My Little Pony Mafia - Page 26

On September 15 2011 23:31 dreamflower wrote:
Oh, oops, I missed the exchange between wherebugsgo and Forumite, where Forumite asks him, "Why not switch your vote? Tnkted isn't going to get lynched anyway" and wherebugsgo complies. So, I guess it isn't true that no one was forcing him to vote for sinani. It is still a dramatic shift from saying "I don't think sinani is scum and I'm not gonna vote for him" to "I'm prepared to switch my vote, but I don't think sinani is the best lynch," to "We only have 6 votes on sinani? ##vote sinani" in about as many posts.

I guess some of this can be attributed to the frustration of anticipating a no-lynch to happen. But it's still weird that wherebugsgo keeps saying that he thinks sinani isn't Mafia and he's never seen a bandwagon form this quickly for a real Mafia, but jumps on the bandwagon anyway and casts the deciding vote against sinani.

On September 13 2011 07:34 Lucidity wrote:

I was a goon in AA. A Vet in Kurumi's TF2 themed mafia and VT in XLIII. 2 of those games were PM games and I was pretty inactive in XLIII, so my meta on TL is pretty useless.

This is a small game so there shouldn't be too many posts. However little there may be to read, a lurker or two is bound to pop up. What are your thoughts on how to deal with them?

On September 13 2011 22:08 Lucidity wrote:

I played as a Goon and a Vet in PM games, so a lot of discussion is not in the thread at all. I've played 1 game as Green, 1 as Blue and 1 as Red. I don't think I have any kind of reliable meta on here.

On September 14 2011 19:55 Lucidity wrote:


Essentially this post served two purposes:

• Introducing the idea of really attempting to lynch a lurker today. Getting a feel for our willingness to follow such a strategy with the last sentence.
  
• Discrediting the cases brought forward so far.

Lynching lurkers should be a last resort. Going after lurkers (and by lurkers she actually means INACTIVES) allows scum to not offer any opinions and simply sheep onto an easy vote. This is not an ideal situation to say the least.

She discredits the cases against Forumite and Greymist, by simply saying that she doesn't like post by post analysis and that she thinks townies are accusing townies. Could you explain why you think townies are accusing townies dreamflower? You offer no reason to doubt the case based on actual discussion points. Simply "oh I'm unconvinced".



Note the displeasure when she sees that someone else voted Forumite. So instead of waiting for other's opinions on the LaL strategy she proposed, she goes ahead with it to try and divert attention away from real scum hunting by voting for DroneAllDay.

Look at the reasoning in that post.

She is visibly upset with another vote on Forumite.
She thinks his defense is inept.
But somehow he does not deserve any attention.
Instead she "guesses" she'll vote for DroneAllDay.

Point? She's defending Forumite with no real reasoning. She puts her vote on an inactive, not a lurker.



The part highlighted in red essentially explains why ON is where her vote should be. DroneAllDay is an inactive, which she doesn't want to go for. She wants lurkers, and ON is one. Yet her vote stays on DroneAllDay. She dedicates an entire paragraph to explaining why DAD is a bad vote, and then doesn't change it.

Then she goes on to try and push the LaL objective. We shouldn't be lynching for information. DEFINITELY not on Day 1. We should be hunting scum. Lynching lurkers (inactives) is not scum hunting. It doesn't give us any information, which you think is important? Yet you still advocate lynching lurkers. Going after "real" targets actually DOES offer us information ito voting patterns, defenses e t c . Not that, that is our first priority, but it blows your LaL policy out of the water.

tl;dr

Defends Forumite and greymist with no reasoning.
Pushes anti-town objective of lynching inactives instead of scum hunting.

(Note that she really means inactives when she says lurkers, even though she indicated otherwise. Her posts make that clear enough.)

On September 14 2011 20:03 Lucidity wrote:
I'll delve into that Curu/sinani/nisani shitstorm later.

Curu has scarred me with his brilliant Mafia play in XLIII(IV)? No matter how town he looks I'm always going to be doubting him now -_-

On September 13 2011 20:29 Lucidity wrote:
Do you think you have saved Jackal from a lynch? He has done nothing scummy so far and was certainly nowhere close to being lynched. Is that some scum-guilt overreaction I'm seeing?

There are many scenarios where we can't trust a DT check. We don't know their sanity, we don't know if there is a framer or millers, there could be fake claims. Even if you didn't consider a framer, the plan didn't make sense and my main point is that you contradicted yourself w.r.t. the use of Blue roles. But it doesn't seem as if you're going to address that.

Vote: Forumite

On September 15 2011 08:01 Lucidity wrote:
Man. Why is everyone scummy. chaos13/sinani/Forumite/tnkted... I can't tell if Curu tried to cause chaos or if he's just being really aggressive... Policy lynching someone for actions in another game isn't something I think a good player would do. Curu hasn't advocated it in other games with Kenpachi/Kurumi as far as I'm aware, and he basically views them as unreadable too.

Of these I think sinani is our best bet... Both in terms of getting the required numbers and in terms of likely scum. The reactions surrounding Curu's attack on him are quite suspect.

##Unvote
##Vote sinani

On September 15 2011 08:40 Lucidity wrote:
Can everypony stop with the name calling? There's no need to be rude.

I think tnkted is a great choice, but is his lynch a realistic possibility? I won't be here for the lynch so I feel safer leaving my vote on sinani.

