|
Part 1 of Tree.hugger's Post Review + Show Spoiler +On July 18 2010 06:08 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +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. On July 18 2010 12:29 tree.hugger wrote:Gentlemen, this is not majority lynch. A plan for all abstaining will basically allow the mafia to get a free shot off, because they can hide behind all the inactives, and pretend they didn't read the thread due to IRL, and thus did not unvote for ___. Bad idea. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 10:44 DarthThienAn wrote: [DarthThienAn inserts thoughts on the no-lynch plan]
My goal is to maximize the number of deaths at the end of Day 1. Therefore, we should lynch someone who has voted. You're going to play like Chezinu? So be it. *** Also, I'd like to once again push the plan of creating a list of FIVE or FOUR inactive players, and then using a random number generator to determine the lynch target. There are many ways we can do this, whether by using the amount of games SKT manages to take off of CJ tonight (well, we'd have to assign 0 to somebody) or some other random metric. Hell, someone could even stream it on their livestream. In that vein, I suggest that we use Siniquity's list as our guide. I've selected random players who look interesting to me from the list of people who had not posted at that time. I somewhat think that mafia tend to post once called out on inactivity, as it's a stupid way to go at the beginning, so hyperbola LaxerCannon Citi.zen All of whom have posted uselessly, should be on the list. Obviously Citi.zen is an adept player, and so he could probably play his way off the list, but for the time being, he's raised several flags. Speaks out against the day 1 no-lynch, a pretty obvious town move. Of course mafia may try this as well to net some town points
+ Show Spoiler +On July 18 2010 12:30 tree.hugger wrote: And this bandwagon against Hyperbola is just dumb.
## Vote Laxercannon On July 18 2010 13:45 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 13:09 Divinek wrote:On July 18 2010 12:30 tree.hugger wrote: And this bandwagon against Hyperbola is just dumb.
## Vote Laxercannon why is it dumb The reason it was introduced in the first place what completely ridiculous. Nothing smart about any of it. We should lynch people for good reasons, not dumb ones. I'm still looking for more nominations for people to lynch. I think those three are a good start. Time to pick one, yes? How about I PM five people a list of the candidates in order, and then someone in the thread will choose a number from 1-3? On July 18 2010 16:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 13:57 Divinek wrote:On July 18 2010 13:45 tree.hugger wrote:On July 18 2010 13:09 Divinek wrote:On July 18 2010 12:30 tree.hugger wrote: And this bandwagon against Hyperbola is just dumb.
## Vote Laxercannon why is it dumb The reason it was introduced in the first place what completely ridiculous. Nothing smart about any of it. We should lynch people for good reasons, not dumb ones. I'm still looking for more nominations for people to lynch. I think those three are a good start. Time to pick one, yes? How about I PM five people a list of the candidates in order, and then someone in the thread will choose a number from 1-3? but WHY was it ridiculous, WHY was it not smart, WHY were the reasons dumb. You might as well have not posted as there was no substance to what you just said Because there were no reasons. Hell, did you even look to see what Hyperbola did to make himself so suspicious? Because he didn't do anything, and that's what I call playing stupidly. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:02 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Actually, until those 5 people explain themselves.
##unvote ##vote pandain
You get the vote as the third - fourth voter of most bandwagons turns out to be red. Convince me your legit, or stop being retarded and ill move my vote. I think, as Divinek is busy proving, these fine gentlemen were voting for Hyperbola for no reason whatsoever. They're all pretty new players, and I'm not convinced that's a list we're likely to find mafia on. I'd rather work with inactivity. Bedtime now. CJ fighting! On July 19 2010 01:15 tree.hugger wrote: Alright, so it's a little too late, and nobody seems up on my idea for picking randomly from a list of inactives. Fair enough, we'll do this the old fashioned way.
But it seems to me that we a list of sorts anyway, and we might as well try to start a bandwagon going on one of them. I think citi.zen's approach is somewhat reasonable, although I feel like established players playing quietly is more mafia-like then he suggests, and I'd rather vote Foolishness than Ketomai. I think Darth is also a huge candidate, I have no idea what he's doing, but it doesn't look like he's going to do anything helpful this game. And of course, the other two candidates and the publicly feuding youngjeezy and infundibulum.
So I propose a new list really. Foolishness Darth (3) Ketomai (1) youngminii (2) infund (1)
I'm going to switch my vote then, by virtue of personal suspicion to: ## Vote DarthThienAn
I urge everyone to pick from this list from now on.
***
And BM, we can't allow people to abstain, please forbid it after this first day lynch. It's just terribly unhelpful.
On July 19 2010 04:53 tree.hugger wrote:Essentially. Voting lists are one of the best ways to catch mafia. They spread out across them in predictable patterns, and once you catch one mafia, you can gain a ton of information by looking at the voting lists. It's much better than post analysis, which is always touch and go. If you give people an out by establishing an abstain bandwagon, then you're just handcuffing the town. And you may still be convinced that your strategy is the right one, but it's obviously not going to happen, and it's time you dropped the issue, so the town can move on. Wasting space, and distracting people from the task at hand is counter productive for obvious reasons. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 03:37 youngminii wrote: It looks like it's a toss up between hyperbola(5), DTA(3), and myself(4).
Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 03:46 lakrismamma wrote: I will follow citizen though to create a third alternative.
##Unvote ##vote ketomai That's a fourth alternative. Also, for everyone's reference, this is a vote moved from Subversion. So we have Hyperbola (5) Darth (3) youngminii (4) Ketomai (2) I believe BrownBear, Subversion, and Ketomai have not yet voted. *** At this point, I think people who have not voted for one of these four people (and in particular, the first three) should reconsider their votes, and select one of these players to lynch. Optimally we'll have three lists, and everyone on one of those lists, which should make mafia spotting a little easier. Again, I'd like to push a lynch on Darth. He's smart, and he knows he's not under the cosh yet. Hyperbola and youngminii have tried to defend themselves, but Darth hasn't lifted a finger, which I think it smart. If you're winning, leave well enough alone. But I'd like to punish him for it, and I encourage others to join. Speaks out against the lynch of Hyperbola + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 14:02 tree.hugger wrote: I went to my roof, however, with a vuvuzela and a bullhorn. After an impromptu concert to make sure people were paying attention, I picked up the bullhorn and yelled "GODDAMMIT, LEARN TO PLAY". Then I went back to bed, the crickets came out, and night fell. On July 20 2010 03:06 tree.hugger wrote:There is are six mafia in this game. There is probably one mafia in each of these lists, but I'd also lean on citi and young being mafia candidates. Show nested quote +citi.zen (rastaban) SiNiquity (Hyperbola) [ b]Pandain (BC) Infundibulum (youngminii) And probably two in this one: Show nested quote + DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, Pyrrhuloxia, tree.hugger) ketomai (citi.zen, lakrismamma) Amber[LighT] (jayme, DarthThienAn), BloodyC0bbler (~OpZ, Foolishness) LaXerCannon (Misder, citi.zen) Mafia vote counts are usually spread across the likely candidates, as the mafia don't know who our blue's are as much as we know who they are. So there's not a lot to be gained by them in focusing on one target, at least not yet. Therefore, there's probably some mafia who voted early, (I'd lean towards those being more experienced players, but possibly not.) some mafia who voted late, and some mafia who changed their votes. I tend to suspect people who voted against each other, as personal conflict give the mafia a great excuse to make a silly vote that won't ever be held to them. I think we've seen faux conflict be manufactured that way as well. We'll see what more the hits tonight give us, but keep this day 1 voting template in mind. On July 20 2010 11:17 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 09:38 Divinek wrote: And hyperbolas post wasnt seemingly bad, they were terrible. As a brave Ace once said if you die early in a mafia game you're playing bad.
Well then how do you explain poor Radfield? Now THIS is suspicious, I actually didn't catch that the vote was so close... Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 08:07 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 20 2010 07:44 Foolishness wrote: So if I'm understanding this, youngminii was ahead in the votes, then BrownBear and bumatlarge voted for Hyperbola, which pushed Hyperbola ahead in the voting (and he stayed ahead until day end). So it's possible there was a push to save youngminii from being lynched.
Of course please correct me if I'm mistaken. The people above me who are doing the vote tally are very very very unorganized with their posts. Then, misder and zeks switch their votes to Laxercannon and abstain, respectively. So the count is now 5-5. Finally, subversion comes in and drops his vote on Hyperbola. 6-5. This is the post: Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 09:16 Subversion wrote: ##Vote: Hyperbola
Not really convinced by him, and there's not really any other clear choice for me right now. Now, that's not a reason, and furthermore, that's a lie. There's at least one other choice that's close, and several others getting votes. This vote is highly influential, but nobody really caught onto it at the time. But if youngminii is mafia, then that's a direct implication of subversion as well. Curious-er and curious-er. On July 20 2010 13:41 tree.hugger wrote:That's wonderful, Bill. I mean, that's terrible about Foolishness, but that's wonderful about you. Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 13:15 Bill Murray wrote: the 48 hours will go from 13 kst, midnight EST, and last 48 hours until the first minute of the 22nd on the east coast. i have to go be with my gf fiancé now! she is gonna kill me for taking this long :p Edited the fix. Forgive me. On July 20 2010 14:03 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 13:44 Subversion wrote: Seems at the moment, mafia aren't making too many mistakes. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. I have never, ever seen a townie say something like this. So narcissistic you had to complement yourself? GG. On July 20 2010 14:03 tree.hugger wrote: ##Vote: Subversion On July 21 2010 04:25 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 02:35 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 20 2010 15:44 Protactinium wrote:Probably not today, unless we can find two clearly delineated targets. Ah, scrolling backward. With the whole Vet idea, let's not forget this: On July 20 2010 13:44 Subversion wrote:Hey man, congratulations, that's really exciting news Wish you all the best On point, I was also in agreement about the weirdness of Foolishness's post, but now he's dead. Seems at the moment, mafia aren't making too many mistakes.Not sure about the block of votes for Hyperbola, seems if it was a scum-instigated thing they could have easily spread it out more? Might have just been a bunch of townies jumping on the bandwagon. Although, I would guess there's a good chance there's one or two mafia in there, who saw an opportunity to jump on a townie vote. And don't forget he made the winning (or losing...) vote. Good catch, subversion not only makes a weird line Seems at the moment, mafia aren't making too many mistakes.but also the bit about the hyperbola vote. Consider he is implying the chances of one - two reds in there, and cast the deciding vote to get hyper lynched. Add in then his "praise" of the mafia, seems he's either really good at slipups or really good at appearing scummy as town. I'd like to point this out yet again. Subversion has more pointing at him this game than anyone else, and it'd not even close. BrownBear isn't playing well, but he's not playing like mafia. Doesn't mean he isn't, but he hasn't said anything close to a tell so far. Meanwhile, Subversion not only cast a highly suspect last-minute vote on a player who really had nothing against him, but he also slipped in the gem quoted above, which, as far as I can tell, has never been said by an innocent townie in the entire history of time. Does he have to roleclaim to get us all to lynch him? Stop pulling a Hyperbola on BrownBear and go lynch the mafia. On July 22 2010 09:00 tree.hugger wrote: This is the stupidest thing, pretty much ever.
Is there evidence against chaoser? Nobody can really explain what it is. Is there evidence against DTA? Hardly. Is there evidence against Subversion? Yes, there is.
1) Subversion voted at the last minute to lynch someone who's bandwagon was pathetic from the start, and really had nothing behind it. But the real significance of that vote, was that it saved someone else (youngminii). We didn't know about it at the time, because BM's count was off, but the mafia (assuming for a moment that youngminii is red) would clearly have a much more accurate count. They might've assumed that BM's vote count would be a cover, but at any rate they needed to make sure to save their own member.
2) Subversion's post, in which he commented on how well the mafia were doing was (a) not true, and (b) something that I don't think I've ever heard anyone innocent ever say in a game of mafia. That's something I can see a new mafia member thinking a townie would say, but that's not something a townie would actually say.
Furthermore, lynching Subversion just makes plain sense from a town perspective. A whole host of people have put their reputations on the line to save Subversion. Nobody has said anything in chaoser's defense. Nobody has said anything in DTA's defense. They've been left to defend themselves, and, apparently to some people that looks guilty.
What does that mean? Aside from being absurdly suspicious, if we lynch Subversion, then we gain a ton of information. If Subversion flips red, then we catch youngminii right off the bat. citi.zen has been defending Subversion nearly every post he gets, albeit a little more subtlety. Almost everyone in the game is on record saying something about Subversion, which means that if we lynch him, we get to figure out who was right, and who was wrong and proceed from there.
None of the other lynch candidates are even close to as valuable as Subversion. If we lose another day lynching people who aren't mafia, then we're going to be in trouble. On July 22 2010 09:41 tree.hugger wrote:Well, I'll pick this up again on Friday, presuming I'm not dead, so I can vote again for Subversion after whoever the hell it is we're lynching today flips green. gg. citi.zen, you win this round. One final note: Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 09:12 youngminii wrote:On July 22 2010 09:00 tree.hugger wrote:] If Subversion flips red, then we catch youngminii right off the bat. I lol'd. You doubt that you're joined at the hip with Subversion? On July 22 2010 13:25 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 13:21 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: I regret nothing. Why the fuck did he fake blue? Because he didn't. Either Pyrr is a clever mafia, or a really really bad townie. I'm leaning towards the latter, and seeing as how we don't seem to want to kill the obvious mafia, can we take this one out next? Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 13:23 youngminii wrote: So on the bright side, how credible am I as a townie ey? You're not at all. And you never have been. [/b] Pushes hard for a lynch of subversion, doesn't change his vote even after subversion soft claims. + Show Spoiler +On July 23 2010 05:19 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 03:08 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 23 2010 03:04 BrownBear wrote:On July 23 2010 02:42 Amber[LighT] wrote: I'm praying that the DT's made use of this lynch so we can pick out alignment. This should be apparent, but NOBODY SHOULD TELL MEDICS OR DTs WHAT TO DO IN THE THREAD. OR EVEN HINT AT IT. The suicide bomber is still out there. That's why I'm glad we haven't. It's better for the DT's to (hopefully) be on top of their own jobs without us spewing "oh do this." If they feel that what they're doing is better than what's being suggested in the thread then that's fine. The game is relying on their diligence at this point and I've stated what I would expect from the DT's throughout much of the game. This goes for the other blues as well. Unless the town comes to some kind of judgement about who to check, then we really don't need to worry too deeply about him. As we all know, just because I say something doesn't mean we're going to do it. For example, it's important that the town talks about citi.zen and BC. Both are veterans, both are smart, both are good at this game. Also, both have been utterly useless so far, popping in once in a while to tell the town that it's doing it all wrong, without ever adding something concrete. It's that kind of ambiguous grey area of activity and inactivity that the mafia love to hide in. Of course, Subversion or youngminii would be great checks as well, seeing as how they're both the same color, and it'd be useful to find out what that is. And surely none of these people would object to them being checked, because they have nothing to fear, right? On July 23 2010 11:13 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 10:54 Pandain wrote:On July 23 2010 10:51 chaoser wrote: So right now the consensus to move to tricode/zeks/amber/misder? Sigh...wtf did we do on day 2 then... Yup, that's the problem. We fuddled up day2. Theres a chance that one of the 3 remaining lynch suspects from day two are ACTUALLY mafia, but as of now it's too hard to tell which one. I for one feel it would be much better to focus on the quiet ones in this game, in order to at least get them to talk. Unless anyone disagrees with me, I think that should be our plan. If by "we" you mean "I, Pandain" then yeah, that's right. And I stand by that reasoning, and pretty much everything I've posted in the thread so far. Nothing I've seen from any of my suspects or Foolishness' makes me think any differently of them. On July 23 2010 13:15 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 13:13 youngminii wrote: I dare you to form a bandwagon on me. When I don't flip red you'd better be prepared to get nailed on by town the next day. Yes I'm talking to you chaoser and infundilxluxvbkjum. It's iNfuNdiBuLuM. On July 23 2010 13:16 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 13:16 BrownBear wrote:On July 23 2010 13:15 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2010 13:13 youngminii wrote: I dare you to form a bandwagon on me. When I don't flip red you'd better be prepared to get nailed on by town the next day. Yes I'm talking to you chaoser and infundilxluxvbkjum. It's iNfuNdiBuLuM. Lawl :D This never gets old. No, it's old. On July 24 2010 04:24 tree.hugger wrote: It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed.
I would caution people to wait until the first 24 hours are up before roleclaiming to BC and Tricode, simply because I'm not sure if everyone in the game has posted, and we should make absolutely sure that no counter-claim has come up.
The last part of this analysis that needs to come is that we need to figure out if we can discern any other reason for the kills, other than random sniping for blues. Both players were somewhat un-influential, which strikes me as odd choices for the night kill.
DT's should get their information out there if they haven't done so already. Find a way, take a risk, see where that leads you. Mostly filler posts but then moves on to doubting BC/tricode. The confusing thing is that after stating that, he recommends waiting 24 hours before claiming to them. He had just pointed out how it wasn't possible to confirm them, but now instead of saying don't claim he wants people to just wait. + Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 04:49 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? Actually, you're absolutely right. Tricode is confirmed as town. But BC still is the same. At this point, I advocate a mass roleclaim to Tricode. He can then tell the town how many of each blue role claimed, and build a circle. On July 24 2010 04:56 tree.hugger wrote: Let me clarify this.
It's an interesting case, in claiming who he hit, Tricode could've conceivably claimed one of the dead guys, or he could've claimed BC. If he had claimed a dead guy, then BC is confirmed. This is what the mafia would want if this was a ploy. However, by claiming BC, then he essentially exonerates himself, by choosing the less-optimal option.
Clear? On July 24 2010 05:10 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 04:59 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? If Tricode claimed to hit Jayme or Roffles, then we'd first have to verify Tricode before BC could be verified. If Tricode really is Mafia, then claiming to hit BC is smart because we gain nothing by lynch-verifying him under the pretense that he's not Mafia. In short, claiming to not hit BC but rather Roffles or Jayme gives us an incentive to lynch him, because we gain something from his death (BC's innocence). The absense of a counter-claim establishes: A: There was a vigi hit and It was performed by Tricode OR B: Tricode and BC are on the same team. Because there has not been a counter-claim, and because Tricode chose the sub-optimal hit target, (if he had been mafia) then we can assume that Option A is correct. On July 24 2010 06:31 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 06:24 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 05:00 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 04:49 tree.hugger wrote:On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? Actually, you're absolutely right. Tricode is confirmed as town. But BC still is the same. At this point, I advocate a mass roleclaim to Tricode. He can then tell the town how many of each blue role claimed, and build a circle. DO NOT MASS ROLECLAIM TO TRICODE Just in case someone missed it at the bottom of page 86. Tree.Hugger's logic is flawed, the flaws have been identified, stop pushing for it until he has been 100% cleared (which, at this point, he has not). DO NOT MASS ROLECLAIM TO TRICODE. Since you last posted that, I responded to your points. In the absence of a counter-claim, Tricode is confirmed town. Now I'm fine with a waiting period for a counter-claim, say, until midnight tonight, but if there isn't one by that time, then Tricode's vigi claim can only be true. That's because the only other option (Tricode and BC on the same team) is rejected because Tricode chose to say that he aimed for BC, which makes him innocent, rather than aiming for Jayme or Roffles, which would make BC look innocent, and which, we can assume, would've been what the mafia would've done. What about this don't you understand? On July 24 2010 06:48 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 06:44 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 05:10 tree.hugger wrote:On July 24 2010 04:59 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? If Tricode claimed to hit Jayme or Roffles, then we'd first have to verify Tricode before BC could be verified. If Tricode really is Mafia, then claiming to hit BC is smart because we gain nothing by lynch-verifying him under the pretense that he's not Mafia. In short, claiming to not hit BC but rather Roffles or Jayme gives us an incentive to lynch him, because we gain something from his death (BC's innocence). The absense of a counter-claim establishes: A: There was a vigi hit and It was performed by Tricode OR B: Tricode and BC are on the same team. Because there has not been a counter-claim, and because Tricode chose the sub-optimal hit target, (if he had been mafia) then we can assume that Option A is correct. The flaw in your logic is that choosing to claim the "sub-optimal hit target" (i.e. BloodyC0bbler) ==> Tricode is innocent. As I explained above, claiming BloodyC0bbler is not sub-optimal for Mafia. I will demonstrate my argument again. Suppose Tricode had instead chosen to claim Jayme or Roffles, the "optimal hit target." If Tricode is telling the truth, then the Mafia attempted to hit BloodyC0bbler, but was instead protected (medic / veteran life). If Tricode is lying (i.e. is Mafia), then Tricode did not put out an extra hit, and barring anyone else coming forward, BC is also lying. Therefore, Tricode's death will either condemn BC or exonerate him. Thus the town has an incentive to lynch Tricode, as there are concrete, indisputable implications which will result from it! Compared to claiming BloodyC0bbler, where lynching Tricode only yields definitive information about BC in the case that he was lying, there is now a disincentive to lynch Tricode (the possibility that he's telling the truth, thereby revealing, "well yep he was telling the truth, but BC is still unknown.") I'm not concerned about lynching Tricode, I want to establish his innocence. And once again, in the absence of a counter-claim, Tricode MUST be innocent, unless both him and BC are lying. And again, I think it's self evident that the mafia would rather have made BC look like a confirmed townie, than Tricode. On July 24 2010 06:51 tree.hugger wrote: And, I see what you're saying, you're arguing that the incentive for the mafia to discourage a test-lynch on Tricode is enough for them to make it look more like Tricode is innocent. I can see that argument, but I believe that the mafia (at this point) would be confident enough so that the town would not waste a lynch on a test which would, in the unlikely event of it being successful, only yield one other mafia. We're somewhat past the point for tests.
