|
On September 23 2010 10:19 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 09:11 Foolishness wrote:
Incognito and Infundibulum are an internecine ingerence. They invaginate incondite, inchoate ingannations, that inquinate inimical ideas in infaust innocents. Their iniquity causes ingerence, so inly instruments to interpose their ingravescent inveighs only makes their interference inexpugnable. For infinity, they indite inopinate, inconscient inconsistencies, that incommode us insouciance innocents. Indeed, indiscriminatory interlude is inescapable. Indispensable intelligence is imperative, that these indign imbeciles be inculpated for their incontestably invictive interchanges. Their impregnable indecency is not imprevious to the induction of the innumerable innocents that inhabit this enterprise. Indubitably, Incognito and Infundibulum intention to insidiate us incontrovertibly interlocks them as mafia. Ingerence, ingannations, invictive, and imprevious are not words. However, invective and impervious are words. Insouciance is a noun used as an adjective. You want insouciant. The last sentence seems to be missing a possessive.
"Ingérence" is French for "interference."
"Ingannations" are deceptions.
"Invicitive" means "undefeatable" which isn't a word according to irrelevant people who fancy themselves hegemons. It is, without a doubt, the title of a fantastically awful movie.
|
On September 23 2010 10:59 meeple wrote:
odd choice for mafia... people seem to have a grudge against them
Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town.
Doesn't seem like an odd choice for me because Ace is one of the best players and Bill Murray was pretty cogent so far this game.
|
On September 22 2010 07:24 Incognito wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 05:52 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On September 22 2010 05:39 Incognito wrote:This post is interesting. YI wants to avoid a situation where town is divided with votes? That's interesting, since usually town gains more information from close votes...note how he splits his vote from his own team mate. I think he is worried because if the votes are split between two teams it is likely the mafia will be able to save the guilty one, if one of the two are guilty. Are you trying to defend him? Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 06:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
RoL has been a little more active than he usually is. He's usually hella inactive green or red. But BC is surely too quiet for my liking. Where are you James?
I thought they were maybe acting similar and blue but actually RoL is way more active than normal and BC is more inactive than normal which I don't know what to think about. RVS by BC makes me suspicious, especially when he puts it on a good player and criticizes lynching inactives while doing it. Of course that teams votes have been changed to meeple / yellowink, I believe, who Incog is now criticizing. Not sure what to think on m/yi yet, other than Incog's post did not convince me. Yeah, we know they're acting weird. You don't need to bring it up yet again. Especially since you're acting weirder than they are. You clearly are reading the thread. On the other hand, it seems to me like BC is in I don't care mode. The last two sentences just don't make sense. Nobody's switched to Team 7, and I didn't present anything against Team 7 yet. So I don't know what you're talking about.
I was trying to explain what I thought he was trying to say, which didn't seem as suspicious to me as it did to you, so yeah I suppose it is a defense.
I misread the vote count. It showed that meeple and yellowink were voting for bc/rol, when I was reading it the other way around (bc/rol voting for meeple/yellowink).
|
@ this whole LSB vs. Incognito thing
Incog and SR seem to be locked in on LSB because he is supposedly too passive. He's not close to the most passive person here. BrownBear hasn't done much except advocate a no lynch. More importantly, BC hasn't done shit.
I don't believe BC has an "I don't care mode." I see his name pop up on MSN often enough. I called him out for his placeholder vote on Foolishness and he didn't ever come back around to move it. RoL, is of course active this game, but that's even weirder than an inactive BC.
vote team 6
|
On September 23 2010 18:52 Incognito wrote:A few posts back, I noted Pyrr's defense of YellowInk: Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 05:52 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On September 22 2010 05:39 Incognito wrote:This post is interesting. YI wants to avoid a situation where town is divided with votes? That's interesting, since usually town gains more information from close votes...note how he splits his vote from his own team mate. I think he is worried because if the votes are split between two teams it is likely the mafia will be able to save the guilty one, if one of the two are guilty. My original post states that YellowInk's behavior is "interesting". My comment also implies that this "interesting" behavior is suspicious. In this post, Pyrr is being apologetic about YellowInk's behavior and is trying to justify it. Why is this weird? First of all, Pyrr hasn't really been directly defending people other than himself. In this post, he defends YellowInk directly, theorizing why YI would behave in such a way. Pyrr hasn't been defending anyone directly (although he has been saying we should give people time to respond before accusing aggressively (which in essence is its own type of defense)), yet pops up out of the blue to defend YellowInk. The most plausible reason why Pyrr did this is because YI is his other mafia teammate. Furthermore, in my original post, I merely stated that YI's behavior was "interesting". But Pyrr feels a need to defend YI preemptively. The are other possible reasons why Pyrr did this (like, he wanted to clarify a possibility), but these possibilities are improbable. Pyrr hasn't really been the clarifying type this game. He has had a far greater role raising questions about other teams: namely, Teams 2 and 6, and all of a sudden he pops up to clarify what someone was thinking? This is an out of place defense and certainly warrants heavy suspicion. Finally, the circumstances under which Pyrr defended YellowInk are out of place. Look at the posts of Pyrr and YellowInk and their relation to one another. On page 17, YellowInk says that he agrees with what people (presumably me?) had to say about Team 1's scumminess. He follows that with a vote on Team 1. He never changes that vote. Two pages later is Pyrr's post defending YellowInk. Pyrr is defending YellowInk even though YellowInk is voting for him. Now just think about that for a moment. Why would you defend someone who has voted for you? It doesn't make sense to defend someone who voted for you if you were a townie. The only reason why you would do that is if BOTH PLAYERS ARE MAFIA. Pyrr's defense of YellowInk confirms my suspicion that YellowInk didn't really want to lynch Pyrr and used meeple's no-lynch to effectively neutralize his vote. Pyrr wants to support YellowInk but overlooks the fact that YellowInk voted for him. Oh well, I'm happy with two easy mafia. [Vote]Team 7Main Point: 1) Pyrr slipped up. He defended someone out of the blue when there was no direct attack involved. He defended someone who voted for him. 2) Team 1 is mafia3) Team 7 is mafia+ Show Spoiler +*Note* This is supplementary information should you not be convinced by my unspoilered argument. This section is spoilered merely so that it does not distract people from my main point which is unspoilered above. PyrrOn September 23 2010 12:10 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
@ this whole LSB vs. Incognito thing
Incog and SR seem to be locked in on LSB because he is supposedly too passive. He's not close to the most passive person here. BrownBear hasn't done much except advocate a no lynch. More importantly, BC hasn't done shit.
