Roffles' Posts:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 17 2010 07:07 Roffles wrote:
30.
/in On July 18 2010 07:31 Roffles wrote:You wait for them to confess that they're mafia. Or you can use PM hacks. I'm sure if you ask Bob he'll lend em to ya. On July 18 2010 07:33 Roffles wrote:
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
I'd much rather lynch a random person than lynch an inactive. Don't think the Mafia is retarded enough to not post, especially since almost every single TL game usually starts with the lynching of an inactive. It's just not worth the risk. On July 18 2010 08:30 Roffles wrote:
Could probably just get someone to generate a number online and take a pic and we'll have to take his word for it I guess.
Don't really have a preference as to who we lynch Day 1 anyways. Not this late and without a concrete plan. Could lynch an inactive, but who knows? They might just get modkilled anyways, so why waste a lynch on someone who's gonna get axed later on down the road anyways? On July 18 2010 11:13 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 10:44 Pandain wrote:On July 18 2010 10:30 Tricode wrote:
##vote abstain
Just doing this if I don't make it tomorrow to vote. My dad is spending his last full day at home before he has to leave for a few months for work.
Other then that, I do suggest we lynch an inactive.
1.if we keep abstaining cause we are always uncertain of what to do, we will never push to killing and finding a mafia member if we went at that rate.
2. That person who is being inactive is probably useless to us anyways just because they are not doing anything to participate.
3. One of the inactive are likely to be mafia just because there is usually one or two guys that are inactive or just post a little bit just so they can stay alive.
Either case, we won't accomplish anything by abstaining, it might even hurt us cause if we keep the option in our head we might use it to much in fear of constantly killing townies/blues and such. So I suggest try keeping abstains as placeholders or if you are truly uncertain in what to do.
Otherwise I encourage and highly suggest that we always use our lynches.
Yeah I think we should lynch, just because isn't the mafia going to kill one of us by the next day? Then again, I'd feel horrible if I lynched a good person. I might abstain, but I'll have to see both sides first. I'll decide later. Oh ho ho. Tis all about risks and taking chances and making educated guesses. If we only lynched when we absolutely knew we'd hit a bad guy, then hell not many lynches would happen the first couple of days ever. On July 18 2010 11:37 Roffles wrote:
##Abstain On July 20 2010 01:34 Roffles wrote:
Nah OpZ, not just one shitty post by BrownBear. Nearly all his posts are shitty. Don't really wanna dig up the post, but I do recall him voting first, then saying "I'm gonna go read".
Like what the hell is that? I'm gonna blindly vote, then read, then afterwards he just makes it even better by saying, "Oh, I could change my vote. But nahhhhh" 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. =( On July 20 2010 11:33 Roffles wrote:Sup. How's it going? I can dig up any post history in this thread by any user in one single click. If you ever need me to do so, I can easily replicate that for you guys. I believe you already know my stance for tonight's lynch. BrownBear's one of the shittier posters in this thread thus far. I believe his posts speak for himself thus far: Show nested quote +On July 02 2010 09:13 BrownBear wrote:
In, this will probably be the last game I play for a while (curse you job). But still, so in for this one.
Also, Floridan vote rigger lol Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 11:05 BrownBear wrote:
I like the village bonfire idea. Who brought the s'mores? Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 11:29 BrownBear wrote:On July 17 2010 11:27 Misder wrote:
So... are we lynching now? KILLMAIMBURNKILLMAIMBURNKILLMAIMBURNKILLMAIMBURNKILLMAIMBURN I mean, what? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 08:36 BrownBear wrote:On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Brown BearOn July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? On July 19 2010 06:30 BrownBear wrote:
###Vote: Hyperbola On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? My bad, didn't realize you could abstain. Should have done that, but at this point it's not like it really matters :/ So anyways, as you can clearly see from each of his posts, he's contributed a whopping 0 insightful comments, and also jumped on the Hyperbola bandwagon for absolutely no reason. No reasoning behind his voting at all. Didn't even read a lick. One of those "flying under the radar" hoping not to get killed, but still able to get night shots off if they're alive and scum. Also, notice the timestamps on his posts. Gone, even though we've been accusing him for the last few pages or so. Doesn't even care, isn't gonna help at all either. Hurts us more than he's helping us. 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. On July 20 2010 11:56 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 11:48 d3_crescentia wrote:
Wait roffles are you serious?? How does one go about attaining the power of filtering? I'm serious. Flamewheel can attest as well. As to obtaining the Filter button, you can't for now. On July 21 2010 10:16 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 09:42 Subversion wrote:On July 21 2010 09:31 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 21 2010 09:29 Subversion wrote:
Go back and look. There's a tally by someone saying 7-4, then after that my vote comes.
Someone stated afterwards that their was an error in counting somewhere, and there were 2 unvotes after that I didn't see.
My vote only looks suspicious due to really poor timing =/ You don't vote for someone just because "they're fucked anyways". That's how bandwagons form. If we have a mafia starting a bandwagon, we _should_not_ just jump on it even if it's winning. I've already defended this a million times now  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  Also, why the fuck all the attention on my vote? Someone made a great post about how Hyperbola's fate was sealed in a block of 4 or 5 votes within an hour. Why is noone looking at those people? My vote came hours afterwards, when he was already circling the drain. It seems pretty clear to me that I'm just a n00b townie jumping on a bandwagon. Why has everyone forgotten about the big group of people that STARTED the bandwagon in the 1st place? You came in with the deciding vote in the end. Hyperbola's fate wasn't sealed and he easily could have been the one still alive today and not youngminii. The person who started Hyperbola's vote train was the guy Hyperbola accused at the very beginning without reading anything. The Mafia has no reason to start a bandwagon on Day 1. No need to risk, especially when they know who's what and they have the power to pretty much bandwagon any vote at the last minute to skew it in their favor. Which brings us back to you, the deciding vote in the end. I'd say you sealed Hyperbola's fate by jumping on board late, which can very possibly be due to Mafia bandwagoning at the last moment. Also, don't bring up this noob card. No one cares if you're a noob. On July 21 2010 23:19 Roffles wrote:
Yawn, just gonna pitch in my two liner here and say that Subversion's slip up doesn't really strike me as a real mafia slip up, just a minor error by a newbie.
