|
Actually, I’m just going to vote ~Opz~ right now instead of XeliN, just because of this tiny suspicion. I don’t know if I truly believe in that he is mafia, but I think he has a better chance at being mafia than XeliN.
|
On October 06 2010 09:19 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 05:40 meeple wrote:On October 06 2010 05:27 Pandain wrote:
I don't count Cynan as inactive and Nobody should vote for him because his actions thus far are in accordance with his previous play. That's not to say I'm not watching him(I am) but he's not that suspicious to me.
Whoa whoa... weird defense of cynan... the votes against him were just to bump him back into posting... which he did, so those should eventually fade away to other, more suitable targets. However, he's definitely not in enough danger for another townie to worry about him getting the chop. This makes a lot more sense if you're an anxious red protecting your buddy... I did pick up on that, but Pandain could just as easily be a Detective trying to defend someone, or a townie with a loud mouth.
Why would a Detective defend on Day 1, especially since they can't start investigating till Night 2?
Townie with loud mouth.
Thoughts in a bit, busy now.
|
On October 06 2010 09:07 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 09:01 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 08:12 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 08:09 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 07:49 ghrur wrote:
Speaking of lynching, I strongly suggest against group voting, or in other words
Don't agree to bandwagon onto a random vote
Don't agree to use individual RNGs and votes
If we bandwagon onto a random vote, how can we know if the person voting is or isn't mafia?
If we use a RNG, how can we be sure Mafia isn't rigging the votes and using the RNG as an out?
Also, once again, I'm against voting an inactive so early on because
A. They could get modkilled. Do we want to waste a lynch?
B. Does it put pressure on them if they can't see the votes due to a busy schedule?
C. Inactives could be very helpful later on.
D. Mafia hardly ever hides in inactives.
Personally, I'll probably read through the voting thread later and see who votes what and let that influence my choice because I'm still new. xD Learning how a veteran votes could be helpful! While these are different reasons for why I no longer am lynching an inactive, it is the same conclusion however. I think we SHOULD make a stand on who to lynch. We hardly have any time left (what, 3 hours?) Right now mafia can manipulate the vote so easily. I'm lynching Infunidibulum because he's posted without really posting, he gave a link to a site which, while perhaps worthwhile to look at, isn't really superb. And sure, we don't really get that much info, but who else do we get info from? I mean, theres the supposed "Cynan-Pandain" connection, but of course I know it won't really amount to anything. There are better candidates for the "posting without posting" thing, two of which I mentioned earlier. Infund has contributed by posting some information which might help some of our blues conduct themselves better and avoid being hit by the mafia. Yeah it doesn't take a whole lot of effort but it's something. Crysis is new and has even more content than Infund. Nuke the bunny actually has been contributing, and has posted 8 times. Infun, however, is an expierenced player. He's by far the best bet in this situation(albeit wouldn't be if like 7 people weren't going to be modkilled) crisis_ hasn't contributed anything. I didn't catch Nukes first post where he does contribute a worthwhile opinion but Crisis_ hasn't done anything but agree or disagree with other people without offering anything himself. cSc hasn't offered anything and is just asking people to think for him. however this is not something I think mafia would do, I wouldn't vote to lynch him. Unless you can find a post where crisis_ contributed something useful I'm voting for him. What I find even more interesting is this post Show nested quote +On October 05 2010 14:05 Crisis_ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:39 ~OpZ~ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:12 Bill Murray wrote:
I'm here. I just started my first day of work, so I don't know if I'll be able to be as active as I have in the past. Haven't gotten to read the thread yet, as I just worked a twelve hour day, but I promise I'll make an informed post tomorrow. Yea, uh huh. I believe it, but come on BM! On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. K, I'll be voting you in a second Crisis_.... How nice of you to vote for me. Glad to know that your vote will be a waste, since: 1. I am participating in active discussion to try to help town and give advice to the DT, I wouldn't be doing this if I were scum. 2. There are better candidates to be lynched, i.e. inactives. He insists he has been participating in active discussion and has been helping the DT but look at his post: Show nested quote +On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. he didn't contribute anything he just quotes another post and agrees
He's new. What he considers "contributing" may be less than what you do. Point is, he gave his opinions, and at least actually helped. Also, stop twisitng his words. He had been contributing in discussion on that subject(those posts were around the same page), while Infun has not at all besides that post in the begining.
