|
Here's a post about possible relationship's between people based on posting. This is based on accusation of the people throughout the thread. The post is structured such that if the bold player is mafia, then the listed people are so and so.
Shcoleosis
Zork and Vain -> town
Varp -> Likely town
Forum -> Scum
Elmizzt -> No opinion
Sand -> Likely scum (initial accusation followed by a swift change of vote)
Zorkmid
Sand, and Shcol -> town
Forumite -> Likely town
Varpulis -> Likely scum (has pointed Zork being town a few times)
Elmizzt -> Scum
Vain -> no opinion
Elmizzt
Varp ->Likely town
Not a whole lot to go for others
Sandroba
Zork-> Town
Elmizzt -> Likely Town
Forumite -> Likely scum
Forumite
I dont think he has been strongly suspected by anyone or strongly said to be town by anyone so there is no linking with others.
Vapulis
Zork -> Likely scum
No one has accused of him of being scum at any point (apart from initial lurking)
Vain
Shcol -> Town
Others have questioned his inactivity but no strong accusation/support yet.
Summary
In summary, Zork and Shcol have been point of discussion or being involved in discussion and most people have some sort of public opinion/vote on either of those. If I were a detective, I would check up on those two since knowing their alignment provides a plethora of information for analysis. Remember, don't role-claim as a DT unless absolutely necessary since it will get you mafia killed in the following night.
Lastly, I did not list my leanings based on the above analysis and it would be better than someone unbiased does that.
Note: This will be my penultimate post before daybreak as I need to do some work. I would make a post just before daybreak detailing what my strategy would be so that you some insight if I die.
|
Hey all, just skimmed your analysis, GREAT to see it!
I was wrong about this being a boring game! GF and I making dinner for company. I'll try and sneak back for half an hour or so and was thinking I'd try and look at the voting records. Hope to be on soon !
|
I believe one of the Mafia recently outed himself, and the latest posts have hinted the same thing. Simple, VarpuliS is Mafia.
Shcoleosis have long been designated scummy, and a good Mafia tactic is to lynch those that are suspicious because that is easy. A good Mafia makes himself immune to suspicion, and this one has a good tactic. He´s the one who speaks the most, explains the situation, help the others in their analysis and appear so pro-town that he´s beyond suspicion. By piling the case on Shcoleosis, he´s himself safe for another day, maybe more, and it´s safe to gather evidence against someone most people allready think is scum allready.
Well, he unvoted Shcoleosis, didn´t he? To lynch an inactive that would get modkilled anyway nonetheless? Yes, there was an opportunity for a double kill there, but also an opportunity to appear more Town to help with providing obvious advice, the situation is no different from a normal first lynch, just that the modkill bonus disappeared. And immediately after the lynch, what does he do? Does a nice post on who everyone is, excluding himself of course, but clearly marking Shcolesis as the most likely Mafia, back on making sure a scummy Townie gets lynched. I hinted that I would do a post-by-post analysis of Shcoleosis, so it´s okay for him to do the same, another strong attack to lynch him. He´s not very subtle, but at least focused.
The quote is below, I bolded the relevant part, so the emphasis is mine.
On April 18 2011 00:12 VarpuliS wrote:
Unfortunately, we've got no clue which blue roles (if any) are in the game. If we do have any blues, we've got one of each, which means that we need to use those abilities wisely. I've got two lists here, 1 for the medic, and 1 for the DT, assuming the best case scenario that we've got both.
Now, why is this scummy? Simple, there is 4 possible role combinations. Townies have no information that hints to which it is. Doctor and Cop can be both alone and together, and the cop couldn´t have identified a roleblocker yet to get more info. Now, what about Mafia? A Mafia knows if he or the other Mafia is a roleblocker, so they know if it´s combinations 1 and 2, or 3 and 4. If they have a roleblocker then it MUST be either one Blue of each type or NO blues at all. Since no role except a Mafia would know this yet, we can be quite sure that Varpulis is Mafia.
He outed himself by mistake, and we should lynch him for Day 2, as well as put Shcolesis off the scumlist.
________
And again I realize that I should check up on Shcolesis, because I just defended him again. I hope he´s not Mafia, but if I´m right that Varpulis is Mafia, then Shcoleosis just became a guaranteed Townie.
|
Eternalmisfit, I think your analysis of me and Varpulis is weak.
If I am Mafia, then Shcoleosis is probably too, since for some reason I defend him all the time.
