Steamship Liquidia (TL Mafia 46)

On November 15 2011 20:44 Forumite wrote:
/confirm

I´m going to step in here. DCLXVI allready caught this and posted before me, but I don´t think my reason for noticing has been discussed. Okay, to me it looks like this; LSB wants us to Lynch All Liars. Kenpachi claimed Townie, but LSB doesn´t want us to take the Kenpachi claim seriously. My problem here is that either Kenpachi lied, or he just told Scum not to nightkill him, because it would be no use. If we are going to go by the LAL policy, then either Kenpachi lied or acted Pro-Scum, so why should we back off? Kenpachi does this every game, then we can ignore his claim, but what I don´t agree with is LSB promoting LAL wanting to ignore the claim, even if it is meta. It took him about 5 posts to go back on his own policy of Lynch All Liars. If Kenpachi lied (or play Pro-Scum), why does LSB then defend him after his first policy post?

FoS LSB

As for lynching 1-2 lurkers and 1-2 scum, sounds reasonable, I think we should stay at about that number for now. We need to be carefull about lynching, not just because of the consequences in the setup, but if we find 5 players who seem connected, then it´s better to lynch 1-2 and see if they are scum, than lynching all 5 at once and kill 5 innocent townies at once.

On November 16 2011 01:19 Zephirdd wrote:


"most of the time"? Care to explain to a newbie when would a mafia NOT want to appear green?

On November 16 2011 02:10 GreYMisT wrote:
Nisani, in both your relevant posts of the game, you have given very neutral coments, and they both serve to give the mafia an "out." bolded are the examples.




and



To me this seems really odd. Care to elaborate on your reasons for posting these?

On November 16 2011 02:32 bumatlarge wrote:
Next person that mentions LAL is getting a vote placed on them. Seriously enough with the useless shit.

We will be lynching however many scummy people we can find on the particular day. We are restricting ourselves when we don't have a clue as to what our boundaries are.

Nisani has posted complete fluff and none of it shows any effort in actually heling town. I don't think the new people are brain-dead, so unless the specifically ask about something, don't use them as an excuse to post asinine shit.

Oh, hi kibbibit

##Vote Nisani201

On November 16 2011 12:05 wherebugsgo wrote:


Nah, remember I said we need to all focus on one person until 24-36 hours before lynch.

Then we start consolidating to get multiple targets. Basically, if one person is working on a case on one person and one person only, it's more effective than if that one person tries splitting their attention to watch four or five at once. It's just not effective.

If we all focus on one target each and then evaluate toward the end of the day, we can sift through the best cases and work on lynching those. However we need activity in the last 24 hours to make this viable, and we'll rack up a lot of posts. But it'll hopefully be the best way to find scum.

What I don't want people doing is what chaoser is doing; just going out there and throwing votes left and right without actually thinking about them. Sure, you can do it if you want, but it's not going to be pretty. The thread will be a mess and you'll have multiple people OMGUSing because they're taking votes.

On November 17 2011 00:55 Palmar wrote:


Which case is bullshit mr. Nisani201?

On November 15 2011 20:44 Forumite wrote:
/confirm

I´m going to step in here. DCLXVI allready caught this and posted before me, but I don´t think my reason for noticing has been discussed. Okay, to me it looks like this; LSB wants us to Lynch All Liars. Kenpachi claimed Townie, but LSB doesn´t want us to take the Kenpachi claim seriously. My problem here is that either Kenpachi lied, or he just told Scum not to nightkill him, because it would be no use. If we are going to go by the LAL policy, then either Kenpachi lied or acted Pro-Scum, so why should we back off? Kenpachi does this every game, then we can ignore his claim, but what I don´t agree with is LSB promoting LAL wanting to ignore the claim, even if it is meta. It took him about 5 posts to go back on his own policy of Lynch All Liars. If Kenpachi lied (or play Pro-Scum), why does LSB then defend him after his first policy post?

FoS LSB

As for lynching 1-2 lurkers and 1-2 scum, sounds reasonable, I think we should stay at about that number for now. We need to be carefull about lynching, not just because of the consequences in the setup, but if we find 5 players who seem connected, then it´s better to lynch 1-2 and see if they are scum, than lynching all 5 at once and kill 5 innocent townies at once.

On November 16 2011 22:48 Forumite wrote:

No, the game had allready started. You confirmed getting your role first of all players, then when people got going with discussing policy, you dropped the above post. During 2 hours people had been talking about policy, and even dropped a few weird posts that have since been called out, so the game had definetly started.

And about which part is scummy about it? Everything! You excuse yourself as a new player, thereby lowering our expectations on your contribution in the game, making way for future lurking. It´s an empty icebreaker, full of forced enthusiasm. The message of the post is "I´m trying to help but will probably fail". Is that the kind of player we are going to rely on in this game, or someone who will be left until the end because noone will bother to shoot him?