| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 20 2010 09:35 DarthThienAn wrote: TL has a search function that we can use to do that Pandain :p Yeah I know I just figure it would be alot easier. But your're right, why do ALL this is you could just take 5 minutes and do it yourself. Add to that that I would have to update it every few pages or so. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 20 2010 10:50 Roffles wrote: You know, I gotta say that this filter function does do wonders in Mafia. Too bad I'm like one of the only people who gets it in here. =( What's the filter function? | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
But wow foolishness was killed. Did not see that coming. At least hes town. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 20 2010 14:25 BrownBear wrote: Sweet, everyone thinks I'm red. Just a couple things: Roffles - your reason for saying I should be a target is because I haven't helped town at all. If I start contributing, by your logic you will no longer be gunning for me, correct? Actually, same question goes to everyone. My plan is to be more active today and contribute. If that's going to stop people from starting a bandwagon on me, that's all well and good. If everyone is dead set on lynching me, though, then 2 things: I'm not even going to bother, and you all seriously need to reevaluate your playstyles. Unless everyone lynchinig you is the mob! + Show Spoiler + Da da da | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 20 2010 14:35 BrownBear wrote: Not what I meant. What I meant was, if I stop making a bunch of shitty posts and play like the townie that I am, and people decide to lynch me anyway, they aren't playing well. Learn to read before jumping on people under suspicion, it really doesn't help their case. Note the bolded part. Hmmm.... seems just a bit reaching for straws there. Just doesn't sound right. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 20 2010 14:03 tree.hugger wrote: Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. I have never, ever seen a townie say something like this. So narcissistic you had to complement yourself? GG. Also this I don't get. So what? He's just noting that maybe the mafia aren't making too many mistakes. I'll say this again, I'm new here, but this definitely doesn't seem like it would prove Subversasion is mafia. Please explain this to me. I mean, we haven't caught any mafia yet(for sure at least), so it's not like his statement is false. And even if it was, why does that make him mafia? I am so confused. Please elaborate. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 05:46 DarthThienAn wrote: Actually, the mafia made a huge mistake - one of their hits failed, or they stacked their hits on Foolishness, a townie. A smart/good player, but only 1 townie nonetheless. The less people there are, the greater their voting power, it's stupid to stack on night 1. So to me, the statement IS false, but the reason why it's suspicious is that no one would ever genuinely say that -> mafia. Haha, you're right about that mistake. However, I thought it had been determined that D3 was also hit but protected by a medic. So they didn't stack their hits, one of their hits simply failed. And the more important thing is why would no one say that? Heck, I might say that. "Hey the mafia are doing pretty good." Just to be sure when I'm voting, please explain more. + Show Spoiler + If Subversion IS mafia, i'm so going to kill myself. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
Chaosers vote for day 1 : On July 19 2010 00:50 chaoser wrote: ##vote abstain for now, didn't want to get modkilled For now, he says. Implying he's going to change it later. Now as I think it's been pretty implied that abstaining was the worse decision, just has vibes of mafia in it. Then look at this, a later post. On July 19 2010 03:46 chaoser wrote: It's already been established that not lynching someone on the first day is a horrible decision, why are you still pushing for it? What the fuck? You've just majorly contradicted yourself. Especially since you never changed your vote from abstain. Just to note this for the future, in case it turns out that BB was innocent. On July 19 2010 09:05 chaoser wrote: + Show Spoiler + On July 19 2010 08:36 BrownBear wrote: My bad, didn't realize you could abstain. Should have done that, but at this point it's not like it really matters :/ So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious? In addition, you yourself disagree with your own vote. I find that suscipious. On July 19 2010 22:44 chaoser wrote: Voting ended at 10:10 Subversion votes for Hyperbola at 9:16 - "No other clear choice" zeks unvotes Hyperbola, abstains at 8:58 - "Unvote