In addition, Crysis is at least putting himself out there with opinions, while Infun can't be linked to having a strong opinion on anything. All he did was link a site, and if its bad info, he can just say "Oh, sorry." And we still can't tell what his views are on anything. Don't forget, just linking a site which *may* help someone isn't unknown to mafia, mafia pretend to "help" all the time.
But what I find most interesting is why you are so caught up in this. You even claim yourself, "We don't have evidence on anyone really" and were inactive up until infun started getting accused. But I'll just leave that as food for thought, as a valuable townie would be contributing none the less. Still, I've got my eyes on you O.O.
On October 06 2010 09:19 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 05:40 meeple wrote:On October 06 2010 05:27 Pandain wrote:
I don't count Cynan as inactive and Nobody should vote for him because his actions thus far are in accordance with his previous play. That's not to say I'm not watching him(I am) but he's not that suspicious to me.
Whoa whoa... weird defense of cynan... the votes against him were just to bump him back into posting... which he did, so those should eventually fade away to other, more suitable targets. However, he's definitely not in enough danger for another townie to worry about him getting the chop. This makes a lot more sense if you're an anxious red protecting your buddy... I did pick up on that, but Pandain could just as easily be a Detective trying to defend someone, or a townie with a loud mouth.
DT's can't investigate till night 2
On October 06 2010 09:22 Misder wrote:
Actually, I’m just going to vote ~Opz~ right now instead of XeliN, just because of this tiny suspicion. I don’t know if I truly believe in that he is mafia, but I think he has a better chance at being mafia than XeliN.
Why? At least Opz is being active, and he always posts scum like. He's like cynan, suscipcious, but playing his normal style so that must be remembered.
Obviously some people are gonig to be modkilled. We should go after the people who will not, but have barely contributed(or go under the "guise" of contributing).
|
EBWOP: Albeit I do have a loud mouth 
|
first off:
@NukeTheBunnys, do you even read the thread?
On October 05 2010 13:03 Misder wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2010 12:47 ~OpZ~ wrote:
I'd rather you post your suspects now Mr. Misder?
What if mafia slay you at night?
=/ I think I rather wait. First, my suspicions aren't really big; they could be comepletely wrong, and I don't really have strong evidence. Plus, I'm still looking at different play styles from previous games. Second, this way, the mafia doesn't know whether I'm right or wrong, so if they really are scared, they're going to have to kill me If you guys really want, I'll post my suspicions, maybe to generate discussion or something on day 1. Which reminds me, how do we decide which inactive to lynch?
Buddying. At least to me it is. Admittedly, Mafia buddy town all the time, but if Misder flips scum so will ~OpZ~. Therefore, I am considering voting Misder.
To all the people hunting for the DT, posting about "strategy" in relation to lynches, and cluttering up the thread with speculation and policy: most of you will be the M words of mafia. I'm talking to you, Amber, Protactinium, Misder, Happy.Fairytaile, ~OpZ~, SouthRawrea, and Crisis_
On October 06 2010 07:57 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 07:49 ghrur wrote:
Speaking of lynching, I strongly suggest against group voting, or in other words
Don't agree to bandwagon onto a random vote
Don't agree to use individual RNGs and votes
If we bandwagon onto a random vote, how can we know if the person voting is or isn't mafia?
If we use a RNG, how can we be sure Mafia isn't rigging the votes and using the RNG as an out?
Also, once again, I'm against voting an inactive so early on because
A. They could get modkilled. Do we want to waste a lynch?
B. Does it put pressure on them if they can't see the votes due to a busy schedule?
C. Inactives could be very helpful later on.
D. Mafia hardly ever hides in inactives.
Personally, I'll probably read through the voting thread later and see who votes what and let that influence my choice because I'm still new. xD Learning how a veteran votes could be helpful! This is a good point. I'm using JeeJee as a placeholder for now but we need to look for someone who has posted in the thread but said almost nothing and has avoided participating in real discussion. Usually inexperienced mafia players are afraid to get involved in discussion because they fear they will incriminate themselves so they just mindlessly agree with other players or say things that have already been said a million times. After re-reading the thread the two best fits for that profile seem to be NukeTheBunnys and Crisis_ I'm keeping JeeJee as a placeholder for now. I'd like to see a stronger case from Pandain for the lynching of Infund, most likely I will switch my vote to crisis or nukethebunnys.