I think also, the mafia would be pretty sure they could bandwagon one of our other standbys if Tricode got in trouble. I think the mafia would prefer to let a player like BC fight for himself (were they on the same team) and I think they'd probably win that fight. On July 24 2010 08:21 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 06:59 SiNiquity wrote:To be honest I do agree with your hunch of Tricode being innocent I also think that d3 is innocent as well. But sadly neither are conclusive, and we should be wary of roleclaiming based on hunches. No, I think we understand each other actually. I think that's a risk we should be taking, however, I'd like to hear what Tricode has to say about this. He's not the kind of player that inspires confidence in his play. Clarifies more of what was said above. He moves from pushing for role claim to BC and tricode, to just tricode and finally that it is a risky play but worth it to claim to tricode.
|
Part 2 + Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 10:31 tree.hugger wrote: Hahahaha, BC where was that Day 1?
Also, I think we should lynch youngjeezy. He's like Subversion, (and tied to him) but more annoying. I think, seeing how he's rendered an opinion on practically everyone in the town by now, he's a lynch that'll keep on giving. I've thought he's mafia from the beginning, basically, and he's continued to get pretty much everything wrong since then.
But I guess I'm open to lynching citi.zen as well, as he's been spectacularly unhelpful, and has been sitting firmly in that grey area between activity and inactivity that usually harbors at least half of the mafia. On July 24 2010 11:32 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 10:46 citi.zen wrote:On July 24 2010 10:31 tree.hugger wrote: Hahahaha, BC where was that Day 1?
Also, I think we should lynch youngjeezy. He's like Subversion, (and tied to him) but more annoying. I think, seeing how he's rendered an opinion on practically everyone in the town by now, he's a lynch that'll keep on giving. I've thought he's mafia from the beginning, basically, and he's continued to get pretty much everything wrong since then.
But I guess I'm open to lynching citi.zen as well, as he's been spectacularly unhelpful, and has been sitting firmly in that grey area between activity and inactivity that usually harbors at least half of the mafia. Pop quiz: out of BC's list of himself, me or pyrr, who has been "hugging that green area" closest? Wait what? The green area? What green area? What are you talking about. And if we're talking about the "grey" area that I mentioned then it's you. The person I said it was. Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 10:43 Subversion wrote: I strongly, strongly believe that youngminii is not scum.
I really think we need to stop looking at the same people we have been since day 1/2, and start looking at new people with fresh eyes. The case against me was pretty ridiculous imo, based on 1 comment and an F'd vote count. youngminii is only in the spotlight because he was somehow, linked to me. How this happened I STILL do not know.
We're still beating the same dead dogs. We need to target a different "group", I strongly feel that the youngminii/dta/me/chaoser thing that has been going since forever is the wrong group of people. We've only lynched two of those people, and the two that only silly people read as town, how can we say the rest are innocent? On July 24 2010 11:41 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 11:04 Tricode wrote: ##vote Abstain
Place holder.
I want to see what everyone says before I place my vote. And what is the point of abstaining? Abstaining doesn't do squat. Why post at all? Why not just not post and not vote? If everyone abstained all the time, then we wouldn't get anything done. Are people ever 100% sure that other people are mafia? Of course not! But you still have to vote anyway. You've abstained two straight days. If the mafia has influenced any of our votes (oh wait, they've all been close, the mafia has literally been at liberty to pick the people they want dead) then you are pretty much the most responsible person. Are you going to vote this time? And what the hell do you mean that you're going to wait to see what people say? You said, back on page 82 that: Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:24 Tricode wrote: When you guys do kill me to prove what I am saying, I will be honest, I tried reading this thread but it is hard with flame wars and ridiculous claims and finger pointing.
You hate reading the thread. But furthermore, you, through your actions of last night, have essentially become one of the town's most valuable resources. If you took any kind of initiative, you could help the town organize. Set an example and start posting constructively. Use your position as the game's most confirmed player to get people together, and forming a better circle. Don't just abstain and sit back. We've had two people survive hits, and one outted Day Vigi, and there's not even the hint that the town has an effective circle together. We're literally playing against one of the worst mafia openings in recent memory, and we're not getting anywhere, thanks primarily to you. (and Pandain, but he can't help it) Get your act together, and play, or be subbed out for someone who will. continues to push for subversion. Trys to get Tricode to step up to his role as a town leader + Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 12:23 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 12:00 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 11:41 tree.hugger wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 11:04 Tricode wrote: ##vote Abstain
Place holder.
I want to see what everyone says before I place my vote. And what is the point of abstaining? Abstaining doesn't do squat. Why post at all? Why not just not post and not vote? If everyone abstained all the time, then we wouldn't get anything done. Are people ever 100% sure that other people are mafia? Of course not! But you still have to vote anyway. You've abstained two straight days. If the mafia has influenced any of our votes (oh wait, they've all been close, the mafia has literally been at liberty to pick the people they want dead) then you are pretty much the most responsible person. Are you going to vote this time? And what the hell do you mean that you're going to wait to see what people say? You said, back on page 82 that: On July 23 2010 16:24 Tricode wrote: When you guys do kill me to prove what I am saying, I will be honest, I tried reading this thread but it is hard with flame wars and ridiculous claims and finger pointing.
You hate reading the thread. But furthermore, you, through your actions of last night, have essentially become one of the town's most valuable resources. If you took any kind of initiative, you could help the town organize. Set an example and start posting constructively. Use your position as the game's most confirmed player to get people together, and forming a better circle. Don't just abstain and sit back. We've had two people survive hits, and one outted Day Vigi, and there's not even the hint that the town has an effective circle together. We're literally playing against one of the worst mafia openings in recent memory, and we're not getting anywhere, thanks primarily to you. (and Pandain, but he can't help it) Get your act together, and play, or be subbed out for someone who will. I just love how you point fingers without any evidence and try and get on everyone's good side (PMing people, sucking up to BC). You don't even respond to my analysis and just say "spammer bad scum that's always wrong". Great play. Woah woah woah. That post wasn't even towards you? What's your problem anyway with thinking that everyone is talking about you 24/7? Your analysis? You're trying to bandwagon chaoser, now right? Old hat, even if chaoser is mafia, which I doubt, seeing as how his bandwagon was made of the same flimsy stuff that Hyperbola's was made out of. We have bigger fish to fry, and I long ago gave up on your ability to post constructively. I figured that ignoring you was enough, but the way you purposely misspell infundibulum's name is just petty, and doesn't belong in this game, and I recommend you take a long meditative retreat in Dharamshala when this is over, it'd teach you to be a nicer person, and stop thinking about yourself all the time. I PM people because this game allows them, and they're a great way for discussing things privately with people. Nothing untoward about that. And where did I 'suck up to BC'? Please. I called him out a few pages ago for posting nothing of value, and not being of help to the town. I welcome the change in his play. As do I welcome this change: Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 12:05 citi.zen wrote: Ok, let's blow this taco stand.
I am a mad hatter. I am part of a dt circle. I would love to help the two dt's connect. Here's how we can do it:
1. Wait to see if there is a counter claim against me and Tricode, since together we should account for the 2 town Kp roles. If there isn't, we are both confirmed. If there is, we have a red player. 2. The other dt asks a confirmed person they checked to contact me. If more than one person comes forward I will ask the dt to claim. This way, if the mafia decide to fake claim we have two reds, not just one. 3. The two DTs, remaining publicly anonymous, are in contact. We give ourselves a chance to win. If there is no counter-claim, say, in 24 hours, (that's the day with 12 hours remaining) I think the other DT should go ahead and do this. That said, if there is another vet or mad hatter, you'd better pick someone you trust and roleclaim to them, or else we're all screwed. On July 24 2010 12:33 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 12:27 d3_crescentia wrote:On July 24 2010 11:04 Bill Murray wrote: d3, you voted for two people in the same post when there is a single lynch today, pick one, or i will pick one for you.
siniquity, see the above post where you may not vote for double lynch without voting abstain. oh so for some reason I thought double lynch had passed for today and not for tomorrow ##vote: abstain If there are 13 votes for abstaining, then we accidentally end the day, correct? Please don't vote at all, or throw your placeholder vote on someone who is not going to carry the day in the end. For example, I'll add to the double lynch. ##Vote Xelin (Haha, where has he been?) ## Vote Double Lynch On July 24 2010 14:28 tree.hugger wrote: BC, if there is no counter-claim, then why would there be any objections to this going forward? At this point, if there is a remaining town KP role, they obviously must have figured out that they need to claim immediately, and they need to roleclaim, or find someone they trust to roleclaim for them.
I know we need to give this time to make sure everyone knows, but if there is no counter-claim, then there's really no other way to look at it, yes? On July 24 2010 16:04 tree.hugger wrote: We're past the point of guessing on inactives. Mafia have been posting, they always do, and we should be able to find them based on evidence, not lack of evidence.
Not that I don't think southrawrea could easily be mafia, but I want to lynch someone who is active and who has people attached to him. Otherwise, we're back to Day three two again.
And citi.zen, I presume your detective has not discovered the mafia, otherwise you'd tell us, yes? On July 24 2010 16:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 16:06 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 09:48 youngminii wrote:My case on Chaoser.+ Show Spoiler +Let us delve into the mind of scum. The pattern for a normal, general scum that doesn't go out of his way to do anything out of the ordinary is quite simple. Lay low on the first day or two and slowly come out with accusations. Be very careful of jumping on bandwagons as it may arouse suspicion. Rather than openly coming out and making a case on someone on the first day/two, try to find someone that is making a fool of themselves and make a small case to see if it gains momentum. I think we can all agree that this is a standard way of playing as scum, keeps the suspicion low while still contributing information. Now let us look at chaoser's early game. One of his first posts is to abstain. This vote does not change for the entire day. Fits perfectly in line with my 'lay low' theory, especially (as the wonderful Pandain pointed out) as chaoser was so against my 'no lynch' strategy. One would have to wonder why he didn't simply vote for someone if he was so against it. He raises the counter argument that voting to abstain is different from voting to no lynch, which is a moot point in my opinion really. I think it's less about the days and more about the fact that we get tons of information from looking at vote lists Cool, chaoser wants information from voting lists on the first day. In fact, he even points this out to the public. So why does he not vote for anyone? Oh right, abstaining doesn't label you as 'against' someone. Good stuff in my opinion, I'd probably do it too if I was scum. So up until early Day 2, chaoser continues to bring in a wealth of information (such as the voting history of certain people etc.) but doesn't actually accuse anyone. All he does is make some accusatory comment that doesn't really have any flair to it. See below. chaoser to BB: So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious? So early on in Day 2, after a small group of people (Divinek, DTA and Amber[light]) already vote for BB, chaoser joins in and mounts a small case against BB. + Show Spoiler +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? After a page or two a LOT of people jump on the bandwagon. It's uncanny. Chaoser realises that if BB is lynched and he flips town then things will look bad for him, so he switches his vote to Subversion, another bandwagon being formed at the time. It's funny, after using that argument against BB he immediately switches to Subversion after seeing the possibility that he might be labeled as mafia (note: someone actually said that the '3rd/4th person on the bandwagon tends to be mafia' and could have affected chaoser's thoughts). The argument he uses against Subversion is one that has already gained traction from BC/Protractinium and so it's easy to ride with. Pandain then mounts an argument against chaoser, who responds by responding to each and every point. I believe they continue this argument via PM and sort it out there and Pandain drops his case on chaoser (I attribute this to Pandain being new to this game and not being very good at picking out lies/deceit etc.). Anyway, what does chaoser do now? Of course, he abstains. Oh, the joy of not really voting for anyone. A common trait of mafia is that they won't contribute too much in the accusations etc. early on. They will however, try and 'appear' to be useful by posting stuff that doesn't really cause them any risk in any way (ie. pointing at someone of being scum). They will often side with someone else or pick on a player that seems to be causing a ruckus which won't be seen as suspicious. In addition to this, scum will go to great lengths to defend themselves. Think about it (directed at newer players), if you are scum you are much more willing to come back to this thread and try to shake off any accusations against you. This is why RVS is quite helpful in smaller games. Often scum will 'lurk' meaning they'll browse around, read everything but won't post too much in order to stay under the radar. However, accusing them and voting for them will force them to come out and defend themselves profusely. We can see this in DTA, he was town and everyone started voting for him. He didn't reply in the thread for a looooooong time (I actually pointed this out but I was ignored /yay), indicating that he was in fact, not lurking but actually AWOL, which is a townie trait. Chaoser falls into the above mafia category. He immediately comes out of his 'useful/informative' shell and starts defending himself a LOT. His posts start becoming a lot of the 'discussion' going on. This continues for a long time, only defending himself and never accusing anyone asides from the occasional "your arguments are weak, why are you trying to get me lynched so bad? Are you scum?" type of argument. Now it's actually really painful to go through skimming page by page but the general trend I see right now is that a lot of people start jumping on the chaoser bandwagon. It's funny, he votes for DTA because he's getting a lot of votes for him. He then states: From reading this, I'll change my vote to Subversion even though that means I'll 100% die.
Darth, if you wanna help me, you could switch it over too and I think he'll be first.
##unvote ##vote Subversion Look at this from a scum perspective. He knows DTA is town. He knows that if DTA is lynched then he'll get an even worse image than before. So what does he do? He tries to side with DTA to lynch someone else that already has a lot of people voting for him. This is actually a good play by mafia as he had already taken the side of voting for Subversion earlier so if questioned, he could retaliate by saying "I already had my suspicions on Subversion before!" + Show Spoiler +On an unrelated side note, I find it funny how people are so quick to link me to Subversion (tree.hugger especially) because I defended him a bit whilst nobody links me to DTA's town and Hyperbola's town when I actually gave them proper defenses. Quite ridiculous imo. Blah blah DTA ends up getting lynched (one of the final votes by chaoser, although it could be argued that he did it to save himself) and ends up flipping town. I know I've always been wary of chaoser but I'd like everyone to read my analysis of him. I'm not going to analyse Night 3 'cause that was just a big spam fest and lots of people probably have an ill image of me now. I'd just like you all to trust me for once (I was right on hyperbola/DTA even though it doesn't mean anything, yes I know) and vote for chaoser. I would also like to mention that I believe infundlibsuvxkum and chaoser are linked but that discussion can be saved for another time. It's okay tree.hugger, you don't have to read this. You're clearly too good at this game to deal with my incessant postings. What did I even say about you? My post was a comment on the two votes in quick succession to lynch South. Not everything is about you. On July 24 2010 16:42 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 16:38 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 16:26 tree.hugger wrote:On July 24 2010 16:06 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 09:48 youngminii wrote:My case on Chaoser.+ Show Spoiler +Let us delve into the mind of scum. The pattern for a normal, general scum that doesn't go out of his way to do anything out of the ordinary is quite simple. Lay low on the first day or two and slowly come out with accusations. Be very careful of jumping on bandwagons as it may arouse suspicion. Rather than openly coming out and making a case on someone on the first day/two, try to find someone that is making a fool of themselves and make a small case to see if it gains momentum. I think we can all agree that this is a standard way of playing as scum, keeps the suspicion low while still contributing information. Now let us look at chaoser's early game. One of his first posts is to abstain. This vote does not change for the entire day. Fits perfectly in line with my 'lay low' theory, especially (as the wonderful Pandain pointed out) as chaoser was so against my 'no lynch' strategy. One would have to wonder why he didn't simply vote for someone if he was so against it. He raises the counter argument that voting to abstain is different from voting to no lynch, which is a moot point in my opinion really. I think it's less about the days and more about the fact that we get tons of information from looking at vote lists Cool, chaoser wants information from voting lists on the first day. In fact, he even points this out to the public. So why does he not vote for anyone? Oh right, abstaining doesn't label you as 'against' someone. Good stuff in my opinion, I'd probably do it too if I was scum. So up until early Day 2, chaoser continues to bring in a wealth of information (such as the voting history of certain people etc.) but doesn't actually accuse anyone. All he does is make some accusatory comment that doesn't really have any flair to it. See below. chaoser to BB: So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious? So early on in Day 2, after a small group of people (Divinek, DTA and Amber[light]) already vote for BB, chaoser joins in and mounts a small case against BB. + Show Spoiler +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? After a page or two a LOT of people jump on the bandwagon. It's uncanny. Chaoser realises that if BB is lynched and he flips town then things will look bad for him, so he switches his vote to Subversion, another bandwagon being formed at the time. It's funny, after using that argument against BB he immediately switches to Subversion after seeing the possibility that he might be labeled as mafia (note: someone actually said that the '3rd/4th person on the bandwagon tends to be mafia' and could have affected chaoser's thoughts). The argument he uses against Subversion is one that has already gained traction from BC/Protractinium and so it's easy to ride with. Pandain then mounts an argument against chaoser, who responds by responding to each and every point. I believe they continue this argument via PM and sort it out there and Pandain drops his case on chaoser (I attribute this to Pandain being new to this game and not being very good at picking out lies/deceit etc.). Anyway, what does chaoser do now? Of course, he abstains. Oh, the joy of not really voting for anyone. A common trait of mafia is that they won't contribute too much in the accusations etc. early on. They will however, try and 'appear' to be useful by posting stuff that doesn't really cause them any risk in any way (ie. pointing at someone of being scum). They will often side with someone else or pick on a player that seems to be causing a ruckus which won't be seen as suspicious. In addition to this, scum will go to great lengths to defend themselves. Think about it (directed at newer players), if you are scum you are much more willing to come back to this thread and try to shake off any accusations against you. This is why RVS is quite helpful in smaller games. Often scum will 'lurk' meaning they'll browse around, read everything but won't post too much in order to stay under the radar. However, accusing them and voting for them will force them to come out and defend themselves profusely. We can see this in DTA, he was town and everyone started voting for him. He didn't reply in the thread for a looooooong time (I actually pointed this out but I was ignored /yay), indicating that he was in fact, not lurking but actually AWOL, which is a townie trait. Chaoser falls into the above mafia category. He immediately comes out of his 'useful/informative' shell and starts defending himself a LOT. His posts start becoming a lot of the 'discussion' going on. This continues for a long time, only defending himself and never accusing anyone asides from the occasional "your arguments are weak, why are you trying to get me lynched so bad? Are you scum?" type of argument. Now it's actually really painful to go through skimming page by page but the general trend I see right now is that a lot of people start jumping on the chaoser bandwagon. It's funny, he votes for DTA because he's getting a lot of votes for him. He then states: From reading this, I'll change my vote to Subversion even though that means I'll 100% die.
Darth, if you wanna help me, you could switch it over too and I think he'll be first.
##unvote ##vote Subversion Look at this from a scum perspective. He knows DTA is town. He knows that if DTA is lynched then he'll get an even worse image than before. So what does he do? He tries to side with DTA to lynch someone else that already has a lot of people voting for him. This is actually a good play by mafia as he had already taken the side of voting for Subversion earlier so if questioned, he could retaliate by saying "I already had my suspicions on Subversion before!" + Show Spoiler +On an unrelated side note, I find it funny how people are so quick to link me to Subversion (tree.hugger especially) because I defended him a bit whilst nobody links me to DTA's town and Hyperbola's town when I actually gave them proper defenses. Quite ridiculous imo. Blah blah DTA ends up getting lynched (one of the final votes by chaoser, although it could be argued that he did it to save himself) and ends up flipping town. I know I've always been wary of chaoser but I'd like everyone to read my analysis of him. I'm not going to analyse Night 3 'cause that was just a big spam fest and lots of people probably have an ill image of me now. I'd just like you all to trust me for once (I was right on hyperbola/DTA even though it doesn't mean anything, yes I know) and vote for chaoser. I would also like to mention that I believe infundlibsuvxkum and chaoser are linked but that discussion can be saved for another time. It's okay tree.hugger, you don't have to read this. You're clearly too good at this game to deal with my incessant postings. What did I even say about you? My post was a comment on the two votes in quick succession to lynch South. Not everything is about you. On July 24 2010 16:04 tree.hugger wrote: Mafia have been posting, they always do, and we should be able to find them based on evidence, not lack of evidence.
Not that I don't think southrawrea could easily be mafia, but I want to lynch someone who is active and who has people attached to him. I should've been more clear. I'd like to lynch a mafia with those characteristics. On July 25 2010 05:22 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 04:18 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: Well the excrement has hit the air conditioning.
I need to think about this.
I'm actually not sure if the correct play is to lynch South here.
The feces has impacted the ventilation? This is going to require some thinking... A counter-claim here doesn't make a whole lot of sense for the mafia, I think they'd rather fake a DT claim, then counter claim this. But... Stating the obvious: -Do not roleclaim to anyone. -Either Tricode, citi.zen, or South is mafia, but likely only one of them. On July 25 2010 05:34 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 05:24 SouthRawrea wrote: Look..I've been busy for the past few days anyways. Do you want me to go take a picture of everything that I've been doing in the backyard in the pouring rain? Just one yes is all I need. This is my first time ever playing a forum mafia game and I'm not used to this way of posting extremely long posts and having every single word scrutinized. The few times I've played the game people would say their reports, and chat in a chatbox. Not to mention this is filled with much more text. I've never even encountered the Mad Hatter role. If you look at the game EpicMafia, although they have like 50 roles, they don't have a single one that I know of that resembles the one in this game. I figured that it was a town-favoured role that was only supposed to be used later in the game when you had a higher chance of hitting the mafia with your bombs. Hence why I only placed one on the person I was most suspicious of at the time. What we could be doing here is giving citi.zen all the info he needs if he is mafia to win the game for that side. DT claims especially. I'm sold. Vote citi.zen. On July 25 2010 07:54 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 07:29 youngminii wrote: This is ridiculous, I can't believe this many people are actually voting for citi.zen. Let me say it one more time.
