|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 20 2011 03:51 DropBear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 03:35 BrownBear wrote:
Point being, Palmar, we know you want us to lynch DropBear. DropBear, we know you want us to not lynch you. Arguing about it just takes up space.
Suits me. Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 03:39 Erandorr wrote:
By the way DB do you think that inofficial mayor role will ever be used in this game? you would have to have half voting for player A against the other half voting for B. And to be completely frank do you really think you would be a good fit for that role right now , with all the shit you seem to be getting from quite a few people in here?
It sort of seems like you are trying really hard to get a good position that screams "I am not scum" and that is very unlikely to ever matter at all The point of it is to ensure a no-lynch never happens. It would only be used if it looks like a no-lynch is imminent. It's a contingency. The only person giving me shit is Palmar lol. Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 03:43 Varpulis wrote:
do we need to elect that lol? If you want to switch your vote to make sure that somebody dies feel free, and be prepared to be held responsible for the results. Alright fair enough, I will do so if the situation arises.
"I will do so if the situation arises."
why is it necessary to say that now? it's not. I think, you just want to give away the responsibility for your votedecision.
|
Alright I'm back and caught up, for the most part it seems. some stuff still confuses me though.
Palmar, I think multiple people agree that we are going to need additional reasoning behind your HEAVY aggression on DB. Just because he posted a policy post is simply not enough. He did it in the werewolf game and flipped medic. That being said...
DB, though I agree that a no-lynch must be avoided, I think electing an informal mayor is a terrible idea. the mayor could end up being mafia. Nominating yourself is a little bit odd, as well as supplying the reasoning "and most importantly I am town." This sounds like something someone would say who defiantly isn't town. additional to that is the fact that nominating yourself mayor makes you a very high priority target for the mafia on night1.
Though i disagree with your reasoning and methods palmar, i am inclined to feel a bit wary about DB myself. I look forward to being potentially swayed by your evidence.
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
##Vote: DropBear for Mayor
|
##Vote: Palmar
He obviously had something in mind and there's no way he wasn't aware of how his accusations would be perceived by the rest of us.
However, his strategy hasn't benefited town by now. He has until the deadline to convince me to vote DropBear or BrownBear. If nothing meaningful comes out of the discussion initiated by him, I'd rather have one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around.
I'd also like to point out that it shouldn't be that difficult to convince me to switch to DropBear, considering DropBear's behaviour.
|
we have exactly 24h left to decide on our first lynch and so far i can't see any valid reasoning who to lynch.
Palmar: do you have any reasonable logic on why to lynch dropbear? you accused brownbear for a while in between, but you switched back to DB. Why??
Lucidity: what did you expect from telling everybody you're a townie?
Kurumi: would you kindly stop playing random question/answer games in this thread? please don't tell me its a ingenious tactic to find mafia..
supersoft: agressive much? nearly every post of you was an accusation so far without any proper reasoning behind it. your post relating to me included 2 unrelated parts of my post and you twisted em together to create a new meaning - accident or not?
and whats up with all that mayor stuff. i don't like having the fate of the lynch in the hands of one guy who might be scum. a big fat no to that until someone can tell me why we should need it (explanations so far were... lacking).
anyway its hard to keep track of everything, PLEASE reduce the non-relevant spam (hey kurumi) to a minimum!
|
Oh, the vote is in 30 hours, not in 6 hours. I thought we were running out of time. :/
Still, I'll stick to Palmar for now.
|
On August 20 2011 05:00 Foolishness wrote:
##Vote: DropBear for Mayor
Your thoughts behind this?
|
On August 20 2011 04:22 GreYMisT wrote:
Alright I'm back and caught up, for the most part it seems. some stuff still confuses me though.
Palmar, I think multiple people agree that we are going to need additional reasoning behind your HEAVY aggression on DB. Just because he posted a policy post is simply not enough. He did it in the werewolf game and flipped medic. That being said...
DB, though I agree that a no-lynch must be avoided, I think electing an informal mayor is a terrible idea. the mayor could end up being mafia. Nominating yourself is a little bit odd, as well as supplying the reasoning "and most importantly I am town." This sounds like something someone would say who defiantly isn't town. additional to that is the fact that nominating yourself mayor makes you a very high priority target for the mafia on night1.
Though i disagree with your reasoning and methods palmar, i am inclined to feel a bit wary about DB myself. I look forward to being potentially swayed by your evidence.
So did you have something original to add in? All I see here is rehashing what everyone else has already said. Don't wait for Palmar to sway you and sheep him, make the case yourself.
|
Im not planning on sheeping Palmar, at least not based on his current evidence. I just would like some more from his point, because he seems to be the most convinced person in this thread, and that interests me.
And as far as I know my point about Dropbear nominating him self mayor as a very fishy thing to do because it would call undue mafia attention to him actually was original.
|
On August 20 2011 04:05 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 03:53 BrownBear wrote:
I don't think I have... please quote where you're getting that from.