like I promised" Misder unvotes Hyperbola, votes for LaXerCannon at 8:38 - "His posts don't have substance" Fooliahness votes for BC at 8:25 - "Bad vibes" Jayme unvotes Hyperbola, votes Youngminii at 7:53 - "Youngminii has is crazy sketch" BrownBear votes for Hyperbola at 6:30 - "oops mistake, didn't know you could absain, oh well, nothing I can do now." Those were the votes of people in the last 4 hours, starting with BrownBear's vote for Hyperbola Just putting the info out there One of his few posts that appear to help the town. However, even with this it is incredibaly skewed. As Zeks said right after this, he's picking out the choice words. In addition, note the italizied part. Possibly still trying to bandwagon BB. When pointed out by Zeks, he links back to each post but still, the original post is still in suspect. Perhaps he just decided to link to cover up the fact he was leading everyone astray. On July 20 2010 23:02 chaoser wrote: And to be truthful, I don;t really believe that BrownBear is townie just from the way he's posting. For the first day he pretty much posts nothing and bandwagons with no real reason. When people point him out of it (that he voted before reading) he goes oh well, it doesn't matter now when it CLEARLY did, the vote ended 6-5. Then, after a whole DAY of people pointing fingers at him he decides to come in and post about vets claiming and basically giving horrible advice. I'm inclined to say he's mafia who fucked up the first day and now he's trying to play dumb townie. Also, his whole ramble about claiming is pushing us off the topic of Subversion's suspicious vote as well as his little statement about how mafia isn't really making mistakes. I'm not 100% clear on my vote yet but I'm watching BrownBear for now. And I also think we should vote double lynch. It's going to be 52 hours till the next lynch give or take, you guys don't think we'll have more than enough information then? Damn boi, you really hate brownbear don't you? Spoilering this as I do with most of my posts, because this is the weakest point and very easily just a coinicidence. + Show Spoiler + On July 21 2010 05:49 chaoser wrote: Does anyone know when day is ending? Tomorrow at 12? So far the votes have been Divinek votes for BrownBear at 13:59 DarthThienAn votes Divinek at 13.59 tree.hugger votes Subversion at 14:03 DarthThienAn unvotes Divinek, votes BrownBear at 14:34 d3_crescentia votes DarthThienAn at 14:50 Amber[LighT] votes BrownBear at 22:15 bumatlarge votes DarthThienAn at 22:59 ~OpZ~ votes BrownBear at 1:01 rastaban votes BrownBear at 1:59 Misder votes DarthThienAn at 3:18 Tricode votes BrownBear at 4:02 Pyrrhuloxia votes DarthThienAn at 4:57 bumatlarge unvotes DarthThienAn, votes Subversion at 5:25 DarthThienAn unvotes BrownBear, votes Subversion at 5:30 End result: BrownBear - 5 DarthThienAn - 3 Subversion - 3 Very possible that he just wanted to quote the votes at this specific time so then people checking in will be like "Hey, look at that brownbear. People think he's mafia!" Finally, this last post is very interesting. It can be taken to mean alot of different things. On July 21 2010 06:02 chaoser wrote: Also, I'm going to put in my vote for Subversion. So far I don't know how I feel about BrownBear. At first I wanted to vote him. He's been playing badly and didn't do anything day one. But then at the same time people jumped all over voting for him in the beginning until just recently when people switched to Subversion, or at least it feels like that. Subversion's little mafia mistake statement is just weird all in all and was part of that voting block (everyone's already mentioned this) so I'll put my vote on him for now but I'll have to see. Still a full day left. ##vote Subversion After rallying so much against BB, he decides to vote subversion? As other people have mentioned, it is very possible for mafia to start to incite a bandwagon against someone and then just slip out once its started. + Show Spoiler + Special thought just for funsies: Chaoser also mentioned the double lynch. It is entirely possible the mafia wants us to use double lynch on both of these people. I was originally agianst BB, but it just seems to me that Chaoser is way for suscipious. With that, I hereby vote. ###Vote Chaoser. Other people's thoughts? | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
| ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