I don't believe BC has an "I don't care mode." I see his name pop up on MSN often enough. I called him out for his placeholder vote on Foolishness and he didn't ever come back around to move it. RoL, is of course active this game, but that's even weirder than an inactive BC.
vote team 6 The only reason why LSB isn't passive is because he's popping up to defend himself. BrownBear has generated more real content than LSB. The most notable thing he said was: On September 21 2010 02:15 BrownBear wrote:There's a bit of an interesting dynamic starting to come out here. Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 15:30 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On September 20 2010 14:15 BrownBear wrote:On September 20 2010 09:32 SouthRawrea wrote:
So this is a really basic game of mafia. If the scenario is 2 mafia 6 townies, we're best of lynching from day 1, no buts or ifs. If we have only have a doctor the scenario is the same, lynch from day 1. The only difference is that we have a better chance of survival. The thing about a cop only scenario is that if mafia claims cop and the real cop counterclaims, we'll end up in a scenario where we'll have 1 mafia, 3 townies with the cop most likely dead. We'll most likely have 1 confirmed, 2 townies and 1 mafia at the end in which case we have a 1/3 shot at winning. Now what the mafia has to be careful of is if we have both a cop and a doctor in which case our chances of winning rise significantly because we'll be able to protect the confirmed cop after we realize that we were duped by the mafia fakecop. Now our two possible options are: 1) Lynch right away or 2) Wait a day for a possible guilty report and proceed to lynch regardless if cop outs himself. If we lynch right away for a scenario where we have a cop, we have a slight chance of outting our cop but it's nothing significant. In the end because we end the game on a mylo, it won't make a difference. However if we wait a day in a situation where we do not have a cop, it'll reduce our chances of winning. It doesn't really matter what we choose to do because we don't the setup of the game.
TL;DR We can choose NL or Lynch but it all depends on which of the game setups we have. Since we don't know which one it is, it doesn't matter which we pick. This was a really long, elegant way of saying absolutely jack shit. That's all SR ever posts. I don't think he posts any better when townie. I think he thinks he is contributing a lot but... he just manages to state the obvious and make it mind bangingly esoteric. Very unnerving. This could be a slip, or it could be Pyrry trying to gently suggest SR as mafia to us. This early in the game, I would be astonished if Pyrry slipped up that spectacularly, so I think he's trying to plant the SR-scum idea in our heads (inception?). On a related note, you claim here that SR is always a cryptic useless babblemouth. This is not a true statement. Look at TL Mafia XXX. SR is pretty concrete and understandable here, even if he posts a lot of one liners. He actively gives input, questions, theorizes, and states his opinion. That game he was townie. So either you're intentionally inaccurately portraying someone, like BrownBear said, or its another honest mistake. In any case, BrownBear bringing this point up is generating content. And BC does have his I don't care moments. I've seen plenty of games where BC just messed around or didn't take the game seriously. Most of them are in the middle of TL mafia history after he gets vanilla townie a bunch of times in a row. For an example, check out Mafia XV. Or the beginning of TL Mafia XXX where he was smurfing as Vayesh Moru. As for RoL, you either have a bad memory, or you don't care about having a good one. Check out TL Mafia XV. RoL is plenty active in that game. The vast number of gross misrepresentations that I have pointed out here is astonishing. Memory is a weird thing, so I can't really say much about this except that its bad play. Your play this game doesn't match anything from your past two games which have samples of both mafia and town play. I would buy the idea that you are trying to change up your style. The thing is, this game, the style you have chosen to switch to is not just bad play, its pro-mafia play. Memory is a weird thing, so I won't say you're mafia because of your horrid misinterpretations of others' posts, but that fact cannot be ignored. Its hard to believe that all the incorrect statements that I've outlined here are just coincidence. Lets take a look at Pyrr's post history this game. Bashing my plan Stating you have no suspicions Making non-committal prod statements against Ace/BM Misrepresentative statement about SR Defense of LSB Refuting the statement "SR is appealing to Pyrr's authority" More wishy-washy statements about SR Says we should be investigating people who are not Team 1,2,7 who were the most suspicious people at that point. A post that is illogical for a townie to make. A NL post A poke on Team 6 Chatter on medics/DT Pyrr is posting like LSB. An overall characteristic of Pyrr's posts is that he either posts neutral statements, defends against an accusation, or joins in on non-essential (non-scum hunting) conversation. No pro-town direction at all. Pokes out Team 6 for some shoddy reasoning. Mysteriously avoids getting suspicious of Team 7 and actually defends Team 7 directly. In this post, he starts crying and