The only thing I can think of is in my large post, where I said if DB is gonna be active I'm less inclined to lynch him. This means I'm less inclined to lynch DB right now, NOT that I'm "heavily advocating lynching a lurker". Please don't put words into my mouth. Here you go: Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 03:35 BrownBear wrote:
If DropBear's gonna be active and making plans, I'm inclined to NOT lynch him day 1, because it means one less inactive jackass dragging us down. Plus, the more active he is, the sooner he'll slip up if he actually is scum. Of course, lynching is preferable to no-lynching in 99.99% of cases, so I'll vote for him in the end if nobody else comes forth.
Well, I read that as any scummy asshole with a plan is going to get a free bye on day 1, because you want to lynch someone inactive? Or does, the free pass on making plans and blanket statements to avoid the lynch only extend to a specific pool of people?
I asked for something of substance and this is what I got?
Oh, you. 
Ok, something you've pulled out of my reasoning that really just wasn't there. You're saying I want to lynch someone inactive. Not necessarily true. Implied, maybe, but NOT what I said. Again, you really need to stop putting words in people's mouths.
What I said there, and what anyone who took 5 seconds to think rationally got out of that sentence before you started spewing shit all over it, is that regardless of what I think about DropBear's alignment (and for the record, I think he's more green than not. Scummy, possibly, but not confirmed scum), I want to see people post more. We're on only 17 pages halfway through the first day, which is kind of sad. I want more content. DropBear's providing it.
I'm for lynching any of the semi-actives - that is, the people who are just contributing one liners and sheeping along to do the bare minimum to fly under the radar. Inactives = people who haven't noticed the game's started yet, people in different time zones who are sleeping, or people who don't care about the game. No reason wasting a vote on them - modkills will get them soon enough. The real area where mafia are probably lurking are the semi-actives - the guys who have posted a few times to be able to say "hey, I was here", but haven't contributed anything of substance or worth to the discussion.
That doesn't include DropBear right now. At the very least, he's provoking discussion both about his silly fake-mayor plan, and about whether or not he's red. He's defending himself and providing some alternate ideas. (Although, DropBear, "I will do so if it becomes necessary"? Really? That's not doing you any favors, bro). Right now, my list of semi-actives include: wherebugsgo, hiro protagonist, Foolishness, and JeeJee (when you read his posts, they don't contribute nearly as much as they do ask questions that go unanswered). I'm open to adding more to that list tho.
So let's start talking about those guys! JeeJee is the most suspicious to me right now: He's posted the most, but I see not all that much in his posts... it looks to me as though he's trying to post while not adding anything of value to town discussion. Just a gut feeling, but I still feel a lot better about lynching him than I do DropBear.
Anyway, long story short: You read things out of my post that didn't exist, those things are the entire basis of your case against me, your case against me sucks, gg, try harder.
##Vote: JeeJee
|
I'm back and about to go over the thread more thoroughly to look at people but in regards to the majority lynch rule I think there's a much much simpler solution. When the lynch is getting closer and it looks like it will be a no-lynch just have everyone put their votes on two people. This is good because
1. There are almost never more than two candidates who actually have a shot of getting lynched close to the deadline anyway.
2. This nearly guarantees that we won't have a no-lynch because the only possible no-lynch here would be an even number of players remaining and splitting it evenly, and if that's going to happen I volunteer my vote to switch so there definitely will be a lynch (Note that this does not give me any power over the lynch, I won't be the one to decide who the 2 candidates to be switched to will be and me switching my vote will be me switching to the only other candidate to ensure a lynch, I will not be choosing to sometimes switch and other times not)
3. This forces everyone to vote on legitimate candidates, it means no throw-away votes or votes that hide what you think about the actually suspicious people, the mafia will be forced to put votes where they might not want to and this makes it easier to get info from the vote because we can see which person got last-minute switches, and which looked like the mafia was trying to avoid killing.
I repeat, I will not be the one deciding who these two candidates should be picked, this gives me no power whatsoever, now I'm going to go back over the thread so wait 15 minutes before yelling that this was policy without real opinions.
|
United States22154 Posts
Barundar replaces ghrur! Welcome Barundar everyone ^_^
|
|
|
On August 20 2011 06:52 BrownBear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 04:05 Palmar wrote:On August 20 2011 03:53 BrownBear wrote:
I don't think I have... please quote where you're getting that from.
The only thing I can think of is in my large post, where I said if DB is gonna be active I'm less inclined to lynch him. This means I'm less inclined to lynch DB right now, NOT that I'm "heavily advocating lynching a lurker". Please don't put words into my mouth. Here you go: On August 20 2011 03:35 BrownBear wrote:
If DropBear's gonna be active and making plans, I'm inclined to NOT lynch him day 1, because it means one less inactive jackass dragging us down. Plus, the more active he is, the sooner he'll slip up if he actually is scum. Of course, lynching is preferable to no-lynching in 99.99% of cases, so I'll vote for him in the end if nobody else comes forth.