 ) On July 21 2010 06:53 Pandain wrote: Just to note this for the future, in case it turns out that BB was innocent. When I say "just in case BB is innocent." I am saying that chaoser was the one who started the bandwagon. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:10 chaoser wrote: lol, I'mma straight out respond to that. I got a pm from BM saying please vote, I voted by abstaining. Later on, I couldn't make up my mind on whether I should vote for Hyperbola or not and I didn't want to vote for anyone else because no one else struck me as suspicious. So I decided to abstain. I felt that no one deserved my vote. If i had voted for someone and later somehow that vote ended up painting me as mafia and the only explanation I had was, I didn't want to vote Hyperbola so I voted a random dude, I'd be digging my own grave. You vote an inactive in order to get them to talk more, you vote someone who you think has to justify a certain response. But you don't just abstain because you don't know who to vote for, But then you don't say to youngmini, who was abstaining for the same reason you were (We have to be sure), that he's stupid. On July 21 2010 07:10 chaoser wrote: How did I contradict myself? I said it would be bad if we all abstained and no one was lynched. Clearly someone was going to be lynched. Just because I vote abstain doesn't mean I didn't want anyone lynched. I didn't contradict myself. Yes. Yes it does mean you contradited yourself. You said it was bad if we abstain, and then you abstained. And Yes, if you vote abstain it means you didn't want anyone lynched. What else does it mean? On July 21 2010 07:10 chaoser wrote: and no one else has made that claim? I noticed his statement was weird and pointed it out so others could analysis it too. If you've noticed, that's what I do. I organize/point out information so that others can have an easier time thinking about things. I'm just noting that you made the claim first. This is all part of my own theory that you wanted the town to double lynch Subversion and Brown Bear. After making sure people were suscipious of Brownbear, you decide to jump on Subversion. And agian, you did the same thing. You say your going to change the vote from abstain later, but then you don't. You don't even say "Hey, I'm unsure who to lynch. Can (person) please clarify what they mean by this.) And yes you do organize/point out information. But as I point out, it isn't always unbiased. On July 21 2010 07:10 chaoser wrote: How did I disagree with my own vote? I was pointing out that his reasoning is FLAWED. He said he voted Hyperbola cause he didn't know he could abstain and then said, oh well, I'm not going to change. I voted abstain because that was the choice I agreed with most at the time. I didn't think anyone was suspicious enough in my mind that I would want to vote for them and also give a good reason as to why I thought they were suspicious. Mmm... nice. That responds to my argument in no way at all. Maybe you quoted the wrong thing? With that, please quote MY statements, not yorus. Makes it incredibally hard since I have to scroll up and down and just takes alot of effort. On July 21 2010 07:10 chaoser wrote: After the first day had passed, I started to get a better inkling of what was going on and there was information I could work with. I pointed out BrownBear again and tried to be logical about why I thought his actions were suspicious. What's wrong with that? Its not neccesarily wrong, but this was part of me showing how in almost every post you argued against Brown bear, argue for double lynch and then start to vote Subversion for a silly sentence(which I believe has no bearing that he's mafia). It's just part of my theory that you are trying to get the town to double lynch BB and Subversion. On July 21 2010 07:10 chaoser wrote: Please read my post, I 100% explained why I didn't vote BrownBear. I also state I'll have to see about the Subversion vote. He has yet to respond so I'm waiting for that before 100% deciding. All in all, I don't think I've done anything scummy. You've tried to paint a lot of my actions as scummy even though they weren't. I can't tell if that's because you just came to the wrong conclusion or if you're trying to divert attention away from the BrownBear/Subversion/Darth situation on voting right now. Maybe you could look at the situation better if I organized all my posts together into one post for you? Mmmm... I did read your post. That's why i quoted it. So all this time you were arguing agianst BB, even more so than Subversion, and you don't vote against him? But then you change to Subversion because of ONE sentence (not as big as BB's, which I honestly believe would be more convincing that he's mafia.) And you even VOTE for him, despite it seeming that you at the time of you arguing agianst BB you were more convinced than you are now of Subversion. Yet you only vote for Subeversion. On July 21 2010 07:15 chaoser wrote: Also, how did I start the bandwagon? I noted what I thought about him but didn't VOTE. How