saying that he's trying to switch from the blame game (which failed him miserably last game), to a more cautious playstyle. Then he claims that he is unfairly perceived as scummy because he "points the finger" too much or "doesn't take a stance on anything". The finger pointing is only bad when based on bad logic and when it is actively pursued in a way that floods the thread so much that other people's voices are not heard. Which is what Pyrr did in TL Mafia XXX. So yes, the suspicion for these behaviors is warranted. Pyrr tries to get pity points by using two extreme examples of playstyle in an attempt to make me look like a triggerhappy. This is not the case. Pyrr is thinking in absolutes. There is more than a "finger pointing" style and a "neutral/no-stance" style. Namely, thoughtful analysis followed by a confident support of the conclusions of your analysis. (Read Ver's TL Mafia XXX review/guide to see how Pyrr's "analysis" in that game really wasn't very good). Another pro-town activity would be discussions of suspicions, but NOT to the point of spamming the thread. Its not that pointing out a lot of suspicions is bad. You have to rely on the quality of the suspicions and the quality of the discussion that follows. Pyrr's "finger pointing" is more than finger pointing. Its aggressive finger pointing with shoddy evidence. In this post, Pyrr is asking for pity and is using appeal to emotion and faulty logic to shrug off accusations on the basis that I'm trigger happy. Main Points: 1. Pyrr's complaint that I'm being unreasonable by attacking his vicious finger pointing and his "neutral" stance + uselessness is absolutist and absurd. 2. Pyrr's posts spread doubt and do not draw informative conclusions. 3. Pyrr's posts are useless, don't show direction, and fit the motive of a mafia wanting to spread doubt while staying low profile and preventing town from going in the right direction. 4. While LSB's posts are scummy, Pyrr's posts are too. There is little doubt that Team 1 is mafia. I was going to post some motive analysis on Team 7, but got side tracked with Pyrr and his unnatural defense of YellowInk. I now feel that a complete analysis of Team 7 is unnecessary at this point, but I will post that tomorrow IF AND ONLY IF people don't buy my above argument. I'm too tired to post it now.
I love how I am supposedly defending Yellowink just because I gave a more likely explanation of what he was trying to say than what you were bringing up.
I did the exact thing for SouthRawrea and everyone thought we were mafia buddies for the next five pages. Now incognito is characterizing it as an attack on SouthRawrea along with half the town, while the other half is saying that I am defending some mafia buddy. All I was saying was that SouthRawrea has made similar posts while mafia and while not and that a tell was probably not to going to be found from its mere presence, as some had believed.
All I'm trying to do is give my perspective on what people are trying to say when people blow it out of proportion.
|
"The are other possible reasons why Pyrr did this (like, he wanted to clarify a possibility), but these possibilities are improbable."
Yes it is more likely that the mafia are actively trying to kill each other on Day 1 and coming very close to it. More than two people's worth of players were going after LSB and I, does that mean I should consider them all mafia and be hostile to them instead of just giving my honest opinion?
Yellowink was voting for me but at least he earlier agreed with me about BC's odd inactivity. He might be mafia; I don't know. But when your whole fucking case is "Pyrr is mafia for sure, he is defending Yellowink, and therefore Yellowink is mafia" it is not very persuasive to me, given that I am not mafia, I wasn't defending Yellowink so much as giving my interpretation on what Yellowink was saying, and I've "defended" several other players the same way.
|
If yellowink is mafia because I defended him, then I suppose Team 2 is mafia because meeple accused Bill Murray of fluff posting for his vote on Team 2.
I do think that meeple's post after the kills was odd. Perhaps he missed the accusation from Ace because it was at Yellowink. I know my eyes were glazing over a lot of these anti-LSB posts. It is also bad of meeple to talk about going over Ace and BM's posts and then not do it. Anyway here is what I can glean to help us from their posts.
Ace on medic claiming plans
On September 22 2010 09:37 Ace wrote:I was fast reading, that was to LSB. Pretty much anyone advocating a medic claim should be looked at suspiciously. Unless the medic protects someone and the person is hit he/she should be quiet. Of course, if the person is hit then BOTH of them should claim. If there is a medic with 2 scum in the game it would be pretty sickening if on Night 1 they did this. If there is a DT they just ignore those 2 players for now and check other people out. Only way for this to fail is if both players are Scum and we can always lynch the non-medic claimer for confirmation on both if things get bad. Also why would the medic self-protect? That's just ridiculous. Protect whoever you think is most valuable to the survival of the town.
Medics and their protted people do not get any PMs, from what I understand, and Ace's reasoning probably doesn't take that into account. Would have been nice to have seen that in the rules post before the game.