There is more information to be gained if SouthRawr is lynched than if citi.zen is lynched. Also, you are a mafia noob, not just a mafia, not just a noob. I think we gain plenty of information about this, seeing as how we have a 50% chance at catching mafia, and this is a split vote. Role list analyzing is going to be cake after today. I call upon every player in this game to vote for either citi.zen or South. One of them is confirmed mafia. There is no hiding under this "I think they're all innocent" nonsense. Pick one.
But more importantly, pick citi.zen. There are four possible outcomes: If we lynch citi.zen the Mafia: Then it's the coup de grâce. We've taken out their best player, and we have two confirmed town members to form a circle around. If we lynch citi.zen the Mad Hatter: Then we still have an intact town circle with a DT and a person who was checked. Also, citi.zen's bombs go off, and two people die. It's not unreasonable to assume that citi.zen, being an experienced mafia player and scum-hunter will have caught at least one mafia in his net. I'd trust his bomb placement, providing he has them. If we lynch Southrawrea the Mafia: Then we've taken out the newest, or one of the newest members of the mafia team. That's about it. If we lynch Southrawrea the Mad Hatter: Then chaoser dies—another player who is newer, and not really driving any buses. I know youngminii thinks he's mafia, but I think that's just silly. Decide for yourself, but I'd trust citi.zen's judgment in bomb placing over Southrawrea. *** I think out of these four options, assuming for a moment that the probability of either being mafia is 50/50, then the obvious better outcomes will come from lynching citi.zen. I hardly think there's anything to recommend Southrawrea as a natural mafia, or even a natural mafia selection to go out and try to sabotage this plan. On the flip side, pretty much the only player on TL who I would expect to pull something as crazy as a MH/town circle claim as mafia is citi.zen. I think, if we're talking character types, citi.zen fits, and Southrawrea does not. On July 25 2010 07:59 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 07:50 citi.zen wrote:On July 25 2010 07:47 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 25 2010 07:41 lakrismamma wrote:On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
see bolded part. He wasn't actually cleared with no counterclaim for a reason I listed earlier which was this
IF you were the mad hatter and you saw someone claim your role, You know instantly he's most likely red. You then wait a day, move your bomb to him get lynched following day (confirms both of you). Instead, he said "if no one claims im legit." He did however get a claim, regardless, his point was moot regardless.
Agaisn you are using the fact that people are looking up to you to present some solutions that are not evident at all.Not everybody would play like this I sure as hell wouldn't. On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote: I most likely wont trust citizen until he proves to be trustworthy. He is far too inactive at this point for the plan he proposed. He has legimate concerns raised against him, a counter claim, etc.... Where is he? Nowhere to be found, instead people who have been semi inactive all game have decided to vouch for him. It comes of as extremely suspicious.
Also, it has no matter where he placed his bombs. If he has them on reds or not. A dt circle is still confirmed, and as much as dead townies suck to have, they do lower the dt pool of checked targets finding reds faster. Anyone who flips red dies, then its a hunt for the gf. If you find three of one blue role, boom you found him, etc...
I find it weird that you can chose between two people, oneof them is mafia. One you have already made a case against and told that he is most likely mafia. Still you vote on the other guy. Was you play earlier a scam to get people to trust you because you found Southrawrea as mafia? Simple, i based one persons scum level based on activity, and the person I am now voting for put out an option with holes and not only has not refuted them, has barely even touched the hatter claim. Instead he is rallying on "trust" to get him through without being here. What to you is more scummy? Someone proposing a make or break strategy with the idea of "trust me" while vanishing into the night, or someone who desperately wants to live. As for hatter play, maybe you wouldn't play like that BUT I am giving a logical idea of what someone might do. Just because you wouldn't do it, nor consider it a viable option is odd as your assuming someone else is completely legit, or that people always play this game under a normal sense of "logic". Not considering it a viable option because you wouldn't do it as other players might. You know offering South hasn't saved you, don't you? You just dug the hole deeper. You realized you've essentially just claimed that out of the three Town KP roles that have been claimed, two of them are mafia? You know that right? Where's the fourth claim? We need it now. Find the fourth claim. On July 25 2010 08:05 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:02 SiNiquity wrote:On July 25 2010 07:50 zeks wrote:On July 25 2010 07:48 BrownBear wrote:On July 25 2010 07:40 SiNiquity wrote: I bet Tricode and BC are cackling maniacally at their good fortune. Kill a medic, claim 3rd hit + protection (both unverifiable), draw out the other 2 KP roles. Let them kill each other. Bonus is that they're both hatters instead of vigilantes.
So much for 50/50. You bring up a very good point here, and I think everyone should read it. It is still possible that Tricode is the liar, and there are 2 Mad Hatters in the game. I would think Tricode's story is the most believable. Same, which is why I'm not voting for him. Had citi.zen said nothing, we would likely be lynching Tricode today to verify his claim (better safe than sorry, etc). If Tricode is innocent, then why should citi.zen say anything... to get in the circles before a counter-claim? But why? Why not just let us lynch Tricode, confirm his vigi-ness and do all this mess next day? Unless he's afraid DT circles would connect before then? This seems like a strong argument to me. Why would citi.zen come out now and not tomorrow, after we've lynched Tricode (and likely gained nothing)? What does Mafia have to gain from a ploy like this? ## Unvote citi.zen## Vote SouthrawreaCiti.zen if you're Mafia, props for fucking with my head. You believe that BC, Tricode, and Southrawrea are all mafia? Because that's what citi.zen has been forced into arguing now, and that seems to be the point you're trying to push as well. I don't think we were anywhere close to lynching Tricode for confirmation, I'd call the premise of your argument unbelievable to begin with. He was our biggest resource, and there literally was no bandwagon for him forming at all. On July 25 2010 08:07 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:05 zeks wrote: People really need to evaluate how risky it was for citi.zen to claim the last MH role after most of the town agreeing with Tricode.
SR claiming however has a lot less repercussions than citi.zen.
Mafia is already out with a lead in this game is it even necessary to play such a huge gambit with citi.zen? What is the point of even taking such a risk? If it was any other player on TL, I'd be arguing this too. citi.zen loves these gambits though, and he's pulled them off time and time again. He shot L with no warning in the last game, and he completely made up a role that didn't exist to save himself in one of the other mafia games. (Can't remember.) citi.zen has balls. On July 25 2010 08:10 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:06 SiNiquity wrote:On July 25 2010 08:00 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 07:59 tree.hugger wrote:On July 25 2010 07:50 citi.zen wrote:On July 25 2010 07:47 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 25 2010 07:41 lakrismamma wrote:On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
see bolded part. He wasn't actually cleared with no counterclaim for a reason I listed earlier which was this
IF you were the mad hatter and you saw someone claim your role, You know instantly he's most likely red. You then wait a day, move your bomb to him get lynched following day (confirms both of you). Instead, he said "if no one claims im legit." He did however get a claim, regardless, his point was moot regardless.
Agaisn you are using the fact that people are looking up to you to present some solutions that are not evident at all.Not everybody would play like this I sure as hell wouldn't. On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote: I most likely wont trust citizen until he proves to be trustworthy. He is far too inactive at this point for the plan he proposed. He has legimate concerns raised against him, a counter claim, etc.... Where is he? Nowhere to be found, instead people who have been semi inactive all game have decided to vouch for him. It comes of as extremely suspicious.
Also, it has no matter where he placed his bombs. If he has them on reds or not. A dt circle is still confirmed, and as much as dead townies suck to have, they do lower the dt pool of checked targets finding reds faster. Anyone who flips red dies, then its a hunt for the gf. If you find three of one blue role, boom you found him, etc...
I find it weird that you can chose between two people, oneof them is mafia. One you have already made a case against and told that he is most likely mafia. Still you vote on the other guy. Was you play earlier a scam to get people to trust you because you found Southrawrea as mafia? Simple, i based one persons scum level based on activity, and the person I am now voting for put out an option with holes and not only has not refuted them, has barely even touched the hatter claim. Instead he is rallying on "trust" to get him through without being here. What to you is more scummy? Someone proposing a make or break strategy with the idea of "trust me" while vanishing into the night, or someone who desperately wants to live. As for hatter play, maybe you wouldn't play like that BUT I am giving a logical idea of what someone might do. Just because you wouldn't do it, nor consider it a viable option is odd as your assuming someone else is completely legit, or that people always play this game under a normal sense of "logic". Not considering it a viable option because you wouldn't do it as other players might. You know offering South hasn't saved you, don't you? You just dug the hole deeper. You realized you've essentially just claimed that out of the three Town KP roles that have been claimed, two of them are mafia? You know that right? Where's the fourth claim? We need it now. Find the fourth claim. How does this post correlate in any way to the post you just quoted? Yea idk what tree is on. Tricode red => BC red, Tricode not red => BC _____ [aka implies nothing] I take that back, you're both right. I thought for a moment that the relationship between the two was the inverse of what is actually is. Fair point, but it just means that citi.zen didn't dig the whole I thought he dug. Doesn't make his post much better... On July 25 2010 08:16 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:07 youngminii wrote: I call upon every player in this game to vote for either citi.zen or South. One of them is confirmed mafia. There is no hiding under this "I think they're all innocent" nonsense. Pick one.
But more importantly, pick SouthRawrea.
There are four possible outcomes: If we lynch citi.zen the Mafia: Then we've taken out one red. We have a town member to form a circle around (SouthRawrea), and this player is 100% new to forum mafia.
If we lynch citi.zen the Mad Hatter: Then ASSUMING citi.zen's already given the second DT party (his inactivity cough) AND if we rule out the possibility of TWO DT groups claiming to him, then we have a town circle with a DT. Two people needlessly die and if you all really think that citi.zen's scumhunting abilities are so good, then why don't you trust him on his SouthRawrea hunt?
If we lynch Southrawrea the Mafia: Then we gain a whole load of information with many implications (unfortunately no one listens to me anymore). We've got BC backed into a corner, we've got chaoser (imo) and a few more, AND we have a huge townie group with TWO DTs working together.
If we lynch Southrawrea the Mad Hatter: Then chaoser dies. Only one death compared to two if citi.zen's Mad Hatter. I do think he's mafia and maybe you would too (directed at tree.hugger) if you got off your high horse and read my analysis posts once in a while.
***
God I can't believe how fast you all just follow tree.hugger's bias 'situation report'. You're cherry-picking and plagiarizing. We gain the same amount of info from vote lists no matter whom is lynched, since this is a polarized vote. The question is of who's bombs you want to go off, or who you'd rather take out if they were both mafia, as they have equal chances to be both. For both answers, the clear answer is citi.zen. And that's full of nonsense. How come we don't go along with citi.zen's analysis on South? Well, dur dur, because if he's mafia he's not likely to help the town out with some accurate analysis is he? If citi.zen truly is town aligned, and he knows he's on the block, do you think he'd honestly leave the second day DT check out of the loop? That's absurd. And you've accused me repeatedly of not reading your analysis. That's not accurate, I have and I think it's junk. Again, there are two variables here that make citi.zen the better lynch, and they're the only two that matter. Bombs, and Skill. And it's citi.zen both times. On July 25 2010 08:44 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:38 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On July 25 2010 08:33 chaoser wrote: guys, please respond to the VERY scummy thing that he did which is keep the triple claim for DT from town. That's VERY WEIRD. Yeah he says that he's leaving, knowing he could be dead by the time he gets back, and doesn't mention that? Aside: Aren't you glad we killed DTA? If he was still alive, we had a vigi claim, we had two mad hatters claim, AND we had all of DTA's wink and nod posts about mad hattering this would be so much worse. That's why you don't dink around as town. DTA is a good enough player to know that he would've had to claim or non-claim in that situation. Lynching DTA was a poor mistake. On July 25 2010 09:39 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 09:33 citi.zen wrote: The townies who voted with the mafia need to stop playing this game. Forever. This is as clear cut as it gets: BC, Inf, Chaos, Tree.hugger, South are red. Perhaps after you lynch me you will... I don't know... go after one of them. You have a double lynch to use.
By the way: to avoid this dumb town situation, the mad hatter is actually the SECOND player my DT checked, not myself. I claimed in his place to keep them safe for one more night. Now they have all they need to accurately place their bombs. I am plain vanilla town, as you are about to find out when I flip.
Remember: BC, Inf, Chaos, Tree.hugger, South. Plus whoever fake claimed. If this saves you, I'm going to furious. If you flip green, I'm going to be furious. This was something that should've been claimed a long time ago. But at least it makes your lynch casualty-free. And not only that, this doesn't change anything. It's still a 50/50 between your version of events and Southrawrea's. If you die green, then we can take your word for it. Fair enough. So nothing changes. On July 25 2010 09:46 tree.hugger wrote:It's iNfuNdiBuLuM. This isn't funny, it's embarassing. On July 25 2010 09:49 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 09:48 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:lol guys i don't really care if he purposely types my name wrong. it takes more effort to do that than write 'infun' but i do appreciate the support He should show some respect to other people playing the game. That doesn't mean that you need to take your foot off the pedal when going after mafia, but this stuff? It's just petty, and has no place in these games. On July 25 2010 10:04 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 10:00 BrownBear wrote:On July 25 2010 09:58 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 09:55 bumatlarge wrote:Just wanna go over tricodes posts to find something + Show Spoiler +On July 18 2010 07:56 Tricode wrote: From that list above i believe it can be a agreed on a majority is saying we should lynch an inactive. Other then that I don't really feel like we have enough information yet to even try to snipe someone....well unless they're is a very stupid mafia member. 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.
On July 18 2010 10:45 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +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. Keep using that reasoning through the whole game. Mind you that there are clever players and mafia will always try to manipulate the game by lying. Add to the equation everyone's fear of being lynched. Then add the fact we have no clues. Mafia don't have to really say anything. You would have to leave the game to a dt (if they find someone and if they come out) to tell you who is red. Then add the fact if that DT is really a dt. But like i said, try using your reasoning through out the whole game if we just kept abstaining cause we aren't sure all the time. On July 21 2010 04:02 Tricode wrote: Hey just finished catching up, sorry for inactivity had to drop my dad off the airport last night and then went to a relatives house. Also every time i refresh or hit next page, it seems like you guys would just add another page on me!
There was just so much to read!
As for now, I find BrownBear's ideas are unhelpful. Wanting to have our vets reveal themselves. Might be a good plan for other circumstances, but in your one and only example that you gave where your scenario worked, you seemed to have some godly player who was just able to survive for once. That doesn't mean that same scenario can apply here (no offense to you vets).
Also this doesn't take the heat off BrownBear for his posts earlier and inactivity especially how BB voted. It seems like you just analyzed a situation real quick came up with a game plan to throw people off your back. I feel you are a better player then how you are presenting yourself this game and I will be awaiting to see more of your responses before making a vote.
Also a few of you seem to be causing annoying chaos. I would keep an eye on these people. They could possibly be a mafia member who are trying to be active, but just annoying enough to act like a stupid townie and cause confusion. Like DTA (though he could just think acting like this would keep him alive in the game for what ever purposes he has in mind, even just being a townie that just wants to avoid mafia attention).
For w/e reason (I'm desperately looking for a job/Real life shit/ video games) if I am absent for the time being I will vote for BB for how odd he is so far in this game with inactivity, his vote, his suggestion that seems to only distract attention from him, what others have pointed out about him, and I feel he hasn't portrayed himself in this game like he did in the last game I played with him where he had more of a dominate presence that helped the town. My vote will change if there is a better candidate.
##Vote BrownBear On July 22 2010 12:07 Tricode wrote: This is pathetic, it took me a whole freaken day just to catch up to all your posts and even then I had to skim through some of them and the crap that you guys filled it up with.
There is just way too much chaos and this game is moving faster then I can keep up.
The only reason I see for killing Darth is because his nonsense is causing more confusion to the game more then others, but there are still others who are causing confusion.
With this madness I am abstaining so I can watch and see what unfolds. Hopefully everyone can start watching and reading to things more carefully instead of cluster fucking the thread with useless information that does not help the case or killing someone for hindrance reasoning.
Though I am believing we are in need of a plan and looking into analyzing what people say more. Though if people like DTA keep their shit up, it will become more difficult to do this cause it is distracting.
Also please people don't just see one little action and instantly call out mafia. Try to watch the person and build up a reasonable case. I am betting a portion of you are just confused and not sure what to do and just voting with the crowd or who ever argues the most aggressively.
For now I am abstaining my vote like i said, for reasons of just wanting to have a bit more solidness of reasoning in who I pick and vote for.
##unvote ##vote abstain
So far he doesn't mention BC once, which I find odd. If he planned on hitting him, it was certainly spur of the moment. Why wouldn't he pick one of the people he mentioned? I also find it weird that he now supports BC :/ sounds fairly wishy washy. On July 23 2010 16:11 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:07 d3_crescentia wrote:On July 23 2010 15:52 SiNiquity wrote: Right. But there's .. *double checks BM's post* 12 townies, 7 blues remaining. So the Vigi revealing gives the Mafia a 6/18 (33.33%) chance instead of 6/19 (31.58%) chance for hitting a "real blue."
But there's gotta be some other catch I'm missing. Or maybe I'm just wary of people roleclaiming in general which is why I'm getting that "vibe" from this plan. Don't think there's any real reason why mafia would be operating by chance. I feel like they're just trying to snipe blues, or people that would be useful. If the vigi reveals themselves + target, we can lynch them to confirm this information. Targeting Roffles or Jayme would reduce chances of BC being mafia since the mafia had no way of planning to put in one or two hits. One thing stands in the way of that, and that's BC's abilities to fake it. If BC himself was targeted by the vigi, then simply by lynching the vigi we can make some clear conclusions about BC. I don't really see the mafia making a fake claim if they know we're going to do this, considering that a 1-1 trade for them isn't very good, though it is possible they'd do this. If the vigi really DID flip blue, then it's harder to say but I believe it would semi-confirm BC. Am I making sense? I'm not sure I am. It's late. Yes and now after letting the vigi know you are going to lynch him lol, how do you propose in finding this vig? soft claims vig? On July 23 2010 16:24 Tricode wrote: Meh fine I guess, I will take one for the team.
I was the vig. I was aiming at BC
Reasons: Who the fuck didn't see it coming from me?
Also to the med who protected BC. I hate you with a true passion.
When you guys do kill me to prove what I am saying, I will be honest, I tried reading this thread but it is hard with flame wars and ridiculous claims and finger pointing.
The person under most of my suspicion is youngminii. From comments he had in the beginning when he seemed afraid that BC was accusing him as being mafia (which BC wasn't). To attacking and finger pointing anyone he had a chance to do so at.
Everyone was scummy for what ever lame reason and he tried to push it hard until he could jump to the next person. He jumped a lot from what I can tell.
Now knowing all of you, you will probably say what I am saying is B.S. and just lynch me.
In which I don't care and go ahead to prove what ever crap you want to believe in. After that I hope you all play well and good luck you will all need it.
If for w/e reason i do live. I will contribute w/e and do w/e to help the town, but to be honest I can't really keep up with how much you guys post. Might be just because of personal issues or something i have going on.
Also everyone should listen to BC keep him alive as long as possible. I trust him and so should you.
You will get your proof of innocence after my death. OK um wow, he says he thinks youngminii is suspicious, and starts saying he doesnt care if he gets lynched, which kinda makes it either seem like an apathetic towny who failed or a really deep scum trying to get away with being a vig, which in itself is pretty ridiculous. Says to trust BC which seems really fishy. Why is he trusting the person he tried to kill? On July 23 2010 16:35 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:33 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 23 2010 16:29 d3_crescentia wrote: wait what
that post doesn't even make sense
you aimed at BC but you don't want him to die? why the hell would you do that Ask fishball, hes done it to me once in the past. And I would of gotten away with it if it wasn't for that meddling medic! God way to ruin everything. Both he and BC play it off like D3 never even accused them of that... On July 23 2010 16:47 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:38 Protactinium wrote: Wow... uh... words cannot express how sad I am that my hour and some minutes spent writing that post just went to waste.
Still, read it anyway. I don't think Tricode is lying (though why would you target somebody you want to remain alive?) but just in case...
Good night town.
##Vote: Abstain ##Vote: Double Lynch You are the only one who has figured me out this whole game. Though I guess you don't know me, if you read my earlier posts I mention how I only join mafia games in hopes that one day I can kill BC. Since now I used up my vig, that dream has to remain for another game. Now I am basically a green townie with the vig name. So since I can't kill him might as well not be a true douche about it. What good would advocating his death and lying do? That would be beyond douchey of me if I did. Either case, my dream failed. So you gunned or him because you wanted to, how very untown-like I really dont feel comfortable keeping someone like this around, if there going to put some secret desire to kill someone for fun. And I don't think tricode is some noob player, which is weird. On July 24 2010 11:04 Tricode wrote: ##vote Abstain
Place holder.
I want to see what everyone says before I place my vote. On July 24 2010 15:55 Tricode wrote: BC seems confident about southrawrea and does have good analysis on him. And I would like to lynch mafia this time round.