As for BrownBear, I dunno really. His defense arguments seem townie enough, but I'm still wary of his vote, read, then no change on the vote tactic from Day 1.
Aside from DTA's antics, I think we're on the wrong path here, but that's just a hunch. On July 22 2010 02:01 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 01:34 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Unvote BrownBear
##Vote: Subversion
Though I think BrownBear's analysis and plan is crappy, we can get more info is we lynch Subversion. Lynching BB just proves that we, as a town, aren't as organized as we would like to be. The Subversion discussion caught a lot of players, many more than the BB discussion. By determining Subversion's role we can pinpoint other key players who were pushing for and against the Subversion lynch. I'm willing to risk putting my name into the hat to get the town on a better path to victory. Depending on the flip, the DT's should try and look at key players involved in the Subversion dispute. Nah, I legitimately think Subversion is just a newbie who made a dumb mistake. He made a stupid blunder the last game he played, and ended up getting modkilled. However, him pulling out the newbie card himself is an alarming point to possibly take suspicion off him. Once again, I think we're going in the wrong direction. On July 22 2010 04:53 Roffles wrote:
??
I never voted on Day 2. I just think BrownBear played Day 1 like a moron, and that Subversion's tactics are odd/newblike, but not necessarily Mafia like. On July 22 2010 05:16 Roffles wrote:
I believe we have about 4 hours left?
Anyways, I'm against the BrownBear/Subversion bandwagons. I think BB played terribly Day 1, but that doesn't mean we should lynch him for his piss poor play. It's highly unlikely Mafia slips up the way he did. As for Subversion, he's in the same boat.
As for lynch targets, I'll skip DTA, and vote for Chaoser simply because he seems to be pushing the BB/Subversion vote wagons pretty hard. Abstained on the first day, even though Abstaining is a rather dumb thing to do on the first day.
If you search through his past, you'll see Chaoser jumping all over Subversion just for a slight slip up, as if he's searching for the tiniest hole to blame someone for. As for DTA, I have my suspicions, but I'm gonna vote for my gut instinct in Chaoser.
##Vote: Chaoser On July 22 2010 05:30 Roffles wrote:
Feel free to think that way.
I ain't jumping on bandwagons, I'm just simply browsing back and making observations on how the game has played out. To put it simply, I think the mistakes Subversion and BrownBear made aren't Mafia type slip ups. In fact, I highly doubt the Mafia would act that reckless or use words the way Subversion did. To me, those are just newbie mistakes made by both players, as the Mafia has no need to pull such stupid stunts. Even if someone was in danger of getting modkilled and they were Mafia, they wouldn't ever dream of pulling such a stupid stunt as "Vote first, then read, and publicly claim so". No mafia would ever risk such a thing, as it just puts way too much suspicion on them.
Same goes for Subversion's slip up. So what'd I do? I went back, and browsed through everyone's post histories in this thread, and went to see who was pushing the vote boats. A few stuck out to me, but sure as hell Chaoser has done exactly what Mafia might do in such situations. Picked on word play, pounded the smallest things in order to generate a vote bandwagon. If you sift through his posts, half of them are simply vote recounts, which inflate his activity. In fact, he's been flying under the radar, and 1) abstained on Day 1, and has been pushing for Subversion's death ever since Day 2 started. On July 22 2010 05:33 Roffles wrote:
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.
There, you outlined it yourself. You acknowledge that his little mafia mistake is just weird, yet you still cast your vote for him. It isn't something that Mafia is stupid enough to slip up on, yet you're fueling the bandwagon even though you acknowledge that it's weird and unusual, not necessarily harmful in all. On July 22 2010 08:31 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 08:16 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
Can anyone summarize why they think chaoser is mafia?
So far I haven't seen a single convincing analysis; it just looks like people are voting for him because other people are voting for him. I'm too lazy to dig up the context of these posts, but here's what I've dug up thanks to Filter. Chaoser Day 1: Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 00:50 chaoser wrote:
##vote abstain
for now, didn't want to get modkilled followed by Show nested quote +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? followed by the start of BrownBear's bandwagon. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 09:05 chaoser wrote:On July 19 2010 08:36 BrownBear wrote:On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Brown BearOn July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? On July 19 2010 06:30 BrownBear wrote:
###Vote: Hyperbola On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? 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? Recall that post of his stating that he's gonna abstain for now only to avoid a modkill? Well, he never really changed his vote afterwards. Show nested quote +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? So then he goes onto kill BB, and also think we should waste our double lynch pretty early, but when he wakes up like 7 hours later, he decides "Oh shit, don't feel like voting for BB, gonna use it on Subversion instead" Show nested quote +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 So if you do a little reading, you'll see that the reason why he switched over to Subversion was simply because other people were doing it. "At first, I wanted to vote BB cause everyone else was killing him. Now they're killing Subversion, so I might as well make myself comfortable and hop on as well" Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 06:12 chaoser wrote:On July 22 2010 06:03 Pandain wrote:
Right now I believe the two viable decisions are either Chaoser or Darth. They are the two most likely canidates for actually being mafia. BB and Subversion are just new and people are jumping on them for really miniscule posts. The only one thing that could lead to one of them being mafia is Subversions deciding vote in favor of Hyperbola, however that is still unlikely because it is just as likely that
1)The Mafia didn't know of BM's miscount
2)He just voted at an unlucky time.
So all those who are picking either BB or Subversion (especially BB) I urge you to change your vote and vote for either Darth of Chaoser.
I would suggest Chaoser, just because I find him more likely to be mafia than DTA. To me, it still seems that Chaoser is just trying to get people lynched and DTA could be plannign something. Of course we should keep an eye on DTA, but let's not just lynch him and ruin anything he might be doing.