If Varpulis is mafia then Shcoleosis is probably Town, since he´s been on him for so long.
Apart from that it´s a very interesting summary, kudos.
|
ah. I see the misunderstanding here. What I meant to say was "If we do have any blues, we've only got one of each. This was to make it very clear that we must not waste any abilities given to us. If you'd like to lynch me, lynch me. I invite you. It will prove my alignment and deny suspicion in my analyses.
Let me repeat that: If you think i'm scum, go ahead and lynch me.
|
That´s it? Your defence is that you are town and it´s okay that you get lynched, instead of us lynching a Mafia? Are you giving up on this game? It doesn´t matter if a player live or die, if Town eventually win then ALL Town win, even if they get lynched or killed on the way, but if you go quietly to get lynched, then you help Mafia only.
|
The missing -only- is almost believeable, but I´m keeping my eyes on you for now.
FoS: VarpuliS
|
On April 18 2011 03:54 VarpuliS wrote:
ah. I see the misunderstanding here. What I meant to say was "If we do have any blues, we've only got one of each. This was to make it very clear that we must not waste any abilities given to us. If you'd like to lynch me, lynch me. I invite you. It will prove my alignment and deny suspicion in my analyses.
Let me repeat that: If you think i'm scum, go ahead and lynch me.
VarpuliS, did you read the guides that were reccomended?
|
6 hours and 48 minutes left in the day, send actions to both me and GMarshal please
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=211590
On another note, TL Mafia vet members RoL and LSB are holding a BW showmatch to decide who gets to control each other's signature. An unstoppable force (RoL's rage) versus an immovable object (LSB's stubbornness), who will win?? Support your fellow members! Tonight at 7PM!
|
Well, If you think that I'm scum, there's probably nothing that I can do to dispel your suspicion. I'm Vanilla town. I've got no powers that I need to protect, only my analysis that will be ignored and discredited if everybody thinks that i'm scum.
I am confident that I've got at least one scum in my list of suspects. A townie for a mafia is a good trade in my book.
In my opinion, there's no doubt that Shcoleosis is a superior choice for the day 2 lynch. I'm sure that some people agree with me. I'm sure that others don't.
I urge you to all to vote for Shcoleosis. I've got multiple analyses to cite as to why. Forumite's got one "mistake" which was simply a miscommunication.
|
Eternalmisfit, why am I likely scum if Sandroba is scum?
Is this because of that old Zorkmid post?
|
On April 18 2011 02:52 VarpuliS wrote:Shcoleosis First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again. + Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +On April 16 2011 08:05 VarpuliS wrote:...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts. First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:17 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all. Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/ This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange. This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum. Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level. Finally, we've got lucky number 3: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 13:01 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all ! Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do: - unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep - mafia -because they're trying to blend in I don't want either in my town come lategame. Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her. ## Vote Shcoleosis and we now pick up with the next post she writes: Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 08:55 Shcoleosis wrote:
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum! This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line). The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum." According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses. Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post: Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie. Moving on. Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum. Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second  Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense. In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj) Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 10:19 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good. I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in. Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book. This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid. Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 11:26 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action. This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please? This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me. Show nested quote +On April 17 2011 01:44 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument. This brings us to the last post to be analyzed. Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid. I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior. The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered.
tl;dr
Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that.
Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go.
|
VarpoliS AND Shcoleosis are both defeatists?
|
On April 18 2011 06:05 Forumite wrote:
VarpoliS AND Shcoleosis are both defeatists?
I wouldn't say that exactly. Sometimes it's hard to sense sarcasm through text. Just so you know, I was being very sarcastic. I don't/can't speak for Varpolis, though.
|
On April 18 2011 06:05 Shcoleosis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 02:52 VarpuliS wrote:Shcoleosis First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again. + Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +On April 16 2011 08:05 VarpuliS wrote:...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts. First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:17 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all. Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/ This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange. This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum. Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level. Finally, we've got lucky number 3: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 13:01 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all ! Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do: - unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep - mafia -because they're trying to blend in I don't want either in my town come lategame. Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her. ## Vote Shcoleosis and we now pick up with the next post she writes: On April 16 2011 08:55 Shcoleosis wrote:
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum! This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line). The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum." According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses. Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post: On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie. Moving on. Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum. On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense. In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj) On April 16 2011 10:19 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good. I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in. Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book. This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid. On April 16 2011 11:26 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action. This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please? This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me. On April 17 2011 01:44 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument. This brings us to the last post to be analyzed. On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid. I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior. The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered. tl;dr Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that. Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go.