So
Changing my vote
##unvote youngmini
##Vote: southrawrea On July 25 2010 06:50 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 06:47 SouthRawrea wrote:On July 25 2010 06:46 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:31 zeks wrote:On July 25 2010 06:25 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:17 zeks wrote: #vote SouthRawrea
Mafia is essentially against a wall so they pushed their most inactive member out to die
How does that make any sense mafia is against a wall so they sacrificed someone who was going to be lynched anyway? if southrawrea is red it doesn't buy the mafia any extra time if he gets lynched 1. His claim is an effort to save himself and get our main man citi.zen killed in the process 2. SouthRawrea is obviously expendable 3. Town organization is becoming a LEGIT THREAT - we've forced the action on them so now they came up with an aggressive reply with South claiming. Scum probably wrote his posts up for him rofl Okay, I can see this line of thinking now. However, so far 1, seems to be backfiring since South has already garnered several votes. And i doubt he had his posts written for him; they're not persuasive at all. Put yourself in the mafias shoes. If citizen is really the hatter, how would you disrupt the plan? The strategies i detailed in my longish post on page 96 (i think its 96) involving false DT claims would be much more powerful and harder to combat than sending out SouthRawrea to meekly claim that he's the real Mad Hatter. Like I said before, never assume the mafia are idiots. The other possibility no one has mentioned is that BC and Tricode are both red and we have 2 Hatters (possible yes... realistic probably not) Oh wow.. never even considered 2 hatters... uh... There is only 2kp roles. So it's unlikely that there are 2 mad hatters when I'm the vig. Also instead of defending yourself, you seem to like to show your hard work that is irrelevant to this game and does not prove anything other then your busy. On July 25 2010 06:57 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 06:53 SouthRawrea wrote:On July 25 2010 06:50 Tricode wrote:On July 25 2010 06:47 SouthRawrea wrote:On July 25 2010 06:46 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:31 zeks wrote:On July 25 2010 06:25 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:17 zeks wrote: #vote SouthRawrea
Mafia is essentially against a wall so they pushed their most inactive member out to die
How does that make any sense mafia is against a wall so they sacrificed someone who was going to be lynched anyway? if southrawrea is red it doesn't buy the mafia any extra time if he gets lynched 1. His claim is an effort to save himself and get our main man citi.zen killed in the process 2. SouthRawrea is obviously expendable 3. Town organization is becoming a LEGIT THREAT - we've forced the action on them so now they came up with an aggressive reply with South claiming. Scum probably wrote his posts up for him rofl Okay, I can see this line of thinking now. However, so far 1, seems to be backfiring since South has already garnered several votes. And i doubt he had his posts written for him; they're not persuasive at all. Put yourself in the mafias shoes. If citizen is really the hatter, how would you disrupt the plan? The strategies i detailed in my longish post on page 96 (i think its 96) involving false DT claims would be much more powerful and harder to combat than sending out SouthRawrea to meekly claim that he's the real Mad Hatter. Like I said before, never assume the mafia are idiots. The other possibility no one has mentioned is that BC and Tricode are both red and we have 2 Hatters (possible yes... realistic probably not) Oh wow.. never even considered 2 hatters... uh... There is only 2kp roles. So it's unlikely that there are 2 mad hatters when I'm the vig. Also instead of defending yourself, you seem to like to show your hard work that is irrelevant to this game and does not prove anything other then your busy. I just defended myself against zeks didn't I D You just asked Zek "why don't you suspect citizen", that isn't really a reason why not to look at you still. You were just trying to bounce off your FoS to citizen instead of defending yourself and giving valid reasons in why we should trust you over citizen. Says he agrees with BC, but doesn't change his vote from south to citi, and posts after a little bit. Thats really suspicious in my book when you add everything up. If a mad hatter gets lynched tonight, I think we need to go after this guy. Hopefully one of them put a bomb on BC, because that would help tremendously in figuring some stuff out. Also hope the DT situation gets resolved very soon... Tricode has an ndying hatred of BC and always wants to kill him. That is a fact of nature. Mafia constants: Chezinu cannot be trusted to say anything useful Ace and BM share a deep hatred of each other Flamewheel is adorable Abenson sucks at mafia Brownbear will fuck up if you ever give him the medic role (and Korynne will be sad) Tricode will try to kill BC every chance he gets Meeple will always protect mafia. L will try to bandwagon Ace On July 25 2010 10:17 tree.hugger wrote: Well, at least we know stuff now. On July 25 2010 10:20 tree.hugger wrote: As I said, we still have an intact town circle, and to make matters better, we've still got the MH left. That's all well and good.
You can suspect me all you want, but basically the more pressing issue is South v. BC/Tricode. We need a good way of figuring that out and only one/two people know.
Either that, or citi.zen's MH is the godfather, which would qualify as a TL Mafia pimpest play, imo. This is the citizen/BC/South posts. He votes double lynch and Citi.zen with the reason that his bombs would be better placed and he would be more likely to try a daring plan. + Show Spoiler +On July 25 2010 10:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 10:22 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 10:20 tree.hugger wrote: As I said, we still have an intact town circle, and to make matters better, we've still got the MH left. That's all well and good.
You can suspect me all you want, but basically the more pressing issue is South v. BC/Tricode. We need a good way of figuring that out and only one/two people know.
Either that, or citi.zen's MH is the godfather, which would qualify as a TL Mafia pimpest play, imo. Haha yeah. Wait so.............. Out of South, Tricode, and Citizens "Mad hatter" ONE OF THEM IS MAFIA I think after tonight, citi.zen's MH should claim. Meaning, the mafia still has to worry about him tonight, but after that, the MH's usefulness to town is probably more as a visible member in this fight. And I know that's like asking the MH/GF to just come out and be a town suspect, when they have nothing to lose personally from being hidden, BUT, the value to the town is pretty obvious, (yes?). On July 25 2010 10:43 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 10:30 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 10:27 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 10:25 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 10:23 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 10:22 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: I dunno how to make this any clearer:
Being Townie 101
1. Do not lie to town. 1a. Do not pretend to be blue.
Being Blue 101
1. Do not lie to town. 2. Do not give your blue role to someone who isn't fully confirmed, especially not in the first couple of days.
We've had so much trouble over the past 3 days because of the refusal of good players to stick to the fundamentals. Some people want to be flashy, they wanna be a hero, they are impatient, etc. The key to town is to act as a crowd, to not stick out. That way, the mafia sticks out and gets caught. When town members get these bright ideas about goofing around to draw out reds they just end up sticking out themselves. The problem is that we were going to let young into the circle yet as soon as citizen turns out to be green(not even blue) he just recklessly posts it. Lol 'recklessly'. I warned you. Yeah, but right away? Heck. HE WASNT EVEN BLUE! You can't deny that citizen had been playing weird. He had been. Everyone knows that, and its evidence from his plans within plans and fakeclaiming. Youngmini we were doing a logical play to figure out if your mafia. It didn't reveal the true dt. 'logical play', okay. This is the most far fetched story I've ever seen come out of a mafia game and I don't care if you're green/blue/red at this point. The majority of the people on the list make up mafia and if you need to be sacrificed to get rid of that entire list, then so be it. You say things like this all the time, and you never really back it up. You throw around words like "flawed" and "inconsistent" like you're the sole arbiter of truth, and that your claims are so self-evident, that they ought to fight for themselves in the thread of public opinion. Part of this game is guessing. Part of this game is skill. Part of this game is persistence. Part of this game is the ability to work with others. You have these abilities in varying qualities, but you don't have the most important trait in mafia, which is patience, and cool headedness. Lynching citi.zen made a lot of sense. It was basically a way of confirming one player over another in a near 50/50 set-up. citi.zen had been on the radar of a ton of people from the game's beginning, including my own. He had a history of useless posting, just as he had a history of making grandiose gambles. But he screwed up hugely today, first by falsely claiming blue, and second by somewhat arrogantly not defending himself. This undoubtably intensified some people's convictions of his guilt, but if you took the chance of him and South being 50/50 mafia, then he was still the obvious choice. His outcomes were better than South's outcomes, and it made logical sense to kill him as a test of this. Unfortunately, the fact that he WASN'T the MH makes this somewhat worse. A new possibility; that of the MH being the GF is now fair game, and his analysis and "bombs" will be missed. He claimed that way to late, and I really don't have any sympathy for him because of that. That said, what you've been right on since the day post is that this isn't over yet, not by a long shot. It's the mafia's move now, and if they continue to suck at killing blues, then the town is in a solid position. We have a split vote today, with only a couple outliers (we need to be focusing on those as well) and so we should be able, as you're saying, to isolate the mafia pretty easily. There's only one wrinkle, and I hesitate to even add this, because we're probably screwed if it's the case. IF citi.zen's MH is the godfather, then we can assume that our two detectives will die tonight. This puts us in a huge hole, but it also makes SouthRawrea look innocent. Which means that the mafia was able to split it's votes between both candidates. At which point, we're done. Hence why citi.zen's fake blue claim could turn out to be so devastating. Here's what On July 25 2010 11:03 tree.hugger wrote: Basically, it works like this:
We lynched citi.zen because in doing so, we would find out which he was, and thus Southrawrea would be the other. Of course, we could've done the same thing by lynching Southrawrea, but due to suspicions I, and many others held, along with the advantage of catching a bigger fish, or using the skill of a superior hatter, we decided that citi.zen was the better target.
However, the fact that citi.zen is NOT the MH candidate, makes our choice a mistake. Whereas lynching Southrawrea would've had the same effect; either validating citi.zen and his friend/Tricode, lynching citi.zen means that we still have a third option on the table; namely that citi.zen was a pawn of the GF. And now we can't ask him about it. Not only that, but if this is the case, then the GF knows both detectives.
Or Southrawrea could be mafia. Or Tricode and Bc could be mafia.
We should've had two choices, but now we still have three.
So here's what we need to do. If citi.zen's MH was the mafia, then we could probably call gg right now, because we're done. At any rate, our detectives should make sure to confide in someone that they trust, because they'll both die. A suicide bomber is likely in this scenario, and that means Southrawrea would die as well, leaving a total of five town deaths and one mafia death in a night.
But because of how bleak this other outlook is, I think we have no choice but to reject it. We can't win the game that way, and so we shouldn't even consider it, and pretend like citi.zen's death has given us the two-pronged choice that we aimed for. On July 25 2010 11:09 tree.hugger wrote: Which is why, after tonight, I think we'll know if citi.zen's Mad Hatter was legitimate or not. If all hell doesn't break lose tonight, then citi.zen's Mad Hatter MUST roleclaim, and we should all roleclaim to them. That way, they can put the blues in touch with each other.
If the Mad Hatter in that scenario is killed tonight, then the detective MUST roleclaim. It's that simple. We can confirm these players simply on the basis of necessity.
I would expect counter-claims at this point. I would therefore advise one of the players involved to take measures that would confirm you in the future. I hope you can think of something plausible.
This is our chance. On July 25 2010 11:10 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 11:07 zeks wrote: Let's blow the real taco stand.
Citi.zen was my mouthpiece.
I am the real mad hatter.
My bombs are on BC and SouthRawrea.
I am missing a medic and a DT. Claim to me if you wish.
I'm right here. Kill me.
Oh hell, why? I was writing my post, goddammit! On July 25 2010 11:12 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 11:05 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 11:03 tree.hugger wrote: Basically, it works like this:
We lynched citi.zen because in doing so, we would find out which he was, and thus Southrawrea would be the other. Of course, we could've done the same thing by lynching Southrawrea, but due to suspicions I, and many others held, along with the advantage of catching a bigger fish, or using the skill of a superior hatter, we decided that citi.zen was the better target.
However, the fact that citi.zen is NOT the MH candidate, makes our choice a mistake. Whereas lynching Southrawrea would've had the same effect; either validating citi.zen and his friend/Tricode, lynching citi.zen means that we still have a third option on the table; namely that citi.zen was a pawn of the GF. And now we can't ask him about it. Not only that, but if this is the case, then the GF knows both detectives.
Or Southrawrea could be mafia. Or Tricode and Bc could be mafia.
We should've had two choices, but now we still have three.
So here's what we need to do. If citi.zen's MH was the mafia, then we could probably call gg right now, because we're done. At any rate, our detectives should make sure to confide in someone that they trust, because they'll both die. A suicide bomber is likely in this scenario, and that means Southrawrea would die as well, leaving a total of five town deaths and one mafia death in a night.
But because of how bleak this other outlook is, I think we have no choice but to reject it. We can't win the game that way, and so we shouldn't even consider it, and pretend like citi.zen's death has given us the two-pronged choice that we aimed for. I'm forced to believe that this is a mafia attempt at covering up the situation at hand. I've tried all game to ignore tree.hugger's scummy posts because I had an initial suspicion that he was town which I clearly followed throughout the whole game. If he isn't mafia I just have to /facepalm really hard. We are following my list, even if I'm being over-excessively loud about it. What am I covering up? What? What about that post is incorrect? On July 25 2010 11:13 tree.hugger wrote: I'm going to take some time off from this game. I'm sick of analyzing things only to have people turn out to not have been telling the truth, and then for the town to be worse off because of it.
And I'm sick of Youngminii. On July 25 2010 11:55 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 11:15 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 11:13 tree.hugger wrote: I'm going to take some time off from this game. I'm sick of analyzing things only to have people turn out to not have been telling the truth, and then for the town to be worse off because of it.
And I'm sick of Youngminii. Coming from the man who said shit about people not being respectful. Look at yourself. This is something I think is important, and I'm not going to let you turn it against me. I think that, whatever Infundibulum thinks about your mis-spelling his name , it became tiresome, unfunny, and annoying. The fact that you repeatedly used it as a bludgeon to get your point across that he was suspicious or mafia was an immature attempt to be demeaning, and, even if he's made of tougher stuff than to be bothered by it, I didn't like to see it as an observer. These games can get heated, but commentary should consist of what occurs in the game, and should stay out of what doesn't. Your posting has been nothing but negativity from the moment you began this game, and while I appreciate your enthusiasm and drive, it's not fun to read through page after page of you flaming people, and engaging in petty disputes. I have no judgments upon you as a person, please know that, but as a mafia player, your style saddens me. I hope you'll take the time to moderate your words and respond to this in a manner that isn't caustic or agressive. If you have criticisms of the way I treat people in this game, then please tell me as well, because I think we can always be nicer to people, and I think in the heat of the moment, it's easy to forget that. I'd love to continue this discussion in pm's. On July 26 2010 08:09 tree.hugger wrote: On July 26 2010 08:14 tree.hugger wrote: So that vote when we were choosing between citi.zen and Southrawrea because both were roleclaiming MH, and only one of them could be correct?
Well it turns out that when citi.zen claimed, he was actually doing it as a proxy, so in fact the entire assumption based on that lynch was invalid. Should've lynched Southrawrea then. Damn we screwed that up. Except Southrawrea was acting as a proxy for BC so in fact the whole reason between us lynching people the last day was a card tower of lies.
Hahahaha! Ahaha! .... Ha!....
...
I advocate the immediate lynching of Zeks and BC because if we're going down, we might as well take out the dishonest anti-town players who got us into this mess. On July 26 2010 09:37 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 08:48 BrownBear wrote:On July 26 2010 08:14 tree.hugger wrote: So that vote when we were choosing between citi.zen and Southrawrea because both were roleclaiming MH, and only one of them could be correct?
Well it turns out that when citi.zen claimed, he was actually doing it as a proxy, so in fact the entire assumption based on that lynch was invalid. Should've lynched Southrawrea then. Damn we screwed that up. Except Southrawrea was acting as a proxy for BC so in fact the whole reason between us lynching people the last day was a card tower of lies.
Hahahaha! Ahaha! .... Ha!....
...
I advocate the immediate lynching of Zeks and BC because if we're going down, we might as well take out the dishonest anti-town players who got us into this mess. *ducks in* Even after their plan has completely gone to shit, he's still trying to save South. Unbelievable. *ducks out* No, let's kill South too. I wanted to kill the people who got people to proxy for them, but after that we should probably lynch South and Tricode, and then start over. I have no problem killing South. On July 26 2010 09:47 tree.hugger wrote: Did anybody involved in this, anyone, just stop to think for one moment that this was bad for the town? Did anyone who proxy'd someone to claim for them realize, when they saw my posts about citi.zen being the better lynch, or youngminii's posts about South being the better lynch, that the town was making a crucial decision based upon people lying?
Did it bother you, Zeks, South, BC that he that the town was making a decision based upon facts that weren't true? I mean, the whole premise of that lynch was to rolecheck competing claims. We didn't do that. We didn't rule out anything. We're back at Day 2, and on Day 2, we were back at Day 1.
And yet nobody thought for just a second and realized that through their incredible scheming , they were shooting the town in the foot. Unbelievable.
Of course it all makes sense now. I remarked to Infun that South's 'claim' was suspicious because he never once said the words "mad hatter" in them. He just heavily implied it. I said several times in the thread that citi.zen being citi.zen, he's probably making some ballsy play. But I guess I was just naive, I guess I just assumed that someone, on either side, would play with their brain, and not with their ego. I guess I assumed that at least one side had the town's interests at heart. But having been hyuked by both sides?
It's really annoying. On July 26 2010 11:33 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 09:56 Subversion wrote: Don't give problems tree hugger. Give solutions. You were right about this, I'm done being annoyed about the last day. (Tricode and Zeks, I didn't actually mean I thought lynching you was a good plan, I just meant that it really annoyed me how much we were played yesterday.) It's really funny how wrong and right I was at the beginning, I had a bunch of people that were working as a team, and that turned out to be right—but it wasn't the mafia team. Oh well. *** And I was going to post about how in fact is wasn't so bad and that Zeks is pretty much confirmed, because if Zeks was the GF, then we were all going to lose anyway, and his roleclaim would make no goddamned sense. BUT I think this should be apparent now to everyone, so if you haven't already, roleclaim to Zeks. And ##vote double lynch ##vote BloodyC0bbler ##vote SouthRawrea After the fall out of Citi.zen's green flip, he votes BC and South as well as Double Lynch. + Show Spoiler +On July 26 2010 11:56 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 11:50 Divinek wrote: if one of south/bc isnt red then fuck this game If BC isn't red, I agree. South could just be bad. Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 11:53 Divinek wrote: also there's way too many people in this game that dont post enough that are probably mob, how annoying d3, (citi.zen's favorite) Misder, XeliN (haha, never posts, never has to) throws out a list (it includes Xelin) but it isn' followed up on. + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2010 03:22 tree.hugger wrote: Wee, sleekit, cow'rin, tim'rous beastie, O, what a panic's in thy breastie! Thou need na start awa sae hasty Wi bickering brattle! I wad be laith to rin an' chase thee, Wi' murdering pattle.
I'm truly sorry man's dominion Has broken Nature's social union, An' justifies that ill opinion Which makes thee startle At me, thy poor, earth born companion An' fellow mortal!
I doubt na, whyles, but thou may thieve; What then? poor beastie, thou maun live! A daimen icker in a thrave 'S a sma' request; I'll get a blessin wi' the lave, An' never miss't.
Thy wee-bit housie, too, in ruin! It's silly wa's the win's are strewin! An' naething, now, to big a new ane, O' foggage green! An' bleak December's win's ensuin, Baith snell an' keen!
Thou saw the fields laid bare an' waste, An' weary winter comin fast, An' cozie here, beneath the blast, Thou thought to dwell, Till crash! the cruel coulter past Out thro' thy cell.
That wee bit heap o' leaves an' stibble, Has cost thee monie a weary nibble! Now thou's turned out, for a' thy trouble, But house or hald, To thole the winter's sleety dribble, An' cranreuch cauld.
But Mousie, thou art no thy lane, In proving foresight may be vain: The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men Gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, For promis'd joy!
Still thou are blest, compared wi' me! The present only toucheth thee: But och! I backward cast my e'e, On prospects drear! An' forward, tho' I canna see, I guess an' fear! an appropriate filler post + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2010 06:23 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2010 06:11 BrownBear wrote:On July 27 2010 06:10 chaoser wrote:On July 27 2010 05:54 BrownBear wrote: They's done.
Bill, please for the love of god stop letting people edit posts. who edited? Many people. The problem is, he's given them permission every time, and I really don't like it. The last person to edit was Proactinium on page 135. You posted twice after then without raising a complaint. And if it's to correct a grammatical error...? On July 27 2010 11:06 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2010 09:45 Bill Murray wrote: I just pmed quite a few good players to see if they want to replace in. Let citi.zen play, so he can yell at us. On July 28 2010 18:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2010 16:04 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 28 2010 15:33 ~OpZ~ wrote:On July 28 2010 15:29 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 28 2010 15:22 ~OpZ~ wrote:On July 28 2010 14:43 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 28 2010 14:39 BrownBear wrote:On July 28 2010 14:29 Divinek wrote: i had strong thoughts bc was mafia just based on how he'd been posting (even if that was only based on how he played one game previously) and his pms to me
but he's such a persuasive asshole, damn experienced players BC is damn good at this game. He almost had me convinced yesterday. Shit, for real? rofl. I did way better than I was thinking I had. SOOOO thought I had only stalled you. BC, you had a VERY slim chance of changing my vote...But as I've said, I regularly distrust you. And your instajump on citizen is what hugely pinned my suspicion at you. Was an epic bus of citizen you pulled off tho. GG for you sir. I woulda done it as town as well. As I said, his play was horrendous there, the fact that only a minority of players saw it makes me sad. It also led to one of the biggest breakthroughs in the game. And if he wasn't lynched, he had the names of both people that woulda been a fake dt, and a fake MH. Citizen personally picked the DT's night 2 check too. So....I dunno good sir if it was horrendous play. I think it was pretty baller. Once game is done I shall go into more detail on what he did and the problems behind it, but I don't really want to derail the game (as its still in motion). citi.zen almost shot the town in the foot, but in reality, knowing that both you and South were mafia, that was a poor play from you guys as well. Knowing that it was, in fact a polarized vote, (something figured out because Zeks claimed when he, had he been mafia, had no need to claim) basically meant that if we didn't get the mafia side of the equation that day, we'd get you tomorrow. So why you went almost all-in to buy yourself a day strikes me as a really odd choice. It's true that you hadn't gotten any of your night lynches correct, but there was really no plausible chance anyone would roleclaim to you (woops, Subversion) and you committed yourself to dying the next day, if not that day. I don't get what the thought was behind it. But I guess we'll hear about that later. At any rate, if you were planning to talk your way out of it, not everyone in this game is as easy to convince as BrownBear. Speaking of which.... Show nested quote +On July 28 2010 14:17 BrownBear wrote: Fuck yeah.