I would urge you to vote Chaoser, but at the very least I humbly request all those not voting either DTA/Chaoser to unvote and pick one of them.
that's very scummy of you to say isn't it? Your suggestion gives mafia license to stack votes instead of having to worry about spreading it over different potential targets (4) right now. If later people ask, they can be like well, Pandain suggested it. And how am I more likely as mafia than DTA? Look at Pyrr's huge statement against him against the two weak points you bring against me (that I abstained after saying don't go with the no-lynch plan (which others did too) and then voted Subversion today.) If I get lynch and I flip non-red, people should carefully examine all the people who are hardcore gunning for me (Pandain, youngminii) Just an extra post that sheds a little light from Pandain's perspective. Anyways, while we're here, Chaoser to me seems like one of the big bandwagon voters in this thread, which is pretty much what Mafia likes to do. As well as a couple others, Chaoser has flopped from BB's wagon to Subversion's wagon with the excuse of "Everyone seems to be doing it, so I might as well too". First day, he gave the Abstain at first excuse in order to avoid a modkill, but never really changed his vote in the end. There are other signs as well, but the fact that he keeps pushing a couple dumb bandwagons in BB and Subversion reeks of bleh to me. Others fit this bill as well, but might as well push for Chaoser to get lynched since he's closer than other possible scum I have in mind. On July 22 2010 10:37 Roffles wrote:
When does day end again? 12:00 KST?
Cause something someone said makes me wanna change my vote, I just wanna see how much time I have left to ponder about my decision. On July 22 2010 14:27 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 14:05 youngminii wrote:
You know, I have a question and I think this should be public information. My sources tell me that tree.hugger has been spreading misinformation to at least 3 different people via PM and instructing them to vote for certain people. However, I do not believe he's scum.
Tree.hugger, stop PMing others and post it here for everyone to see. Don't just say 'vote for this person' and 'vote for that person', tell them who you're suspicious of and ask them who they're suspicious of. Do not go around giving orders. It also seems as if you're targeting newer players (although I'm not sure about this). Yawn, you can count me in on that as well. I however don't pay much attention to PMs and I kinda just said screw it to what he wanted me to do. On July 22 2010 16:09 Roffles wrote:Yawn, all you had to do was ask. + Show Spoiler [Jayme's Posts] +On July 08 2010 07:37 Jayme wrote:
/in
On July 17 2010 07:16 Jayme wrote:
YEAA lets get this started!
On July 17 2010 10:30 Jayme wrote:
Yea is there gonna be a day post or what? On July 17 2010 11:23 Jayme wrote:
No day post? Alright I ...
vote:Amber[light]
because I want to and the random number I picked from excel from 1 to 30 landed on him. So the cookie crumbles. On July 18 2010 05:51 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 05:29 Divinek wrote:
I think voting inactives at the start to be among the better options. While it seems reasonable that people who get mafia go omg cool role, and want to post, some of them may want to lurk cause they think that's a good way to avoid attention or something.
So the only way to get substance out of these people is to call them out and pressure vote them. I'd think by now voting on an inactive is just about as likely to yield results as RNG...which is to say you have about a 1/5 chance of nailing a Mafia, and if we don't due to a crazy vote swing at least we have something to go on for the next day. I would believe that most people that are new would read other mafia games on this forum and realize the whole "Lynch INACTIVE day 1" policy TL has. I don't think any red would not post at all but i'm willing to go with either. On July 18 2010 07:36 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 06:25 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 06:08 tree.hugger wrote:On July 18 2010 05:39 XeliN wrote:
I'm not entirely sure on the inactive thing, if there is someone who doesn't post whatsoever they are dead anyway, and it encourages people to spam simply to not be case as inactive. Depends how things work out, if there is someone who at the end of day 1 has only posted one thing that is about as useful as typing "lol mafia!" then I'd agree but it depends on circumstance.
This only really applies for the first day, after that lynching for inactivity if there is not a more obvious choice seems like a universally very good idea, but I'm surprised more people arn't considering the idea of using a RNG to decide our first kill.
And OpZ just lol @ immediately claiming 3 people seemingly randomly as mafia. So much spam in the first couple pages. Get a hold of yourselves people, you're not witty. Also, our inactive lynches always end up being townies, but every time when we look back at the game, there's always a mafia member or two who was inactive at the beginning, or posted and spammed just enough to clear the inactivity bar. I propose we make a list of FIVE players who are inactive, and then RNG them to determine a lynch candidate. That way we either force mafia into the open, or catch that one newbie mafia who doesn't know how to post properly. At the very least that would make the town's move a little harder to gauge. If you narrow the list down to 3 I'm down with it. If you put it at 5 people and only get 1 mafia correctly on the list, then you've only done just as good as a blind RNG (20%). You narrow it down to three and conversely you have a chance to have a list full of greens and nothing else, which is likely because you're only using 10% of the player list assuming a red is playing inactively. Either go full RNG or go full inactive because a mix of the two is liable to get us a list with only greens on it which is even more pointless than just picking a random number. On July 18 2010 08:12 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 08:03 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
RNG lynch is dumb because you have more of a chance to land on a townie, and then he could be a helpful townie.
if we lynch an inactive we're killing someone who probably would not have helped us anyway
however, i don't want to lynch someone that would just get modkilled since that's obviously a waste.
Bill, how many votes can someone miss before they get zapped? As far as I know they can't miss any votes at all. We have more of a chance to land on a townie with any day 1 method we choose simply due to the fact that there are 24 townies and 6 mafia...there is no way of avoiding this. As a matter of fact I would say we have a better chance of hitting a good red player through RNG because I mean...who's to say that this "good townie" isn't just a red being a good townie. I understand lynching an inactive is killing someone who wouldn't have helped anyway but you're still doing just that...just about guaranteeing a green lynch which is completely pointless. As I said before I'm willing to go with either, there isn't much we could do. The issue I see with RNG is verifying if it's actually RNG. On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. On July 19 2010 07:53 Jayme wrote:
The whole mini Hyperbola bandwagon was rather funny. He comes in and says a few lines and then 3 people just jump on him like a pack of wild dogs.