Well, I read that as any scummy asshole with a plan is going to get a free bye on day 1, because you want to lynch someone inactive? Or does, the free pass on making plans and blanket statements to avoid the lynch only extend to a specific pool of people? I asked for something of substance and this is what I got? Oh, you. Ok, something you've pulled out of my reasoning that really just wasn't there. You're saying I want to lynch someone inactive. Not necessarily true. Implied, maybe, but NOT what I said. Again, you really need to stop putting words in people's mouths. What I said there, and what anyone who took 5 seconds to think rationally got out of that sentence before you started spewing shit all over it, is that regardless of what I think about DropBear's alignment (and for the record, I think he's more green than not. Scummy, possibly, but not confirmed scum), I want to see people post more. We're on only 17 pages halfway through the first day, which is kind of sad. I want more content. DropBear's providing it. I'm for lynching any of the semi-actives - that is, the people who are just contributing one liners and sheeping along to do the bare minimum to fly under the radar. Inactives = people who haven't noticed the game's started yet, people in different time zones who are sleeping, or people who don't care about the game. No reason wasting a vote on them - modkills will get them soon enough. The real area where mafia are probably lurking are the semi-actives - the guys who have posted a few times to be able to say "hey, I was here", but haven't contributed anything of substance or worth to the discussion. That doesn't include DropBear right now. At the very least, he's provoking discussion both about his silly fake-mayor plan, and about whether or not he's red. He's defending himself and providing some alternate ideas. (Although, DropBear, "I will do so if it becomes necessary"? Really? That's not doing you any favors, bro). Right now, my list of semi-actives include: wherebugsgo, hiro protagonist, Foolishness, and JeeJee (when you read his posts, they don't contribute nearly as much as they do ask questions that go unanswered). I'm open to adding more to that list tho. So let's start talking about those guys! JeeJee is the most suspicious to me right now: He's posted the most, but I see not all that much in his posts... it looks to me as though he's trying to post while not adding anything of value to town discussion. Just a gut feeling, but I still feel a lot better about lynching him than I do DropBear. Anyway, long story short: You read things out of my post that didn't exist, those things are the entire basis of your case against me, your case against me sucks, gg, try harder. ##Vote: JeeJee
I don't agree with lynch inactives. Way too easily manipulated by Mafia as every lurker would look the exact same and they could point you in the direction of one of them. Absolutely no discussion nor relevant information comes from simply policy lynching.
The simplest way to deal with lurkers it to encourage people not do it. Everyone should know it's anti Town as hell to sit in the shadows and do nothing, so no Townie should be inclined to lurk anyways. If you can't keep interest, then ask to be replaced. Don't make us deal with you.
Nobody else sees Sevyrn over there (hi Sevyrn!)? The worst reason for a vote I have ever seen in my life, followed by "I wasn't actually voting I was pressuring but I unvoted as soon as he made a post" followed by "I unvoted cause I don't want people to lynch me."
|
Which is why i said lynch SEMI-ACTIVES, not inactives. Dude, come on.
Semi-active != inactive.
|
Cool beans.
Vote Sevyrn for me then. Look at dem posts.
|
You're right Sev is very suspicious but the problem is that we have a dozen people just like him, people that are barely active aren't posting many opinions and are generally difficult to get reads on. But you know who stands out? Palmer. I don't know why he's gotten away with this until now but he seriously has like a dozen posts that say nothing but kill DB, normally stepping into the spotlight and accusing someone is very townie but he isn't stepping into the spotlight he's just repeating kill DB and giving one shitty meta argument that basically boils down to "trust me". Well I don't.
##Vote: Palmar
|
On August 20 2011 07:38 BrownBear wrote:
Which is why i said lynch SEMI-ACTIVES, not inactives. Dude, come on.
Semi-active != inactive.
so you are convinced, that neither palmar nor DB is scum. Therefor you search a new target among the semiactives. I agree with that plan.
On August 20 2011 05:09 xtfftc wrote:
##Vote: Palmar
He obviously had something in mind and there's no way he wasn't aware of how his accusations would be perceived by the rest of us.
However, his strategy hasn't benefited town by now. He has until the deadline to convince me to vote DropBear or BrownBear. If nothing meaningful comes out of the discussion initiated by him, I'd rather have one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around.
I'd also like to point out that it shouldn't be that difficult to convince me to switch to DropBear, considering DropBear's behaviour.
ah, okay I understand, you vote for palmar, not because you think he's scum, but because he didn't convince you to vote for DB. This is scumlogic. Town doesn't vote people for playing bad. Town votes for scum.
Compared to DP, who proposed some really useless plans like this unnecessary mayorthing, your stuff seems more scummy to me.
##unvote
##vote: xtfftc
|
Wanna see worse scum logic? Town voting someone to sheep, then unvoting when called out for it cause he "doesn't want to get lynched."
|
United States4714 Posts
Sevryn is by far the scummiest. His vote on DB had a ridiculously scummy reason behind it. After he got called out on it he back peddles and claims it was just a pressure vote. And he says he didn't see anything scummy about DB and his only reason for pressure voting was again because of something palmar did it swedish mafia. And then he says he took the vote off not really because he thought db was innocent but he didn't want to get lynched for bandwagoning lol. Sevryn is just lol scum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