did I start a bandwagon against him? I was posting my own thoughts on the situation and seeing how other people thought about it. You dont have to vote for someone to start a bandwagon  . But you have been the one who first pointed that out, than probably the one who has been the most active against BB. I would consider that "Starting the bandwagon."On July 21 2010 07:31 BrownBear wrote: I wouldn't go so far as to say chaoser started a bandwagon on me, as others were already against me to begin with. But there's been so much hate against me coming from him. So. Much. :'( :'(. Haters gonna' hate. I believe the very first one was Hyperbola, but I think that was just more anger against you. There are a variety of reasons you could've voted for Hyperbola first. Yet Chaoser is the second one after. You're right, perhaps he wasn't the one who "literally" started. But he has definitely been one of, if not the, most active against you. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
| ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:31 BrownBear wrote: I wouldn't go so far as to say chaoser started a bandwagon on me, as others were already against me to begin with. But there's been so much hate against me coming from him. So. Much. :'( Actually, I do have one final question for you Brown Bear. Why DID You vote for Hyperbola in the begining. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 08:04 chaoser wrote: There is more evidence/weird things going on for BrownBear/Subversion than for me at this moment. I'd be more than happy to continue the next day but for now I'd like to focus on the issue that was being talked about before. Right now I feel like I'm just helping you in derailing the thread and so I'd like to continue this conversation in PMs and post those up if people want later. Interesting idea. However, I am stuck as to whether to do this. I DO believe I may have stumbled upon something that everyone should now. Given that I myself am not the best debater, I posted this because I wanted other people to hear what they think. On Subversion and BrownBear, I feel that Subversion is being voted on unfairly. Subversions one line "Oh the mafia aren't making too many mistakes" does not seem AT ALL to be indicative that he's the mafia. As Citizen has stated above me, it sounds reasonable coming from a new player such as him. I myself am still confused as to HOW this makes him mafia. Especially more so than brownbear. But I do not believe this is derailing the thread. I believe I have found potentially vital information. If someone believes that a person may be mafia, and offers enough evidence, how is that derailing the thread? Especially since with my theory if you ARE indeed mafia, this directly affects the possibility of Subversion and Brownbear being mafia. With that, I shall begin to respond to your defenses. I am sorry if you are not mafia and I am in fact contributing to the mafia. But this information must be sorted out. On July 21 2010 08:04 chaoser wrote: I've never voted like that before but I can see where you're coming from. Usually when I vote I just vote for who I actually believe is suspicious. Next time I'll be sure to use my first day's vote to get people to talk. Also, I don't think I said youngminii was stupid. It's not that you said Youngmini is stupid, its that you are criticizing his plan for not lynching people(abstaining thus) because we do not have enough info. Then you abstain because you cannot make enough of a solid decision because of a lack of information. All the while criticizing Youngmini for advocating the same thing. On July 21 2010 08:04 chaoser wrote: I said it was bad to use the strategy of "no-lynch" on the first day, I didn't say it was bad to abstain. If I did I met it as part of the "no-lynch" strategy and not that abstaining by itself is bad. If i really thought abstaining was bad 1) I wouldn't have abstained lol and 2) I would have been vocal about others abstaining that first day. The poing is you HAVE been vocal about other's abstaining the first day + Show Spoiler + On July 19 2010 03:46 chaoser wrote: It's already been established that not lynching someone on the first day is a horrible decision, why are you still pushing for it? and that I am pointing out that you are contradicitng yourself by saying that abstaining is bad and abstaining yourself. On July 21 2010 08:04 chaoser wrote: I don't think I was the first to make the claim and I don't want to double lynch BrownBear and Subversion, that's not even possible, if we vote double lynch today we'd get it the NEXT day in which case, if things are as they are now, either Subversion or BrownBear will have been lynched. Ok so I didn't reaffirm my decision about