Furthermore, I like this post. It shows that DoctorH and I are on the same page. I am not sure as to his role, but I am pretty sure he is Town.
On October 06 2010 09:25 Protactinium wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 09:19 Bill Murray wrote:On October 06 2010 05:40 meeple wrote:On October 06 2010 05:27 Pandain wrote:
I don't count Cynan as inactive and Nobody should vote for him because his actions thus far are in accordance with his previous play. That's not to say I'm not watching him(I am) but he's not that suspicious to me.
Whoa whoa... weird defense of cynan... the votes against him were just to bump him back into posting... which he did, so those should eventually fade away to other, more suitable targets. However, he's definitely not in enough danger for another townie to worry about him getting the chop. This makes a lot more sense if you're an anxious red protecting your buddy... I did pick up on that, but Pandain could just as easily be a Detective trying to defend someone, or a townie with a loud mouth. Why would a Detective defend on Day 1, especially since they can't start investigating till Night 2? Townie with loud mouth. Thoughts in a bit, busy now.
Detectives typically defend people they find to be town. Combine that with his beating himself up over changing his vote to OpZ, your fishing for why I feel he's DT (when you know my actions are money as fuck), your DT fishing on your own earlier in the thread, and I present to you Bill Murray's first mafia catch of the game:
Protactinium.
Points:
1) as seen from the TL Mafia game I hosted, he is fitting in with his mafia meta. He makes huge "pro-town" posts as mafia. As town he is way more argumentative. I can provide the difference, but I would have to indicate who he is.
2) he is a fucking smurf who has another name on this site
3) He was fishing for the DT and "discussing" who the DT was, how to find him, and what he should do
4) He was curious as to how I knew Pandain was the DT when he knows I am a good player
vote to lynch protactinium
|
Err BM he wasn't in TL Mafia XXX... ? I'd also like to hear more about the smurf thing :O.
|
On October 06 2010 09:27 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 09:07 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 09:01 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 08:12 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 08:09 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 07:49 ghrur wrote:
Speaking of lynching, I strongly suggest against group voting, or in other words
Don't agree to bandwagon onto a random vote
Don't agree to use individual RNGs and votes
If we bandwagon onto a random vote, how can we know if the person voting is or isn't mafia?
If we use a RNG, how can we be sure Mafia isn't rigging the votes and using the RNG as an out?