Tomorrow, tree.hugger and a yet-to-be-decided-on fourth.
Town, we got this :D Not with that lynch, you don't. On July 28 2010 18:29 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2010 15:43 youngminii wrote:On July 28 2010 15:31 ~OpZ~ wrote: and everyone that wanted to hold off on voting for BC, should be looked at with huge suspicion. It will probably lead to ANOTHER overwhelming case against me. Again, my only argument is I'm not sheepish with my votes, AND I didn't want day to end. I also wanted something from BC before he died to point us in the direction of whom is town/mafia.
I didn't vote for citizen, but those who didn't instavote for BC today, but DID vote for citizen should most definitely be scrutinized thoroughly. Just so you know, Pandain totally refused to insta-gib BC (and I think he did the same for SouthRawrea) on the grounds of some totally random reason. He also voted citi.zen even after I PM'd him threatening to reveal his DT claim if he did. Holding a roleclaim over someone's head, even if you suspect they're mafia isn't a very productive way to play... nobody will want to roleclaim to you! But in the end, that split vote worked, we actually did have a mafia on the chopping block. So with some DT leadership (ahem, ahem) we should be in business. On July 29 2010 18:36 tree.hugger wrote: Okay, I'm going to catch up more fully with the day in a little bit after I wake up, which will be after I go to sleep, which will be after the MSL. But I just wanted to remark how funny it was that literally all the players I had playing 'on a team' at the beginning, and thus on my suspicion list, were DT's and their fellow rolechecks. Except BC. I did get him right.
We agreed upon Pandain right? I'll check Rastaban later, but he's probably scum.
And thank god Infund was a townie, because I was pretty sure, but not 100% I could trust you. gg man. On July 30 2010 03:12 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 23:30 chaoser wrote: ##Vote tree.hugger
Until tree responds, I'm going to keep my vote on him No problem, I woke up for the MSL, and then fell asleep after it was over, and now I'm up again. Basically, I was talking to Foolishness at the beginning, and then Infund and several others at different points throughout the game. We identified players who were playing on a team early on and tried to get one lynched as a rolecheck on the whole group. My thought was that they were mafia of course, and it turned out to be a little bit of bad luck that we ended up figuring out the town circle, and not the mafia, although ironically we had much more success in that regard than the actual mafia. I've been somewhat busy in the middle of this week, and I'm actually heading up to Montreal for a music festival tomorrow, so my activity is going to be more suspect I'm afraid. And I stand by the lynch of citi.zen, with what we knew at the time, it was the right choice, and it turned out to not be so big of a deal anyway. I've totally lost track at this point of who's claimed to be a DT or not. Looks like; ##Vote: Pandain ##Vote: RastabanMafia KP goes down to 1 once we axe Pandain, ya? This is very manageable. These posts catch us up to the present (or at least the time I started on this) where Tree defends lynching Citi.zen and votes pandain and I.
SUMMARY
Tree starts off with being against the lynch of Hyperbola and votes DTA. Day two he starts pushing Subversion as a prime candidate and doesn't change even after subversion soft claims blue. He supports that Tricode is innocent but suspects BC, He wants Tricode to step up and have mass role claims go to him, thinks it is worth the risk. Shortly after we have the Citi.zen/South claims. He supports lynching South and pushes hard for the town to follow suit. The argument is that Citi.zen is more skilled with placing his bombs and that he is more likely to make such a bold play. Follows up by voting South and BC though he is hesitant to add BC at first. He has been pushing Subversion the entire game, did the mafia think they might could get him lynched sooner and then decided it was too late and had to be sure he was night killed so they double hit him (since there was only 1 hit that night and no one claimed. I am not sure that Tree is town like I was with Bumatlarge after reading through his posts. Tree has a lot more grey areas but also some strong town actions. I thought I would post this and check over some of the other candidates before deciding anything.
Also sorry there is a hanging end bold tag, I couldn't find out where it came from.
|
On August 02 2010 13:38 Tricode wrote: Note: Rastaban hasn't posted since pg. 161 and to add the only posts he makes are all about Tree.Hugger.
I apologize, life has gotten crazy the last couple days. I will have something substantial tomorrow though I promise.
|
Vote: Chaoser
Reason incoming, I have to make a couple calls but will have it up shortly after.
|
Chaoser is to me the most suspicious, I am willing to change my vote if he can defend himself properly (I know he is away right now but said he will be back before the vote). I will keep watch for his response.
(1)Voting Record + Show Spoiler +Day 1: Abstain Day 2: DTA Day 3: Citizen Day 4: BC and SouthRawea Day 5: Tree.hugger He has been on the majority lynch every day except for the first day where he abstained.
(2)Deaths and Suspicions + Show Spoiler +After the blue roles were sniped the next target was Youngminii, who was the person trying the hardest to get Chaoser lynched the entire game. I propose that we lynch chaoser since he's pretty much next on my list. I know I was wrong about Infundibulum but we don't really have anyone better to lynch (unless you can come up with one), and chaoser was one of Zeks's leading suspects too.
Here we have both Zeks and YM placing chaoser as a leading suspect. He was listed right below BC and SR on YM's hit list On July 25 2010 10:18 youngminii wrote: BC SouthRawrea Chaoser Infundibuxdlgxcubum Pandain (Claimed DT) Amber[Light] (Pandain claimed to have checkd him) Tree.hugger (moved tree.hugger to the bottom 'cause it's likely he's just bad town) Quote this every page. Thanks. Pandain a now confirmed townie urged for Chaoser early on 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.
We later have Chaoser pushing strongly for Pandain, renewing suspicions. On July 23 2010 13:13 Pandain wrote:If I die: My will: + Show Spoiler +My pet panda Pandet goes to Youngmini in honor of our secret friendship alliance. My secret lover Subversion will get all other belongings. Also, ebwop, "Also I'm getting highly suspicious of all this" I'm getting suscipious of chaoser just because he's just started being so flammatory and instigative. I mixed my thoughts.
(3)Scummy Play + Show Spoiler +Let me start with YM's excellent early case on Chaoser: On July 24 2010 09:48 youngminii wrote:My case on Chaoser.+ Show Spoiler +Let us delve into the mind of scum. The pattern for a normal, general scum that doesn't go out of his way to do anything out of the ordinary is quite simple. Lay low on the first day or two and slowly come out with accusations. Be very careful of jumping on bandwagons as it may arouse suspicion. Rather than openly coming out and making a case on someone on the first day/two, try to find someone that is making a fool of themselves and make a small case to see if it gains momentum. I think we can all agree that this is a standard way of playing as scum, keeps the suspicion low while still contributing information. Now let us look at chaoser's early game. One of his first posts is to abstain. This vote does not change for the entire day. Fits perfectly in line with my 'lay low' theory, especially (as the wonderful Pandain pointed out) as chaoser was so against my 'no lynch' strategy. One would have to wonder why he didn't simply vote for someone if he was so against it. He raises the counter argument that voting to abstain is different from voting to no lynch, which is a moot point in my opinion really. I think it's less about the days and more about the fact that we get tons of information from looking at vote lists Cool, chaoser wants information from voting lists on the first day. In fact, he even points this out to the public. So why does he not vote for anyone? Oh right, abstaining doesn't label you as 'against' someone. Good stuff in my opinion, I'd probably do it too if I was scum. So up until early Day 2, chaoser continues to bring in a wealth of information (such as the voting history of certain people etc.) but doesn't actually accuse anyone. All he does is make some accusatory comment that doesn't really have any flair to it. See below. chaoser to BB: So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious? So early on in Day 2, after a small group of people (Divinek, DTA and Amber[light]) already vote for BB, chaoser joins in and mounts a small case against BB. + Show Spoiler +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? After a page or two a LOT of people jump on the bandwagon. It's uncanny. Chaoser realises that if BB is lynched and he flips town then things will look bad for him, so he switches his vote to Subversion, another bandwagon being formed at the time. It's funny, after using that argument against BB he immediately switches to Subversion after seeing the possibility that he might be labeled as mafia (note: someone actually said that the '3rd/4th person on the bandwagon tends to be mafia' and could have affected chaoser's thoughts). The argument he uses against Subversion is one that has already gained traction from BC/Protractinium and so it's easy to ride with. Pandain then mounts an argument against chaoser, who responds by responding to each and every point. I believe they continue this argument via PM and sort it out there and Pandain drops his case on chaoser (I attribute this to Pandain being new to this game and not being very good at picking out lies/deceit etc.). Anyway, what does chaoser do now? Of course, he abstains. Oh, the joy of not really voting for anyone. A common trait of mafia is that they won't contribute too much in the accusations etc. early on. They will however, try and 'appear' to be useful by posting stuff that doesn't really cause them any risk in any way (ie. pointing at someone of being scum). They will often side with someone else or pick on a player that seems to be causing a ruckus which won't be seen as suspicious. In addition to this, scum will go to great lengths to defend themselves. Think about it (directed at newer players), if you are scum you are much more willing to come back to this thread and try to shake off any accusations against you. This is why RVS is quite helpful in smaller games. Often scum will 'lurk' meaning they'll browse around, read everything but won't post too much in order to stay under the radar. However, accusing them and voting for them will force them to come out and defend themselves profusely. We can see this in DTA, he was town and everyone started voting for him. He didn't reply in the thread for a looooooong time (I actually pointed this out but I was ignored /yay), indicating that he was in fact, not lurking but actually AWOL, which is a townie trait. Chaoser falls into the above mafia category. He immediately comes out of his 'useful/informative' shell and starts defending himself a LOT. His posts start becoming a lot of the 'discussion' going on. This continues for a long time, only defending himself and never accusing anyone asides from the occasional "your arguments are weak, why are you trying to get me lynched so bad? Are you scum?" type of argument. Now it's actually really painful to go through skimming page by page but the general trend I see right now is that a lot of people start jumping on the chaoser bandwagon. It's funny, he votes for DTA because he's getting a lot of votes for him. He then states: From reading this, I'll change my vote to Subversion even though that means I'll 100% die.
Darth, if you wanna help me, you could switch it over too and I think he'll be first.
##unvote ##vote Subversion Look at this from a scum perspective. He knows DTA is town. He knows that if DTA is lynched then he'll get an even worse image than before. So what does he do? He tries to side with DTA to lynch someone else that already has a lot of people voting for him. This is actually a good play by mafia as he had already taken the side of voting for Subversion earlier so if questioned, he could retaliate by saying "I already had my suspicions on Subversion before!" + Show Spoiler +On an unrelated side note, I find it funny how people are so quick to link me to Subversion (tree.hugger especially) because I defended him a bit whilst nobody links me to DTA's town and Hyperbola's town when I actually gave them proper defenses. Quite ridiculous imo. Blah blah DTA ends up getting lynched (one of the final votes by chaoser, although it could be argued that he did it to save himself) and ends up flipping town. I know I've always been wary of chaoser but I'd like everyone to read my analysis of him. I'm not going to analyse Night 3 'cause that was just a big spam fest and lots of people probably have an ill image of me now. I'd just like you all to trust me for once (I was right on hyperbola/DTA even though it doesn't mean anything, yes I know) and vote for chaoser. I would also like to mention that I believe infundlibsuvxkum and chaoser are linked but that discussion can be saved for another time. Since then here has been his recent contributions: On July 28 2010 23:06 chaoser wrote:But what about our friendship alliance ;_; One-liner On July 29 2010 01:56 chaoser wrote: Original Message: why did sub only want to check them and not you?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: We were going to do test on both each day.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: why didn't you get amber in...
----------------------------------------- Original Message: yeah sub made a direct claim to proct for w/e reason. = Than proctat told me. We were going to let youngmini in if he passed the test but then he revealed our plan
----------------------------------------- Original Message: you said that down below. Your DT checked amber...when did it become procat?
----------------------------------------- Original Message:
Nope. He checked youngmini and Amber. Both were green.
Youngmini was suscipious though so we decided to lay out the test. ----------------------------------------- Original Message: did your DT check me?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: amber wasn't in the group. Procatorium or w/e was.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: well fuck me, i'mma go read over the rest of his posts, is it just you and amber now?
----------------------------------------- Original Message:
yes -.- ----------------------------------------- Original Message: was he your dt?
----------------------------------------- Original Message:
Subversion was dead. ------------------------------------------------- On July 29 2010 01:56 chaoser wrote: my PMs with Pandain PM list On July 29 2010 05:32 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 04:42 zeks wrote: I am also intrigued to know who rastaban's DT was
Did Subversion tell rastaban too?
Or was there something I missed I think he mentioned that BC was his DT helpful but no new content On July 29 2010 07:09 chaoser wrote: This really has become a spamfest huh complains about spam On July 29 2010 08:43 chaoser wrote: OH ME ME ME! spams On July 29 2010 09:52 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 09:43 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: If/when Pandain flips mafia it pretty much clears chaoser. Wait, why does it clear me? This is followed by pandain's response: On July 29 2010 10:02 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 09:52 chaoser wrote:On July 29 2010 09:43 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: If/when Pandain flips mafia it pretty much clears chaoser. Wait, why does it clear me? Probably because I was the one who first wrote against you, thus mafia probably doesn't want to accuse their own scum. I even went pretty in depth too. This excludes the BC and SR case of course. Also, @ divinek. Idk. Personaly I highly reccomend everyone who hasn't already rced to zeks to do so NOW. He has already proven hes safe by getting rid of SR and BC, the godfather. Please, don't be scared. Why would Chaoser be so worried if a known red flipping would clear him? Could he have known that even though he had flipped red he was the miller, and was worried that the reverse would hold up, he would be suspected when Pandain eventualy flipped miller? On July 29 2010 10:13 chaoser wrote: day's over right? oneline without content On July 29 2010 12:44 chaoser wrote: zeks DID say he wanted to blow a popsicle stand. again On July 29 2010 14:00 chaoser wrote: jesus... more On July 29 2010 14:01 chaoser wrote: goddamnit, lost our DT and medic. All we have left are vets... I think this might count as 2 lines but the second sentence didn't finish so lets make 1.5 On July 29 2010 14:19 chaoser wrote: why did sin protect xelin???? ... On July 29 2010 22:47 chaoser wrote: 1) Youngminii got it wrong, here's what happened: Sin protected Xelin for some reason and died. zeks only had one bomb on infun because he lied about having two bombs out to scare mafia. He actually did have two bombs on BC and South the night before they were lynched and by the time they died, he had only moved on off, losing a bomb. The mafia then hit bumatlarge and lakris. At least, that's my reading of it.
2) Pandain ;_; you got DT checked red, let it die man. You're going to get lynched regardless, try to help town find second lynch.
3) youngminii moved his vote off me ;_; I was going to make him post a video of him dancing to some song when I flipped green we actualy get more than one line this time, but line one is interpreting the night post and line 3 is joking with YM, only 2 has any content. It is pushing for Pandain's lynch who showed red, this is pretty much what everyone will do though mafia will love this since it is a guaranteed kill since they know he is miller now. On July 29 2010 22:48 chaoser wrote: ##Vote Pandain
sorry buddy, you got checked red. You know I'd want you to vote me if I got checked red too. unfortunatly there are no DTs to verify this. On July 29 2010 23:03 chaoser wrote: 14/30 1. tree.hugger 2. brownbear 3. youngminii (sub said was green) 5. chaoser 6. divinek 11. rastaban (said BC claimed DT to him) 13. Amber[LighT] (sub said was green?) 15. pandain (Flipped Red) 16. ~OpZ~ 23. d3_crescentia (Got medic protected?) 24. Misder 26. Pyrrholuxia 27. Tricode (Vigi, said he hit BC) 29. protactinium
What else is there? that's the condensed list.
Player list, contributing without analysing, or pushing for suspects. On July 29 2010 23:09 chaoser wrote: From looking at nights, it seems like Vets didn't get hit. The only time that was even a possibility was during the night where only Sub died though I guess we've decided that he got double stacked which is highly suggestive that he got leaked or they somehow were very sure he was DT. So that means if we have two vets that's 11+2 v 3. If we kill one today it'll be 10+2 v 2 and then when mafia hit at night and if they don't hit vet it'll be 9+2 v 2. I say we have very good chances of winning. contributing more game observations but without analysing people, or pushing for suspects. On July 29 2010 23:26 chaoser wrote: From my PMs with tree.hugger early in the game, he led me to believe that he was in some sort of circle and that he was 100% sure that Sub and Young were mafia. Care to explain, tree? Now pushes for Tree.hugger, thankfully we are now getting content On July 29 2010 23:28 chaoser wrote: citi.zen misinformed us, as everyone saw. We judged citi.zen to be the one more likely to be mafia, but it was basically a gut call on that front. We assumed that both options would prove the same thing, and it was just a choice between two candidates.
See my thread posts for my irritable summation.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: dude...wtf happened tonight? did your circle get misinformation or something?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: I don't think we can muster the votes to get them today.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: do you have any info that I could use to help back up my little case a couple pages back or are you guys still not ready to move yet?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: Yes.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: are you still decently sure about subversion/youngminii?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: It confuses the hell out of me. I have about three explanations for it, and neither of them are particularly useful or likely.
I mean, I know the mafia is trying to snipe blues, but they clearly suck at it, and the fact that nobody in the thread who was influential in any way was killed makes me suspicious.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: well, you didn't die lol that's a good thing...right?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: He's an idiot. Doubt he's mafia, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't block out what he says. Listen at your peril.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: final message, what are you thoughts on pandain? is he trustable?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: luck has little to do with it.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: best of luck
----------------------------------------- Original Message: <--tree.hugger Haha, I'm probably dying tonight. I've come to terms with that and made appropriate arrangements.
I don't thing Pandian's pm release will change anything. Another PM list On July 29 2010 23:29 chaoser wrote: er, BM, can I edit that into spoilers? On July 29 2010 23:30 chaoser wrote: ##Vote tree.hugger
Until tree responds, I'm going to keep my vote on him On July 30 2010 06:37 chaoser wrote: wait, did we double lynch? three more filler posts, one line a piece On July 31 2010 02:15 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2010 01:58 BrownBear wrote:Divinek, I don't think we're going to get anywhere by arguing, so I'm just gonna say we agree to disagree. Your style of play says that if someone checks red they get lynched no matter what. It's a black and white style of play, and it is legitimate. My style of play says that it's more shades of grey, especially if Millers are in the game. I decided that since Pandain and I had been sharing PMs and talking about things since about Day 2, and I had gotten a very pro-town read off of him, I would trust my instincts and trust that he was miller #2. Obviously, you think my style of play is stupid, and I think your style of play is narrow-minded. Arguing about it isn't going to get anywhere. Let's just agree that we lynched Pandain, he flipped miller, and now we're moving on. Before I take my vote off of you, though, please quote your post where you claimed vet. I still didn't see it reading through the last 5 or so pages, and I'm too lazy to read further back It's not stupid, but it's a very dangerous type of play. You can have people like BC or such who can play pro-town ish and make great arguments and in the end sway people's votes away from him even if he is mafia. It's happened several times before in other games where someone will be flipped red, claim miller/insane DT and argue people away from lynching them when they were mafia. People can play anti-town/make bad calls and still be town but appear as mafia. People can play pro-town and still be mafia and appear as town. If you start playing the grey, it gets very very hard to tell if it's a town grey or a mafia grey. The best way, and most heavyhanded way, is to kill anyone who flips red. Makes sure that pandain gets voted for. Again, this isn't bad play since he was red, but mafia would be pushing heavily for him since that is one of the 2x lynches they don't have to worry about. On July 31 2010 13:46 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2010 12:09 Divinek wrote:On July 31 2010 12:01 youngminii wrote: Red's probably just riding along letting town kill each other. Rastaban/chaoser gogogo. yeah wtf chaoser abstained from the second lynch vote or his name is somehow invisible to me in that list bm posted die die die I voted pan and tree. Kill me if you like, I'll only flip green and then youngminii has to do the run devil run dance for TL mafia =] He knows that YM had been tailing him the whole game On August 01 2010 09:44 chaoser wrote: I find it strange that pyrr still isn't dead yet even though he's a pretty big name...hmmmm would have been nice for chaoser to have posted some actual reasoning behind why we should suspect pyrr. On August 01 2010 13:47 chaoser wrote: 2. brownbear 5. chaoser 6. divinek 11. rastaban (said BC claimed DT to him) 16. ~OpZ~ 23. d3_crescentia (Got medic protected?) 24. Misder 26. Pyrrholuxia 27. Tricode (Vigi, said he hit BC) 29. protactinium Another player list On August 02 2010 05:42 chaoser wrote: Sorry I haven't been posting/active in this thread for the last day, Got an interview with UPenn tomorrow for medical school so I've been prepping. Should be back by 3 in the afternoon tomorrow so I'll write up something big then. I am intrested to see what we will get when he returns, I just hope it isn't another one liner or pm/vote list.
Chaoser, I haven't played with you before so I don't know your meta, maybe this is your style, but it just seems so conducive to remaining hidden as mafia. I don't know that you are red but you have been playing very suspiciously this entire game and I would like some answers. I would like to hear why you have voted as you have, and why you have seemingly not been contributing to the actual discussion lately.
