|
On April 27 2011 09:04 Orange2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2011 08:18 Blue1 wrote:
This is from the op:
Activity:
As far as activity goes in this game, I am not using the standard rule. I hold you all tot he agreement you made and expect a commitment. I will nudge someone for inactivity to get them to post more, but I won't mod kill them. Punishments will be handed out post game with the severity and terms listed in the sign up thread.
...
I will say this one more time. The two cardinal sins in this game are as follow.
1. Trying to find out AKA's of players, or who is in the game.
2. Inactivity.
Neither will result in an immediate mod kill, but afterwords I will do everything in my power to make you suffer. Which can be quite a lot.
I think this is incentive enough to make people post. I don't think a huge analysis at this point is necessary as I've pretty much commented on every post he's made so far and I don't feel like repeating myself. For now we have to use the info we have so far and I'm voting on the person I find most likely to be scum. Red is a close candidate though. If you don't feel the same way and have any leads on others I sugest you share it.
I would agree with you, but as the last experiment proved the threat of excessive banning is not enough to persuade subjects to post as much as they should, which is why I believe we should be pressuring inactives/lurkers. I disliked Zerg's caps-locked attitude but he seems to have recovered from it and I now have no problem keeping him around. I fail to see why red pointing out that inactives are a problem makes him scum, he clearly stuck out his neck when it wasn't necessary to point out to us that the mafia could just be skating by, without being really pressured, and you guys want to lynch him for it? Once everyone has posted something of substance we can start worrying about scumhunting, but as far as we know the scum team has yet to post and are giggling franticly in a corner, watching us shove each other closer to the incinerator. Assume for a second you guys are right, and protoss is the newbiest of newbie mafias if thats the case even if we leave him around and pressure inactives now he is going to make some kind of major mistake that gives him away or revert to typical newbie mafia behavior, which we *will* catch him at. I'm content to leave him around in the knowledge that we will know if he is scum or not sooner rather than later. I'd much rather poke the people not doing anything to see how they squirm. On no lynch. Town almost never benefits from no lynch, in 98% of the previous experiments all no lynching did was fail to provide information and basically recreate day 1, nolynch provided no real benefits, and in the end meant the town had one less person to work with. yellow1 pink2 green2 have yet to make substantial contributions, and it annoys me, I did not know I could get annoyed, but apparently I can
Pointing out that mafia could be skating by as lurkers without any pressure doesn't require 'sticking your neck out' at all. It's a bland, blanket statement that applies to any game. It's the very easiest way for mafia to 'contribute'. It's also less than irrelevant on day1 when less than 24 hours have passed since the game started. For some people, this may be their first chance to catch up on the thread since the game started.
Also, I agree with the poster above who asked you to dispense with the role-playing. It just obscures your points.
|
Interesting first post yellow, you are right, it *is* easy for red to post "people are lurking" but doing so after being accused of lurking is kind of ballsy, dont you think?
Also nice empty post, tell me, who do you think should be lynched? Why?
You clearly disagree with my assessment of red, would you lynch him over someone such as green2? Why or why not? Give me data yellow, stuff I can analyze.
Oh and for your information the game has been up for almost 19 hours, which to me is more than enough time for *everyone* to have posted something of relevance. Notice how whenever I pressure someone they pop up, sooner rather than later.
That said, you posted, moving on to the next subject
##Unvote
##Vote:pink2
|
Lots of random questions thrown my way so I will try not to write an essay here.
I would agree I've done more than my fair share of self defense, Orange. Unfortunately, the reasons I've been voted so far have included, "He's too nice," "He's a noob," "He's defending himself," and you yourself have pointed out, "He wants to stay in the game." I feel none of these implicate me as scum, so I continue to prepare myself against unfounded finger pointing. I am simply a first time player who--you're correct--wants to stay in the game for the experience. I was not aware that being polite when you're a newcomer means you get kicked out. o_o
The points that have already brought up that could be valid against me ("he's bandwagoning," "he's back pedaling," etc.) I feel I've already explained to the best of my ability. I'm learning on the fly here.
