EPTI caller your all-in.
TL Mafia XXII - Page 48
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
I caller your all-in. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
I jugan your caller. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On April 21 2010 07:21 Caller wrote: almost as good as L in pinning the godfather mayor Works EVERY TIME. | ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
I Rage. OHSHI- | ||
|
Infundibulum
United States2552 Posts
On April 21 2010 05:37 Falcynn wrote: Wait...so Caller's argument against Rage is that Rage is way too calm in his defending of himself and as a result must be mafia? I realize I'm a total noob and am probably being premature with this but I'm giving a FoS (am I using this term right? just looked it up on that mafiascum wiki) to Caller, because it seems like he's purposely trying to sow discord with these "rules" he's using to spot mafia. Then again, as stated, he is a way more experienced player than me, but I still don't see the logic in the way he makes some of his accusations. No, you are right that there is a lot of strange reasoning in Caller's post. I don't remember him using these sorts of arguments in past games. | ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
On April 21 2010 07:42 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: No, you are right that there is a lot of strange reasoning in Caller's post. I don't remember him using these sorts of arguments in past games. do you remember me using any arguments in past games/ | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
| ||
|
Infundibulum
United States2552 Posts
On April 21 2010 08:10 Caller wrote: do you remember me using any arguments in past games/ Yes. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On April 20 2010 04:46 Bill Murray wrote: seriously 10 games and not red | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
Caller, all your arguments still stem from what you would have done if you were mafia. Is anyone here saying that Caller is surely pro-town? I'm not saying you're definitely scum, but you definitely do not come off as pro-town to me. So far all you've done is sow dissent and point fingers, and when you attack RaGe and he doesn't go apeshit that somehow translates to surefire scum? Do you have to be a hothead to be mafia? Maybe RaGe's gameplan is more complex than "if someone says something that I find fishy in any way, I must call that person out as scum." That's your gameplan, and I don't think it's working. Please stop congratulating people for making your suspect list, it doesn't seem to be particularly difficult. Anyone else think maybe he's doing this on purpose? I can't follow his logic. The only one I would say I'm sure is town is tree.hugger, he's clear, conscise and has intelligent things to say. As for Zona, can we get a statement? Your recent absence aside, the automatic archives is awesome, much props. Cynan, you were pretty active at first but lately (like, your last 10 posts) you've been very tight-lipped and short of words. I think it would be good to see more than a oneliner the next time you post? KF91, going through your posts I agree with most of what you say, but then, When it reaches Day 3 or so (We would have about 10 less players than right now), I think it would be more manageable for me to start analyzing and accusing people. Just what you'll be doing for the first two days. Participation is low as it is, it seems to me we can use every voice at this point. | ||
|
KF91
Canada221 Posts
What I was referring to with my Day 3 analysis, is that I will be able to provide an analysis of each player (Maybe I'll split it up into two posts, first half of people on the first part of Day 3, then the rest on the second part of Day 3, I really haven't planned it out yet) so it will help the town accuse and maybe even decide who we should lynch. | ||
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
On April 21 2010 08:47 KF91 wrote: Well I have been regularly reading through the thread and giving my opinion on the events that have been happening and what I think about people. But as you can see, there's really nothing to touch upon at this moment (Read this page and the last; it's mostly random spam that does not contribute to the game at all). What I was referring to with my Day 3 analysis, is that I will be able to provide an analysis of each player (Maybe I'll split it up into two posts, first half of people on the first part of Day 3, then the rest on the second part of Day 3, I really haven't planned it out yet) so it will help the town accuse and maybe even decide who we should lynch. A good way to mark yourself as not credible is announcing that you've only read the last two pages and then saying you won't be doing anything until the 3rd day. | ||
|
KF91
Canada221 Posts
On April 21 2010 09:00 Jugan wrote: A good way to mark yourself as not credible is announcing that you've only read the last two pages and then saying you won't be doing anything until the 3rd day. I did not say that I have only read the two pages; I just stated that the past two pages have been full of posts that are almost useless. At the same time, I did not say that I won't be doing anything until Day 3. If you have read my posts, you could see that I have tried to contribute to the ideas of the town by giving my own input with regards to what has been happening. All I stated in my post is that I will be able to give a thorough analysis of every player in the game when it reaches Day 3, because at this moment, there are way too many players, and not enough time on my side to invest into a "project" like that. | ||