Also, once again, I'm against voting an inactive so early on because
A. They could get modkilled. Do we want to waste a lynch?
B. Does it put pressure on them if they can't see the votes due to a busy schedule?
C. Inactives could be very helpful later on.
D. Mafia hardly ever hides in inactives.
Personally, I'll probably read through the voting thread later and see who votes what and let that influence my choice because I'm still new. xD Learning how a veteran votes could be helpful! While these are different reasons for why I no longer am lynching an inactive, it is the same conclusion however. I think we SHOULD make a stand on who to lynch. We hardly have any time left (what, 3 hours?) Right now mafia can manipulate the vote so easily. I'm lynching Infunidibulum because he's posted without really posting, he gave a link to a site which, while perhaps worthwhile to look at, isn't really superb. And sure, we don't really get that much info, but who else do we get info from? I mean, theres the supposed "Cynan-Pandain" connection, but of course I know it won't really amount to anything. There are better candidates for the "posting without posting" thing, two of which I mentioned earlier. Infund has contributed by posting some information which might help some of our blues conduct themselves better and avoid being hit by the mafia. Yeah it doesn't take a whole lot of effort but it's something. Crysis is new and has even more content than Infund. Nuke the bunny actually has been contributing, and has posted 8 times. Infun, however, is an expierenced player. He's by far the best bet in this situation(albeit wouldn't be if like 7 people weren't going to be modkilled) crisis_ hasn't contributed anything. I didn't catch Nukes first post where he does contribute a worthwhile opinion but Crisis_ hasn't done anything but agree or disagree with other people without offering anything himself. cSc hasn't offered anything and is just asking people to think for him. however this is not something I think mafia would do, I wouldn't vote to lynch him. Unless you can find a post where crisis_ contributed something useful I'm voting for him. What I find even more interesting is this post On October 05 2010 14:05 Crisis_ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:39 ~OpZ~ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:12 Bill Murray wrote:
I'm here. I just started my first day of work, so I don't know if I'll be able to be as active as I have in the past. Haven't gotten to read the thread yet, as I just worked a twelve hour day, but I promise I'll make an informed post tomorrow. Yea, uh huh. I believe it, but come on BM! On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. K, I'll be voting you in a second Crisis_.... How nice of you to vote for me. Glad to know that your vote will be a waste, since: 1. I am participating in active discussion to try to help town and give advice to the DT, I wouldn't be doing this if I were scum. 2. There are better candidates to be lynched, i.e. inactives. He insists he has been participating in active discussion and has been helping the DT but look at his post: On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. he didn't contribute anything he just quotes another post and agrees He's new. What he considers "contributing" may be less than what you do. Point is, he gave his opinions, and at least actually helped. Also, stop twisitng his words. He had been contributing in discussion on that subject(those posts were around the same page), while Infun has not at all besides that post in the begining. In addition, Crysis is at least putting himself out there with opinions, while Infun can't be linked to having a strong opinion on anything. All he did was link a site, and if its bad info, he can just say "Oh, sorry." And we still can't tell what his views are on anything. Don't forget, just linking a site which *may* help someone isn't unknown to mafia, mafia pretend to "help" all the time. But what I find most interesting is why you are so caught up in this. You even claim yourself, "We don't have evidence on anyone really" and were inactive up until infun started getting accused. But I'll just leave that as food for thought, as a valuable townie would be contributing none the less. Still, I've got my eyes on you O.O. Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 09:19 Bill Murray wrote:On October 06 2010 05:40 meeple wrote:On October 06 2010 05:27 Pandain wrote:
I don't count Cynan as inactive and Nobody should vote for him because his actions thus far are in accordance with his previous play. That's not to say I'm not watching him(I am) but he's not that suspicious to me.
Whoa whoa... weird defense of cynan... the votes against him were just to bump him back into posting... which he did, so those should eventually fade away to other, more suitable targets. However, he's definitely not in enough danger for another townie to worry about him getting the chop. This makes a lot more sense if you're an anxious red protecting your buddy... I did pick up on that, but Pandain could just as easily be a Detective trying to defend someone, or a townie with a loud mouth. DT's can't investigate till night 2 Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 09:22 Misder wrote:
Actually, I’m just going to vote ~Opz~ right now instead of XeliN, just because of this tiny suspicion. I don’t know if I truly believe in that he is mafia, but I think he has a better chance at being mafia than XeliN. Why? At least Opz is being active, and he always posts scum like. He's like cynan, suscipcious, but playing his normal style so that must be remembered. Obviously some people are gonig to be modkilled. We should go after the people who will not, but have barely contributed(or go under the "guise" of contributing).
Why do you keep saying infund contributed nothing? That guide would be very helpful for new DT's and he contributed some helpful advice which will keep our blues alive while crisis contributed 0 original information. Infund did throw out a strong opinion which was that blues shouldn't roleclaim and that they should play outside of conventional play style while crisis just agreed/disagreed with other people
i understand he is new but to say he doesn't fit the profile of a non-contributing player masquerading as an active townie while infund does is just stupid. I don't think he's even likely mafia but you seem pretty bent on infund being scum while other people fit your reasoning better
|
|
|
that or he's one really good village idiot
|
On October 06 2010 09:10 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 01:56 BrownBear wrote:
Divinek, there's a voting thread <3
Also, I have nudged everyone who hasn't posted so far. I will be gone at classes for the next 5 hours or so, so I will not be available until later, but feel free to PM me with questions and I will answer them before the day cycle ends. Remember that you must both post in this thread, and vote in the voting thread, to avoid my wrath. 11 hours left in this day cycle! you nudged me, and I had posted.