I was asked what I thought of Red fanning the flames. I have not seen enough from him yet to feel comfortable lynching him, but I do think he is acting suspicious... I would think he would be a good candidate to investigate.
Blue asked who I feel should be lynched, and Orange asked me to essentially point a finger. I do agree that a no lynch day 1 is pointless, despite feeling like I could be the first casualty. From reading other threads It seems that pointing the finger at inactive players is considered an "easy out" or even suspicious. However, if the players you listed, Orange, do not speak up soon (I see Yellow just posted), why would we not vote to lynch a player who is not going to contribute to discussion? At the worst we lynched a townie who did not help us on day 1, and with some luck we manage to snag a mafia who is sitting back and letting you all do his/her work for him.
For now, I would vote between pink or green who so far have not contributed, and see how they scramble to defend themselves at the very end of the day and explain why they have not helped witch hunt yet.
|
On April 27 2011 09:52 Orange2 wrote:
Interesting first post yellow, you are right, it *is* easy for red to post "people are lurking" but doing so after being accused of lurking is kind of ballsy, dont you think?
No, why would it be?
Also nice empty post, tell me, who do you think should be lynched? Why?
You clearly disagree with my assessment of red, would you lynch him over someone such as green2? Why or why not? Give me data yellow, stuff I can analyze.
This is a pretty big reply to an empty post. I'd lynch red2 if I had to lynch somebody right now, because his posts suck. There's plenty of daytime left for me to change my mind, and there are several players I'll be watching carefully. And yes, I'd lynch red over green, obviously, because green hasn't posted yet so I have no read on him. If he doesn't post before the day ends, of course, the situation will be different.
Oh and for your information the game has been up for almost 19 hours, which to me is more than enough time for *everyone* to have posted something of relevance. Notice how whenever I pressure someone they pop up, sooner rather than later.
I know exactly how long the game has been up. It started after I went to bed, and I started reading this thread when I got home from work and finished supper. I posted when I was finished, and there was no way I could have posted before then, regardless of when or whether anyone called me out for "lurking".
That said, you posted, moving on to the next subject
##Unvote
##Vote:pink2
Do you genuinely believe you are accomplishing something by this?
|
We haven't heard from Green yet and he just voted for himself in the vote thread. Thoughts?
|
Im gonna vote yellow1 for a couple of reasons.
First of all he has an extremely "im right your wrong and nothing can change my mind" attitude for someone who just started posting. He seems to be coming off as extremely aggressive right out the gate and I would like to see how well his aggressive attitude holds up with some votes stacked on his name. I get the feeling that hes trying extremely hard to put on a show.
Heres a quote from him
Pointing out that mafia could be skating by as lurkers without any pressure doesn't require 'sticking your neck out' at all. It's a bland, blanket statement that applies to any game. It's the very easiest way for mafia to 'contribute'. It's also less than irrelevant on day1 when less than 24 hours have passed since the game started. For some people, this may be their first chance to catch up on the thread since the game started.
Also, I agree with the poster above who asked you to dispense with the role-playing. It just obscures your points.
He seems to be spending his efforts "Debunking" players that are looking pro town and not actually looking for scum signs. this is a pretty common scumtell. If he was town he should be making a mental note of the "fluffness" of someones post and checking it untill further use later when he has a case. Instead hes trying to discredit people as much as possible as soon as possible.
And then theres his last statement. Repeating what someone else says in order to create the illusion of contributing. another big scum tell. im getting a 90% scum read on him.
##Vote:yellow1
|
On April 27 2011 11:15 red2 wrote:Im gonna vote yellow1 for a couple of reasons. First of all he has an extremely "im right your wrong and nothing can change my mind" attitude for someone who just started posting. He seems to be coming off as extremely aggressive right out the gate and I would like to see how well his aggressive attitude holds up with some votes stacked on his name. I get the feeling that hes trying extremely hard to put on a show. Heres a quote from him Show nested quote +Pointing out that mafia could be skating by as lurkers without any pressure doesn't require 'sticking your neck out' at all. It's a bland, blanket statement that applies to any game. It's the very easiest way for mafia to 'contribute'. It's also less than irrelevant on day1 when less than 24 hours have passed since the game started. For some people, this may be their first chance to catch up on the thread since the game started.