Initially this bandwagon looked rather harmless but now he's got 7 votes on him and unless a miracle happens it looks like he's being lynched.
That being said anybody who advocates no lynch as much as Youngminii has is crazy sketchy while at the same time ignoring why people have said it's a terrible thing to do. In the end it's rarely the blues that actually win you the game and it's a few good analytical townies that save the day. If a sudden bandwagon comes up and all of a sudden a detective gets killed you have yourself at the very least a strong suspect list.
SO yea
##Unvote
##Vote: Youngminii
Even if you're townie your discussion sidetracked us like crazy. On July 19 2010 23:29 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 22:44 chaoser wrote:Vote Count:
6] Hyperbola (Divinek, Pandain, SiNiquity, bumatlarge, BB, Subversion)
4] YoungMinii (XeliN, Amber[LighT, Roffles, Infizzleundibulumizzle)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, Pyrrhuloxia)
2] ketomai (citi.zen, lakrismamma)
2] Amber[LighT] (jayme, DarthThienAn),
2[ BloodyC0bbler (~OpZ, Foolishness)
2] LaXerCannon (Misder, citi.zen)
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
1] Pandain (BC)
1] Infundibulum (youngminii)
5] abstain (LaXerCannon, tricode, SouthRawrea, Chaoser, protactinium, zeks) Voting ended at 10:10Subversion 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 Okay that told us absolutely nothing besides the fact that BrownBear apparently doesn't like to rectify mistakes and that Foolishness gets vibes. So at least Hyperbola turned up green and not blue, that would have made that freak miniwagon almost humorous On July 20 2010 12:58 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 10:27 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 07:15 LaXerCannon wrote:Resources (fixed) + Show Spoiler +Jayme -> Amber[light]
Pandain -> abstain
DTA -> Abstain -> d3_crescentia
d3_crescentia -> DTA
DTA -> Unabstain
citi.zen -> DTA
rastaban -> citi.zen
youngminii -> Pyrrhuloxia
Pandain -> Incognito
SouthRawrea -> Abstain
~OpZ~ -> Chaoser
BloodyC0bbler -> Abstain
bumatlarge -> Divinek
Pandain -> BloodyC0bbler
Hyperbola -> SiNiquity
LaXercannon -> Abstain
Youngminii -> Abstain
Divinek -> Abstain
Tricode -> Abstain
Misder -> Hyperbola
Divinek -> Hyperbola
Pandain -> Hyperbola
Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain
zeks -> Hyperbola
SiNiquity -> Hyperbola
Roffles -> Abstain
tree.hugger -> LaXercannon
Foolishness -> Abstain
lakrismamma -> LaXercannon
lakrismamma -> Subversion
BloodyC0bbler -> Pandain
~OpZ~ -> BloodyC0bbler
Pyrrhuloxia -> DTA
XeliN -> Brownbear
iNfuNdiBuLuM -> youngminii
youngminii -> iNfuNdiBuLuM
citi.zen -> ketomai
XeliN -> youngminii
chaoser -> abstain
Amber[LighT] -> abstain
treehugger -> DTA
Amber[LighT] -> youngminii
Roffles -> youngminii
lakrismamma -> ketomai
DTA -> Amber[LighT]
bumatlarge -> Hyperbola
BrownBear -> Hyperbola
Jayme -> Youngminii
Foolishness -> BloodyC0bbler
Misder -> LaXerCannon
zeks -> abstain
Subversion -> Hyperbola
BloodyC0bbler -> Abstain -> Pandain
bumatlarge -> Divinek -> Hyperbola*
BrownBear -> Hyperbola*
Chaoser -> Abstain
citi.zen -> ketomai
d3_crescentia -> DTA
Divinek -> Abstain -> Hyperbola*
DTA -> Abstain -> Amber[LighT]
Foolishness -> Abstain -> BloodyC0bbler
Hyperbola -> SiNiquity
iNfuNdiBuLuM -> youngminii
Jayme -> Amber[Light] -> youngminii
lakrismamma -> LaXerCannon -> Subversion -> ketomai
LaXercannon -> Abstain
Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon
~OpZ~ -> Chaoser -> BloodyC0bbler
Pandain -> Abstain -> Incognito (?) -> BloodyC0bbler -> Hyperbola*
Protactinium -> Abstain
Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain -> DTA
rastaban -> citi.zen
Roffles -> Abstain
SiNiquity -> Hyperbola*
SouthRawrea -> Abstain
Subversion -> Hyperbola
Tricode -> Abstain
tree.hugger -> LaXerCannon
XeliN -> Brownbear -> youngminii
youngminii -> Pyrrhuloxia -> abstain -> iNfuNdiBuLuM
zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain
What interests me is this block of voting: Misder -> Hyperbola Divinek -> Hyperbola Pandain -> Hyperbola Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain zeks -> Hyperbola SiNiquity -> Hyperbola and these people: Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain My head hurts so I'll just give a couple one liners for now (I've been digging through this damned thread for like an eternity) The Hyperbola bandwagonMisder @ 10:43 Divinek @ 10:51 Pandain @ 10:56 zeks @ 11:22 SiNiquity @ 11:37 Within an hour, Hyperbola gets bandwagonned and is in first place: Show nested quote +5] Hyperbola (Misder, Divinek, Pandain, Zeks, SiNiquity)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, citi.zen)
1] Amber[LighT] (jayme),
1] d3_crescentia (darthThienAn),
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] chaoser (~opz~)
1] Divinek (bumatlarge)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
6] abstain (BloodyC0bbler, LaXerCannon, youngminii, tricode, Pyrrhuloxia, Roffles) @ 11:37 (after roffles' vote) Definitely suspicious considering how fast and compact the votes were together Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain Misder -> starts bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed zeks -> fourth voter for bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed attempts at lowering suspicion? I already said why I unvoted for Hyperbola. + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:38 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Guys, really? Okay so I'm pretty much lynched because you people can't take a joke. So I'm leaving this as my legacy: People I think are mafia or atleast seem fishy:Brown BearShow nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? youngminiiShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 21:01 youngminii wrote:
Actually, I'm not going to overlook it. Why would you place a vote on me 'just in case'? Especially after you heard BC say I was a strong player (which citi.zen evidently disagrees with)? You have these two guys criticising my post when it's not even serious, you jump on this bandwagon and then put a placeholder vote on me just in case?