Missed your post, my bad. Doesn't matter at this point, though :D
|
|
|
Reminder: There are 3 hours left in the day, and a lot of you have yet to vote. I suggest you do so before the deadline!
If you think you're not gonna be here around the deadline, err on the side of voting, even if its just a placeholder and you'll change it when you get back. It always sucks when you think "oh, no problem, I'll just vote when I get back half an hour before the deadline" and then something comes up and you miss your chance.
|
On October 06 2010 09:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 09:27 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 09:07 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 09:01 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 08:12 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 08:09 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 07:49 ghrur wrote:
Speaking of lynching, I strongly suggest against group voting, or in other words
Don't agree to bandwagon onto a random vote
Don't agree to use individual RNGs and votes
If we bandwagon onto a random vote, how can we know if the person voting is or isn't mafia?
If we use a RNG, how can we be sure Mafia isn't rigging the votes and using the RNG as an out?
Also, once again, I'm against voting an inactive so early on because
A. They could get modkilled. Do we want to waste a lynch?
B. Does it put pressure on them if they can't see the votes due to a busy schedule?
C. Inactives could be very helpful later on.
D. Mafia hardly ever hides in inactives.
Personally, I'll probably read through the voting thread later and see who votes what and let that influence my choice because I'm still new. xD Learning how a veteran votes could be helpful! While these are different reasons for why I no longer am lynching an inactive, it is the same conclusion however. I think we SHOULD make a stand on who to lynch. We hardly have any time left (what, 3 hours?) Right now mafia can manipulate the vote so easily. I'm lynching Infunidibulum because he's posted without really posting, he gave a link to a site which, while perhaps worthwhile to look at, isn't really superb. And sure, we don't really get that much info, but who else do we get info from? I mean, theres the supposed "Cynan-Pandain" connection, but of course I know it won't really amount to anything. There are better candidates for the "posting without posting" thing, two of which I mentioned earlier. Infund has contributed by posting some information which might help some of our blues conduct themselves better and avoid being hit by the mafia. Yeah it doesn't take a whole lot of effort but it's something. Crysis is new and has even more content than Infund. Nuke the bunny actually has been contributing, and has posted 8 times. Infun, however, is an expierenced player. He's by far the best bet in this situation(albeit wouldn't be if like 7 people weren't going to be modkilled) crisis_ hasn't contributed anything. I didn't catch Nukes first post where he does contribute a worthwhile opinion but Crisis_ hasn't done anything but agree or disagree with other people without offering anything himself. cSc hasn't offered anything and is just asking people to think for him. however this is not something I think mafia would do, I wouldn't vote to lynch him. Unless you can find a post where crisis_ contributed something useful I'm voting for him. What I find even more interesting is this post On October 05 2010 14:05 Crisis_ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:39 ~OpZ~ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:12 Bill Murray wrote:
I'm here. I just started my first day of work, so I don't know if I'll be able to be as active as I have in the past. Haven't gotten to read the thread yet, as I just worked a twelve hour day, but I promise I'll make an informed post tomorrow. Yea, uh huh. I believe it, but come on BM! On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. K, I'll be voting you in a second Crisis_.... How nice of you to vote for me. Glad to know that your vote will be a waste, since: 1. I am participating in active discussion to try to help town and give advice to the DT, I wouldn't be doing this if I were scum. 2. There are better candidates to be lynched, i.e. inactives. He insists he has been participating in active discussion and has been helping the DT but look at his post: On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. he didn't contribute anything he just quotes another post and agrees He's new. What he considers "contributing" may be less than what you do. Point is, he gave his opinions, and at least actually helped. Also, stop twisitng his words. He had been contributing in discussion on that subject(those posts were around the same page), while Infun has not at all besides that post in the begining. In addition, Crysis is at least putting himself out there with opinions, while Infun can't be linked to having a strong opinion on anything. All he did was link a site, and if its bad info, he can just say "Oh, sorry." And we still can't tell what his views are on anything. Don't forget, just linking a site which *may* help someone isn't unknown to mafia, mafia pretend to "help" all the time. But what I find most interesting is why you are so caught up in this. You even claim yourself, "We don't have evidence on anyone really" and were inactive up until infun started getting accused. But I'll just leave that as food for thought, as a valuable townie would be contributing none the less. Still, I've got my eyes on you O.O. On October 06 2010 09:19 Bill Murray wrote:On October 06 2010 05:40 meeple wrote:On October 06 2010 05:27 Pandain wrote:
I don't count Cynan as inactive and Nobody should vote for him because his actions thus far are in accordance with his previous play. That's not to say I'm not watching him(I am) but he's not that suspicious to me.