Thanks,
|
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
|
On August 03 2010 05:26 ~OpZ~ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 02:47 rastaban wrote:Chaoser is to me the most suspicious, I am willing to change my vote if he can defend himself properly (I know he is away right now but said he will be back before the vote). I will keep watch for his response. (1)Voting Record+ Show Spoiler +Day 1: Abstain Day 2: DTA Day 3: Citizen Day 4: BC and SouthRawea Day 5: Tree.hugger He has been on the majority lynch every day except for the first day where he abstained.
(2)Deaths and Suspicions+ Show Spoiler +After the blue roles were sniped the next target was Youngminii, who was the person trying the hardest to get Chaoser lynched the entire game. I propose that we lynch chaoser since he's pretty much next on my list. I know I was wrong about Infundibulum but we don't really have anyone better to lynch (unless you can come up with one), and chaoser was one of Zeks's leading suspects too.
Here we have both Zeks and YM placing chaoser as a leading suspect. He was listed right below BC and SR on YM's hit list On July 25 2010 10:18 youngminii wrote: BC SouthRawrea Chaoser Infundibuxdlgxcubum Pandain (Claimed DT) Amber[Light] (Pandain claimed to have checkd him) Tree.hugger (moved tree.hugger to the bottom 'cause it's likely he's just bad town) Quote this every page. Thanks. Pandain a now confirmed townie urged for Chaoser early on 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.
We later have Chaoser pushing strongly for Pandain, renewing suspicions. On July 23 2010 13:13 Pandain wrote:If I die: My will: + Show Spoiler +My pet panda Pandet goes to Youngmini in honor of our secret friendship alliance. My secret lover Subversion will get all other belongings. Also, ebwop, "Also I'm getting highly suspicious of all this" I'm getting suscipious of chaoser just because he's just started being so flammatory and instigative. I mixed my thoughts. (3)Scummy Play+ Show Spoiler +Let me start with YM's excellent early case on Chaoser: On July 24 2010 09:48 youngminii wrote:My case on Chaoser.+ Show Spoiler +Let us delve into the mind of scum. The pattern for a normal, general scum that doesn't go out of his way to do anything out of the ordinary is quite simple. Lay low on the first day or two and slowly come out with accusations. Be very careful of jumping on bandwagons as it may arouse suspicion. Rather than openly coming out and making a case on someone on the first day/two, try to find someone that is making a fool of themselves and make a small case to see if it gains momentum. I think we can all agree that this is a standard way of playing as scum, keeps the suspicion low while still contributing information. Now let us look at chaoser's early game. One of his first posts is to abstain. This vote does not change for the entire day. Fits perfectly in line with my 'lay low' theory, especially (as the wonderful Pandain pointed out) as chaoser was so against my 'no lynch' strategy. One would have to wonder why he didn't simply vote for someone if he was so against it. He raises the counter argument that voting to abstain is different from voting to no lynch, which is a moot point in my opinion really. I think it's less about the days and more about the fact that we get tons of information from looking at vote lists Cool, chaoser wants information from voting lists on the first day. In fact, he even points this out to the public. So why does he not vote for anyone? Oh right, abstaining doesn't label you as 'against' someone. Good stuff in my opinion, I'd probably do it too if I was scum. So up until early Day 2, chaoser continues to bring in a wealth of information (such as the voting history of certain people etc.) but doesn't actually accuse anyone. All he does is make some accusatory comment that doesn't really have any flair to it. See below. chaoser to BB: So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious? So early on in Day 2, after a small group of people (Divinek, DTA and Amber[light]) already vote for BB, chaoser joins in and mounts a small case against BB. + Show Spoiler +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? After a page or two a LOT of people jump on the bandwagon. It's uncanny. Chaoser realises that if BB is lynched and he flips town then things will look bad for him, so he switches his vote to Subversion, another bandwagon being formed at the time. It's funny, after using that argument against BB he immediately switches to Subversion after seeing the possibility that he might be labeled as mafia (note: someone actually said that the '3rd/4th person on the bandwagon tends to be mafia' and could have affected chaoser's thoughts). The argument he uses against Subversion is one that has already gained traction from BC/Protractinium and so it's easy to ride with. Pandain then mounts an argument against chaoser, who responds by responding to each and every point. I believe they continue this argument via PM and sort it out there and Pandain drops his case on chaoser (I attribute this to Pandain being new to this game and not being very good at picking out lies/deceit etc.). Anyway, what does chaoser do now? Of course, he abstains. Oh, the joy of not really voting for anyone. A common trait of mafia is that they won't contribute too much in the accusations etc. early on. They will however, try and 'appear' to be useful by posting stuff that doesn't really cause them any risk in any way (ie. pointing at someone of being scum). They will often side with someone else or pick on a player that seems to be causing a ruckus which won't be seen as suspicious. In addition to this, scum will go to great lengths to defend themselves. Think about it (directed at newer players), if you are scum you are much more willing to come back to this thread and try to shake off any accusations against you. This is why RVS is quite helpful in smaller games. Often scum will 'lurk' meaning they'll browse around, read everything but won't post too much in order to stay under the radar. However, accusing them and voting for them will force them to come out and defend themselves profusely. We can see this in DTA, he was town and everyone started voting for him. He didn't reply in the thread for a looooooong time (I actually pointed this out but I was ignored /yay), indicating that he was in fact, not lurking but actually AWOL, which is a townie trait. Chaoser falls into the above mafia category. He immediately comes out of his 'useful/informative' shell and starts defending himself a LOT. His posts start becoming a lot of the 'discussion' going on. This continues for a long time, only defending himself and never accusing anyone asides from the occasional "your arguments are weak, why are you trying to get me lynched so bad? Are you scum?" type of argument. Now it's actually really painful to go through skimming page by page but the general trend I see right now is that a lot of people start jumping on the chaoser bandwagon. It's funny, he votes for DTA because he's getting a lot of votes for him. He then states: From reading this, I'll change my vote to Subversion even though that means I'll 100% die.
Darth, if you wanna help me, you could switch it over too and I think he'll be first.
##unvote ##vote Subversion Look at this from a scum perspective. He knows DTA is town. He knows that if DTA is lynched then he'll get an even worse image than before. So what does he do? He tries to side with DTA to lynch someone else that already has a lot of people voting for him. This is actually a good play by mafia as he had already taken the side of voting for Subversion earlier so if questioned, he could retaliate by saying "I already had my suspicions on Subversion before!" + Show Spoiler +On an unrelated side note, I find it funny how people are so quick to link me to Subversion (tree.hugger especially) because I defended him a bit whilst nobody links me to DTA's town and Hyperbola's town when I actually gave them proper defenses. Quite ridiculous imo. Blah blah DTA ends up getting lynched (one of the final votes by chaoser, although it could be argued that he did it to save himself) and ends up flipping town. I know I've always been wary of chaoser but I'd like everyone to read my analysis of him. I'm not going to analyse Night 3 'cause that was just a big spam fest and lots of people probably have an ill image of me now. I'd just like you all to trust me for once (I was right on hyperbola/DTA even though it doesn't mean anything, yes I know) and vote for chaoser. I would also like to mention that I believe infundlibsuvxkum and chaoser are linked but that discussion can be saved for another time. Since then here has been his recent contributions: On July 28 2010 23:06 chaoser wrote:But what about our friendship alliance ;_; One-liner On July 29 2010 01:56 chaoser wrote: Original Message: why did sub only want to check them and not you?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: We were going to do test on both each day.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: why didn't you get amber in...
----------------------------------------- Original Message: yeah sub made a direct claim to proct for w/e reason. = Than proctat told me. We were going to let youngmini in if he passed the test but then he revealed our plan
----------------------------------------- Original Message: you said that down below. Your DT checked amber...when did it become procat?
----------------------------------------- Original Message:
Nope. He checked youngmini and Amber. Both were green.
Youngmini was suscipious though so we decided to lay out the test. ----------------------------------------- Original Message: did your DT check me?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: amber wasn't in the group. Procatorium or w/e was.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: well fuck me, i'mma go read over the rest of his posts, is it just you and amber now?
----------------------------------------- Original Message:
yes -.- ----------------------------------------- Original Message: was he your dt?
----------------------------------------- Original Message:
Subversion was dead. ------------------------------------------------- On July 29 2010 01:56 chaoser wrote: my PMs with Pandain PM list On July 29 2010 05:32 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 04:42 zeks wrote: I am also intrigued to know who rastaban's DT was
Did Subversion tell rastaban too?
Or was there something I missed I think he mentioned that BC was his DT helpful but no new content On July 29 2010 07:09 chaoser wrote: This really has become a spamfest huh complains about spam On July 29 2010 08:43 chaoser wrote: OH ME ME ME! spams On July 29 2010 09:52 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 09:43 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: If/when Pandain flips mafia it pretty much clears chaoser. Wait, why does it clear me? This is followed by pandain's response: On July 29 2010 10:02 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 09:52 chaoser wrote:On July 29 2010 09:43 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: If/when Pandain flips mafia it pretty much clears chaoser. Wait, why does it clear me? Probably because I was the one who first wrote against you, thus mafia probably doesn't want to accuse their own scum. I even went pretty in depth too. This excludes the BC and SR case of course. Also, @ divinek. Idk. Personaly I highly reccomend everyone who hasn't already rced to zeks to do so NOW. He has already proven hes safe by getting rid of SR and BC, the godfather. Please, don't be scared. Why would Chaoser be so worried if a known red flipping would clear him? Could he have known that even though he had flipped red he was the miller, and was worried that the reverse would hold up, he would be suspected when Pandain eventualy flipped miller? On July 29 2010 10:13 chaoser wrote: day's over right? oneline without content On July 29 2010 12:44 chaoser wrote: zeks DID say he wanted to blow a popsicle stand. again On July 29 2010 14:00 chaoser wrote: jesus... more On July 29 2010 14:01 chaoser wrote: goddamnit, lost our DT and medic. All we have left are vets... I think this might count as 2 lines but the second sentence didn't finish so lets make 1.5 On July 29 2010 14:19 chaoser wrote: why did sin protect xelin???? ... On July 29 2010 22:47 chaoser wrote: 1) Youngminii got it wrong, here's what happened: Sin protected Xelin for some reason and died. zeks only had one bomb on infun because he lied about having two bombs out to scare mafia. He actually did have two bombs on BC and South the night before they were lynched and by the time they died, he had only moved on off, losing a bomb. The mafia then hit bumatlarge and lakris. At least, that's my reading of it.
2) Pandain ;_; you got DT checked red, let it die man. You're going to get lynched regardless, try to help town find second lynch.
3) youngminii moved his vote off me ;_; I was going to make him post a video of him dancing to some song when I flipped green we actualy get more than one line this time, but line one is interpreting the night post and line 3 is joking with YM, only 2 has any content. It is pushing for Pandain's lynch who showed red, this is pretty much what everyone will do though mafia will love this since it is a guaranteed kill since they know he is miller now. On July 29 2010 22:48 chaoser wrote: ##Vote Pandain
sorry buddy, you got checked red. You know I'd want you to vote me if I got checked red too. unfortunatly there are no DTs to verify this. On July 29 2010 23:03 chaoser wrote: 14/30 1. tree.hugger 2. brownbear 3. youngminii (sub said was green) 5. chaoser 6. divinek 11. rastaban (said BC claimed DT to him) 13. Amber[LighT] (sub said was green?) 15. pandain (Flipped Red) 16. ~OpZ~ 23. d3_crescentia (Got medic protected?) 24. Misder 26. Pyrrholuxia 27. Tricode (Vigi, said he hit BC) 29. protactinium
What else is there? that's the condensed list.
Player list, contributing without analysing, or pushing for suspects. On July 29 2010 23:09 chaoser wrote: From looking at nights, it seems like Vets didn't get hit. The only time that was even a possibility was during the night where only Sub died though I guess we've decided that he got double stacked which is highly suggestive that he got leaked or they somehow were very sure he was DT. So that means if we have two vets that's 11+2 v 3. If we kill one today it'll be 10+2 v 2 and then when mafia hit at night and if they don't hit vet it'll be 9+2 v 2. I say we have very good chances of winning. contributing more game observations but without analysing people, or pushing for suspects. On July 29 2010 23:26 chaoser wrote: From my PMs with tree.hugger early in the game, he led me to believe that he was in some sort of circle and that he was 100% sure that Sub and Young were mafia. Care to explain, tree? Now pushes for Tree.hugger, thankfully we are now getting content On July 29 2010 23:28 chaoser wrote: citi.zen misinformed us, as everyone saw. We judged citi.zen to be the one more likely to be mafia, but it was basically a gut call on that front. We assumed that both options would prove the same thing, and it was just a choice between two candidates.
See my thread posts for my irritable summation.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: dude...wtf happened tonight? did your circle get misinformation or something?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: I don't think we can muster the votes to get them today.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: do you have any info that I could use to help back up my little case a couple pages back or are you guys still not ready to move yet?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: Yes.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: are you still decently sure about subversion/youngminii?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: It confuses the hell out of me. I have about three explanations for it, and neither of them are particularly useful or likely.
I mean, I know the mafia is trying to snipe blues, but they clearly suck at it, and the fact that nobody in the thread who was influential in any way was killed makes me suspicious.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: well, you didn't die lol that's a good thing...right?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: He's an idiot. Doubt he's mafia, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't block out what he says. Listen at your peril.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: final message, what are you thoughts on pandain? is he trustable?
----------------------------------------- Original Message: luck has little to do with it.
----------------------------------------- Original Message: best of luck
----------------------------------------- Original Message: <--tree.hugger Haha, I'm probably dying tonight. I've come to terms with that and made appropriate arrangements.
I don't thing Pandian's pm release will change anything. Another PM list On July 29 2010 23:29 chaoser wrote: er, BM, can I edit that into spoilers? On July 29 2010 23:30 chaoser wrote: ##Vote tree.hugger
Until tree responds, I'm going to keep my vote on him On July 30 2010 06:37 chaoser wrote: wait, did we double lynch? three more filler posts, one line a piece On July 31 2010 02:15 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2010 01:58 BrownBear wrote:Divinek, I don't think we're going to get anywhere by arguing, so I'm just gonna say we agree to disagree. Your style of play says that if someone checks red they get lynched no matter what. It's a black and white style of play, and it is legitimate. My style of play says that it's more shades of grey, especially if Millers are in the game. I decided that since Pandain and I had been sharing PMs and talking about things since about Day 2, and I had gotten a very pro-town read off of him, I would trust my instincts and trust that he was miller #2. Obviously, you think my style of play is stupid, and I think your style of play is narrow-minded. Arguing about it isn't going to get anywhere. Let's just agree that we lynched Pandain, he flipped miller, and now we're moving on. Before I take my vote off of you, though, please quote your post where you claimed vet. I still didn't see it reading through the last 5 or so pages, and I'm too lazy to read further back It's not stupid, but it's a very dangerous type of play. You can have people like BC or such who can play pro-town ish and make great arguments and in the end sway people's votes away from him even if he is mafia. It's happened several times before in other games where someone will be flipped red, claim miller/insane DT and argue people away from lynching them when they were mafia. People can play anti-town/make bad calls and still be town but appear as mafia. People can play pro-town and still be mafia and appear as town. If you start playing the grey, it gets very very hard to tell if it's a town grey or a mafia grey. The best way, and most heavyhanded way, is to kill anyone who flips red. Makes sure that pandain gets voted for. Again, this isn't bad play since he was red, but mafia would be pushing heavily for him since that is one of the 2x lynches they don't have to worry about. On July 31 2010 13:46 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2010 12:09 Divinek wrote:On July 31 2010 12:01 youngminii wrote: Red's probably just riding along letting town kill each other. Rastaban/chaoser gogogo. yeah wtf chaoser abstained from the second lynch vote or his name is somehow invisible to me in that list bm posted die die die I voted pan and tree. Kill me if you like, I'll only flip green and then youngminii has to do the run devil run dance for TL mafia =] He knows that YM had been tailing him the whole game On August 01 2010 09:44 chaoser wrote: I find it strange that pyrr still isn't dead yet even though he's a pretty big name...hmmmm would have been nice for chaoser to have posted some actual reasoning behind why we should suspect pyrr. On August 01 2010 13:47 chaoser wrote: 2. brownbear 5. chaoser 6. divinek 11. rastaban (said BC claimed DT to him) 16. ~OpZ~ 23. d3_crescentia (Got medic protected?) 24. Misder 26. Pyrrholuxia 27. Tricode (Vigi, said he hit BC) 29. protactinium Another player list On August 02 2010 05:42 chaoser wrote: Sorry I haven't been posting/active in this thread for the last day, Got an interview with UPenn tomorrow for medical school so I've been prepping. Should be back by 3 in the afternoon tomorrow so I'll write up something big then. I am intrested to see what we will get when he returns, I just hope it isn't another one liner or pm/vote list. Chaoser, I haven't played with you before so I don't know your meta, maybe this is your style, but it just seems so conducive to remaining hidden as mafia. I don't know that you are red but you have been playing very suspiciously this entire game and I would like some answers. I would like to hear why you have voted as you have, and why you have seemingly not been contributing to the actual discussion lately. Thanks, This is actually a pretty epic post given that BC tricked you so easily and made you into a puppet....I would like to hear all of that from chaoser too. Someone should pm him. I'm not going to follow you though. Omg it's good. And omg I want to......you have to be town...I'm really fucking torn right now....BM it's going to make me cry if day ends while I'm at work. (And I didn't mean to spam all these posts, just a lot is happening right now, and I quoted this epic ass analysis)
Really though I had nothing to lose. I was town, not a blue role and since no one else was PMing me (except for checking to see if BB had a good excuse for his posts) it wasn't like I would be giving up any vital information. And worse case, as it turned out to be he was a fake DT, then we net a red when 3 DTs show up. Since critical information hadn't fallen into my hands I didn't need to make a judgment call until Citi.zen's plan went into affect. SouthRawea's claim and there being 3 DTs I didn't think mafia would make a play risking that many people. If Citi.zen had been the hatter as he claimed then it was likely he would have had a bomb on BC so it would have netted us a red anyway,
|
On August 03 2010 06:49 chaoser wrote: Hey guys, just got back from philly, interview an late and took a detour to finally get some philly cheesesteak, I'm catching up in about 5 minutes, taking a shower first, been a long and tiring day x_x woke at 6 to drive over. Did well on my interview though so yay
Glad you interview went well and hope you get the job. Here on the home front though, you are on trial and the court is eagerly awaiting your defense. But please do shower first as that smell is over powering the jurors
|
On August 03 2010 06:55 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 06:06 Protactinium wrote:On August 03 2010 06:03 Divinek wrote:On August 03 2010 05:58 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: Vote is obviously to try to save myself. Rastaban's post is good but it still seems to me Misder is the best suspect. If I die today please go after Misder next. how do you feel about chaoser? i mean yeah it was a save yourself vote but what are some true beliefs you have about him so far, as he seems quite a prime suspect at this point based on the votes alone To be honest, going back and reading things over I'm more amazed now that Chaoser hasn't died since he's had all that suspicion on him. I'm terrible at vote analysis, but it does seem that he was saved. Still though, it's now been 27 hours since he promised to post something. If he doesn't post something substantial soon, I'm going to switch my vote to him. I almost died day two and afterwards wayyy too much shit came up with everyone counterclaiming and saying they got hit and whatnot. Even if I was saved, I don't think mafia would stir (that word took me 1 minute to remember how to spell x_x) up some crazy plan that put both GF and a regular mafia in touble/killed just to save me.
Mafia DID put out a GF and a normal Mafia to get citi.zen lynched, so I wouldn't put it past them. I think though, that is was just a by product of citi.zen's claim, I don't think it was to clear you. BC had already started the distraction from the previous days vote when he claimed the hit at the start of the day.
|
On August 03 2010 09:27 chaoser wrote: it's 4/4 on me/pyrr right?
I looked through your responses but I didn't find them very convincing. There are just too many coincidences. While your reasons for voting individually make sense as whole it is highly suspicious. Coupling this with the an entire game of questionable play and the continued suspicions of better players then me make this a fairly easy call. I will leave the balance as it is as well and see what we can make of it.
|
##unvote ##Vote Bill Murray
|
On August 04 2010 02:36 bumatlarge wrote: BM so BM I prefer that with Catz's peruvian accent, I now go around saying soooooo BM and everyone looks at me strangely
|
On August 05 2010 01:21 BrownBear wrote: ##Vote: rastaban
It's LYLO, and he seems the most likely to me to be red. At this point, I have to assume the BC-claiming-to-him thing was a mafia mindgame.
That was a fast vote with little explanation when we are in a LYLO situation... I am going to look back, and check Chaosers and Opz posts as they were never confirmed, knowing they were town could be what helps us pinpoint the mafia.
|
On August 03 2010 09:31 Divinek wrote:no with your vote it's 5 on pyrr 4 on you
It is too bad that this vote count ended up being off. because if it was accurate then the following posted earlier might have rang true:
On August 03 2010 05:07 Divinek wrote: it's great cause everyone that has voted so far is quite quite town like in my eyes, cant wait for the mafia to place their votes on some wagon!
If the mafia knew the vote count was off they may not have tried anything and spread there votes. I would like to hear from the confirmed (Divinek, D3) what there thoughts are on the current situation.
Right now I am leaning towards Misder, he has been playing like Xelin this whole game, and his votes have been very strange. Don't know if it is enough to hang someone.
