what the reasoning behind this bandwagon was, and remind me who were the 3rd and 4th voters in the bandwagon and think about why they would be the most suspicious. So you state an idea with good reasoning, I agree and support it... then I'm suspicious. Please explain how that works. I dunno if spots 3 and 4 are mafia hotspots or something, since you mention it so much... a simple check reveals that about 75% of the time either the #3 or #4 voter in any bandwagon in TL mafia is scum (day 1 and 2, that is). You're the fourth, mate, and you seem to be agreeing with me, which is ALWAYS a bad sign. Call has a point, only 32% of all statistics are made up on the spot. mate go check the games yourself i already did it and its 92% not 32% The point is an arbitrary number can serve for it since the number itself is made up. Due to the fact that I was being sarcastic, I chose a number below 50% in mock support for your ridiculous assumption. And no, I will not look through every single game to see if the statistic made up happens to match up with a coincidence in other mafia games.
well, you see, i actually looked through the games. Well not all of them but i did a SRS of which games to look at. I looked at 8 and 6 games had that phenomenon. And I was aware of your sarcasm, as you saw I picked 92%. Please don't try and lecture me if you're not going to backup your words.
|
ugh, this tells us nothing, why was he railroaded -_-
|
![[image loading]](http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv352/sirjamesthegood/DoubleFacePalm.jpg)
see what i meant
|
On April 20 2010 10:43 Ace wrote:
Wow my business is like, totally feeling the effects of this current economy.
paradox of thrift imho
|
On April 20 2010 23:48 RaGe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 21:39 d3_crescentia wrote:
Quick pre-work post; probably won't be able to post that much until late. It's a good point in time to collect our suspicions and accusations so we can prioritize DT checks. We can check RaGe since we've got a lot of people pointing the finger of suspicion at him currently. Then there's others that have been pointed out like Osmoses or unexplained voters like love1another etc. but checking them probably won't give us any substantial information. Also... Zona's been noticeably absent, though he's probably been busy programming - I'd like to see his thoughts on the situation. Well I propose if you role check me you get an official count of who's still suspicious of me, since a lot of people are refuting the claims against me now. At least that way you can be sure that people really want a rolecheck on me, and maybe we could get some clues from the arguments surrounding my proposition if it does happen and we get a list.
Rage you have failed to explain any of my concerns that I have of you, each of which individual may be circumstantial but together are quite damning. Consider that:
a) you type very cautiously and use words like town which, although neutral, give me the impression that you are trying not to be suspicious.
b) you advocate not doing discussion on day 1, when in fact day 1 discussions are absolutely critical for further analysis. The only reason why you would want to shut down day 1 discussion (aside from forcing a lynch on a member of town, anyways) is because you want to hide or create a hiding ground for some of the inactives. It also creates less evidence: consider that mafia have a certain chance of slipping up. It only follows that the more a mafia talks the greater the chance that in one of his posts he will slip up. There's no reason to not encourage discussion, as the more townies talk the more choices mafia will have to shoot at tonight. This is especially true for mad hatters and veterans, who should be constantly being pro-town and trying to draw hits.
c) you haven't actually contributed anything despite the fact that you've read the thread and had time to do so
d) you nonetheless play the whole voice of reason card, which is something that Shinbi-chan did in the WaW game that although made him extremely pro-town served to hide his mafia intentions.
e) You haven't responded to any of the accusations other than by saying "well nobody has said anything" or "my accusers have all backed down," or by saying someone who has criticized you on random grounds as being
Is this really what you're going to do all mafia game? Call people out, offer no reasoning and when people call you out you either whine about being always accused or go "yeah just lynch me i'll be green".
f) Anybody who plays the "town order and plan" card is suspicious because that is what I ALWAYS do when I'm mafia.
Please respond promptly.
|
Rage, congratulations, you just confirmed my suspicions of you as mafia.