Whoa whoa... weird defense of cynan... the votes against him were just to bump him back into posting... which he did, so those should eventually fade away to other, more suitable targets. However, he's definitely not in enough danger for another townie to worry about him getting the chop. This makes a lot more sense if you're an anxious red protecting your buddy... I did pick up on that, but Pandain could just as easily be a Detective trying to defend someone, or a townie with a loud mouth. DT's can't investigate till night 2 On October 06 2010 09:22 Misder wrote:
Actually, I’m just going to vote ~Opz~ right now instead of XeliN, just because of this tiny suspicion. I don’t know if I truly believe in that he is mafia, but I think he has a better chance at being mafia than XeliN. Why? At least Opz is being active, and he always posts scum like. He's like cynan, suscipcious, but playing his normal style so that must be remembered. Obviously some people are gonig to be modkilled. We should go after the people who will not, but have barely contributed(or go under the "guise" of contributing). Why do you keep saying infund contributed nothing? That guide would be very helpful for new DT's and he contributed some helpful advice which will keep our blues alive while crisis contributed 0 original information. Infund did throw out a strong opinion which was that blues shouldn't roleclaim and that they should play outside of conventional play style while crisis just agreed/disagreed with other people i understand he is new but to say he doesn't fit the profile of a non-contributing player masquerading as an active townie while infund does is just stupid. I don't think he's even likely mafia but you seem pretty bent on infund being scum while other people fit your reasoning better
I'm not saying he's contributed nothing, I'm saying he really hasn't contributed anything to this game. Plainly, Infun is a better and much more obvious choice than Crysis, who has at least been trying to contribute. And plainly I think he has been. Decent 3 paragraphs, but how does it help?
Those who post without content are spammers, those who write essays without content are scum. Hyperbole, obviously, and I don't know for sure that infun is 100% scum. But I do know he's a better lynch in my eyes. Plainly, Infun has not contributed at all. He linked to a website, but anyone can really do that. Again, mafia will appear to help people all the time. And you don't always have to lie, or even want to lie as scum. (See: Ace's mafia guide).
You're saying crysis is a better lynch than Infun. How? Crysis has at least attempted to contribute, and is new, so his posts will obviously be shorter than normal. He is adapting to this game, to accuse him and declare him mafia because he hasn't contributed "meaningfully" is the wrong conclusion. Instead, realize he is contributing, and push him to contribute more.
Crysis makes 3 posts, talking about what he feels.
Infun makes one in the very beginning, linking to a "helpful site." Then he disappears.
Tell me which is the better choice.
|
On October 06 2010 09:34 Bill Murray wrote:
4) He was curious as to how I knew Pandain was the DT when he knows I am a good player
Also, wtf? I never told you if I am or am not DT. and if I was, it would be wise not to reveal it.
But I'm willing to soak up hits, let the mafia hit me 
|
On October 06 2010 10:00 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 09:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 09:27 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 09:07 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 09:01 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 08:12 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 06 2010 08:09 Pandain wrote:On October 06 2010 07:49 ghrur wrote:
Speaking of lynching, I strongly suggest against group voting, or in other words
Don't agree to bandwagon onto a random vote
Don't agree to use individual RNGs and votes
If we bandwagon onto a random vote, how can we know if the person voting is or isn't mafia?
If we use a RNG, how can we be sure Mafia isn't rigging the votes and using the RNG as an out?
