EPTOn October 30 2011 16:47 Ciryandor wrote:
Can we have a voting thread opened, or are we all voting here?
Can we have a voting thread opened, or are we all voting here?
Since its a mini game, you may vote right in the thread
Newbie Mini Mafia - Page 10
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Since its a mini game, you may vote right in the thread | ||
xsksc
United Kingdom1044 Posts
| ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On October 30 2011 22:10 Toadesstern wrote: ciry desperatly trying to not die on day1 this time  Well, look where that brought town... but really, if we want town to get this game won we have to be on the ball. Just because everyone has chimed in as being present doesn't excuse you from being non-contributing in this game; so let's start digging in. Skrammen, just saying good day to all isn't enough yet, as Drem had already marked out xsksc randomly for his name. What do you think of this? Also, what about risk.nuke's reaction to Toadesstern's promptings for activity? Chocolate and hyshes, why no commentary on Hacklebeast's response to Zanfada's early pressure? Do you think it's warranted to react to early pressure in that way? Also, the same thing applies to IMABUNNEH, what are your views on three people getting focused on early? So we have three people who've pointed out three other guys for one of any sort of random reasons, and all of them have given some sort of reaction already. We already have something to work with here, and maybe a vote or two on them if you think their reaction or push is suspicious enough in your eyes. | ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On October 30 2011 23:11 Toadesstern wrote: nah, I'm kinda paranoid since last game where out of 12 people about 7 got modkilled because they didn't post enough I see, but that is unrelated hence your paranoia defense isn't very convincing.. You were just hinting dts and medics to reveal themselves. That is scummy. | ||
|
Drem903
United States100 Posts
He only seems to post to try and appear active. | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
On October 31 2011 00:53 Drem903 wrote: The thing with xsksc was pretty much just a joke to try and get the ball rolling. The only person that has really garnered any suspicion from me is bunneh, and that's only because his posts seem to be "posts for the sake of posting" rather than trying to really get anything dones. He only seems to post to try and appear active. Posts for posting's sake is an empty phrase. Posts for the sake of truth, posts for the sake of the good and the beautiful, those are the posts that I am searching for. But seriously toad is looking a little suspicious. The people that would benefit the most from knowing who are dt/medic are the mafia. For the town, it's best if nobody knows, to present a difficult target. | ||
|
Drem903
United States100 Posts
If you're not able to change you're vote, then we also have to be very suspicious of zanfada. We both randomly chose a person to try and encourage discussion, but he actually voted. If you can't change you're vote, then that seems suspicious to me, as he seems in a hurry to lynch someone (anyone). If you can change you're vote, then it's no big deal, but it's still something to consider. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Either toads or risk.nuke definately look a bit dodgy. Both of the posts struck me as quite aggressive in turning it into finger pointing. I don't think getting all up in peoples' grills immediately is what we want. It's just going to get innocent people on the defensive from the start. Drem has so far poked at someone randomly as a "joke" and then at myself for not getting immediately aggressive. Who's next, risk.nuke for BEING aggressive? :p I don't think finger pointing every 6 posts at a different person is going to help us. I doubt someone with almost no activity at this point is likely to be scum though. So even though Skrammen hasn't said anything,I'd rule him out for the time being and look at the "half-active" posters. risk.nuke and hacklebeast are both pretty aggressive in getting people to turn on someone so early. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:01 Chocolate wrote: Posts for posting's sake is an empty phrase. Posts for the sake of truth, posts for the sake of the good and the beautiful, those are the posts that I am searching for. But seriously toad is looking a little suspicious. The people that would benefit the most from knowing who are dt/medic are the mafia. For the town, it's best if nobody knows, to present a difficult target. Not necessarily. Being active means that if you're scum, you have more chances of doing a scumslip because you either let something about the set-up or the players themselves be known, or that you tie yourself to fellow players and end up compromising part of your team with how you either defend them or not engage with them at all. In any case, if you think that Toad really is scummy, as I personally don't, given that I've played with him before and this is consistent with the play he's done, put it where your words are and vote him. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