Ace also was suspicious of LSB for advocating a medic claim, and idea that I think was first brought up by BrownBear(?). I don't know why it's so suspicious. The medic in this game is more powerful than usual in that he can protect himself, and therefore essentially become a stump who can vote, and still choose to prot someone else at some point. Of course the lack of pm notification is a complimentary nerf, but it also takes away one of the reasons the medic would prot someone else, namely to confirm an extra person. The medic could still be reasonably certain their protected person was innocent, given that mafia is unlikely to hold back a hit when we've already made life harder on them by no lynching, and there are, of course, no veterans or other weird stuff.
Ace's accusation of Yellowink
On September 22 2010 09:39 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 09:33 Ace wrote:On September 22 2010 06:43 YellowInk wrote:
At this point I believe that the mafia are among teams 1, 3, 5, and 6. I do not know precisely who, but at this stage of the day, hanging team 1 still makes sense. Ace, I was getting the same feeling initially about the bandwagoning onto team 1, but then I looked carefully at who was and wasn't on board with the team 1 vote and realized that just about everyone who was on the team 1 vote I already had a feeling of being pro town. The most suspect people have pushed the no lynch.
The recent argument made against no lynch was under the assumption of no medic saves. Consider what occurs if you have 1 medic save: we gain an entire day! In a typical game, a single medic save does not gain us a day. Using the no lynch here would lose us the day that a medic save could gain us.
No lynch is for endgame situations only. Hang team 1. No it isn't. This post is blatantly misleading. No lynching is for when you can't conclude someone is scummy enough to lynch. Like I've said, the town does not have to lynch every day. So most of the time it's in your best bet to No lynch unless you are in a situation where there is clearly going to be a benefit. Being in the end game does not matter for a No lynch, all it means is that you're decision has a more immediate consequence but it's also easier. Towards the end of the game it is actually much rarer to have a No lynch. Remember what I said? It's in your best bet to avoid a lynch when you aren't sure someone is scum or there is no clear benefit. At the end of the game you have so much information between votes, player interaction, the knowledge of what roles have been revealed and your own ties to players that it's really not often you'll be No lynching then. In a typical game a single medic save NOT gaining you a day is false. Saving a player and them possibly being confirmed innocent is a pretty big deal don't you think? It may not directly add more days to your win condition but adding more players to the likely pro-town pool, that TWO players know about is pretty heartbreaking for scum once it's revealed. Using a No Lynch now would actually be the best bet...if this were 10 hours ago and this was a normal setup with infinite No Lynches. Clearly though, LSB has been posting god knows what and well I'm a little intrigued by this post of yours. I thought you were a good player so how could you actually believe this nonsense you just posted? The only thing worrying me is that Incognito seems to have pegged both your teams also which shows his scumdar is operating on great batteries like mine, or he's just good at picking off easy townies. So I'm going to ask you this one time: Let's assume you were a detective. What team would you investigate tonight and why?
Notice Yellowink was suspicious for asking us to lynch despite the benefits of no lynch being explained by LSB (obviously Yellowink's mafia buddy) and Ace.
Also, from what I can tell Ace was for no lynch, although he had some qualifications. Bill Murray thought no lynching was a bad idea, although I think he ended up voting that way due to Ace realizing the votes on LSB and I were suspicious. Conclusion: there were plenty of reasons for legitimate townies to be on either side of the lynch/no lynch debate, although Ace's suspicion of Yellowink may be well grounded.
Here's a Bill Murray post about Foolishness
On September 21 2010 19:28 Bill Murray wrote:
Foolishness trendily lurks until D2
too bad if he doesnt die N1 he is likely mafia, as he likes to lurk D1 as mafia just like he does as townie or blue so that is very, very, very null from him. I cannot emphasize this more. The funny thing is, though, mafia could choose to not hit him and use it as an argument. "Foolishness didn't die, he is mafia, get him" on day 2. That's the problem with his high level of play if it goes unchecked, it makes all arguments pretty WIFOMy which is why I like to pressure people who lurk
I like to do that more on day 2, or forward, though.
I like a lynch on D1 vs a No Lynch, so I am tempted to wagon. If I wagon, would you guys take it the wrong way? I like wagons as town these days, but I don't like mislynches, and I haven't seen anything glaring at me saying "this player is scummy as fuck" like I had originally thought I had.
It's funny everyone is dead set on a team I initially thought was scum. The minute I back off, people start believing. The world works in mysterious ways.
I am going to vote simply to consolidate my vote with my partner's, and
Vote: Team 1
Tomorrow we can pressure people based around their posts, and our general suspicions on teams 7 and 2 if they flip red. If they flip townie, then I'll have to look at a couple certain teams, too, so I'm actually happier with this lynch than teams 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and possibly even 2.
I got really suspicious of Foolishness last game, just because he was quiet day 1. He was normal after that, and maybe he's always been quiet day 1. I expect him to make some posts of great import today, mafia or not.
There was some post by BM where he said infundibulum was matching his "red-meta" but he then took it back due to a post by incognito.
Also, BM and Ace made plenty of posts against LSB and I. Go ahead and dig those up if you want.
|
On September 24 2010 16:42 Incognito wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 00:53 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
I love how I am supposedly defending Yellowink just because I gave a more likely explanation of what he was trying to say than what you were bringing up.