I just remembered a list of his posts was compiled earlier, so I went back and found them I will re-post them in case anyone else wants to look over them as well.
|
1st Batch + Show Spoiler +On July 30 2010 03:57 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Compendium of posts by or about Misder (Part 1) + Show Spoiler +Page 9 On July 17 2010 00:38 Misder wrote: How do you know who's mafia if there are no clues? Behavior? Page 11 On July 17 2010 11:27 Misder wrote: So... are we lynching now? Page 17 This was the first vote on Hyperbola, who ended up getting lynched. Prior to this post, nine different people had one vote each on them. Misder ended the day with his vote on LaxerCannon, though... On July 18 2010 10:43 Misder wrote:##Vote: hyperbolaShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 08:10 Hyperbola wrote: Hello my fellow Liquadians. I am here and active. Sup. Just posting here not to get killed. Btw SiNiquity is mafia because his last post is just way too long. #### I vote SiNiquity Sketchy to me. He says hes active, but says he only posted because he does want to be killed. And hyperbola's reason to lynch SiNiquity is horrible lol. I was actually going to abstain, but hyperbola's post annoyed me lol. More vote analysis: Misder voted with SouthRawrea (as well as Roffles and Citi.zen) against Chaoser on Day 2. Day 3, Misder voted for me rather than citi.zen or southrawrea (citi.zen died). Day 4, Misder voted for Pandain rather than BC. Page 19 On July 18 2010 13:22 Misder wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 12:23 Hyperbola wrote:On July 18 2010 11:10 SiNiquity 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. There's a 27% chance we will hit a blue tonight. The mafia has a 57% chance of hitting a blue on the first night. But if you want a good reason, then I'd consider hyperbola. Not to look petty, but his only contribution is "Hi, I'm active!" In fact, if you search his recent games, he's been inactive in most of them, and the last one he used this to his advantage to fly under the radar as mafia. So he has a history of being inactive. Assuming this continues, he's either an inactive townie or mafia, but either way it works to our advantage to lynch him. Hrm. Exactly what scum would do. Starting a bandwagon against me when I've accused one of their operatives. And SiNiquity, you took your time to write another rather lengthy post against me. I'm quite flattered but this is quite suspicious in my book. You almost seem on edge and unload the big guns on a random passerby on the street who looked you the wrong way. And as a semi-legitimate defense: I'm quite quiet in all of my games. Yes I have been mafia in some but I've also had my fair share of green and blue roles. You've picked the wrong person to act as your scapegoat bucko. Um... I'm not aligned with SiNiquity at all right now. I know nothing of him. However, I do know that your post seems really... odd, to say the least. Also, what is wrong with a lengthy post? His first lengthy post was just a list of names that have not contributed (I was on that list... hopefully I'm doing ok helping out the town as much as I can). His second lengthy response, I admit, is completely against you; but he has a point. Just because you were townie aligned before does not mean that you can act sketchy and get away with it. Page 22 Misder asks Amber[Light] why he is trusting Xelin On July 19 2010 02:27 Misder wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 01:34 Amber[LighT] wrote: ###vote youngminii if I have to trust someone I trust xelin. I'm going to follow his decisions till the end of the day at least.
Sorry got to the game early so I read some posts :D Why exactly do you trust Xelin out of all the players here? As for the hyperbola bandwagon: I didn't really mean to actually start the bandwagon xD I just pointed out that his posts don't provide substance at all, and his defense is very poor. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 02:06 Hyperbola wrote: You seem pretty adamant about accusing me for like a quick post I made a while back. Look dude, I'll spill the beans, my post against Sinequity wasn't serious. I still can't believe you haven't caught on to that by now. I accuse him for making a long post just for fun and I also didn't feel like abstaining. I also like being quiet and examining things behind the lines. What you're gonna crucify me every game for not posting often? I'm keeping my vote on Sinequity as a placeholder, mmkay? and I think this came a way too late. Why not say this when defending himself the first time? He's just asking to be lynched... Page 25 Vote changed to LaxerCannon 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 ##Unvote: Hyperbola 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... Page 30 Impatient for day post 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 ##Unvote: Hyperbola 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!!!! Page 31 Deflects blame for Hyperbola bandwagon onto followers BrownBear, zeks, and Subversion On July 20 2010 13:44 Misder wrote:BrownBear, zeks, and Subversion are the three people that originally voted for Hyperbola... just because. As people already pointed out, they are under the most suspicion because they just went the easy way out, without needing to read the thread. I think that we should lynch one of these three. Either they are mafia who don't want to come out or townies that aren't helping anything by jumping on bandwagons which was decisive in who we lynched on Day 1 (could have been 4-5 if they actually read the thread and had their own ideas). + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 13:11 Bill Murray wrote: the day technically started at 9 pm est/10 kst my girlfriend and i have been fighting, and i'm sorry that that inhibited my ability to resolve the night's action on time, but we really needed a night out together, and went to see the movie inception. i would like to add that i am now engaged to be married. i will make the day start from midnight tonight as a result. let me go through the actions and see who was to be killed/protected/etc. Congrats! I'm sorry about making you rush the day post >.< Page 36 BloodyC0bbler makes a big post including why he thinks Zeks and Misder are town. Why would the GF make a post trying to convince town that two town-aligned people are town-aligned? Page 36 Misder puts FoS on lakrismamma, citi.zen, and DTA for Foolishness's death (note I used this in my case against DTA). On July 21 2010 03:18 Misder wrote:Foolishness's posts interest me a lot. I'm not sure if he was targeted because of his posts or because he was active, but we can look at his posts. (these posts are in backward order>.< sorry.) + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 09:31 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 09:25 Pandain wrote:Hmm time passes too fast. As this is my first mafia game, I'm extra afraid I'm going to die. So in case I die, I'll live something that players can easily check on if they want to. It's the posts by each player in the game, in case a player wants to check up on something. Tree.Hugger: + Show Spoiler +BrownBear + Show Spoiler +Oh god there are 600 posts. How could I be so stupid -.-. Unless people really want me to keep making these(which I'll of course do, gladly) I'll be doing it farily slowly. + Show Spoiler +This was harder than I thought . Oh well. You'd have an easier time if you look at lakrismamma or citi.zen If the mafia did target Foolishness for his posts, it seems to point fingers at lakrismamma or citi.zen. We can't be positive, but we can be suspicious, especially since most of Foolishness' posts are targeting citi.zen + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 08:30 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 08:22 DarthThienAn wrote:Foolishness, are you so innocent yourself? You haven't really posted at all. Unofficial Start of the Game: Your first post after it: which doesn't really say much.
2nd post: A ninja abstain vote to avoid modkill. Let's see if you change it later / actually contribute. 3rd post: There's the switch. You go to BC based on "bad vibes," claim busy IRL, and promise future activity. Your next post: A summary of what happened during the voting. Implies youngminii, BrownBear, and bumatlarge might all be mafia together. Next (two): Basically saying that we can't pull much from the voting patterns without more information than the vote talliers have given us. Next: Bashing on me for... what, joking around a bit and still providing about as much content as you? Gonna stop there as the other posts are pretty recent. So how much content have you provided? Not much. And all of it is within the last two pages. Sure you're busy with life and all, but maybe I'm busy with life too. Maybe we're all busy with life, except flamewheel. Sure, I might be spamming a bit here and there, but maybe I don't have much to say / don't have the time to write it all out. This isn't about me. This is about you. I gave reason for my actions. Where's your reasons on why you're acting "like Chezinu"? Most people are blind so let me spell it out for everyone. You're hiding something. It's clear that you're attitude is the result of the fact you know some information that you don't want everyone else to know. That means you're blue or red. I'm sure I'm not the only one to figure this out, and if you're blue I bet a mafia member has figured this out. And if you don't have much to say/don't have the time to write it all out, go get yourself replaced. By the way, shoving arguments against me to try to divert attention off of yourself is terrible. You should know me well enough I'm just going to keep pressuring you until you claim or until I get 75% of the town to vote for you. If you want me off your back, all you got to do is point out how someone else is obviously mafia and you're not. I mean, all you had to do there was say "I'm not mafia, citizen is clearly mafia, look at his posts; clearly scum". And if you were somewhat serious about it I'd totally divert attention off of you since citizen is such an easy kill for the town. Here, we see Foolishness attack DTA. DTA has been acting very very weird, and I agree with Foolishness about DTA hiding something. The mafia may be scared of Foolishness because of his attacks on fellow mafia members. This points fingers to DTA. Also, Foolishness makes it clear that citi.zen is a target for lynching, and that DTA could have pointed fingers to him. + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 08:12 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 08:08 DarthThienAn wrote:On July 20 2010 08:05 Foolishness wrote:On July 20 2010 08:01 DarthThienAn wrote:Guys if I die tonight, then I am mafia. Death Post: + Show Spoiler + You might as well just roleclaim whatever blue role you have to the town. I mean, if the mafia don't kill you tonight they are either stupid or you are in fact mafia. If you aren't dead after night then you should be top priority for lynch. Of course, you could just actually act normal and help us out to save you a bunch of trouble. lol. Just doing my job ^^. On another note, I think Hyberbola was Godfather, so he flipped green... I mean, BM didn't officially say that he was a townie in the night post. :D:D:D I do appreciate you making it easy for all of us on who to vote for as soon as day starts. Mafia have probably sent in their hits already. Just claim now. The earlier the better. More assertiveness. Very scary for the mafia. + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 08:05 Foolishness wrote:You might as well just roleclaim whatever blue role you have to the town. I mean, if the mafia don't kill you tonight they are either stupid or you are in fact mafia. If you aren't dead after night then you should be top priority for lynch. Of course, you could just actually act normal and help us out to save you a bunch of trouble. More attacks on DTA. I feel that this is an important quote, considering that the mafia didn't target DTA this night. + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 08:02 Foolishness wrote: The ordered by player list doesn't help for anything.
The only thing that's useful out of these lists is tracking the changes of who was ahead in the voting and how they got ahead. For instance, youngminii was ahead in votes at some point (I believe), looking at who were the people that pushed Hyperbola over is what's important. You also need the timestamps of when these votes happen, in order to confirm if there was a mafia pushover.
It's been said before, mafia spread out their votes as much as possible. I wouldn't be surprised if there was only 1 mafia in the votes for youngminii and hyperbola combined. The only exception to this is if a mafia was about to be lynched, as the team would try to save that person. That's what we need to look out for. People already talked about this. That means we are on the right track. ##Vote: DarthThienAn because of his weird behavior and bring confusion. If he is a blue role or a townie, then he will need to defend himself in order to actually help the town. If he is a mafia, good. On July 21 2010 03:21 Misder wrote:I would also like to point out this post by citi.zen. + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 10:09 citi.zen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 09:31 Foolishness wrote:On July 20 2010 09:25 Pandain wrote:Hmm time passes too fast. As this is my first mafia game, I'm extra afraid I'm going to die. So in case I die, I'll live something that players can easily check on if they want to. It's the posts by each player in the game, in case a player wants to check up on something. Tree.Hugger: + Show Spoiler +BrownBear + Show Spoiler +Oh god there are 600 posts. How could I be so stupid -.-. Unless people really want me to keep making these(which I'll of course do, gladly) I'll be doing it farily slowly. + Show Spoiler +This was harder than I thought . Oh well. You'd have an easier time if you look at lakrismamma or citi.zen I know you're not a bad player, so this attempt to cast doubts on me out of the blue strikes me as odd. Especially since you're grouping me with lakrismama - which makes zero sense, as you would know full well it if you were honestly searching for reds. Look at his posts: Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 15:25 lakrismamma wrote:On July 18 2010 12:03 citi.zen wrote: A few comments on how I see the game going:
1. PMs are allowed so trust circles are the way to go. Sooner or later they will form because of Dt checks, medic protection, vet soaking up a hit when we know they are the lone vet, etc. When this happens we'll be in good shape. 2. BCs list is fine, but many people seem to miss its point entirely. 3. There is no roleblocker, but there is a suicide bomber. Be very careful with your circles. Speak through confirmed townies if possible. 4. We lynch an inactive and/or bad player day one. Hyperbola is a fine target. Bumatlarge is ok too, bringing grudges from prior games here can derail us for many pages. 5. I already voted for Darth, why is it not counted? I will likely change it, but still! Good post! Abstaining is stupid. Part of why suggesting voting for for inactive persons is to make that person become active to defend himself therefore we get more to read from and mafia cant hide in the inactives. I think Hyperbola has defended himself pretty well. ##vote LaxerCannonHe is usually more active so get to it Laxer. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 03:46 lakrismamma wrote: I think youngminii has a point. I think we should keep an eye on hyperbola and him but not lynch them. DTA is probably just inactive town. But in that case we have no need for him either. So he is a decent alternative.
I will follow citizen though to create a third alternative.
##Unvote ##vote ketomai Transparent much? No mafia, in any game that I have seen, risks showing this "support" towards each other on day 1. You know this. And you Sir are now looking very red. Foolishness has been pointed out as having odd behavior. He may have been a future lynching target. Why would the mafia target someone who is suspicious of being red? Page 36 Citi.zen points out that Misder's collection of Foolishness's post leaves out the one where Foolishness votes for BloodyC0bbler! On July 21 2010 03:29 citi.zen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 03:21 Misder wrote:I would also like to point out this post by citi.zen. + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 10:09 citi.zen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 09:31 Foolishness wrote:On July 20 2010 09:25 Pandain wrote:Hmm time passes too fast. As this is my first mafia game, I'm extra afraid I'm going to die. So in case I die, I'll live something that players can easily check on if they want to. It's the posts by each player in the game, in case a player wants to check up on something. Tree.Hugger: + Show Spoiler +BrownBear + Show Spoiler +[url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5612556]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5612556 [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5740359]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5740359 [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5740736]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5740736[/url] [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5755546]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5755546[/url] [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5755551]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5755551[/url] [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5755555]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5755555[/url] [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5756205]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5756205[/url] Oh god there are 600 posts. How could I be so stupid -.-. Unless people really want me to keep making these(which I'll of course do, gladly) I'll be doing it farily slowly. + Show Spoiler +This was harder than I thought . Oh well. You'd have an easier time if you look at lakrismamma or citi.zen I know you're not a bad player, so this attempt to cast doubts on me out of the blue strikes me as odd. Especially since you're grouping me with lakrismama - which makes zero sense, as you would know full well it if you were honestly searching for reds. Look at his posts: Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 15:25 lakrismamma wrote:On July 18 2010 12:03 citi.zen wrote: A few comments on how I see the game going:
1. PMs are allowed so trust circles are the way to go. Sooner or later they will form because of Dt checks, medic protection, vet soaking up a hit when we know they are the lone vet, etc. When this happens we'll be in good shape. 2. BCs list is fine, but many people seem to miss its point entirely. 3. There is no roleblocker, but there is a suicide bomber. Be very careful with your circles. Speak through confirmed townies if possible. 4. We lynch an inactive and/or bad player day one. Hyperbola is a fine target. Bumatlarge is ok too, bringing grudges from prior games here can derail us for many pages. 5. I already voted for Darth, why is it not counted? I will likely change it, but still! Good post! Abstaining is stupid. Part of why suggesting voting for for inactive persons is to make that person become active to defend himself therefore we get more to read from and mafia cant hide in the inactives. I think Hyperbola has defended himself pretty well. ##vote LaxerCannonHe is usually more active so get to it Laxer. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 03:46 lakrismamma wrote: I think youngminii has a point. I think we should keep an eye on hyperbola and him but not lynch them. DTA is probably just inactive town. But in that case we have no need for him either. So he is a decent alternative.
I will follow citizen though to create a third alternative.
##Unvote ##vote ketomai Transparent much? No mafia, in any game that I have seen, risks showing this "support" towards each other on day 1. You know this. And you Sir are now looking very red. Foolishness has been pointed out as having odd behavior. He may have been a future lynching target. Why would the mafia target someone who is suspicious of being red? Good collection of posts man, congrats! You left out this one: Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 08:25 Foolishness wrote: Switching my Vote from abstain:
##Vote BloodyCobbler
Just based on bad vibes so far. I am busy irl the past few days, but I will be active permanently by the first night for the rest of the game. If the first night goes by and I haven't made an active contribution feel free to hold me accountable. Page 43 Misder changes vote from DTA (who gets lynched) to Chaoser On July 22 2010 01:32 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 21 2010 13:01 chaoser wrote: 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
NEW VOTES:
chaoser votes Subversion at 6:02 BrownBear abstains at 6:52 Pandain votes chaoser at 6:53 Jayme votes Subversion at 8:20 youngminii votes chaoser at 8:32 chaoser unvotes, abstains at 9:25 LaXerCannon abstains at 9:27 SouthRawrea votes for chaoser at 11:19 chaoser votes for Subversion at 12:34
hmm, let's test something. this is either going to bite me in the ass or go very well for me
##vote Subversion
End result: BrownBear - 5 (Divinek, Amber[LighT], ~OpZ~, rastaban, Tricode) Subversion - 5 (tree.hugger, DarthThienAn, bumatlarge, Jayme, chaoser) DarthThienAn - 3 (d3_crescentia, Misder, Pyrrhuloxia) chaoser - 3 (Pandain, youngminii, SouthRawrea) abstain - 2 (BrownBear, LaXerCannon)
People yet to vote: xelin, SiNiquity, lakrismamma, Infundibulum, Subversion, BloodyC0bbler, Citi.zen, zeks, protactinium, roffles
Chaoser won't tell us what he is experimenting. Here's what I think he is doing. Remember subversion's post? + Show Spoiler +On July 21 2010 09:09 Subversion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 06:09 citi.zen wrote:On July 21 2010 05:56 DarthThienAn wrote:On July 21 2010 05:51 Pandain wrote: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. There's the possibility that d3 is a mafia faking taking a hit. It's low chance, but not 0% so I didn't leave it out. Other than that, he's either a veteran and/or got medic protection. What do you mean? My thoughts: Mafia FAILED last night strategically. Subversion was NOT being sarcastic/joking (look at his post). So why would he say that? Furthermore, even if the mafia HAD failed, saying that "mafia aren't making too many mistakes" is an extremely odd statement to make. Sure, it's not the best lead, but it's better than me, and I'm willing to let BB redeem himself if he happens to be a terrible townie. Subversion, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be on the path to correction at all. I don't know... I am leaning with Pandain here. Subversion is a brand new player who does not know what to expect in these games. I can see him think... "How do you catch mafia? You watch for mistakes! Have we caught any? Nope. Ah - so thus far they aren't making too many mistakes." I see no huge red flag. That said, he does not strike me as someone useful for the town so I am OK losing him if there are no better candidates. THANK YOU fucking hell. I played in ONE NIGHT of harry potter mafia, I got temp banned for some stupid joke and got replaced This is my first game ffs, I didn't realise what I said would make it "oh gg, he's mafia lol, what a fkn moron". I was trying to be useful Seems like everyone is jumping on my voting bandwagon, I get what I said was stupid now, although I still don't really understand why its a fucknormous mistake. I was simply stating what to me, was a fairly obvious fact. It was kind of a justification for my vote to be honest. I didn't see any major mistakes, I didn't have anyone I felt REALLY deserved a vote, but I didn't wanna abstain and I thought Hyperbola was fucked anyway. So I read what he said and what others said, there didn't really seem like any better choice, so I just voted for him. Like I said, I didn't really think my vote mattered much anyway. I also had Bill up my ass saying I was gonna be modkilled if I didn't vote! I really don't want to be voted out here, I don't want to roleclaim either, but I can if necessary?? I think that chaoser is trying to get subversion to roleclaim. He voted for subversion to pressure subversion to roleclaim to defend himself. Do not roleclaim yet. This makes me very very suspicious of chaoser. I may be completely paranoid, but its scummy to me. ##Unvote DarthThienAn Vote chaoser On July 22 2010 01:43 Misder wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 23:48 citi.zen wrote: Oh, I could also be persuaded to vote for misder if you guys like him more than zeks. Uh... Is there a reason why I'm under suspicion? If there is, what is it?