Consider the facts:
every single piece of evidence I tossed at RaGe was flimsy and easily torn apart by simple, reasonable, logic. In fact look at my post history:
Let's say RaGe is pro-town. Thus he would consider his ideas to be pro-town as well. Thus, anybody that goes against his ideas would be considered anti-town and thus a lynch candidate, or they're a stupid townie. Despite reality and statistics, people generally consider me a good player, so they automatically remove me from the idea of "stupid townie" even though that is usually my role.
Thus the only apparent choice is that I'm anti-town and should therefore be lynched. This is especially because if RaGe truly was pro-town, and I not only go against him but accuse him with basically nonsense and nulltells, that this means that clearly I am mafia and he should advocate for my lynch.
But we already know that several people consider me to be pro-town despite my complete lack of intelligible contributions. Going after me may be risky, especially because it draws attention to yourself. Now what would a townie think?
a) who cares if I die, I have no role anyways, might as well go after Caller b/c he might be mafia godfather or smth!!!!oneoneone
or
b) this is too risky, if I die I might give too much information away, better to play it safe
Remember what I said about how town and mafia play? Most inexperienced mafia tend to play it safe when they can. For instance, notice how Ace (before he went trollcore) was willing to put (well, not himself) but a lot of effort and also draw attention to himself (by the way he still hasn't analyzed my posts, can I pay money for that?) when he accused me. I defended myself, but anyone can see that I instinctively concluded that because he disagreed with me, and I'm pro-town, and he's an intelligent player, that therefore he must be anti-town. Everybody does this when faced with an accusation that's flimsy. Everybody. Even the most experienced players tend to get pissed off when this is the case.
Yet what does RaGe do? He calmly dismantles my argument and then proceeds to pretend like I've done nothing wrong, aside from going against everything he thinks is pro-town (promoting unity or whatever horsehydro-evacuatedremainder he mentions of being pro-town. He himself has mentioned how he hasn't played in a while, so he's probably not pulling something sneaky here. And yet he proceeds to assume that I'm town, because he doesn't go after me at all and is like "you have a few reasonable points, etc." Why would anybody in their right mind do this? Look what even Jugen did when I accused him. He proceeded to burst a blood vessel in his criticism of me, even though it was pretty inarticulate and didn't really do anything to my credibility. Yet RaGe just kind of pretends it doesn't happen without any sort of retaliation. Unless you're the gosuest townie in the world, I think it's pretty easy to conclude what RaGe's true affiliation is.
Please, regardless of who dies tonight, check this man out.
|
On April 21 2010 04:08 RaGe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2010 03:01 Caller wrote:
Rage, congratulations, you just confirmed my suspicions of you as mafia.
Consider the facts:
every single piece of evidence I tossed at RaGe was flimsy and easily torn apart by simple, reasonable, logic. In fact look at my post history:
Let's say RaGe is pro-town. Thus he would consider his ideas to be pro-town as well. Thus, anybody that goes against his ideas would be considered anti-town and thus a lynch candidate, or they're a stupid townie. Despite reality and statistics, people generally consider me a good player, so they automatically remove me from the idea of "stupid townie" even though that is usually my role.
Thus the only apparent choice is that I'm anti-town and should therefore be lynched. This is especially because if RaGe truly was pro-town, and I not only go against him but accuse him with basically nonsense and nulltells, that this means that clearly I am mafia and he should advocate for my lynch.
But we already know that several people consider me to be pro-town despite my complete lack of intelligible contributions. Going after me may be risky, especially because it draws attention to yourself. Now what would a townie think?
a) who cares if I die, I have no role anyways, might as well go after Caller b/c he might be mafia godfather or smth!!!!oneoneone
or
b) this is too risky, if I die I might give too much information away, better to play it safe
Remember what I said about how town and mafia play? Most inexperienced mafia tend to play it safe when they can. For instance, notice how Ace (before he went trollcore) was willing to put (well, not himself) but a lot of effort and also draw attention to himself (by the way he still hasn't analyzed my posts, can I pay money for that?) when he accused me. I defended myself, but anyone can see that I instinctively concluded that because he disagreed with me, and I'm pro-town, and he's an intelligent player, that therefore he must be anti-town. Everybody does this when faced with an accusation that's flimsy. Everybody. Even the most experienced players tend to get pissed off when this is the case.