Does this not strike you as scummy at all? Overly scummy but scummy nonetheless? In fact, I think this is the scummiest post I have seen all game (not that long). However, I don't think you're really that bad at this game and even a mediocre scum wouldn't do that kind of mistake. Will need confirmation on other more experienced TL mafia players on your meta. You are entirely too defensive when a person puts a vote on you as a placeholder. Either you are scum or a very nervous blue. You also endorse no lynching on the first day to appear to be "pro-life" and "for the town". I really don't see your reasoning behind this because a random shot in the dark of inactives or suspicious players can in fact nab a red. And if it doesn't you only lose a green because a blue would at least roleclaim or try to join up with trust circles to avoid getting lynched in this manner. (Divided blues that don't make connections are really hindering the town). SiNiquityI had absolutely no evidence against you before but now you are starting to stink of scum at first you took my accusal of you as a joke and brushed it off, but when people started accusing me of being mafia you saw an opportunity and went into action to provide as much evidence as you could find against me by even looking into past games. Then you just completely shut your mouth and is now waiting for the situation to close to start talking again (afraid you'll say something to bring attention to you and me being the perfect scapegoat). Also your previous posts were really try-hard in my opinion. You contributed absolutely nothing by typing up lengthy posts that just summarized what everyone said. Besides that you clarified and discussed some rules of the game and such. You want to make it seem like you are contributing and keep a neutral and non aggressive stance like a reporter so no one would suspect you. This could just be your playstyle but it seems like a very cautious red one to me. LaXerCannonShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:30 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
If we randomly pick someone, we have a better chance of getting a blue then a red. Why don't we try voting for who we think is red? It's not like the game will automatically get easier for us as it goes on, since there aren't any clues. Also, at this point everyone's votes are spread out so we are nearly guaranteed an innocent lynch. Getting everyone to agree to vote for the random could be awfully tough.
IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list). We can take this step further by listing inactives in reverse order and numbering them from 1-X, use a number we obtain from the second paragraph and count through the list, looping when needed. I'm getting carried away here... I think lynching an inactive player is the best course of action. I also think we should get a list of players who are new to this mafia game so we know who they are. A new player who's scum can easily hide under that mask; I think it's best we can monitor them from the get go. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:33 LaXerCannon wrote:
##Abstain in case I can't find it within myself to wake up early tomorrow to post (no other time >_>) Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 11:38 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 10:13 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 09:59 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 09:51 Bill Murray wrote:
EVERYONE abstaining? I guess it'd no lynch. Didn't expect that to happen! Okay so everyone should abstain imo. If you have any objections to this idea, please raise it asap because we need everyone to switch their vote to abstaining. Even one vote = lynch and that will be very suspicious of the person who left their vote by 'accident'. ##Unvote Pyrr
##Vote Abstain I'm not sure I like it. The inactives will get modkilled, no one gets lynched, the mafia kills 2 more people, and then we're back at square one, no? On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS. Bad idea, there's no incentive for town to post -> silent town = dead town Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:13 LaXerCannon wrote:
playoffs are done for today! my next post will be in....around 16-18 hours. First LaxerCannon recommends lynching inactives but then goes ahead and abstains. Then he goes on again about how we should just line up inactives to lynch and doesn't change his vote. Then he vanishes. This is fishy for two reasons. First the obvious contradiction, and second, the effort to try and direct suspicion away from him. He keeps pushing the idea to lynch random inactive people while the town debates over a few suspects and really does nothing but push the town in the wrong direction: not analysing the game but killing off quiet people. Then he talks about playoffs and keeps endorcing random picking ideas. That is wayy too anti-town to be a blue. And if he's green he doesn't care about the game much. ------------------------------------------------------- this is all I have now and hope I at least contributed to the game before I die sorry about trying to have fun guys :/ j/k ~peace
Vote: LaXerCannonblah. I don't want to abstain... but I don't know who to lynch I vote LaXerCannon because his posts don't have any substance whatsoever. He tries to contribute, but doesn't give any astounding idea. His ideas are based on previous ideas that have been said, and doesn't say anything new. Then he distracts from the conversation. Either Hyperbola is a mafia member that is trying every attempt to get out, by making false accusations, or he is a townie who make a mistake but is trying to amend it by giving analysis. I tend to lean towards the latter. Plus, Hyperbola is now being active, which is good. If he is a mafia member, his activeness may work against him because he will have to dodge a lot to make it seem like he is a townie. If he is a townie, well, good. An active townie a very very good. Hopefully, I made the right decision... Also, as many people already stated, Hyperbola was not screwed all the way. It was 6-5 for Hyperbola, a very close vote. Anyways... ITS 9:27!!!!!! WHERE IS THE DAY POST!!!! The initial miniwagon was enough to REALLY up his chances at being lynched. AT least on TL massive swing votes to lynch someone else in the last few hours is very rare and I've only seen it happen a very few times. I thought that wagon was ridiculous from the start and then people jump on it with absolutely no real reasoning whatsoever and weren't challenged on it....either that or they IGNORED their challenges. So yea Brownbear what the hell dude? Real reasoning for voting for him besides "lol I didn't know I could abstain but I found out later and didn't change my vote" On July 20 2010 20:18 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 15:38 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
BrownBear i'd like to see more input from the rest of the town but i guess my sentiments on vets claiming boils to this:
1. the town wants the mafia to inadvertently waste hits on vets
2. vets claiming practically guarantees that this will not happen You have to balance the fact that you have a central confirmed townie with which to operate from. Randomly hitting a Vet is so rare as it is that I just don't see a huge benefit in keeping them hidden when one has obviously been hit...or the medic got a really lucky protection on someone. I personally like the vet claiming idea because on their own they are a pretty weak blue role. On July 21 2010 08:20 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +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 I personally understand the brownbear vote because I was thinking about doing the same thing. Subversion's strange comments have been well...strange and I'm really itching to vote for him because his foot in mouth syndrome could get us in trouble later in the game when saying something stupid can have catastrophic consequences. That being said
##Vote:Subversion
Jayme's Posts:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 08 2010 07:37 Jayme wrote:
/in
On July 17 2010 07:16 Jayme wrote:
YEAA lets get this started!