Also, once again, I'm against voting an inactive so early on because
A. They could get modkilled. Do we want to waste a lynch?
B. Does it put pressure on them if they can't see the votes due to a busy schedule?
C. Inactives could be very helpful later on.
D. Mafia hardly ever hides in inactives.
Personally, I'll probably read through the voting thread later and see who votes what and let that influence my choice because I'm still new. xD Learning how a veteran votes could be helpful! While these are different reasons for why I no longer am lynching an inactive, it is the same conclusion however. I think we SHOULD make a stand on who to lynch. We hardly have any time left (what, 3 hours?) Right now mafia can manipulate the vote so easily. I'm lynching Infunidibulum because he's posted without really posting, he gave a link to a site which, while perhaps worthwhile to look at, isn't really superb. And sure, we don't really get that much info, but who else do we get info from? I mean, theres the supposed "Cynan-Pandain" connection, but of course I know it won't really amount to anything. There are better candidates for the "posting without posting" thing, two of which I mentioned earlier. Infund has contributed by posting some information which might help some of our blues conduct themselves better and avoid being hit by the mafia. Yeah it doesn't take a whole lot of effort but it's something. Crysis is new and has even more content than Infund. Nuke the bunny actually has been contributing, and has posted 8 times. Infun, however, is an expierenced player. He's by far the best bet in this situation(albeit wouldn't be if like 7 people weren't going to be modkilled) crisis_ hasn't contributed anything. I didn't catch Nukes first post where he does contribute a worthwhile opinion but Crisis_ hasn't done anything but agree or disagree with other people without offering anything himself. cSc hasn't offered anything and is just asking people to think for him. however this is not something I think mafia would do, I wouldn't vote to lynch him. Unless you can find a post where crisis_ contributed something useful I'm voting for him. What I find even more interesting is this post On October 05 2010 14:05 Crisis_ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:39 ~OpZ~ wrote:On October 05 2010 12:12 Bill Murray wrote:
I'm here. I just started my first day of work, so I don't know if I'll be able to be as active as I have in the past. Haven't gotten to read the thread yet, as I just worked a twelve hour day, but I promise I'll make an informed post tomorrow. Yea, uh huh. I believe it, but come on BM! On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. K, I'll be voting you in a second Crisis_.... How nice of you to vote for me. Glad to know that your vote will be a waste, since: 1. I am participating in active discussion to try to help town and give advice to the DT, I wouldn't be doing this if I were scum. 2. There are better candidates to be lynched, i.e. inactives. He insists he has been participating in active discussion and has been helping the DT but look at his post: On October 05 2010 12:03 Crisis_ wrote:I'm in favor of voting inactives. It forces people to talk, leading to more communication. As mentioned before, communication is a step forward in helping us to determine scum. I'd have to agree with most of this. Mafia often snipe the quiet folk as they are often medics or other good power-roles. In my first game on TL where we were mafia that was one of the tell-tale signs of the medic we sniped. I'd also agree with you on the DT building an argument but I'm against claiming at this point in time until the DT builds up a few more reports. He can't just let his reports do the work for him; he has to be a proactive townie. As for the DTs, I agree with most of this. A DT that plays the role of a proactive townie will be diffused amongst the crowd, instead of being a sitting duck to the mafia's quiet-sniping tendencies. he didn't contribute anything he just quotes another post and agrees He's new. What he considers "contributing" may be less than what you do. Point is, he gave his opinions, and at least actually helped. Also, stop twisitng his words. He had been contributing in discussion on that subject(those posts were around the same page), while Infun has not at all besides that post in the begining. In addition, Crysis is at least putting himself out there with opinions, while Infun can't be linked to having a strong opinion on anything. All he did was link a site, and if its bad info, he can just say "Oh, sorry." And we still can't tell what his views are on anything. Don't forget, just linking a site which *may* help someone isn't unknown to mafia, mafia pretend to "help" all the time. But what I find most interesting is why you are so caught up in this. You even claim yourself, "We don't have evidence on anyone really" and were inactive up until infun started getting accused. But I'll just leave that as food for thought, as a valuable townie would be contributing none the less. Still, I've got my eyes on you O.O. On October 06 2010 09:19 Bill Murray wrote:On October 06 2010 05:40 meeple wrote:On October 06 2010 05:27 Pandain wrote:
I don't count Cynan as inactive and Nobody should vote for him because his actions thus far are in accordance with his previous play. That's not to say I'm not watching him(I am) but he's not that suspicious to me.