|
Incognito
United States2071 Posts
On April 21 2010 06:29 KF91 wrote: In a normal situation, a mafia (More the inexperienced mafia) that is being blamed would feel more nervous and therefore would post short, erratic posts trying to defend themselves. But what Rage has been doing is almost the complete opposite of that. His posts are composed well and I think that he defended himself correctly. What do you think about Osmoses? If I use your rule of thumb...it seems as if Osmoses would be likely innocent. However, I don't feel satisfied with the idea that Osmoses is innocent... On April 21 2010 06:29 KF91 wrote: Also Caller, the whole 3rd/4th to bandwagon theory. I'm not going to argue about the fact that it happens 75% of the time, but currently it looks like that's all the basis you have to be suspicious of people (Most recently, of meeple). Although his commentary on the lynch should be analysed more throughly with previous posts and posts to come, I don't think your points 1 and 2 should really play into a basis of suspicion. Shouldn't posting behaviour be considered more important than the order of votes casted for a lynch? Actually meeple is a fairly suspicious character imo. Let me go back through his archived posts and check. Ok, useless posts, followed by attacking BC's plan/idea. Not really pro-town, but not suspicious yet either. Oh noes. Next post he defends BC. Not sure how much we can read into this. But flip floppiness is kinda pro-mafia. Then he ignores BM, cool. Advocates anti day-3 double lynch policy. Ok, fine I guess this is a justifiable position. There are plenty of people who have advocated this position in the past. Regardless though, traditionally usually have a decent amount of information in our hands by day 3. Yet meeple arbitrarily assumes that we won't have enough info by day 3. On April 18 2010 06:50 meeple wrote: I don't agree that Day 3 is a good time to use the lynch... we still won't have tons of info by then. Really? Well why don't you try to make generate this info then? Seriously info doesn't just pop out of nowhere into your hands. Seems to me like meeple has no intention of attempting to get information. He inherently assumes that not enough will be available. Oops! Also, another thing to note about meeple's posting is that if you look at all of meeple's posts as a whole, he is always reacting. He is always responding to what is going on immediately in front of him. Not going through or trying to analyze other players as a whole. Strike two! Well, before I write him off on that, meeple: start trying to dig up and analyze real information instead of just responding to what is immediately in front of you please.. Continuing, meeple finally decides to respond to the BM incident, complains about inactivity, and jokes around. Casually mentions a bandwagon (not certain if this is an anti-bandwagon stance, but I assume it is?), and then in the next post jumps onto the jpak wagon. Talk about hypocrisy. Next several posts are trash, and then he comes up with a medic list. Cool. It looks useful. Unfortunately, infundibulum already made one of those. He was probably ignored, but oh wells. At least meeple leaves Ace (Detective?) off the list, and adds some people to the list who aren't really worth mentioning. tree.hugger? Foolishness hasn't been useful, and hobbes is a big WUT? Why does meeple also ignore Zona and d3_crescentia from his list? Shady and poorly thought out list at best. Next he defends himself from Caller. And now he will have to defend himself from me. Better come out and explain yourself before I explain your situation for you (well, I already did). (Note to inactives, don't think that I'm going to give you the same treatment as meeple and let you defend yourselves. The difference here is that at least meeple is being active. He gets a few more bonus tolerance points on my list than you guys do). Oh also I'd like you to come out and explain your choices for your bizzare medic list. Ah yes JadeFist. As BM (and Radfield) have kindly pointed out, you can't change your vote to the losing or winning bandwagon. Seeing as you change your vote, don't post in the thread, and blatantly break the rules, you're have some serious business against you. Not only that, but you're already a shady character. Don't worry, I won't ask you to come out here and defend yourself. I might listen if someone else tries to come and defend you though. On April 21 2010 06:54 Radfield wrote: I've been reading through AcrossFiveJulys posting history, and to me it seems a bit suspect. It's nothing specific in particular, but does anyone else get the same vibe? Not on the top of my list, but yes. Even after a call for more posts from the non-voters, it seems like people still aren't motivated to post. Maybe I'm just not scary enough?  | ||
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
On April 21 2010 09:04 KF91 wrote: I did not say that I have only read the two pages;. On April 21 2010 08:47 KF91 wrote: there's really nothing to touch upon at this moment (Read this page and the last | ||
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
| ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
| ||
|
KF91
Canada221 Posts
Oh, I think you just misunderstood because of my sentence structuring style -.- Sorry bout that. "Read" in that context was in an imperative sense, as in I was telling Osmoses to read the past two pages, and not "Read" as in "I just read the past two pages" | ||
| ||