On July 17 2010 10:30 Jayme wrote:
Yea is there gonna be a day post or what? On July 17 2010 11:23 Jayme wrote:
No day post? Alright I ...
vote:Amber[light]
because I want to and the random number I picked from excel from 1 to 30 landed on him. So the cookie crumbles. On July 18 2010 05:51 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 05:29 Divinek wrote:
I think voting inactives at the start to be among the better options. While it seems reasonable that people who get mafia go omg cool role, and want to post, some of them may want to lurk cause they think that's a good way to avoid attention or something.
So the only way to get substance out of these people is to call them out and pressure vote them. I'd think by now voting on an inactive is just about as likely to yield results as RNG...which is to say you have about a 1/5 chance of nailing a Mafia, and if we don't due to a crazy vote swing at least we have something to go on for the next day. I would believe that most people that are new would read other mafia games on this forum and realize the whole "Lynch INACTIVE day 1" policy TL has. I don't think any red would not post at all but i'm willing to go with either. On July 18 2010 07:36 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 06:25 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 06:08 tree.hugger wrote:On July 18 2010 05:39 XeliN wrote:
I'm not entirely sure on the inactive thing, if there is someone who doesn't post whatsoever they are dead anyway, and it encourages people to spam simply to not be case as inactive. Depends how things work out, if there is someone who at the end of day 1 has only posted one thing that is about as useful as typing "lol mafia!" then I'd agree but it depends on circumstance.
This only really applies for the first day, after that lynching for inactivity if there is not a more obvious choice seems like a universally very good idea, but I'm surprised more people arn't considering the idea of using a RNG to decide our first kill.
And OpZ just lol @ immediately claiming 3 people seemingly randomly as mafia. So much spam in the first couple pages. Get a hold of yourselves people, you're not witty. Also, our inactive lynches always end up being townies, but every time when we look back at the game, there's always a mafia member or two who was inactive at the beginning, or posted and spammed just enough to clear the inactivity bar. I propose we make a list of FIVE players who are inactive, and then RNG them to determine a lynch candidate. That way we either force mafia into the open, or catch that one newbie mafia who doesn't know how to post properly. At the very least that would make the town's move a little harder to gauge. If you narrow the list down to 3 I'm down with it. If you put it at 5 people and only get 1 mafia correctly on the list, then you've only done just as good as a blind RNG (20%). You narrow it down to three and conversely you have a chance to have a list full of greens and nothing else, which is likely because you're only using 10% of the player list assuming a red is playing inactively. Either go full RNG or go full inactive because a mix of the two is liable to get us a list with only greens on it which is even more pointless than just picking a random number. On July 18 2010 08:12 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 08:03 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
RNG lynch is dumb because you have more of a chance to land on a townie, and then he could be a helpful townie.
if we lynch an inactive we're killing someone who probably would not have helped us anyway
however, i don't want to lynch someone that would just get modkilled since that's obviously a waste.
Bill, how many votes can someone miss before they get zapped? As far as I know they can't miss any votes at all. We have more of a chance to land on a townie with any day 1 method we choose simply due to the fact that there are 24 townies and 6 mafia...there is no way of avoiding this. As a matter of fact I would say we have a better chance of hitting a good red player through RNG because I mean...who's to say that this "good townie" isn't just a red being a good townie. I understand lynching an inactive is killing someone who wouldn't have helped anyway but you're still doing just that...just about guaranteeing a green lynch which is completely pointless. As I said before I'm willing to go with either, there isn't much we could do. The issue I see with RNG is verifying if it's actually RNG. On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. On July 19 2010 07:53 Jayme wrote:
The whole mini Hyperbola bandwagon was rather funny. He comes in and says a few lines and then 3 people just jump on him like a pack of wild dogs.
Initially this bandwagon looked rather harmless but now he's got 7 votes on him and unless a miracle happens it looks like he's being lynched.
That being said anybody who advocates no lynch as much as Youngminii has is crazy sketchy while at the same time ignoring why people have said it's a terrible thing to do. In the end it's rarely the blues that actually win you the game and it's a few good analytical townies that save the day. If a sudden bandwagon comes up and all of a sudden a detective gets killed you have yourself at the very least a strong suspect list.