I did the exact thing for SouthRawrea and everyone thought we were mafia buddies for the next five pages. Now incognito is characterizing it as an attack on SouthRawrea along with half the town, while the other half is saying that I am defending some mafia buddy. All I was saying was that SouthRawrea has made similar posts while mafia and while not and that a tell was probably not to going to be found from its mere presence, as some had believed.
All I'm trying to do is give my perspective on what people are trying to say when people blow it out of proportion. Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 11:50 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
I was trying to explain what I thought he was trying to say, which didn't seem as suspicious to me as it did to you, so yeah I suppose it is a defense. A case of the pandering politician. Using vague/wishy washy words to soften the impact of your words. You're so terrible at defending yourself that I'm not sure what to think at this point. Stop contradicting yourself. Plain and simple, you were defending YellowInk. At this point its not my job to convince the victim that he is scummy. Its my job to clarify to the town why my victim is scummy. So in the interest of clarity, town should ignore statements like these: Show nested quote +But when your whole fucking case is "Pyrr is mafia for sure, he is defending Yellowink, and therefore Yellowink is mafia" it is not very persuasive to me, given that I am not mafia, I wasn't defending Yellowink so much as giving my interpretation on what Yellowink was saying, and I've "defended" several other players the same way. Show nested quote +If yellowink is mafia because I defended him, then I suppose Team 2 is mafia because meeple accused Bill Murray of fluff posting for his vote on Team 2. These statements are faulty logic and simply aren't true. Any sensible townie can read my case to see exactly why this connection is very suspicious. Don't be misled by Pyrr's misinterpretations of what my argument truly is.
There's not much I can do when you are irrationally locked into me. I'm really not liking how you are twisting peoples' words around. I make it clear that I don't think Yellowink's post was suspicious, but it doesn't exonerate him of anything either, and say that it could be considered a defense relative to your accusation. Rather than allow for any consideration of nuance, you continually quote things away from their context and lock into the most suspicious possible interpretation.
In your second set of quotes, it is obvious that "your whole fucking case is [etc]" is hyperbole but it is damn close to the truth nonetheless. It also directly contradicts your idea that I am operating under the strategy of using "vague/wishy washy words to soften the impact of your words." I'm not really paying attention to the way I phrase things because the substance is more important but you are constantly disregarding this.
This is the same thing Foolishness is doing with meeple when he jumps on him with this quote
Also notice his last sentence, he says "most people would go with the lynching day 1" yet he himself has already voted to No Lynch. Indeed this is quite suspicious.
In context, meeple was saying that IN A DIFFERENT GAME, WITH MORE PLAYERS AND A DIFFERENT RULESET, most people would go with the lynching day 1. But in this game, in which meeple helped us understand that no lynching is a good idea, meeple voted no lynch and, indeed, most of us ended up voting no lynch.
Why do Foolishness and incognito keep stripping statements of their context in order to push lynches? I am much more suspicious of incognito and infundibulum, though. When Bill Murray totally misread my post about SR and jumped on it as some sort of monumental slip up on my part (the whole post is about SR in previous games, in which we have been on mafia teams together, which means we are both mafia this game...?), rastaban cooly explained the obvious.
Infundibulum, though, is more suspicious. He was against the no lynch, and very slow to change his opinion even when it was logically explained. Then he also was for medic claiming even though he also said mafia claims are very powerful.
"just precursory thoughts are that if the medic makes a save, he should probably claim - i get the feeling mafia fakeclaims are potentially very powerful in this game"
This is the best of both worlds for mafia - medic claims to give them more info, and then people are led to be scared of any claim that occurs. If you think mafia wouldn't be able to fake claim very well, then you should be more likely to support medic claiming, and vice-versa.
|
On September 25 2010 07:06 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
To start with, I apologize for my insane inactivity this game. Have spent a fair amount of my mornings/afternoons job hunting, then out with friends I haven't seen for months at night. Few peoples birthdays, as well as a family in the hospital leads to me being insanely busy (much more so than I was anticipating). I have managed to garner time and look over the debates on today's lynch and some of the arguments are fairly convincing so I shall trust you guys this once as I won't have the time to go more carefully into things till tomorrow at the earliest. As such to avoid being modkilled.
Vote team 7
Well I suppose I can't disprove this, though if he is mafia it could still be both true and a convenient excuse. At least he has showed up with something.
Obviously no one agrees with me on Team 6 atm except my beloved teammate so I have to
vote Team 7.
|
@Pandain
He says:
Doesn't contribute, a clear "I repeat what someone says." Also tries to negate a plan by saying no one will follow it, which is one of the worst arguments someone can make as that can be applied to anything.
Foolishness had a swell summary of the reasons why no lynch was good. Rather than copy and paste that, I referred people to it in case they were skimming and caught my posts and not Foolishness's. His logic had persuaded me and I didn't have anything to add - maybe I would have came up with it if he hadn't first, I dunno. Why does it matter?
You say that it was a bad argument to say no one will follow it. Well, who ended up placing votes on who the medics should protect? No one. It makes more sense to just suggest. It's true that a list might produce some sort of deterrence but no one even ended up casting votes for a medic list, and even if we had the medic is under no obligation to agree with it. I don't think the person who proposed the list even casted any sort of formal vote for this medic straw poll.