Yet what does RaGe do? He calmly dismantles my argument and then proceeds to pretend like I've done nothing wrong, aside from going against everything he thinks is pro-town (promoting unity or whatever horsehydro-evacuatedremainder he mentions of being pro-town. He himself has mentioned how he hasn't played in a while, so he's probably not pulling something sneaky here. And yet he proceeds to assume that I'm town, because he doesn't go after me at all and is like "you have a few reasonable points, etc." Why would anybody in their right mind do this? Look what even Jugen did when I accused him. He proceeded to burst a blood vessel in his criticism of me, even though it was pretty inarticulate and didn't really do anything to my credibility. Yet RaGe just kind of pretends it doesn't happen without any sort of retaliation. Unless you're the gosuest townie in the world, I think it's pretty easy to conclude what RaGe's true affiliation is.
Please, regardless of who dies tonight, check this man out. lmao are you serious
ofc im serious everytime i make a wall of text im cereal
|
On April 21 2010 04:22 RaGe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2010 04:15 Caller wrote:On April 21 2010 04:08 RaGe wrote:On April 21 2010 03:01 Caller wrote:
Rage, congratulations, you just confirmed my suspicions of you as mafia.
Consider the facts:
every single piece of evidence I tossed at RaGe was flimsy and easily torn apart by simple, reasonable, logic. In fact look at my post history:
Let's say RaGe is pro-town. Thus he would consider his ideas to be pro-town as well. Thus, anybody that goes against his ideas would be considered anti-town and thus a lynch candidate, or they're a stupid townie. Despite reality and statistics, people generally consider me a good player, so they automatically remove me from the idea of "stupid townie" even though that is usually my role.
Thus the only apparent choice is that I'm anti-town and should therefore be lynched. This is especially because if RaGe truly was pro-town, and I not only go against him but accuse him with basically nonsense and nulltells, that this means that clearly I am mafia and he should advocate for my lynch.
But we already know that several people consider me to be pro-town despite my complete lack of intelligible contributions. Going after me may be risky, especially because it draws attention to yourself. Now what would a townie think?
a) who cares if I die, I have no role anyways, might as well go after Caller b/c he might be mafia godfather or smth!!!!oneoneone
or
b) this is too risky, if I die I might give too much information away, better to play it safe
Remember what I said about how town and mafia play? Most inexperienced mafia tend to play it safe when they can. For instance, notice how Ace (before he went trollcore) was willing to put (well, not himself) but a lot of effort and also draw attention to himself (by the way he still hasn't analyzed my posts, can I pay money for that?) when he accused me. I defended myself, but anyone can see that I instinctively concluded that because he disagreed with me, and I'm pro-town, and he's an intelligent player, that therefore he must be anti-town. Everybody does this when faced with an accusation that's flimsy. Everybody. Even the most experienced players tend to get pissed off when this is the case.
Yet what does RaGe do? He calmly dismantles my argument and then proceeds to pretend like I've done nothing wrong, aside from going against everything he thinks is pro-town (promoting unity or whatever horsehydro-evacuatedremainder he mentions of being pro-town. He himself has mentioned how he hasn't played in a while, so he's probably not pulling something sneaky here. And yet he proceeds to assume that I'm town, because he doesn't go after me at all and is like "you have a few reasonable points, etc." Why would anybody in their right mind do this? Look what even Jugen did when I accused him. He proceeded to burst a blood vessel in his criticism of me, even though it was pretty inarticulate and didn't really do anything to my credibility. Yet RaGe just kind of pretends it doesn't happen without any sort of retaliation. Unless you're the gosuest townie in the world, I think it's pretty easy to conclude what RaGe's true affiliation is.
