EPTLord of the Rings Mafia - Page 31
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
supersoft
Germany3729 Posts
| ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
Drunk IPhone Mafia In order to participate in Dunk IPhone Mafia you have to be drunk and write from your phone. If you accidentally sober up and write sensible well formatted posts from your computer you must immediately post a one liner apologizing for this. | ||
|
chaoser
United States5541 Posts
On September 19 2011 07:18 supersoft wrote: sorry guys, i was on the road the whole day and only have my telephone to post today. i vote iGrok because of the reasons i gave in my last post. On September 19 2011 07:39 supersoft wrote: wait a sec pls i try to catch up. like i said i wasnt avaliable and now i am a bit drunk + i am postin with my iphone. You got drunk in 21 minutes while on the road posting from your iPhone? | ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On September 19 2011 07:32 chaoser wrote: Radfield, I'm all for voting eraddorr off especially given his "wrong thread" lie. I still however think prplhz is mafia. You once said "I agree 100%". Was wondering what you opinion on him now is. Prp is blech. He has veered away somewhat from my Day 1 metrics, and he certainly seems to be posting more freely and less neutrally. I would put him at 2/5 on the scum-town meter. | ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On September 19 2011 07:43 chaoser wrote: You got drunk in 21 minutes while on the road posting from your iPhone? Lightweight! | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On September 19 2011 05:05 syllogism wrote: I don't find any of the behaviour I noted scummy by itself, because most players on TL tend to be illogical. There are some players I hold to a higher standards, and indeed I find them easier to read. Contradictions can be scummy, but can often be attributed to poor logic by either reader or the author. Only four of the people I listed in my post were presented as lynch candidates, and the three names were clearly highlighted as the ones I'd focus on today. Twisting words if scummy behaviour, so either you misread or have an agenda; jeejee/palmar/sandroba were noted for their complete lack of thread presence and correctly so. Do you disagree? I have never seen you FoS someone and then vote for someone else, which is also curious. However, your scum play seems blander than this so perhaps it's just that I haven't seen you play town enough. You say: "Currently I'd like to lynch someone who has clearly been around and posted some while not saying anything worthwhile." I fail to see how jeejee/palmar/sandroba do not fit into that. What I inferred, is that you would include them in that, but aren't, because they gave excuses. Excuses are weak, though, as it just lets mafia hide. So, you list four people as lynch targets, and then add 3 more, who would be lynch targets according to your own definition, but gave excuses. This at a time, where if you want to get someone lynched, you need to direct focus on them to get the ball rolling. Introducing several new targets doesn't do this, it only muddles the waters and spreads out focus onto more people. It's a tactic for misdirection. That's why I find it scummy. As well, all your cases are incredibly weak, due to again, a lack of specific accusations against them. You just throw them all under the same umbrella, that makes it so that any pressure you may produce is going to be incredibly weak. Also, "A term (abbreviated FoS) used to formally indicate "you're being watched." It can be an implicit way of saying "I might vote for you"; typically in cases where the person doing the fingering does not want to actually vote the suspicious player." http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=FOS It means I'm suspicious of you, not that I think you're the best lynch target of the day. A FOS is not a vote, it's a way to create pressure, which is why we've entered into this current conversation. I found prplhz fairly suspicious, quite similar to Vain, as his early posts were complete fluff, but his case against Dr.H seemed genuine, even if I disagree with most of the content. If you haven't noticed, I'm nowadays quite against lynching newer players unless the case amounts to something other than "he isn't making sense". Non-contributing veterans are generally better targets. The connection you attempt to draw between me and WBG is pretty hilarious, given I'm the one who got him to claim third party and his alleged win con, which clearly made him a lynch candidate and a very likely eventual vig target. As soon as WBG started asking for the ring, it was fairly obvious he was acting as though he were a third party. I don't think that he's mafia right now, but that doesn't exclude the possibility. Mafia are at an information advantage, and there may be roles for which it is beneficial for a vig/role-cop to visit WBG, like a mafia PGO, which may happen if he is not lynched. You also missed the conditional. If one of you or prplhz flip scum, then I think there's a lot better possibility for WBG to be mafia, with some ulterior motive for appearing as a third party. Do you think switching vote is scummy behaviour? Is it scummier than throwing your vote away when it becomes clear your candidate of choice isn't going to get lynched? What is the scum motivation for switching, unless WBG is scum? I don't think switching your vote is scummy. However, calling someone scum, and then completely giving up when a bandwagon doesn't form is (In the case of prplhz). You should at least push for you target, not make one post, give up, and then hop on a different wagon. And, I already answered your question. I said if one of you two flip scum, then we should look at WBG as being scum. Also, for the moment I really want to flip prplhz. There's been at least two counter-bandwagons formed already, which raises my suspicions that he's mafia. | ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On September 19 2011 07:43 chaoser wrote: You got drunk in 21 minutes while on the road posting from your iPhone? That's some party... | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On September 19 2011 07:50 DoctorHelvetica wrote: I'm keeping my vote on WBG out of principle because I am sure he is either SK or Mafia. The fact that no one is even exploring the possibility that he is scum says volumes to me. If he were, in fact mafia, it's a fitting enough to say "nah hes obv just 3rd party he can't be scum if yoou vote for him youre scum becasue hes not scum" but we don't know what alignment anyone is only mafia know that :-) That was my whole reason for voting for him originally and the reason Ill probably vote for him tomorrow. WBG won't be lynched today but hopefully he will be shot tonight or lynched tomorrow. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
why would my flipping scum make wbg more likely to be scum? i didn't deal too much with him or support his supposed 3rd party agenda more than any other, i only said that 3rd party shouldn't be designated for lynches 12 hours into the day. @drh you're still on my list for sure. what principle is making you abstain from voting? don't you think one of me and erandorr could be scum? | ||
|
supersoft
Germany3729 Posts
if i have to decide between both, maybe erandorr is a little bit scummier. but really, this post edit lie is straNge, but it doesnt give much information about his alignment... | ||
|
xtfftc
United Kingdom2343 Posts
| ||
|
Erandorr
2283 Posts
 | ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On September 19 2011 08:00 xtfftc wrote: Such a last minute vote, sorry again. :/ Cutting it rather close there... | ||
|
Navillus
United States1188 Posts
 | ||
Mig
United States4714 Posts
| ||
|
Navillus
United States1188 Posts
| ||
|
Navillus
United States1188 Posts
| ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On September 19 2011 08:03 Navillus wrote: Or blue actually, I just realized that fits too. If he's blue, I'll cry over how pitiful his defense was... | ||
|
Drazerk
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On September 19 2011 08:03 Navillus wrote: Or blue actually, I just realized that fits too. If he is blue I give up... | ||
| ||