---
As for the post about Bill Murray I don't really have anything to add if you don't like my explanation. He spent the game trying to get me killed and going against the no lynch plan and he was anti-town on both counts. In any case he didn't strike me as mafia when he started posting so I didn't vote for him.
---
On the post about SouthRawrea, there is really no justification for even suggesting its a slip up. I was talking about previous games and this is obvious. And it's not mind blowingly important but it was helpful to the minor discussion at hand. Period. Everything you are adding to it is WIFOM - this is why first people were using it to say we were both mafia and now are using it to say only I am mafia.
---
Yeah, bumatlarge's plan was bad - I didn't know that PMs weren't allowed. Luckilly I didn't send any before figuring that out. I have all the teams figured out now and I didn't when LSB and I first talked on IM about our thoughts.
---
"Apologizes for his partner, tries to wave it aside. Doesn't contribute."
Infundibulum just a few posts ago mentioned that people are focusing on meeple rather than both meeple and Yellowink so people are still not following this advice (supposedly). Personally, I've seen posts about yellowink and meeple but the point is that its an important idea. Nevertheless your conclusion admits that I am "not as scummy" as LSB but chalks this up to my experience and fewer posts (I think I've been posting quite a bit). You even admit "If this team were two Pyrr's" you wouldn't vote for us, which proves you are voting only because of LSB, which proves that I was making a necessary contribution by asking people to consider people in pairs when choosing lynch targets.
|
On September 25 2010 11:07 SouthRawrea wrote:
Is it just me or is it hard to keep track of days? I'm not sure if it's just for this game but I seem to be oblivious of when the next day is coming.
Well I didn't know Day was about to end, I kinda figured Korynne would say "x hours left" or something when it got close.
|
On September 25 2010 23:58 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2010 17:53 Incognito wrote:
Dang I'm good at being pro-mafia. I'm too disheartened to defend myself, so go ahead and lynch me. I will still be voting for Team 1, although nobody is in the clear at this point. This is our last chance to lynch a mafia, and nobody's really done a good job at looking pro-town at this point. Did you really just say that?
That looks like the type of post I made every time I got an innocent lynched in Mafia XII.
|
So my intuition after our mislynch yesterday was that one of Incog/Infundi and Foolishness/Rastaban was mafia. I suppose maybe both, but BC has also been suspicious.
I suppose BC's explanation is probably true. It doesn't really clear him in anyway but it isn't a good enough reason to vote for him in lylo, especially when RoL has been very active when he's always hidden when mafia to my knowledge (though he's usually rather inactive when green as well).
Then infundi/incog and RoL/BC both show up and claim medic. Lol.
My initial reaction favors Team 6. It would fit with RoL's behavior since I haven't seen him blue and he would probably have to be more active to make up for BC's absence and avoid lynch for suspicious inactivity like I was pushing. I've seen a lot of games with lurker mafia RoL and bored townie RoL but I don't think I've seen blue RoL and I suppose this could be it.
Meanwhile, the following incognito posts give me almost-too-obvious mafia vibes:
On September 25 2010 17:53 Incognito wrote:
Dang I'm good at being pro-mafia. I'm too disheartened to defend myself, so go ahead and lynch me. I will still be voting for Team 1, although nobody is in the clear at this point. This is our last chance to lynch a mafia, and nobody's really done a good job at looking pro-town at this point.
On September 26 2010 10:53 Incognito wrote:
Its pretty sad I guessed wrong both times.
Night 1 it was between Ace and our team, tonight it was between Pandain/BB and Team 2. Guessed wrong both times and someone died. Actually my fault, since there were slightly more interesting reasons to protect both Ace + Pandain/BB. Not thinking T_T
These "lol sorry I fucked up guys" and "woe is me" posts aren't really necessary - Team 7 was lynched by a huge part of the town, I even changed my vote to them at the last minute in case people kept switching to us. So why is he worried we would pin it on him? Again with the protection choices he mentions, I don't get why he wouldn't prot himself both times. Either way, though, if he gets it wrong its not like he wasn't thinking; it's just unlucky. It doesn't seem like the authentic mindset to me.
To some extent this is all wifom and the posts from RoL/BC and Infundi/Incog after claiming are somewhat useless, so I think voting records are something to consider carefully and give more weight.
I guess it's down to LSB and I and whoever the other innocent team is to pick between 8 and 6 (I believe the other innocent team is Team 3 and will get to that at the end; I'm not sure though so please don't write us off if you are innocent, Team 2).
voting:
Day 1:
infundibulum votes Team 1 (green)
incognito votes Team 7 (green)
BC votes Team 3 (???)
RoL votes no lynch (pro-town)
Day 2:
infundibulum does not vote
incognito, RoL, BC all vote Team 7 (green)
Incognito was first voter for Team 7, there was no need for any mafia votes, really, because the voting was between Team 1 (green) and Team 7 (green). LSB and I were the only ones voting for BC/RoL (???). RoL also pushes for us to be lynched.
Day 3:
incog Team 3 (???)
RoL Team 8 (???)