Forumite, you think I'm mafia when we've got scum posting shit like this? And you said I was giving up on the game? I do think that Shcoleosis is mafia. Why don't we lynch her?
It seems to me that she knows that I'm town, saw my defense, and realized that it might work. So she parroted it.
Even if she isn't mafia --which I doubt-- She's not even reading the analysis people are posting. I don't want somebody like that on my team come LYLO.
This bullshit about me being mafia because i'm the most pro-town player in this game is ridiculous. If I were scum, why would I provide all these tools for the town to use? Why would i make so many posts for people to analyze? Compare me to Shcoleosis.
I ask you all now to be honest.
Who seems more scummy?
|
On April 18 2011 04:23 VarpuliS wrote:
Well, If you think that I'm scum, there's probably nothing that I can do to dispel your suspicion. I'm Vanilla town. I've got no powers that I need to protect, only my analysis that will be ignored and discredited if everybody thinks that i'm scum.
I am confident that I've got at least one scum in my list of suspects. A townie for a mafia is a good trade in my book.
In my opinion, there's no doubt that Shcoleosis is a superior choice for the day 2 lynch. I'm sure that some people agree with me. I'm sure that others don't.
I urge you to all to vote for Shcoleosis. I've got multiple analyses to cite as to why. Forumite's got one "mistake" which was simply a miscommunication.
This feels a lot like shoving someone in front of you to dodge a bullet that was obviously meant for you.
|
On April 18 2011 03:54 VarpuliS wrote:
ah. I see the misunderstanding here. What I meant to say was "If we do have any blues, we've only got one of each. This was to make it very clear that we must not waste any abilities given to us. If you'd like to lynch me, lynch me. I invite you. It will prove my alignment and deny suspicion in my analyses.
Let me repeat that: If you think i'm scum, go ahead and lynch me.
>.<
wow, what kind of attitude is this...
|
On April 18 2011 06:15 VarpuliS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:05 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 18 2011 02:52 VarpuliS wrote:Shcoleosis First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again. + Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +On April 16 2011 08:05 VarpuliS wrote:...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts. First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:17 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all. Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/ This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange. This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum. Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level. Finally, we've got lucky number 3: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 13:01 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all ! Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do: - unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep - mafia -because they're trying to blend in I don't want either in my town come lategame. Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her. ## Vote Shcoleosis and we now pick up with the next post she writes: On April 16 2011 08:55 Shcoleosis wrote:
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum! This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line). The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum." According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses. Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post: On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie. Moving on. Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum. On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense. In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj) On April 16 2011 10:19 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good. I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in. Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book. This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid. On April 16 2011 11:26 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action. This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please? This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me. On April 17 2011 01:44 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument. This brings us to the last post to be analyzed. On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid. I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior. The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered. tl;dr Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that. Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go. Forumite, you think I'm mafia when we've got scum posting shit like this? And you said I was giving up on the game? I do think that Shcoleosis is mafia. Why don't we lynch her? It seems to me that she knows that I'm town, saw my defense, and realized that it might work. So she parroted it. Even if she isn't mafia --which I doubt-- She's not even reading the analysis people are posting. I don't want somebody like that on my team come LYLO. This bullshit about me being mafia because i'm the most pro-town player in this game is ridiculous. If I were scum, why would I provide all these tools for the town to use? Why would i make so many posts for people to analyze? Compare me to Shcoleosis. I ask you all now to be honest. Who seems more scummy?
Correction: I'm not reading YOUR long-winded analysis. I'm pretty embarrassed for you because you're wasting your time. A lot of it.
|
I'd like to make something clear: Lynching me is not a good idea. Lynching me is a waste of a lynch. I want to live, and see this one through till the end. If people are dead set on lynching me however, I recognize that there isn't much that I can do to stop them.
I don't want people to want to lynch me. I show that by being active, helpful, and pro-town.
If helping the town makes me scum, then what makes me town?
|
On April 18 2011 06:18 VarpuliS wrote:
I'd like to make something clear: Lynching me is not a good idea. Lynching me is a waste of a lynch. I want to live, and see this one through till the end. If people are dead set on lynching me however, I recognize that there isn't much that I can do to stop them.
I don't want people to want to lynch me. I show that by being active, helpful, and pro-town.
If helping the town makes me scum, then what makes me town?
Wow, so your bluff failed, now you're backpedaling so fast, you're going backwards in time.
FOS: VarpuliS
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