abstaining the first day. I'll make sure to do it if I continue to believe Subversion is the one I want to vote for after he talks ok? Hmm this is actually a good point. *scratches his chin slowly* I've been thinking about that for the last 10 minutes or so and I've decided that it's possible that you were going to bring up another possible mafia suspect(whos actually townie). Then you could get the town to double lynch. In fact, if Darthien is not mafia, then you could very well have predicted that we were going to double lynch Darth/Sub or Darth/BB. However, this is where I'm starting to get into one specific theory too much. Again, I want other people to please contribute to this discussion. Especially since I'm not the best at explaining myself, heh On July 21 2010 08:04 chaoser wrote: . I don't know what you're referring to and I think I was confused on what you were referring to in your original statement with this line: Mm, I think that's all of it? Man we are both so confused haha. "I'm not sure what you're talking about, because you aren't sure either." I don't understand any of this portion. anyway, that sums it up. I feel like stopping leading this charge just because I may become blind to certain aspects or may just fail in one argument, thus nulling the whole argument. A Final Word: You've brought up being against no lynching, yet saying abstaining is still okay. Yet I believe you are contradicting yourself just because the no lynching plan is based around the fact that we don't have enough information yet. And then you go and abstain just for that reason. So there I am saying that you are contradicting yourself. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 09:06 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: Guys, these players haven't posted since Day 2 began: 7. xelin 10. lakrismamma 14. SouthRawrea 30. roffles My thoughts on lynch candidates so far: DTA - probable town, based on his behavior towards Foolishness. BB - unsure. Subversion - inexperienced townie. Right not my spidey sense is tingling and i'm pretty sure that a lot of the recent posts are just town infighting while the mafia sits back and watches. The players on my list up there, and the ones who are attempting to slip under the radar with 1-2 posts since Day 2 are the kind of people we need to keep an eye on. Just putting it out there some of them have explained theyr'e not going to be active on a certain day. Doesn't mean Infundibulum isn't correct in saying we should be on the lookout for these guys, but it does lend credibility to some of the aforementioned players. Xelin: + Show Spoiler + On July 20 2010 02:42 XeliN wrote: I don't have much time currently to commit to this game as much as I'd like, still keeping track just can't go over things as carefully as I should. I'll be fine after tomorrow, just caught me at a unfortunately busy period. Anyway, Young, going back I didn't respond to you. Your right about my criticism of you for trying to influence the action of the blues, I didn't properly read what you were suggesting, which hopefully if I am right was simply that we should have organised a system whereby we make sure the blues do not use their night actions on the same person. I stand by my analysis of you however, I went over your posts and they did strike me as suspicious. Particularly the way you were pressing for lynching someone who was going to be modkilled anyway or a no lynch, which only hurts us. Currently the best thing to look at would be voting patterns and arguments in light of Hyperbola flipping town, I'd be careful though because it's plausible that none of the people who voted for Hyper are mafia, this is a first day lynch afterall. Your sig freaked me out earlier when I read it Bill, was reading the rules//roles section and didnt realise sig changes apply to old posts so had a weird moment of de ja vu xD Lakrisamma: Don't see any explanation. Definitely be more cautious towards him. SouthRawrea: Don't see any explanation. Definitely be more cautious towards him. Roffles:+ Show Spoiler + On July 20 2010 11:33 Roffles wrote: I'm off to sleep, but I'll be back with more after PL is done. PS: Filter button allows me to see every post made by that user in a given thread. One click on Filter next to say Pandain's name allows me to see every single one of his 42 posts in this thread for easy reference. Hmmm.... heavy heavy sleeper? :D. Could just be lazy, I am sometimes. So yeah, do what Infunblahblahbalh says, but at least he has more of an excuse. Again, this does not mean InFunblahblah is wrong, just that some of them may have more of an excuse than others. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 10:04 LaXerCannon wrote: I didn't say that that wasn't the case. I merely said why it's a bad idea. If you look, I didn't even vote for you. To answer your questions: 1. It was 5-5 with hyperbola going to die. two people unvoted near the end -> mafia thinks that another might bail making it 4-5 so by adding one more vote, you're putting the nail on the coffin. 2. Mafia has no reason to start a bandwagon on the very first day. You know, if subversion is mafia and he voted for Hyperbola, that means that Youngmini is mafia too. Now that brings up the question, is Youngmini Mafia? Now, we have a Secret Friendship Alliance, and that is even more sacred than bff rings. So I do not believe he is mafia. Other people's thoughts? Intresting Tidbit: If Youngmini IS mafia, that also means that it is less likely chaoser is mafia. Since Youngmini did vote for lynching Chaoser. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
Another thing; If the Mafia HAD been aware of BM's miscalculation, and Subversion IS part of the mafia, than perhaps the mafia did do this to save Youngmini. So the question comes down to whether the mafia was aware or not. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 10:32 SiNiquity wrote: --BM tally (6-3)-- [correct] <voting> --Final tally (6-4)-- [incorrect, should be 6-5] ^ crappy diagram of what happened. But honestly I feel at this point it's a sidetrack only serving to derail the discussion. How so? Explain of course. I mean, we only have a limited time to discuss so any conversations we can put aside will be helpful. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 11:01 chaoser wrote: Are you still going on about me? Pandain and I have pretty much squared away the problem he had with me: THIS IS FROM HIM "Did you see the "A final word" thing. That pretty much sums up this argument from my side. I'm saying that you criticizing youngmini for saying "hey lots not lynch people" and your decision to abstain both come from the same reason: We don't have enough info. And thus, since you criticize Youngmini, you are contradicting yourself. Do I make myself clear?" ----------------------------------------- Original Message: THIS IS FROM ME In response to: no where in there did I say I was against abstaining. I said not lynching someone on the first day is a horrible decision. Individuals abstaining doesn't mean no one will be lynched. I was against the plan of EVERYONE abstaining, not the idea of abstaining in general. Sorry, if I was confusing about that. No had feelings either way lol. The contradiction comes from the fact that though I voted abstain because I didn't have enough information and yet I criticized youngminii (your) call for us all to "no-lynch" on day one because there wasn't enough information I voted for Subversion because I didn't like the initial bandwagon on BrownBear and was starting to have doubts because of Subversion's perceived bad play in Day 1 as well as his "slip" that the mafia made no mistakes so far. If you're going to say, omg that's bandwagon too then every majority vote is "bandwagoning". To me, bandwagoning is when there's a huge amount of votes for one person over a very short amount of time. I don't think I bandwagoned. Also, after reading what Subversion has said as well as some things that Pandain stated in the thread, I've moved my vote off him. Get off my back. Thanks =] Umm... just so your not misled I still think your mafia, which is why I'm still voting for you. Also, I didn't really want to argue that much in the PMs because I wanted everyone to hear it so they could clarify/contribute/say"OMG YOUR WRONG" my statements. The one thing we did settle was that he now acknowledges his contradiction. I'm slightly less suscipious, but still think your mafia. Just clarifying  . | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On July 21 2010 11:36 chaoser wrote: Oh, you too Pandain. The contradiction is hardly any contradiction and the only remaining part of your argument against me is that I was very suspicious of BrownBear but then moved on to Subversion when I clearly explain why I did in my post about voting for Subversion. What? It's not much of a contradiction that you appear to be pro town by rallying against youngmini for advocating no-lynching yet all the while abstain yourself (thus helping the mafia). | ||
| ||
|
|
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
GSL
Yamato Cup
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs Jaedong
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
I told you, there was noone else that looked better, and I didn't want to abstain. Sure, maybe I should've just abstained, but everyone was saying abstaining is stupid and I'm new and I didn't want to fuck up. Lol, that's gone great so far 