|
2nd Batch
+ Show Spoiler +On July 30 2010 03:58 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Part 2 + Show Spoiler +Page 44 Says he is suspicious of Zeks and BC On July 22 2010 03:30 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 22 2010 02:09 citi.zen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 01:43 Misder wrote:On July 21 2010 23:48 citi.zen wrote: Oh, I could also be persuaded to vote for misder if you guys like him more than zeks. Uh... Is there a reason why I'm under suspicion? If there is, what is it? Glad you asked! I am intrigued by the trifecta of you/zeks/BC. If one of you turned red, I'd heavily suspect the others. The converse obviously does not necessarily hold. BC concluded in his long post that zeks and misder are likely innocents who left the hyperbola bandwagon when they realized what a monster of a creation is was, and that it was probably leading to lynching an innocent player (hello day 1 lynches). Seems like a pretty strong thing to infer, but the man has mad experience, so who knows. Both zeks and misder use the same argument for their switch: they never voted with any conviction, only to make hyperbola become more active. Then foolishness got killed and the ever so helpful misder put together a post on foolishnes' accusations about me and darth, conveniently forgetting to include the fact that foolishness voted for BC. This post was an obvious attempt to start suspicion, but mysteriously misder never followed up on it once Amber 'splained it to him: Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 03:29 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 21 2010 03:21 Misder wrote: I would also like to point out this post by citi.zen. [nr: the rest of the quote does not paste well - go find it yourselves] Because then it puts the finger-pointers in a position when players, such as yourself, go back and analyze the posts. This is actually a common ruse to cause the town to run around in circles as townies battle townies. It's not to say your analysis is invalid, but it could just be a breadcrumb trail to no-wheres-ville setup and managed by the mafia. Most townies enjoy debating their hunches, mafia prefers to start shit and then lay low - this is exactly what you did here. So yeah, I think you make an excellent lynching candidate. If you turned red we'd have a lead on other players. If you are not lynched you or zeks should get checked tonight (not BC - if red he would be the GF who put himself up for checking). That's my little conspiracy theory of the day! + 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 I never said the only reason to vote to lynch him was to get him active. I said it was a plus. + Show Spoiler +blah. 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... My reason for lynching him was this + Show Spoiler +As for the hyperbola bandwagon: I didn't really mean to actually start the bandwagon xD I just pointed out that his posts don't provide substance at all, and his defense is very poor. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 02:06 Hyperbola wrote: You seem pretty adamant about accusing me for like a quick post I made a while back. Look dude, I'll spill the beans, my post against Sinequity wasn't serious. I still can't believe you haven't caught on to that by now. I accuse him for making a long post just for fun and I also didn't feel like abstaining. I also like being quiet and examining things behind the lines. What you're gonna crucify me every game for not posting often? I'm keeping my vote on Sinequity as a placeholder, mmkay? and I think this came a way too late. Why not say this when defending himself the first time? He's just asking to be lynched... Nothing in there said that I wanted him to be active. I changed my vote because he contributed a lot to the town even though he was under attack. No mafia member would do this. This is pro-town behavior. The reason why I gathered up the posts from Foolishness was to see if we could find anything from his posts. It wasn't like I was making a claim based on Foolishness's posts, just making sure we didn't miss out on something that the mafia didn't want Foolishness to expand on. Foolishness was a clear advocate for lynching DTA and you (citi.zen). Mafia may have wanted to kill Foolishness before he can expand. After Amber's post, I didn't know if I was going the right direction or not. It seemed like what I was doing was not helping, so I stopped. I thought that I got my point across with original post, and I left it at that. Do not put me in the same category as zeks or BC. I have my own suspicion of both of them... though not as thought out. Page 62 On July 22 2010 12:44 Misder wrote: ##Vote Double lynch
I have a feeling that after today, we are going to have a huge crapload of people under suspicion... Page 63 On July 22 2010 12:48 Misder wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 12:45 Pandain wrote: But yeah Darth, just for your own interests you might want to vote Chaoser just because I'm definitely not voting Subversion. Darth already said that hes went to sleep xD On July 22 2010 12:50 Misder wrote: One more person needs to vote double lynch for it to pass!! On July 22 2010 12:50 Misder wrote: It is majority vote for double lynch, right? On July 22 2010 12:54 Misder wrote: oh, lol. When I looked at BM vote tally, I thought there were 15 people left and we needed 8 people... stupid me. Page 71 Citi.zen wonder why no one is responding to or following with his suspicion of Misder. Pandain replies to say he thinks Zeks is more suspicious than Misder. On July 23 2010 06:09 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 05:46 citi.zen wrote:On July 23 2010 05:19 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2010 03:08 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 23 2010 03:04 BrownBear wrote:On July 23 2010 02:42 Amber[LighT] wrote: I'm praying that the DT's made use of this lynch so we can pick out alignment. This should be apparent, but NOBODY SHOULD TELL MEDICS OR DTs WHAT TO DO IN THE THREAD. OR EVEN HINT AT IT. The suicide bomber is still out there. That's why I'm glad we haven't. It's better for the DT's to (hopefully) be on top of their own jobs without us spewing "oh do this." If they feel that what they're doing is better than what's being suggested in the thread then that's fine. The game is relying on their diligence at this point and I've stated what I would expect from the DT's throughout much of the game. This goes for the other blues as well. Unless the town comes to some kind of judgement about who to check, then we really don't need to worry too deeply about him. As we all know, just because I say something doesn't mean we're going to do it. For example, it's important that the town talks about citi.zen and BC. Both are veterans, both are smart, both are good at this game. Also, both have been utterly useless so far, popping in once in a while to tell the town that it's doing it all wrong, without ever adding something concrete. It's that kind of ambiguous grey area of activity and inactivity that the mafia love to hide in. Of course, Subversion or youngminii would be great checks as well, seeing as how they're both the same color, and it'd be useful to find out what that is. And surely none of these people would object to them being checked, because they have nothing to fear, right? I've actually tried to contribute, it's just that nobody cares to read anything but their own little flame wars. Has there been a single reply to my accusation of misder? Crickets - after asking me why I suspected him even he hasn't followed up at all - why draw attention to yourself when there is not risk of getting lynched? I also thought lynching zeks would be a decent idea, and said that if he is red we could have 2 more strong suspects, remember? Here's one more: look above you at Chaoser's posts. What he is doing is textbook red in my experience. The endless "voting behavior" discussions are a great way for the mafia to distract everyone for pages and pages, but I am yet to see a red "caught" based on it. It does however offer a great way to seem "active" without risking much - all you're doing is summarizing data without even commenting on it (why risk slipping up!). Another subtle and common bit of mafia behavior is to be more dismissive than usual, saying things like "I'm not your mom" or "screw you" rather than respond in a way that encourages further discussion. It works great when it's done by veterans against new players, but everyone does it to some degree. All the while, Chaoser was active and online, even posting in other threads. Am I being too ambiguous? I actually followed up on your suscipion of misder/zeks and I've decided that misder is much more town-likely than zeks. Misder I feel is actually contributing while Zeks posts' aren't that praiseworthy much. In addition, I negated the idea of ALL the three of them being mafia (misder,zeks, BC) because as misder says in this post he includes zeks in being under suscipion. Obviously that could just be a mafia ploy, but it does help lend credibility to Misder. In addition, Misder could be mafia too. Looking over his posts I found a few that are suscipious, but not neccesarily mafia like. Here we see his reasoning ORIGINALLY for voting Hyperbola, but of course I take this to mean a joking sort of vote. He does question Hyperbola but then later unvote him here. A theory could be laid that Misder wanted to "start" the bandwagon on Hyperbola and than jump out. This could be possible, but I believe it is too early to call such a thing certain. Even more theories(all speculative) could be laid out supporting him being mafia. For example, in this post he begins to show how Foolishness's death could have been caused by his posts "accusing people." Misder could just be using this to help the mafia, or he could just be trying to help. Either way, uncertain. More questionable is what you point out that in that post he forgot to include Foolishness's vote for BC. As of now, should we vote Misder? No. Should we keep an eye on him? Perhaps. Personally I feel zeks is a better suspect. I've compiled a list of his posts and notes I can share, but as of now they're pretty sloppy and just my thoughts. I'll probably reveal it later. Finally, as for BC? not sure yet. He's a mafia vet, therefore should be watched closely, but I'm not sure if there are close enough ties to tie him to mafia. Especially a 3 person maifa. Unless you have more posts by BC which could indicate him, I'm more likely to just suspect Zeks. A note about Zeks: One of the reasons I suspect him is because he's fairly quiet. More so than probably 95% of people.*cough* Tricode *Cough*. Speak up zeks, I'll probably change my mind about you. So yeah, those are just my thoughts. Just wanted you to know I have been thinking about that post. In short: Interesting idea, but we need more evidence/posts. I feel like one of the things holding us back is that certain people aren't speaking that often. Does it make them mafia? Certainly not. Can it be indicative of a mafia? Certainly. These thoughts are certainly not final, and I'm still in the process of analyzing and deciding. Page 72 Misder responds On July 23 2010 08:36 Misder wrote:citi.zen's post + Show Spoiler +On July 22 2010 02:09 citi.zen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 01:43 Misder wrote:On July 21 2010 23:48 citi.zen wrote: Oh, I could also be persuaded to vote for misder if you guys like him more than zeks. Uh... Is there a reason why I'm under suspicion? If there is, what is it? Glad you asked! I am intrigued by the trifecta of you/zeks/BC. If one of you turned red, I'd heavily suspect the others. The converse obviously does not necessarily hold. BC concluded in his long post that zeks and misder are likely innocents who left the hyperbola bandwagon when they realized what a monster of a creation is was, and that it was probably leading to lynching an innocent player (hello day 1 lynches). Seems like a pretty strong thing to infer, but the man has mad experience, so who knows. Both zeks and misder use the same argument for their switch: they never voted with any conviction, only to make hyperbola become more active. Then foolishness got killed and the ever so helpful misder put together a post on foolishnes' accusations about me and darth, conveniently forgetting to include the fact that foolishness voted for BC. This post was an obvious attempt to start suspicion, but mysteriously misder never followed up on it once Amber 'splained it to him: Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 03:29 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 21 2010 03:21 Misder wrote: I would also like to point out this post by citi.zen. [nr: the rest of the quote does not paste well - go find it yourselves] Because then it puts the finger-pointers in a position when players, such as yourself, go back and analyze the posts. This is actually a common ruse to cause the town to run around in circles as townies battle townies. It's not to say your analysis is invalid, but it could just be a breadcrumb trail to no-wheres-ville setup and managed by the mafia. Most townies enjoy debating their hunches, mafia prefers to start shit and then lay low - this is exactly what you did here. So yeah, I think you make an excellent lynching candidate. If you turned red we'd have a lead on other players. If you are not lynched you or zeks should get checked tonight (not BC - if red he would be the GF who put himself up for checking). That's my little conspiracy theory of the day! my post + Show Spoiler +On July 22 2010 03:30 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 22 2010 02:09 citi.zen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 01:43 Misder wrote:On July 21 2010 23:48 citi.zen wrote: Oh, I could also be persuaded to vote for misder if you guys like him more than zeks. Uh... Is there a reason why I'm under suspicion? If there is, what is it? Glad you asked! I am intrigued by the trifecta of you/zeks/BC. If one of you turned red, I'd heavily suspect the others. The converse obviously does not necessarily hold. BC concluded in his long post that zeks and misder are likely innocents who left the hyperbola bandwagon when they realized what a monster of a creation is was, and that it was probably leading to lynching an innocent player (hello day 1 lynches). Seems like a pretty strong thing to infer, but the man has mad experience, so who knows. Both zeks and misder use the same argument for their switch: they never voted with any conviction, only to make hyperbola become more active. Then foolishness got killed and the ever so helpful misder put together a post on foolishnes' accusations about me and darth, conveniently forgetting to include the fact that foolishness voted for BC. This post was an obvious attempt to start suspicion, but mysteriously misder never followed up on it once Amber 'splained it to him: Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 03:29 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 21 2010 03:21 Misder wrote: I would also like to point out this post by citi.zen. [nr: the rest of the quote does not paste well - go find it yourselves] Because then it puts the finger-pointers in a position when players, such as yourself, go back and analyze the posts. This is actually a common ruse to cause the town to run around in circles as townies battle townies. It's not to say your analysis is invalid, but it could just be a breadcrumb trail to no-wheres-ville setup and managed by the mafia. Most townies enjoy debating their hunches, mafia prefers to start shit and then lay low - this is exactly what you did here. So yeah, I think you make an excellent lynching candidate. If you turned red we'd have a lead on other players. If you are not lynched you or zeks should get checked tonight (not BC - if red he would be the GF who put himself up for checking). That's my little conspiracy theory of the day! + 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 I never said the only reason to vote to lynch him was to get him active. I said it was a plus. + Show Spoiler +blah. 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... My reason for lynching him was this + Show Spoiler +As for the hyperbola bandwagon: I didn't really mean to actually start the bandwagon xD I just pointed out that his posts don't provide substance at all, and his defense is very poor. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 02:06 Hyperbola wrote: You seem pretty adamant about accusing me for like a quick post I made a while back. Look dude, I'll spill the beans, my post against Sinequity wasn't serious. I still can't believe you haven't caught on to that by now. I accuse him for making a long post just for fun and I also didn't feel like abstaining. I also like being quiet and examining things behind the lines. What you're gonna crucify me every game for not posting often? I'm keeping my vote on Sinequity as a placeholder, mmkay? and I think this came a way too late. Why not say this when defending himself the first time? He's just asking to be lynched... Nothing in there said that I wanted him to be active. I changed my vote because he contributed a lot to the town even though he was under attack. No mafia member would do this. This is pro-town behavior. The reason why I gathered up the posts from Foolishness was to see if we could find anything from his posts. It wasn't like I was making a claim based on Foolishness's posts, just making sure we didn't miss out on something that the mafia didn't want Foolishness to expand on. Foolishness was a clear advocate for lynching DTA and you (citi.zen). Mafia may have wanted to kill Foolishness before he can expand. After Amber's post, I didn't know if I was going the right direction or not. It seemed like what I was doing was not helping, so I stopped. I thought that I got my point across with original post, and I left it at that. Do not put me in the same category as zeks or BC. I have my own suspicion of both of them... though not as thought out. citi.zen, you've only made one post against me (with actual content), and I have responded earlier. Just saying. And if you really want to lynch me, you have tonight and day (mafia time) to present to the people before I can respond... (as I stated, I will not be able to get internet access tomorrow, and maybe even the day after tomorrow.) Page 78 Votes for me before day starts On July 23 2010 14:21 Misder wrote:##Vote Double Lynch ##Vote Pyrrholuxia For DTA Since I can't defend myself later and no one is probably going to defend me, I'll just say that I'm pro-town. My only sugestion is look at my posts. They are the only things defending me right now. Hopefully I will be able to get internet access sometime soon. Page 88 BC says: "A list of 6 where 1-2 will most likely be red Siniquity, Southrawrea, Pandain, subversion, misder, protactinium" Page 94 Lakrismamma says: "I think BC is being very suspicious in not not coming with any ideas except delaying the claims. I find it weird as well that he dident include Misder in his little investigation. Misder is one of the scummyest people in the game I think. For now though since we could not abstain too much according to BM." Page 96 Siniquity says: "I searched and it seems Misder is the only one that hasn't posted since the Tricode / Citi.zen claiming party and has hinted he would probably be inactive this go-around. I think everyone else has at least posted, though a few only dropped in some one liners just saying they were either active or trying to catch up and didn't reference Tricode / Citi.zen directly, so it could be they missed it." Page 97 BC says: "As for why I haven't analyzed misder? So what? I opted to snag people I saw obviously coasting/acting scummy. You know, rather than fingering me for who I didn't analyze, maybe you should spend time analyzing said person. Hell if you think you believe they are scum, maybe you should give a reason why other than "I think" Trying to put suspicion on me for who I didn't analyze is like saying "You contributed, but because your scum list and mine don't overlap 100% you must be red" instead of contributing yourself." Page 120 Zeks posts: "Double Lynch List (18/13): Siniquity, BrownBear, Protactinium, zeks, ~OpZ~, rastaban, bumatlarge, chaoser, tree.hugger, LaXerCannon, Pandain, lakrismamma, XeliN, citi.zen, youngminii, pyrrhuloxia, amber[light], Divinek Who is missing? Tree.hugger, BC, SouthRawrea, Infundibulum, Misder, Tricode, Subversion" Page 130 Tree.Hugger posts: " On July 26 2010 11:53 Divinek wrote: also there's way too many people in this game that dont post enough that are probably mob, how annoying d3, (citi.zen's favorite) Misder, XeliN (haha, never posts, never has to) " Page 135 Protractinium posts: "And so we have it here. Mafia killed Subversion, and I had a PM from Pandain telling me that the "other Detective" was going to check Subversion tonight, but to "keep Subversion from thinking that, and to just play it cool and to have him check Misder/lakrismamma." Page 136 Votes Pandain and SouthRawrea. Says we should lynch Zeks to see if BC is innocent or not. Says we should lynch Rastaban next. On July 26 2010 16:51 Misder wrote: ##vote Double Lynch ##vote SouthRawrea ##vote Pandain
I'm back. And I read through the entire thread. It confused the heck out of me... my first mafia game wasn't this complicated. >.< Here's my train of thought: SouthRawrea has been lying, and fake claiming. Easy enough. And when he is asked to post PMs, he retypes it. I think that he doesn't know what PM posting looks like, so in order to cover up his made up PMs, he says he retypes it. Pandain has been lying in the PMs. To me, this suggests that he is mafia. Even when he is PMing, he doesn't follow the plans that are given. I don't know anything about PMing in a mafia game, but it seems to be all a mind game. And it seems like Pandain is confusing as many people as possible. I don't feel like BC is mafia. If he is, we can prove it by lynching zeks. This is pretty flawed, but I just have a feeling (I could be completely wrong, in which...) I also think that we should consider lynching rastaban. rastaban's dt is fake; we cannot confirm whether he is lying or that his dt is lying. We lynch rastaban to get this info. Page 153 Pandain's top 4 suspects On July 29 2010 14:17 Pandain wrote: Top four list(in my opinion) Imo we should look at these user's collection of posts first. In no particular order 1.Misder 2.Pyrr 3.tree hugger 4.Opz Page 156 Divinek suspicious of Misder On July 29 2010 15:22 Divinek wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 15:16 youngminii wrote:On July 02 2010 07:57 Bill Murray wrote: 1. tree.hugger 2. brownbear 3. youngminii 4. chaoser 5. divinek 6. rastaban 7. Amber[LighT] 8. pandain 9. ~OpZ~ 10. d3_crescentia 11. Misder 12. Pyrrholuxia 13. Tricode 14. protactinium
Out of this list, there are 4 people that I am absolutely sure are town aligned. That leaves 10 people left. By using this double lynch today, there's a 1/5 chance that we hit mafia. It is crucial that we hit at least 1 mafia today because that will lower their KP to 1. If we don't hit any scum today, then there will be 10 people left tomorrow with 3 Mafia and no double lynches. Miss two more times and it's lights out for town. So while it's not GG if we miss today, it doesn't bode well for us at all if they're allowed to keep using their 2 KP.
There's a good chance Pandain is mafia and so he's my leading suspect. I propose that we lynch chaoser since he's pretty much next on my list. I know I was wrong about Infundibulum but we don't really have anyone better to lynch (unless you can come up with one), and chaoser was one of Zeks's leading suspects too. Aaaaand with that:
##Vote Pandain ##Vote chaoser hm i like you're list this is my modified one taking myself out of course(and the practically and absolutely confirmed greens) but you dont have to believe that, ill have to try to painfully read some of chaosers actual content posts 1. tree.hugger 2. brownbear 4. chaoser 8. pandain 9. ~OpZ~ 11. Misder 12. Pyrrholuxia 14. protactinium so yeah that's solid odds, im still really suspicious of misder. He still hasnt been saying shit, i might almost think he's a better candidate than chaoser, almost time to read his posts Page 157 Divinek and rastaban and I discuss Misder Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 16:08 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On July 29 2010 16:02 rastaban wrote:On July 29 2010 15:59 Divinek wrote:On July 29 2010 15:54 rastaban wrote: Uhg, just caught up, that was a horrible night. At least my read on Bumatlarge was correct.
I agree that Pandain is the way to go for our first vote, but I will hold off voting for him to see what defense he has. Really though I don't see how any argument would make it worth the risk of keeping a red alive, especially since we can drop their KP to 1 if we get one more.
Now who should we look at for the second lynch? So far Chaoser and Tree have both been put forth. I think I will go back through there posts and see if I can get a read on either one. please consider misder also! though i think both of your above are very good options as well Your right, I had forgotten he was listed as well. He seems to have been pretty quiet as well. I guess I should take a look at misder; all I have thought about him so far this game is that he helped me get DTA lynched. Page 158 Brown Bear votes Misder. First vote on Misder this game? I think so. Show nested quote +On July 30 2010 01:39 BrownBear wrote: In fact, you know what? I'm trusting Pandain on this one. He's given no reason for me to ever think he's mafia, and given that there are millers, I'm going to trust my gamesense over the DT check.
Plus, our secret friendship alliance is unbreakable :D
##UNVOTE: PANDAIN ##VOTE: MISDER ##KEEP VOTE ON DIVINEK
If he flips miller I shall be vindicated. Page 159 Pandain has a new top 4 list. This one omits OPZ and adds Divinek. Show nested quote +On July 30 2010 02:52 Pandain wrote: Also, Opz your right. I was putting you on the list cause' of your general attitutude. But I was just saying we should look at these user's posts, not theyre neccesarily mafia.
New top 4 list 1.Misder 2.Divinek 3.Tree.hugger 4.Pyrr.
Page 159 Pandain votes for Divinek and I. Divinek shoud be lynched first because somehow this will prove Misder's alignment? Show nested quote +On July 30 2010 03:10 Pandain wrote:Hmmm actually I think we shoud lynch divinek. When I'm miller, it will also become alot clearer. Look at the fact that he absolutely refused me to be able to defend myself AT ALL. Also, he accused Misder so if he's mafia I doubt he would accuse him this late in the game. OF course unless he's trying to build himself up for later game(to be trusted pro town.) Plus if he's mafia you know for sure im innocent Though I'm already majority lynched. Show nested quote +On July 30 2010 03:12 Pandain wrote: ##Vote Divinek ##Vote Pyrr
We lynch Divinek, we find out whether Misder's innocent or not.
|
|
where is Xelin for an epic ending post when we need him
|
On July 29 2010 08:40 XeliN wrote: Oh what villainous webs we weave, to entice naivety into our midst and feast upon it. The dice is rolled, the hour shall strike for one brave solider blindly entering into the den of the beast. Yet justice doth spread itself too far, and the virtuous too oft find themselves stifled under it's harrowing wings. Flee, oh flee this tainted land, the light is swept away by dusk, blurring deceit and truth, entwined. The colour of our countenance shall cease it's divisive nature. Lo! for the mighty and weak alike shall become unified within this spectrum of transcendency. Our virtue shall glimmer out through eschatological verification, Who shall journey bravely with me out of this most turbulent sea? Would the marked come companioned? The Dice is rolled...
I'm a wee bit infested and very much looking forward to meeting one, or more of you, on this most auspicious of nights.
|
On August 05 2010 06:16 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:16 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On August 05 2010 06:14 Pandain wrote: Haha it would be hilarious if there was actually an additional person and BM accidently mistyped. Would make my day :D Also: so it was BC, SR, Xelin, Proct, Rastaban, and pyrr? Sup yo? you like my team now =) Pretty sexy. Did proct(/mafia) plan this all out with framing me for subversions death.
Being miller was icing on the cake really
|
|
|
|