|
On April 18 2011 03:04 Eternalmisfit wrote:
I would be surprised if none of me, Zork, or Varpulis get hit by the mafia tonight (or the next night at the very least). Since I know I am town, I would start getting suspicious of the other two in that case; and I believe it will be a likewise thought process for the other two as well.
This. There's a reason the three of us are on my "medic save us" list. If Zork survives the next two nights without help from a medic, I'll be very suspicious of him.
The trouble is by that point I'll most likely already be dead. 
I'm going to go do some real life stuff, I'll come back with final post a couple of hours before the day post comes, in case I get hit tonight.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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?
|
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 06:17 Shcoleosis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:15 VarpuliS wrote: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.
[quote]
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.
ninja'd while I wrote my last post. wow... just... wow. You seem less pro-town with every post you make. I hope others see this as well.
At this point you don't even have to be scum, I still think you'd make a nice lynch target.
|
It's alright, I think that you can go. In hindsight I'd have pointed a FoS at VarpuliS too, probably. It's good that you raised the suspicion. I might look into Eternalmisfit too, for good measure, because he's also been very pro town.
I'm probably going to go away for a while too, before I get to involved in this fight with Shcoleosis that seems to be going nowhere. See you all after the day post, assuming I make it out alive. (fingers crossed  )
|
So it seems we do have a medic, if I interpret the post right. If so, thank you, whoever you are.
If mafia's got a roleblocker, looking at the possible setups this means that we've also got a dt, so best case situation, yay.
Good night everybody, I'll join the day 2 discussion tomorrow.
|
On April 18 2011 11:07 Zorkmid wrote:LOL! If you were REALLY roleblocked, this means that this is our setup: 1 Mafia Role Blocker, 1 Mafia Goon, 5 Town, 1 Medic, 1 Detective Sandroba has claimed detective, and the Medic guessed correctly. Can anyone else here confirm that if Sandroba is telling the truth (Im not sure) that this is the only setup possible?
Just because he was roleblocked doesn't mean he has a role. More likely he's a townie who the mafia roleblocked for the sake of roleblocking somebody.
From the role list in the second post: Roleblocker
You are a mafia member who has the ability to prevent a player from performing a night action. Once per night, you may roleblock a player, and your target will be unable to perform night actions for that night. Your target will be informed that they have been roleblocked (even if they didn't have a night action). You do not have to use your action every night.
|
Alright, there's been some activity while i've been gone, it seems. Sandroba, I'm liking the analysis of Vain. He does look very suspicious, you're right.
It's interesting that the mafia targeted Forumite. I've got a theory as to why, too.
Forumite analyzed me a couple of hours prior to the day post, and concluded that I was mafia. Now, imagine that the day post comes, and he's dead. Who looks like scum?
Mafia had a plan with that kill: they wanted to put the suspicion off of themselves, and on to one of the town's most active analysts. If everybody thinks that i'm scum, nobody will believe my analyses. My most recent analysis was on Shcoleosis, so this evidence just makes her even more suspicious to me.
FoS Vain
FoS Shcoleosis
|
On April 18 2011 22:26 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 22:12 Forumite wrote:
I am one of the probable Townies, and I hinted that I had something really good that I was waiting to drop, which is probably why they aimed for me.
I would like you to note that I didn´t say I was saved at first. Partly because I didn´t see the PM until this morning, but also because I wanted to lure out the Mafia, and because I knew people would suspect me if I say I was saved. Saying I´m saved doesn´t help much, except if I get someone to make a mistake, like Vain did. Actually Occam's Razor tells me that the reason you didn't say you were saved at first is because you weren't, you didn't know that when you're saved the host PMs you with "you were saved" you guessed at the wording that would be used, and you were wrong. ##Vote Forumite
But Zorkmid, unless somebody else claims that they took the hit and got saved, We'll have to believe him. I know I didn't get saved, you say that you didn't, Eternalmisfit hasn't claimed anything...
Unless the medic completely ignored my "medics save us list" (which Forumite was on) and randomly picked somebody who happened to be the same guy that the mafia targeted, his claim makes sense.
Occam's Razor tells me that Forumite is probably telling the truth.
|
Yeah, Zorkmid, Sandroba voted vain because he analysed him and concluded scum. Unless somebody else counterclaims that they also got saved, I'm leaning towards believing Forumite.
Also, that would be a really stupid lie, because the medic would know immediately that he was lying.On April 18 2011 23:00 sandroba wrote:
Claiming to be saved while not being saved is a terrible move, as I explained in my analysis of vain. Medic could claim and trade his life for mafia, which is a great deal for town.
I'm pretty sure Vain is mafia, so scholeosis can't be aswell.
This says it all. I disagree that Vain and Shcoleosis can't both be mafia, but I agree with the rest of the post.
|
I just took a very close look at your analysis Sandroba, and couldn't agree more with how contentless Vain's posts have been. Unless he breaks out some analysis soon, he's just as suspicious as Shcoleosis.
It's a close call though. If we could lynch them both, I would.