SO yea
##Unvote
##Vote: Youngminii
Even if you're townie your discussion sidetracked us like crazy. On July 19 2010 23:29 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 22:44 chaoser wrote:Vote Count:
6] Hyperbola (Divinek, Pandain, SiNiquity, bumatlarge, BB, Subversion)
4] YoungMinii (XeliN, Amber[LighT, Roffles, Infizzleundibulumizzle)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, Pyrrhuloxia)
2] ketomai (citi.zen, lakrismamma)
2] Amber[LighT] (jayme, DarthThienAn),
2[ BloodyC0bbler (~OpZ, Foolishness)
2] LaXerCannon (Misder, citi.zen)
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
1] Pandain (BC)
1] Infundibulum (youngminii)
5] abstain (LaXerCannon, tricode, SouthRawrea, Chaoser, protactinium, zeks) Voting ended at 10:10Subversion 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 Okay that told us absolutely nothing besides the fact that BrownBear apparently doesn't like to rectify mistakes and that Foolishness gets vibes. So at least Hyperbola turned up green and not blue, that would have made that freak miniwagon almost humorous On July 20 2010 12:58 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 10:27 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 07:15 LaXerCannon wrote:Resources (fixed) + Show Spoiler +Jayme -> Amber[light]
Pandain -> abstain
DTA -> Abstain -> d3_crescentia
d3_crescentia -> DTA
DTA -> Unabstain
citi.zen -> DTA
rastaban -> citi.zen
youngminii -> Pyrrhuloxia
Pandain -> Incognito
SouthRawrea -> Abstain
~OpZ~ -> Chaoser
BloodyC0bbler -> Abstain
bumatlarge -> Divinek
Pandain -> BloodyC0bbler
Hyperbola -> SiNiquity
LaXercannon -> Abstain
Youngminii -> Abstain
Divinek -> Abstain
Tricode -> Abstain
Misder -> Hyperbola
Divinek -> Hyperbola
Pandain -> Hyperbola
Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain
zeks -> Hyperbola
SiNiquity -> Hyperbola
Roffles -> Abstain
tree.hugger -> LaXercannon
Foolishness -> Abstain
lakrismamma -> LaXercannon
lakrismamma -> Subversion
BloodyC0bbler -> Pandain
~OpZ~ -> BloodyC0bbler
Pyrrhuloxia -> DTA
XeliN -> Brownbear
iNfuNdiBuLuM -> youngminii
youngminii -> iNfuNdiBuLuM
citi.zen -> ketomai
XeliN -> youngminii
chaoser -> abstain
Amber[LighT] -> abstain
treehugger -> DTA
Amber[LighT] -> youngminii
Roffles -> youngminii
lakrismamma -> ketomai
DTA -> Amber[LighT]
bumatlarge -> Hyperbola
BrownBear -> Hyperbola
Jayme -> Youngminii
Foolishness -> BloodyC0bbler
Misder -> LaXerCannon
zeks -> abstain
Subversion -> Hyperbola
BloodyC0bbler -> Abstain -> Pandain
bumatlarge -> Divinek -> Hyperbola*
BrownBear -> Hyperbola*
Chaoser -> Abstain
citi.zen -> ketomai
d3_crescentia -> DTA
Divinek -> Abstain -> Hyperbola*
DTA -> Abstain -> Amber[LighT]
Foolishness -> Abstain -> BloodyC0bbler
Hyperbola -> SiNiquity
iNfuNdiBuLuM -> youngminii
Jayme -> Amber[Light] -> youngminii
lakrismamma -> LaXerCannon -> Subversion -> ketomai
LaXercannon -> Abstain
Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon
~OpZ~ -> Chaoser -> BloodyC0bbler
Pandain -> Abstain -> Incognito (?) -> BloodyC0bbler -> Hyperbola*
Protactinium -> Abstain
Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain -> DTA
rastaban -> citi.zen
Roffles -> Abstain
SiNiquity -> Hyperbola*
SouthRawrea -> Abstain
Subversion -> Hyperbola
Tricode -> Abstain
tree.hugger -> LaXerCannon
XeliN -> Brownbear -> youngminii
youngminii -> Pyrrhuloxia -> abstain -> iNfuNdiBuLuM
zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain
What interests me is this block of voting: Misder -> Hyperbola Divinek -> Hyperbola Pandain -> Hyperbola Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain zeks -> Hyperbola SiNiquity -> Hyperbola and these people: Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain My head hurts so I'll just give a couple one liners for now (I've been digging through this damned thread for like an eternity) The Hyperbola bandwagonMisder @ 10:43 Divinek @ 10:51 Pandain @ 10:56 zeks @ 11:22 SiNiquity @ 11:37 Within an hour, Hyperbola gets bandwagonned and is in first place: Show nested quote +5] Hyperbola (Misder, Divinek, Pandain, Zeks, SiNiquity)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, citi.zen)
1] Amber[LighT] (jayme),
1] d3_crescentia (darthThienAn),
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] chaoser (~opz~)
1] Divinek (bumatlarge)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
6] abstain (BloodyC0bbler, LaXerCannon, youngminii, tricode, Pyrrhuloxia, Roffles) @ 11:37 (after roffles' vote) Definitely suspicious considering how fast and compact the votes were together Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain Misder -> starts bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed zeks -> fourth voter for bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed attempts at lowering suspicion? I already said why I unvoted for Hyperbola. + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:38 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Guys, really? Okay so I'm pretty much lynched because you people can't take a joke. So I'm leaving this as my legacy: People I think are mafia or atleast seem fishy:Brown BearShow nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? youngminiiShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 21:01 youngminii wrote:
Actually, I'm not going to overlook it. Why would you place a vote on me 'just in case'? Especially after you heard BC say I was a strong player (which citi.zen evidently disagrees with)? You have these two guys criticising my post when it's not even serious, you jump on this bandwagon and then put a placeholder vote on me just in case?
Does this not strike you as scummy at all? Overly scummy but scummy nonetheless? In fact, I think this is the scummiest post I have seen all game (not that long). However, I don't think you're really that bad at this game and even a mediocre scum wouldn't do that kind of mistake. Will need confirmation on other more experienced TL mafia players on your meta. You are entirely too defensive when a person puts a vote on you as a placeholder. Either you are scum or a very nervous blue. You also endorse no lynching on the first day to appear to be "pro-life" and "for the town". I really don't see your reasoning behind this because a random shot in the dark of inactives or suspicious players can in fact nab a red. And if it doesn't you only lose a green because a blue would at least roleclaim or try to join up with trust circles to avoid getting lynched in this manner. (Divided blues that don't make connections are really hindering the town). SiNiquityI had absolutely no evidence against you before but now you are starting to stink of scum at first you took my accusal of you as a joke and brushed it off, but when people started accusing me of being mafia you saw an opportunity and went into action to provide as much evidence as you could find against me by even looking into past games. Then you just completely shut your mouth and is now waiting for the situation to close to start talking again (afraid you'll say something to bring attention to you and me being the perfect scapegoat). Also your previous posts were really try-hard in my opinion. You contributed absolutely nothing by typing up lengthy posts that just summarized what everyone said. Besides that you clarified and discussed some rules of the game and such. You want to make it seem like you are contributing and keep a neutral and non aggressive stance like a reporter so no one would suspect you. This could just be your playstyle but it seems like a very cautious red one to me. LaXerCannonShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:30 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
If we randomly pick someone, we have a better chance of getting a blue then a red. Why don't we try voting for who we think is red? It's not like the game will automatically get easier for us as it goes on, since there aren't any clues. Also, at this point everyone's votes are spread out so we are nearly guaranteed an innocent lynch. Getting everyone to agree to vote for the random could be awfully tough.
IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list). We can take this step further by listing inactives in reverse order and numbering them from 1-X, use a number we obtain from the second paragraph and count through the list, looping when needed. I'm getting carried away here... I think lynching an inactive player is the best course of action. I also think we should get a list of players who are new to this mafia game so we know who they are. A new player who's scum can easily hide under that mask; I think it's best we can monitor them from the get go. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:33 LaXerCannon wrote:
##Abstain in case I can't find it within myself to wake up early tomorrow to post (no other time >_>) Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 11:38 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 10:13 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 09:59 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 09:51 Bill Murray wrote:
EVERYONE abstaining? I guess it'd no lynch. Didn't expect that to happen! Okay so everyone should abstain imo. If you have any objections to this idea, please raise it asap because we need everyone to switch their vote to abstaining. Even one vote = lynch and that will be very suspicious of the person who left their vote by 'accident'. ##Unvote Pyrr
##Vote Abstain I'm not sure I like it. The inactives will get modkilled, no one gets lynched, the mafia kills 2 more people, and then we're back at square one, no? On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS. Bad idea, there's no incentive for town to post -> silent town = dead town Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:13 LaXerCannon wrote:
playoffs are done for today! my next post will be in....around 16-18 hours. First LaxerCannon recommends lynching inactives but then goes ahead and abstains. Then he goes on again about how we should just line up inactives to lynch and doesn't change his vote. Then he vanishes. This is fishy for two reasons. First the obvious contradiction, and second, the effort to try and direct suspicion away from him. He keeps pushing the idea to lynch random inactive people while the town debates over a few suspects and really does nothing but push the town in the wrong direction: not analysing the game but killing off quiet people. Then he talks about playoffs and keeps endorcing random picking ideas. That is wayy too anti-town to be a blue. And if he's green he doesn't care about the game much. ------------------------------------------------------- this is all I have now and hope I at least contributed to the game before I die sorry about trying to have fun guys :/ j/k ~peace
Vote: LaXerCannonblah. I don't want to abstain... but I don't know who to lynch I vote LaXerCannon because his posts don't have any substance whatsoever. He tries to contribute, but doesn't give any astounding idea. His ideas are based on previous ideas that have been said, and doesn't say anything new. Then he distracts from the conversation. Either Hyperbola is a mafia member that is trying every attempt to get out, by making false accusations, or he is a townie who make a mistake but is trying to amend it by giving analysis. I tend to lean towards the latter. Plus, Hyperbola is now being active, which is good. If he is a mafia member, his activeness may work against him because he will have to dodge a lot to make it seem like he is a townie. If he is a townie, well, good. An active townie a very very good. Hopefully, I made the right decision... Also, as many people already stated, Hyperbola was not screwed all the way. It was 6-5 for Hyperbola, a very close vote. Anyways... ITS 9:27!!!!!! WHERE IS THE DAY POST!!!! The initial miniwagon was enough to REALLY up his chances at being lynched. AT least on TL massive swing votes to lynch someone else in the last few hours is very rare and I've only seen it happen a very few times. I thought that wagon was ridiculous from the start and then people jump on it with absolutely no real reasoning whatsoever and weren't challenged on it....either that or they IGNORED their challenges. So yea Brownbear what the hell dude? Real reasoning for voting for him besides "lol I didn't know I could abstain but I found out later and didn't change my vote" On July 20 2010 20:18 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 15:38 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
BrownBear i'd like to see more input from the rest of the town but i guess my sentiments on vets claiming boils to this:
1. the town wants the mafia to inadvertently waste hits on vets
2. vets claiming practically guarantees that this will not happen You have to balance the fact that you have a central confirmed townie with which to operate from. Randomly hitting a Vet is so rare as it is that I just don't see a huge benefit in keeping them hidden when one has obviously been hit...or the medic got a really lucky protection on someone. I personally like the vet claiming idea because on their own they are a pretty weak blue role. On July 21 2010 08:20 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +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 I personally understand the brownbear vote because I was thinking about doing the same thing. Subversion's strange comments have been well...strange and I'm really itching to vote for him because his foot in mouth syndrome could get us in trouble later in the game when saying something stupid can have catastrophic consequences. That being said
##Vote:Subversion On July 23 2010 13:27 Jayme wrote:
I have returned from the longest work day ever.
Reading the las 30 freaking pages but I'm around On July 23 2010 13:53 Jayme wrote:
I am not a fan of subversion..still. I think he has terrible foot in mouth syndrome and has what amounts to a legion of followers ready to defend him anytime a serious accusation comes down.
subversion should have been lynched, would have told us a lot.
I'm looking at phyrr now. He's jerked around an entire town before as mafia and nobody ever really challenged it. I don't think it's the case this time but it should be looked at.
Further the town needs to stop with the bandwagons. Any bandwagon after day 1 is needlessly destructive...stop doing it. On July 23 2010 13:27 Jayme wrote:
I have returned from the longest work day ever.
Reading the las 30 freaking pages but I'm around On July 23 2010 13:53 Jayme wrote:
I am not a fan of subversion..still. I think he has terrible foot in mouth syndrome and has what amounts to a legion of followers ready to defend him anytime a serious accusation comes down.
subversion should have been lynched, would have told us a lot.
I'm looking at phyrr now. He's jerked around an entire town before as mafia and nobody ever really challenged it. I don't think it's the case this time but it should be looked at.
Further the town needs to stop with the bandwagons. Any bandwagon after day 1 is needlessly destructive...stop doing it.
Putting these out right now; seems that both were fairly inactive but definitely seemed like a blue snipe. Or maybe one of these got vigi hit and Mafia hit BC? Have to wait for a claim I guess.
|
EPT