Whoa whoa... weird defense of cynan... the votes against him were just to bump him back into posting... which he did, so those should eventually fade away to other, more suitable targets. However, he's definitely not in enough danger for another townie to worry about him getting the chop. This makes a lot more sense if you're an anxious red protecting your buddy... I did pick up on that, but Pandain could just as easily be a Detective trying to defend someone, or a townie with a loud mouth. DT's can't investigate till night 2 On October 06 2010 09:22 Misder wrote:
Actually, I’m just going to vote ~Opz~ right now instead of XeliN, just because of this tiny suspicion. I don’t know if I truly believe in that he is mafia, but I think he has a better chance at being mafia than XeliN. Why? At least Opz is being active, and he always posts scum like. He's like cynan, suscipcious, but playing his normal style so that must be remembered. Obviously some people are gonig to be modkilled. We should go after the people who will not, but have barely contributed(or go under the "guise" of contributing). Why do you keep saying infund contributed nothing? That guide would be very helpful for new DT's and he contributed some helpful advice which will keep our blues alive while crisis contributed 0 original information. Infund did throw out a strong opinion which was that blues shouldn't roleclaim and that they should play outside of conventional play style while crisis just agreed/disagreed with other people i understand he is new but to say he doesn't fit the profile of a non-contributing player masquerading as an active townie while infund does is just stupid. I don't think he's even likely mafia but you seem pretty bent on infund being scum while other people fit your reasoning better I'm not saying he's contributed nothing, I'm saying he really hasn't contributed anything to this game. Plainly, Infun is a better and much more obvious choice than Crysis, who has at least been trying to contribute. And plainly I think he has been. Decent 3 paragraphs, but how does it help? Those who post without content are spammers, those who write essays without content are scum. Hyperbole, obviously, and I don't know for sure that infun is 100% scum. But I do know he's a better lynch in my eyes. Plainly, Infun has not contributed at all. He linked to a website, but anyone can really do that. Again, mafia will appear to help people all the time. And you don't always have to lie, or even want to lie as scum. (See: Ace's mafia guide). You're saying crysis is a better lynch than Infun. How? Crysis has at least attempted to contribute, and is new, so his posts will obviously be shorter than normal. He is adapting to this game, to accuse him and declare him mafia because he hasn't contributed "meaningfully" is the wrong conclusion. Instead, realize he is contributing, and push him to contribute more. Crysis makes 3 posts, talking about what he feels. Infun makes one in the very beginning, linking to a "helpful site." Then he disappears. Tell me which is the better choice.
Infun didn't say much but what he did say contributed. He was giving advice to blues, that's something.
I never said Crisis was mafia. If you read my post you'd know that. Crisis has posted more than infund and said less. I'm just pointing that out. I'm not declaring him mafia but for now he's the strongest candidate for my vote because he has posted several times without saying anything at all. I'm not going out on a limb and saying he's 100% red or even 50%, that would be retarded.
|
I don't think we should go for Protact either, he is contributing and that leaves a trail to analyze. If his strategy as mafia is to masquerade as pro town, than how is that diifferent from being just pro town?
Also, who is smurfing as Protcat. Please tell, then I can analyze him better.
+ Show Spoiler +Frick I'm starting to spam, I'll stop :p
|
On October 06 2010 10:04 Pandain wrote:
Also, who is smurfing as Protcat. Please tell, then I can analyze him better.
Anyone who says Protact's real name in thread no longer gets a modkill, but will get a stern look from me.
And I mean a VERY stern look. VERY STERN.
|
OK. It's not fair. If I want to meta him, and provide both town and mafia games, I have to say who he is. That is NOT FAIR to me making a case on him.
|
On October 06 2010 10:05 BrownBear wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2010 10:04 Pandain wrote:
Also, who is smurfing as Protcat. Please tell, then I can analyze him better.
Anyone who says Protact's real name in thread gets a modkill. Just sayin'
i think it's a bit ridiculous that some people know. If someone was to smurf i really think either everyone or no one should know
|
On October 06 2010 10:11 Bill Murray wrote:
OK. It's not fair. If I want to meta him, and provide both town and mafia games, I have to say who he is. That is NOT FAIR to me making a case on him.
They wish to remain unknown, I am honoring their request. You may meta all you want with the game they played as Protactinium. I'm sure you can work with that, but it's really not up for discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