To the DT I'm going to assume we have at this point: Investigate Vain and Shcoleosis.
|
I am considering the events of the night. My analysis would be discredited if everybody thought that I was scum, which would have happened if Forumite died, because Forumite was suspicious of me. He removed the FoS before the night ended, but it's likely that the mafia didn't notice that in time.
Shcoleosis being scum fits perfectly with this, because I've been very vocal about lynching Shcoleosis, given my multiple analyses against her. If people don't believe me, then the scum gets to live another day.
|
I think that lynching Vain would actually accomplish a lot at this point. I've been suspicious of him for a while, and his actions today have made him my #1 suspect. If he flips town Shcoleosis is basically proven scum, and if he flips scum then we've caught a scum.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Vain's big mistake was this:On April 18 2011 19:25 Vain wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 18:12 Forumite wrote:
We know that we have a medic, but we have no idea who it is, nor who was saved. Going out with something like this doesn´t really serve a point, so we can´t identify who it was either.
Look, if I was marked for a night-kill and saved, then the Mafia knows it, the Medic knows it, but there is no way I can prove this to any others without possibly endangering the Medic, and that´s something we don´t want to do.
Like Sandroba saying "I´m roleblocked", it doesn´t give us any info, except that IF someone else was roleblocked then that person only can be quite sure that Sandroba is Scum, but haven´t got a way to expose him.
Would you take my word for it if I said I was marked for death but saved by the Medic, when it´s such an obvious way to appear more Town? It is not an obvious way to appear more town. If you claimed you were saved like you are now and someone else also would claim that one of you would be lying. That would couse suspicion on both of the claimers and probably would get one of you killed. Now if your claim is correct it would mean you were town(i really do not think you tried to kill yourself) And this would also mean VarpuliS would be in the clear. The reasoning behind this would be that if you would be killed while you were clearly suspecting Varpulis then VarpuliS would be drawing unnecessary suspicion on him. Also i still suspect scholeosis because with you AND VarpuliS gone there would be 6 people left. Night kill would mean a townie kill and then the maffia only would have only to persuade one person to win the game. With the leading accuser for scholeosis gone this would be an excellent position for scholeosis to be in. I could also be missing some connections. We now have to figure out who would have a reasonal benefit of you (and Varpulis) gone
Go read sandroba's post, he explains why.
|
This is a theory, I'm just going to throw it out there: Sandroba is mafia, Vain's just not a very good player. Sandroba's been suspicious in my book for a while, but suddenly he accuses Vain and everybody ignores the possibility that he's scum. Clever, that.
Also, note how he's defending Shcoleosis. I'll think this over, and come back later with a some evidence.
|
The one thing I'm worried about: Vain could be our medic. In that case he'd know that Forumite was targeted and saved, and accidentally let it slip.
Remember, blues are also trying to hide, because if blues get uncovered, mafia goes ahead and kills them.
I think that neither Shcoleosis nor Vain is contributing, and either would make a good lynch, because if the one we lynch today flips green, I can almost guarantee that the other one won't.
By the way Shcoleosis: Reading the thread and not contributing is the definition of lurking.
|
just re-read my post, and I seem to have contradicted myself.
EBWOP: If Vain is not our medic, he makes a good lynch.
|
On April 19 2011 04:23 sandroba wrote:
To me both scholeosis and vain have presented extremely scummy behavior, but as I stated before there is simply no way they are both mafia.
Looking at the first day activity it was pretty clear that scholeosis was going to get lynched, yet nobody seemed to care much. There was no way mafia could have known senj wasn't going to show up and it seemed like everyone was tunneling scholeosis, except for forumite and he is our only confirmed townie. I hope everyone understands that the mafia would try to not let this happen on day 1 if scholeosis was indeed mafia.
Now looking at the night activity, mafia tryied to kill forumite. Before forumite analysis of varpulis his FoS was Vain and Elmizzt. No one seemed to give credit to forumite's analysis of vain, as he seemed very pro-town. Even forumite didn't seem convinced by his own analysis in the end.
Then we know that the medic saved forumite. Who do you guys think that could have possibly targgeted forumite for a save? I personally think it's much more likely to be scholeosis than vain. If vain was medic he had no reason whatsoever to be sure forumite was town. Scholeosis on the other hand would be pretty convinced as forumite was the only one who defended him and everybody else was pointing fingers at him.
Now let's say neither of them is the medic. That makes it more likely that vain's slip proves he is mafia.
That's why I feel vain is the better lynch. Ever since I rose suspicion on vain all hell broke loose in this thread. That's much more consistent with him being mafia.
This makes a lot of sense to me. Sandroba, you've got me convinced. I swear to god I'll lynch you if he flips medic, though.
##Vote: Vain
|
Vain, for all of the guides you claim to read, you don't seem to know what a bandwagon is. A bandwagon would be me seeing three other people voting for you, and do the same without giving a reason. A bandwagon is not reading an analysis, debating it with others, being convinced, and then voting for you. Weak defense.
Also, nobody knows what you're talking about when you reference the guides. If you want to ask a question, just ask it, don't be vague.
To all the people calling Forumite a liar: Then what did happen? Mafia decided not to hit anybody? why the hell would they do that? Elmizzt, how did you know when the PM's went out? Are you claiming blue?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