(Notice incog and bc have both voted Team 3... since we know one of those teams is mafia, it probably means Team 3 is innocent - certainly a few points for them anyway)
At the same time, voting doesn't tell us too much. If I'm right that Team 3 is innocent then both medic claiming teams have voted for exclusively innocent teams (maybe both are mafia? lol see spoiler for my musings on that). Still I am more comfortable voting Team 8 because they led the Team 7 lynch with ehh arguments and maybe Team 3 is mafia.
+ Show Spoiler +
WEIRD NOTE: Is there any benefit to both mafia teams claiming medic? Now this might sound LOL, but I just had a weird thought where 6 and 8 could be mafia and both claim medic. If there is no 3rd medic than town would perhaps split their votes among them and maybe the two mafia teams could switch their votes at the last minute... Or if there was a third medic the vote could maybe split three ways. Lol no thats stupid but it is weird that this goes down and votes start getting put on LSB and I? So there is some sort of mind fuck going on.
If team 6 is mafia, who would their teammate be?
2? I don't know of a connection here, which could be great evidence of a connection.
3? Foolishness is pushing their lynch now. Unlikely.
If team 8 is mafia who would their teammate be?
2? This early post seems like an odd defense:
On September 21 2010 04:54 Infundibulum wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:08 LSB wrote:On September 21 2010 02:15 BrownBear wrote:There's a bit of an interesting dynamic starting to come out here. On September 20 2010 15:30 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
That's all SR ever posts. I don't think he posts any better when townie. I think he thinks he is contributing a lot but... he just manages to state the obvious and make it mind bangingly esoteric. Very unnerving. This could be a slip, or it could be Pyrry trying to gently suggest SR as mafia to us. This early in the game, I would be astonished if Pyrry slipped up that spectacularly, so I think he's trying to plant the SR-scum idea in our heads (inception?). That's not a slip up. We are pretty certain that team 2 is mafia. I just want a few more posts from them. What makes you think so? I'm curious, because Team 2 isn't on my radar right now for mafia. The way I see it - Bumatlarge seems drunk, Divinek made one post where he completely misunderstood how the game works, and SR talked about the merits of lynch vs no lynch. none of this says 'mafia' to me.
Infundibulum says bad things about each player (drunk, stupid, and then with SR I guess it was a good thing since BB pointed out that it was a confusing statement that said nothing while Infun calls it a talk about merits), but then concludes they aren't suspicious, thus subtly pushing them away without putting them in danger.
On September 26 2010 11:00 bumatlarge wrote:
My left eyebrow is raised incognito... are you some blue role? I really dont understand why you would start yappin like that as a green townie. I was gonna stick with my gut on team 1 but if you really want to throw yourself out there...
This post is really weird. Incog claims medic. Pretty clearly. But then bumatlarge reacts as if he is just hinting. It could be that they were planning a claim where bum would prod incog to claim first or something. Also weird that he suggests incog claiming would make him change his vote from me and he votes for me anyway (his vote for me makes no sense I'll get to that in a next post).
3? I kind of felt something between 2 and 3 but really can't name anything concrete. Of course maybe the confusion of bumatlarge should be taken as evidence that nothing was planned between them and I should be getting weirded out by Foolishness putting his hands in the air and jokingly asking for a Team 2 lynch.
So it looks like I am thinking 2 is mafia both ways. So I suppose I could just vote Team 2, but now Team 2 is following the same logic and voting for me, which makes no sense to me, so I think we should keep it to the 2 we know 1 of is mafia.
Y'all are mofos for making me stay up to figure this shit out.
vote Team 8
|
On September 26 2010 16:29 bumatlarge wrote:We cant split the vote three ways here, we have to be really decisive, so I suggest everyone setting their priorities on two teams. Giving different options for people you are torn between, only takes a little stealth nudge from a mafia to win them the game. I didn't know who to vote for... so I went through votes and accusations and tried to pick apart what combinations are unlikely. Teams 1 and 2 = unlikely the entire team 2 squad voted them on the first day, and we haven't been friends ever since. Would be pretty ballsy of us with 2 other individuals on that boat. Teams 1 and 3 = VERY LIKELY Show nested quote +The link between teams 1 and 7 is pretty clear. I don't think it makes much of a difference between the two. We should be considering either team 6 or 7 instead, and not team 1. Show nested quote +If you really think LSB is mafia, you would vote no lynch, and spend the next ~36 hours convincing the town with solid analysis and not "I'm 100% positive LSB/Pyrry are mafia". They have never gunned for each other, and tend not to make too much contact otherwise. They both opted for a no lynch, and even though the thought behind it was sound, you would gun for it as mafia if people starting stacking votes on your buddies. Teams 1 and 6 = Unlikely Pyr initiates a vote that almost gains momentum, and general FoS from LSB. Team 6 doesnt seem to like them either. Teams 1 and 8 = kinda-unlikely Pyr LSB initiates and then votes for them. Not sure if it could be mafia mind games. Now infundi puts his lylo vote on them. team 2 and 3 = likely I dont think anyone on my team has mentioned them, and foolishness gave a few direct criticisms, which is decent mafia blending that cant really be called scummy. And even as foolishness accused us now as team 6 cohorts, its not like it would matter who he accuses at LYLO as long as we dont get lynched now. teams 2 and 6 = likely we both voted together and I dont think we really confronted them or them to us. teams 2 and 8 = likely same thing, man we should get on the ball with all these accusations and voting people more  teams 3 and 6 = unlikely foolish pushing a fellow mafia team as lylo? No real reason to. teams 3 and 8 = mensamensa dont see much but do see some, teams 6 and 8 = TeeHee that would be funny, but i dont see it out of the realm of possibility. What piques me the most is Team 1's connections. It may seem like putting teams as 'likely' partners would label them as strong reds, but i think it does the opposite. It gives them an open townie mind frame, no strings attached mentality. In fact the if youve got that one 'likely' connection and no others, that might be pretty damning. Which is what team 1 and 3 has in my book. I think a team1 lynch would not only break us out of lylo, it would give us a solid lead. And foolish, while straining from taking out the chain-saw, does have some sort of weedwhacker for team 1. That, the no-lynch spec ops mission and cut ties from every other team makes me want to trust my gut on this. I've had it in for team 1 this whole game, and I see no reason to stop now. That and I can eliminate all team 2 connections, because I swear on a bear, promises on porpoises, agreement on C-ment, truth of my tooth, and the virginity of my future first born daughter that I am townie. ##vote team 1
What we know 100%:
Either Team 6 or Team 8 is mafia.