WBG: In what world could sinani and Curu both be scum?

On September 16 2011 03:40 wherebugsgo wrote:
I'm on my phone and just reading, don't have much time. I'll be back in an hour or two when I have computer access to clarify as much as I can.

Dreamflower, my case on tnkted yesterday was basically three things:

He's had a few situations in which he's been wishy washy. He backed off Greymist despite saying his defense was unsatisfactory.

He sheeped Lucidity's opinion and randomly voted you. He didn't seem to contribute anything.

I didn't sheep anyones opinion. Stop making blanket statements without any evidence. I also didn't randomly vote anyone, I posted my reasons for doing so.

Lastly, he has an air of wanting to blend in to me. I feel like his posts don't actually contribute anything, there is a feeling of feigned contribution.

This isn't analysis or logical at all. In fact, it is exactly what you accused me of: "Trying to blend in without contributing anything". "He feels scummy" is a terrible reason in forum mafia when somebody's life is on the line. Theres literally no way for me to respond to this because I can't change how you feel. Luckily, you can't change how anyone else feels either. If you think I'm scum, go find evidence for it. All I can say to that is good luck.

This case on Lucidity is really weak. Lucidity is the same person he said yesterday had great logic on Dreamflower; tnkted even sheeped Lucidity's vote yesterday.

Did you even read my post? I addressed this.

On September 16 2011 03:19 tnkted wrote:
Okay, Lucidity is scum. I liked his dreamflower analysis at first (because it was the only true analysis posted like, this entire game), but upon reading the rest of his stuff its clear that he's scum. Hes been hopping on bandwagons, throwing out soft foses, and trying to deflect attention from himself. We will start with the latter:

Deflection attention


Translation: "My meta on TL is pretty useless, don't even try to understand me or my motives. I'm unreadable. Yeah baby. Total badass."

But just so that nobody forgets this important fact (ie, if he seems scummy its just because you don't know his meta, so be unsure about everything) he posts it again.



Soft FoSes

Then he throws this weird, semi-FOS on dreamflower but doesn't commit to a vote or even any sort of honest pressure on her, asking her to explain herself. You'll note that he didn't have any trouble throwing a vote on forumite, or any of the people after his dreamflower analysis.



But thats not the only soft FOS he throws out. Here's some snide remark about curu, undermining towns confidence in him:



Bandwagoning
It begins with forumite:



Then has that post on dreamflower above, but he doesn't commit. Instead, he hops on four (five?) wagons at once, but commits to sinani. What this does is throw suspicion on several people, but commits to the easiest lynch.






TLDR: Lucidity is scum. He's trying to blend in by throwing out soft FOSes and hopping on wagons. Vigs should hit him tonight, and we should vote him tomorrow.

On September 16 2011 04:48 Lucidity wrote:
Your case is extremely weak I'm afraid. But it has strengthened the case against you. Scum struggle to see scummy behaviour, which results in analyses such as that above. Your earlier behaviour is consistent with this as well. I'm liking our chances for Day 2

On September 16 2011 08:21 Jackal58 wrote:
How long til the day post?

On September 16 2011 02:09 dreamflower wrote:
By the way, wherebugsgo, can you restate your case against tntked again, please? I went back over your posts, and it seemed like you were accusing him of wishy-washiness and sheeping Lucidity at one point. Is that about right? I just want to be clear on why you wanted to lynch him last night.

On September 15 2011 23:31 dreamflower wrote:
Oh, oops, I missed the exchange between wherebugsgo and Forumite, where Forumite asks him, "Why not switch your vote? Tnkted isn't going to get lynched anyway" and wherebugsgo complies. So, I guess it isn't true that no one was forcing him to vote for sinani. It is still a dramatic shift from saying "I don't think sinani is scum and I'm not gonna vote for him" to "I'm prepared to switch my vote, but I don't think sinani is the best lynch," to "We only have 6 votes on sinani? ##vote sinani" in about as many posts.

I guess some of this can be attributed to the frustration of anticipating a no-lynch to happen. But it's still weird that wherebugsgo keeps saying that he thinks sinani isn't Mafia and he's never seen a bandwagon form this quickly for a real Mafia, but jumps on the bandwagon anyway and casts the deciding vote against sinani.

On September 16 2011 02:09 dreamflower wrote:
It's not that I believe a no-lynch is a viable option, except possibly in some endgame situation, which we certainly are not in right now. But I couldn't help but be surprised that the no-lynch didn't happen last night, due to the vote of someone who made it clear that he believed the person he was voting for wasn't Mafia, no less. For my part, I wouldn't have blamed wherebugsgo specifically as the cause for the no-lynch. I definitely wouldn't have insta-voted him the next day over it. There were plenty of people who were also posting at the time who could have changed their vote, like Nisani or DroneAllDay with his weird filter-ish accusation of Nisani (what was that, by the way? DroneAllDay, are you really accusing someone because of posts they made before the game started?), and didn't. If we'd had a no-lynch, it would have been because of several people who voted for players other than sinani206, not just because of wherebugsgo.

I guess it really would have been frustrating to not have a lynch happen last night, though. Considering how starved we are for information, I can't fault you for that. Sorry for the "hammer," wherebugsgo; I just thought the change of heart was really striking at first, though it is understandable.