Also, I agree with the poster above who asked you to dispense with the role-playing. It just obscures your points. He seems to be spending his efforts "Debunking" players that are looking pro town and not actually looking for scum signs. this is a pretty common scumtell. If he was town he should be making a mental note of the "fluffness" of someones post and checking it untill further use later when he has a case. Instead hes trying to discredit people as much as possible as soon as possible. And then theres his last statement. Repeating what someone else says in order to create the illusion of contributing. another big scum tell. im getting a 90% scum read on him.
##Vote:yellow1
Yeah, you're either really bad or scum.
|
Take another look over red's posts, guys, tell me what you see.
|
I find yellow's reasoning completely sound. Calling him out on his aggressive attitude is fine, but saying it is scummy is wrong. His aggression is in response to orange's thought process that pressuring lurkers is a town tell. I don't think orange is scum at the moment, and neither does yellow (?) but I have to agree with him about you, red. Hopefully it isn't a psychological thing, but I'll read your posts more closely. Zerg has started posting normally and orange is getting better.
I mean how would you like it if I 6^of4 potatoe,,,,, cane (*)*)>>S<A2
|
Things have slowed down tonight, but Green has had all day to contribute and he also voted for himself in the vote thread...? So,
##Unvote: Zerg1
##Vote: Green2
|
After reading reds response I'm satisfyed with either a protoss or red lynch right now. Your "90% scum read" makes no sense to me at all and I've been much more agressive than yellow yet you OMGUS him like a boss.
|
I still stand by my initial gut read. Yellow is raising red flags for me. heres his response to my accusations.
Yeah, you're either really bad or scum.
Now wouldnt a townie be compelled to explain to town what it is about my accusations that make me scum? thats what we are doing is searching for the scummy players right? so if you see a player who is looking like scum.. but dont try to share your reasons for suspecting this person.. what does that tell us? unless you dont have any real reason to suspect im scum. your comment was just fluff to try and intimidate me. Its this dismissive attitude that had made me suspicious of you in the first place.
|
Questions:
1.) What is your number one scum tell? meaning what kind of post or style immediatly makes you think someone is scum? Bandwagoning (defense see below), extended inactivity,
2.) what is your number one town tell? Agreesiveness
3.) What is your favorite role and why? Anything other than vanilla town. This is my 4th game and I've never had a role other than this.
4.) Do you love the companion cube? More than a hot beer on a cold christmas morning.
I've only just managed to read through the thread, my brain seems to shun the "color#" format of smurf names here. It has taken me several tries!
So based on what I have a read to this point, my vote is going to be on Protoss1. His original scummy posting was chalked up to his being a new player (we have no way of confirming this). I feel that a new player that was posting that frequently and long windedly might is likely to be scum. I didn't say much at all in my first game (Was Town).
As for else I have a scum read on:
Isn't much to go on yet, but red2 made a post that I thought was scummy. When orange2 was basically told to STFU! by Random4, red2 said:
whoa whoa relax bro. we want to build a positive town atmosphere. think happy thoughts.
This stuck with me for two reasons:
1. Short, contentless scummy post.
2. Red2 seems to be bandwagonning in terms of defending people accused by Orange2, who I have a strong town read on. He does this with no justification
I've always felt that mafia would want to be seen to defend both townies AND mafia if it was apparent that at least one other townie.
For this reason I also have a townread on Random4.
All of this being said, I've never played a game where there was a mafia lynch on day one.
|
EBWOP:
Voting for Protoss1 for now, but not set in stone.
|
On April 27 2011 20:59 green2 wrote:
EBWOP:
Voting for Protoss1 for now, but not set in stone.
If Protoss is scum his scum buddy is dumb as a post.
|
On April 27 2011 22:00 purple2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2011 20:59 green2 wrote:
EBWOP:
Voting for Protoss1 for now, but not set in stone. If Protoss is scum his scum buddy is dumb as a post.