And just to call someone out a bit, I believe Skrammen has actually said the least of anyone so far, with a total contribution of: Good morning gentlemen! | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:19 Drem903 wrote: Are you able to change you're vote after you have voted? If you're not able to change you're vote, then we also have to be very suspicious of zanfada. We both randomly chose a person to try and encourage discussion, but he actually voted. If you can't change you're vote, then that seems suspicious to me, as he seems in a hurry to lynch someone (anyone). If you can change you're vote, then it's no big deal, but it's still something to consider. From the GM post: 5. This game follows Extended Majority Lynch Rules. Majority = #of players remaining in the game/2) (rounded down) + 1. Unlike in traditional majority lynch, the lynch is NOT decided the moment majority is reached. Instead, only the final vote count matters. If there is no majority at the deadline, the day ends with a no lynch. Non-voters will be modkilled for failure to vote. You can change your vote if you wish to do so. | ||
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:19 Drem903 wrote: Are you able to change you're vote after you have voted? Yes | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
| ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:22 IMABUNNEH wrote: I'm not entirely sure what "posting for the sake of posting" is defined at, but its not like there was anything MUCH to poke at prior to my posts. Either toads or risk.nuke definately look a bit dodgy. Both of the posts struck me as quite aggressive in turning it into finger pointing. I don't think getting all up in peoples' grills immediately is what we want. It's just going to get innocent people on the defensive from the start. Drem has so far poked at someone randomly as a "joke" and then at myself for not getting immediately aggressive. Who's next, risk.nuke for BEING aggressive? :p I don't think finger pointing every 6 posts at a different person is going to help us. I doubt someone with almost no activity at this point is likely to be scum though. So even though Skrammen hasn't said anything,I'd rule him out for the time being and look at the "half-active" posters. risk.nuke and hacklebeast are both pretty aggressive in getting people to turn on someone so early. Getting in peoples faces is precisly what we want. How else do you expect to catch scum? | ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:24 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: I don't see how toad telling people to be active even if they are blues is suspicious, it isn't like he said "dt's and medics should role-claim in the thread" or anything. He, like most of us, is simply trying to encourage activity from everyone. It also helps make it clear that you must contribute to scum-hunting as a blue if you don't want to be mistaken for scum yourself. And just to call someone out a bit, I believe Skrammen has actually said the least of anyone so far, with a total contribution of: Even if that was what you thought, why were you so quick to tell everyone what you thought toad ment. He wasn't about to get lynched.. If that's what he thought when he wrote it he wouldn't had have any problems telling us that himself, if he's scum he might had given a scumslip. FOS | ||
|
xsksc
United Kingdom1044 Posts
On October 30 2011 20:12 Toadesstern wrote: oh and just a hint since this is a beginners game: If you are a dt or medic don't just hide or something. Toad is the only person that appears suspicous to me so far. Sounds like scum trying to find blues. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:42 risk.nuke wrote: Even if that was what you thought, why were you so quick to tell everyone what you thought toad ment. He wasn't about to get lynched.. If that's what he thought when he wrote it he wouldn't had have any problems telling us that himself, if he's scum he might had given a scumslip. FOS Based on the last line of his post To sum it up: post bitches I am pretty sure that is what he meant. But, you make a good point, I suppose I should mostly let people speak for themselves. Sorry about that, I'll try to give people more time to respond before jumping in. | ||
|
xsksc
United Kingdom1044 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:27 risk.nuke wrote: Getting in peoples faces is precisly what we want. How else do you expect to catch scum? When people are all aggro at each other, that's the best time to watch for slips right? That's what I'd have thought anyway. So I'm watching them more closely. Even if that was what you thought, why were you so quick to tell everyone what you thought toad ment. He wasn't about to get lynched.. If that's what he thought when he wrote it he wouldn't had have any problems telling us that himself, if he's scum he might had given a scumslip. 2 people coming to each others' defense early on in the game isn't something I'd have expected either. Interpreting someone else's words to make them seem "nicer" than they were stated... | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
On October 31 2011 02:47 IMABUNNEH wrote: 2 people coming to each others' defense early on in the game isn't something I'd have expected either. Interpreting someone else's words to make them seem "nicer" than they were stated... There was no coming to each others' defense, as he has said nothing in my defense. With Bunneh, Chocolate, and Risk all calling him out before my post, I simply wanted to avoid early bandwagoning (sp?) before we had some more contributions from everyone in the game. It was simply that and nothing more. | ||
| ||