Please, regardless of who dies tonight, check this man out. lmao are you serious ofc im serious everytime i make a wall of text im cereal well since your post implies nothing else but mind reading capabilities, who's my #1 suspect according to you.. or wait.. who am I gonna kill tonight with my mafia powarz? I'm sure that wall of text was as much of a 'game' as the one before it. I'm just not sure what this one is trying to achieve. I hope you're a detective pretending to be a dumb townie
oh no, this one isn't a game. this one is fully serious.
explain to me the flaws with the logic you used last time, or can you not explain them?
|
On April 21 2010 04:21 Jugan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2010 04:15 Caller wrote:On April 21 2010 04:08 RaGe wrote:On April 21 2010 03:01 Caller wrote:
Rage, congratulations, you just confirmed my suspicions of you as mafia.
Consider the facts:
every single piece of evidence I tossed at RaGe was flimsy and easily torn apart by simple, reasonable, logic. In fact look at my post history:
Let's say RaGe is pro-town. Thus he would consider his ideas to be pro-town as well. Thus, anybody that goes against his ideas would be considered anti-town and thus a lynch candidate, or they're a stupid townie. Despite reality and statistics, people generally consider me a good player, so they automatically remove me from the idea of "stupid townie" even though that is usually my role.
Thus the only apparent choice is that I'm anti-town and should therefore be lynched. This is especially because if RaGe truly was pro-town, and I not only go against him but accuse him with basically nonsense and nulltells, that this means that clearly I am mafia and he should advocate for my lynch.
But we already know that several people consider me to be pro-town despite my complete lack of intelligible contributions. Going after me may be risky, especially because it draws attention to yourself. Now what would a townie think?
a) who cares if I die, I have no role anyways, might as well go after Caller b/c he might be mafia godfather or smth!!!!oneoneone
or
b) this is too risky, if I die I might give too much information away, better to play it safe
Remember what I said about how town and mafia play? Most inexperienced mafia tend to play it safe when they can. For instance, notice how Ace (before he went trollcore) was willing to put (well, not himself) but a lot of effort and also draw attention to himself (by the way he still hasn't analyzed my posts, can I pay money for that?) when he accused me. I defended myself, but anyone can see that I instinctively concluded that because he disagreed with me, and I'm pro-town, and he's an intelligent player, that therefore he must be anti-town. Everybody does this when faced with an accusation that's flimsy. Everybody. Even the most experienced players tend to get pissed off when this is the case.
Yet what does RaGe do? He calmly dismantles my argument and then proceeds to pretend like I've done nothing wrong, aside from going against everything he thinks is pro-town (promoting unity or whatever horsehydro-evacuatedremainder he mentions of being pro-town. He himself has mentioned how he hasn't played in a while, so he's probably not pulling something sneaky here. And yet he proceeds to assume that I'm town, because he doesn't go after me at all and is like "you have a few reasonable points, etc." Why would anybody in their right mind do this? Look what even Jugen did when I accused him. He proceeded to burst a blood vessel in his criticism of me, even though it was pretty inarticulate and didn't really do anything to my credibility. Yet RaGe just kind of pretends it doesn't happen without any sort of retaliation. Unless you're the gosuest townie in the world, I think it's pretty easy to conclude what RaGe's true affiliation is.
Please, regardless of who dies tonight, check this man out. lmao are you serious ofc im serious everytime i make a wall of text im cereal What kind of cereal? Also, it would help if you actually quotes what rage said in your argument because sometimes it's a little tedious to keep having to go back and figure out what he said (as opposed to you loosely summarizing it)
the bot has everybody's posts, just take a look at that. I don't want to be accused by "you're cherry-picking, etc." I want people to see it for themselves.
|
by the way, meeple is also suspect for
a) voting 3rd
b) rapidly switching votes... to 3rd
c) commentating on the result of the lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