All I'm saying is that I don't feel very strongly about my vote, I'm like a Dem voting for Dukakis.
|
Cool now only mr pink has to post.
Green, can you explain this more?
Red2 seems to be bandwagonning in terms of defending people accused by Orange2, who I have a strong town read on. He does this with no justification
I'm not exactly sure what you are getting at by "defending people accused by orange" I don't think red has really been doing that, maybe you should read his other posts.
RoL, when exactly does the day end?
|
I'm feeling more and more than Red and Yellow are on different sides of the town line, but I'm having a hard time figuring out which is which.
I still don't know why people think I should be the Day 1 vote... the only thing I've been guilty of is being new. I haven't been creating chaos or making random accusations and then silently backing away and letting other people argue it out and do my work for me.
If I get lynched, when does my role get revealed? (not sure if this should be in mod font, but I'm guessing you all can answer my question for me). Since I'm looking more and more likely to be lynched, according to the rules revealing your role is not against the rules, it's just frowned upon. Would revealing my role as a last ditch effort just serve to help the mafia more than the town?
For the last time: I am not scum.
|
12am tonight. In just over 12 hours.
|
Activity seems to be dying down, thats not very much fun...
Onto promoting activity!
A post by post of our good friend, green, who has all of 4 posts,
His first post was useless spam, so I'll disregard it, it only shows that he was around,
onto post 2, I'm deleting parts of it and keeping those parts I think relevant
On April 27 2011 20:58 green2 wrote:3.) What is your favorite role and why? Anything other than vanilla town. This is my 4th game and I've never had a role other than this. Notice how he emphasizes that he is both town and new, its something to take note of. So based on what I have a read to this point, my vote is going to be on Protoss1. His original scummy posting was chalked up to his being a new player (we have no way of confirming this). I feel that a new player that was posting that frequently and long windedly might is likely to be scum. I didn't say much at all in my first game (Was Town). I disagree with this point, activity is not a scumtell, inactivity might be. Notice the part I boded I know its a misedit, but its a notable misedit, its obvious that green isn't convinced that its likely a scum tell "might" but he revised it to make it sound more convinced, to justify a vote he is unsure of. As for else I have a scum read on: Isn't much to go on yet, but red2 made a post that I thought was scummy. When orange2 was basically told to STFU! by Random4, red2 said: Show nested quote +whoa whoa relax bro. we want to build a positive town atmosphere. think happy thoughts.
This stuck with me for two reasons: 1. Short, contentless scummy post. 2. Red2 seems to be bandwagonning in terms of defending people accused by Orange2, who I have a strong town read on. He does this with no justification I've always felt that mafia would want to be seen to defend both townies AND mafia if it was apparent that at least one other townie. This analysis seems forced to me, its trying to make too much out of too little, sure its a short and contentless post, but point two is... nonsensical? I must be missing something but I dont see where Green is getting that from. Reading this part of the post I feel like green might as well have included "oh btw red is the color of mafia, so he is obviously scum" For this reason I also have a townread on Random4. Why? You dont give a real reason, is it because he voted for red? You realize that voting for buddies and then moving the vote is textbook mafia right? All of this being said, I've never played a game where there was a mafia lynch on day one. Getting ready to justify a mislynch. there is no reason why town *has* to not lynch mafia day 1.
On April 27 2011 22:17 green2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2011 22:00 purple2 wrote:On April 27 2011 20:59 green2 wrote:
EBWOP:
Voting for Protoss1 for now, but not set in stone. If Protoss is scum his scum buddy is dumb as a post. All I'm saying is that I don't feel very strongly about my vote, I'm like a Dem voting for Dukakis. Setting himself up to move his vote off Protoss if the opportunity arises, see the part where I said that mafia dont mind voting for their own, especially if they can be "unsure" and move the vote later
Result: Medium/Low Scum Read I need to see more from green, but I'm getting hints that he may be more red than his name suggests.
That said <3 green, I will never desert you. Now if you would please step closer to the emergency test subject incinerator...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