What you conclude:
Team 1 is mafia. Team 1 is tied up with Team 3 so they are probably mafia scum buddies.
What you vote:
Team 1.
Please try again.
|
On September 26 2010 11:02 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2010 10:53 Incognito wrote:
Its pretty sad I guessed wrong both times.
Night 1 it was between Ace and our team, tonight it was between Pandain/BB and Team 2. Guessed wrong both times and someone died. Actually my fault, since there were slightly more interesting reasons to protect both Ace + Pandain/BB. Not thinking T_T You're guessing wrong again with your vote there by the way. Consider a few things from my perspective (that I'm green). You wanted to kill team 1. Team 1 voted to kill team 6 yesterday, and team 1 originally voted to kill team 2 the first day (before moving to No Lynch). After reviewing the votes and suspicions it doesn't seem to make much sense for any of the mafia to have voted for their teammate. Assuming that nobody is linked to team 1 (except for rastaban and I). Your teammate revealed that you were either red or blue. Apparently you're claiming blue now. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt for now and believe your claim, although I'm sure other people are going to have something to say about it. Thus that leaves teams 2 and 6 as mafia. Vote: team 6
It's weird, looking at the votes I feel stronger that you are more innocent than team 2 than I feel team 6 is more innocent than team 8.
|
Hmm I dunno what Team 2 is doing but I don't like it. They are making no sense and splitting their votes out wildly. Maybe we can just go for them (foolishness / whichever medic team is for real)? We still have almost 24 hours left.
##unvote
##vote Team 2
|
On September 27 2010 14:17 Divinek wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2010 13:33 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
I swear to god this town is some form of retarded. Pyrrhuloxia have you just completely avoided reading the thread? Either vote for me or vote for incognito. no actually he has read it. Before when bum voted for TEAM 1. pyrr pointed out that it's between 6/8 and now he does exactly the same thing rofl
At this point I am more sure about you so that's where my vote is. Did I change my mind? Yes. Sue me.
|
On September 27 2010 15:04 Divinek wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2010 14:24 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On September 27 2010 14:17 Divinek wrote:On September 27 2010 13:33 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
I swear to god this town is some form of retarded. Pyrrhuloxia have you just completely avoided reading the thread? Either vote for me or vote for incognito. no actually he has read it. Before when bum voted for TEAM 1. pyrr pointed out that it's between 6/8 and now he does exactly the same thing rofl At this point I am more sure about you so that's where my vote is. Did I change my mind? Yes. Sue me. you're more sure about my team than someone that has fake claimed medic? that's pretty impressive. I'd like to see such compelling evidence that puts us above a guaranteed mafia.
I have more of a townie read on Team 3 than a medic read on either medic claimer. I'll look it back over and make a final decision later I guess but Foolishness seemed to have a similar feeling.
|
|
|
The chance of Incog faking medic is basically nil. No way they hold off on a hit just to do that. The medic is a huge threat to the mafia and they would love to have him dead. It's all wifom mind games since the mafia can think "incog will probably protect himself so we can freely kill someone else, but incog will know that and try to prot someone else since we know he claims to have tried that before, so we should hit incog." Doesn't implicate anyone.
Team 2: I thought they were mafia for pushing all innocent lynches but they did help kill Team 6, although less than Team 3. That said, a bus at that point would have totally made sense given how many people were against Team 6.
Team 3: If my intuition that one of Incog and Foolishness is mafia is correct, it would have to be Foolishness at this point rather than Incog as I had thought. I think Incog has this same gut feeling too, but the case he's pushing is all complicated wifom when Team 2 seems like the choice that follow Occam's Razor.
Team 2 jumped the early bandwagon on us and now is following the confirmed innocent team onto another team. They also split up their votes the previous day. I agree Rastaban has been too inactive but Divinek admits he is doing the same thing. Both teams are making apologies I would deem suspicious except that Incog's team did the same thing the day before.
Vote Team 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
