Hier Analysis
A lot of this is going to be repetitive, but whatever.
Let's start with his post in which he calls myself, Palmar, and BC scum.
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
Here are some of my thoughts so far.
Mafia
Palmar
-Way too many people announcing their vote for him, with the official vote tag and everything. Claiming they love his plan, even though there REALLY wasn't any plan Palmar offered to begin with. Typical propaganda by the mafia.
"Too many people" voting for a person day 1 makes them mafia? How many is too many?
wut?
Also, could you cite the "way too many people" claiming to love his plan? You're just saying there exist "way too many people," the "official vote tag and everything" doesn't make them scumbuddies, and "typical propaganda" is just a load of hogwash.
None of this is substantiated. It's entirely your subjective opinion, backed up by nothing.
Thus, this is not a reason to call Palmar scum. It's bad.
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
-Most of his campaign relies on him proclaiming he is good as town, and bad as mafia.
First part is false; most of his campaign, as far as I could tell, was not about him being better as town and bad as mafia. Second part is actually true, he IS better at town than mafia. That's actually a good reason to put him in office, it means we can quickly tell if he's scum or not.
He specifically said this:
On November 24 2011 18:23 Palmar wrote:And this is why I should be voted for mayor. Credentials:- More often than anyone else in this game, have I been killed night 1 as town
- I have played 22 games of mafia on TL prior to this one
- I had to learn the game the hard way, I fucked up massively in my newbie games
- In the last 7 games I have played as town, I have successfully pushed for mafia lynch on day 1
- I am one of the most transparent player in this game, my town play is top notch, my scum play is pretty bad
- Unlike some other candidates, you can actually call me out for being wrong, because I'm not bad
- If for some reason I don't hit mayor, I'm one of the few people in this game that has the guts and reads to successfully play as the sheriff.
This is how I intend to run town:- I will be running a strict Lynch-All-Liars policy (LAL) and will push hard to enforce it. With a game this big we cannot afford townies running amok with some ridiculous plans of how lying will somehow benefit town. Do not lie, you will be held accountable.
- I will encourage scumhunting. I will personally be very active and willing to answer questions. I will help our newer players recognizing scumtells. But more importantly, I have the confidence and the guts to call people out on bullshit. I will let you know if what you're doing is bad, or wrong.
- I will discourage lurking. I will in public sight help lurker-banes find suitable targets and offer assistance without revealing them by publicly posting reasons people are lurking.
- I will be aggressive and fair. I will be active and logical. If at any point of the game my logic doesn't hold up you should lynch me. But it won't come to that.
In conclusionYou have the opportunity to vote one of the more experienced player and one of the more successful players into office. In addition, more than almost any other veteran in this game, I have a history of being very, very active and open. None of the other true veterans in this game (veteran meaning both experienced and good), play the game with as much passion as I do. I hope you all make the right choice.
His credentials are half of his campaign, his intentions of running town are the other half.
Saying that most of his campaign was based on his assertion that he is better at town than scum is wrong.
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
-Already started working on his "people with ability to veto" list to veto people ending up on the suspect list. That includes himself. lol wut? Note that he wants 3 veto votes to prevent a person to be on the suspect list for DTs. That means there are at least 3 mafia members on that list Palmar proposed.
Unnecessary assumption.
This assumption relies on Palmar being scum first, and you NEVER connect people until one person flips. Palmar has not flipped yet, so Hier making this unqualified assumption as if it is the truth is incredibly scummy.
The only players who talk as if they know for sure what is going on are scum. They sometimes slip in their wording of things, and this is one such example of Hier doing it.
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
-Slightly suspicious about his adamant urge to kill YM. YM merely opposed his candidacy. Not a sure reason to call scum.
Probably the only valid reason for believing Palmar to be scum, and note that Hier is only "slightly suspicious" because of this. even saying that it's not a sure reason to call him scum
Then, why the hell is he agreeing so adamantly with Ace, since Ace's argument practically revolves around this?
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
WBG
-I'm not a fan of his DT plan. Unless prevented by an ability, mafia will get a kill every night. Meanwhile, the town's lynches are semi-blind and can be manipulated by the mafia. We are meant to follow a list, which itself can be manipulated through propaganda, waste our player resources (forced kills), and waste our vigilante shots all to slightly help out our detective(s) to figure out their sanity, the attempts of which can be all for naught by GF, Millers, and framers. If mafia gets a slightly favorable population ratio within the first few days, the game is over. No thanks. I'd rather have our DTs work independently, even if it is a gamble on them being competent.
You're not a fan of my plan. Okay, fine. That doesn't make me scum!
A list of 10 players is incredibly hard to manipulate, especially as all of them, if the plan were to be followed through with, will die. The way I drafted the plan was specifically intended to counter all forms of manipulation. There are elements of chance in there, dispersion, and uncertainty that all create dilemmas for scum.
Indeed, we would not be wasting our vig shots, if people had actually stepped forth and added players to the plan. I was the only person who actively contributed to it, despite other people agreeing with it. I had at least one wrong read (on syllo) but otherwise I don't think I was.
The last part about mafia getting a favorable population ratio is blatant fear mongering. This is essentially saying, if we mislynch day 1 and day 2, mafia win. This is not true in any game and it is not true here either. The fact that you include this is simply more telling of the fact that you are the one spreading propaganda, not me.
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
-His claim that sandroba is mafia hangs entirely on his first lynch target, sinani206. Though I admit questionable, he puts way too much weight on that point alone.
Lol. As I have pointed out before, there were other reasons to believe sandro was scum day 1. His logic wasn't very good. Toward the end of day 1 I saw his play improve and as of now I don't believe he is scum.
However, the fact that you say this is quite compelling evidence against you, as can be seen in the following part of the quote:
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
BC
-The original creator of the DT plan. It is likely WBG modified it, as opposed to advising BC behind the curtains to fix it, because they wanted to create an extra face to compete in the elections, diluting the suspicions.
Hier's sole reason for believing BC is scum is because he is the original creator of the DT plan and he assumes that I am scum with BC. He attacked me for (wrongly) believing that my sole reason for calling sandro scum was based on the sinani lynch target. Yet, he uses only one reason for attacking BC. Hier has some really shitty double standards.
On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
Town
sandroba
-Is against WBG's plan, with which I agree with; it is far too prone to manipulation and errors by DTs.
Can't Quite Tell
syllogism
GreYMisT
prplhz
No effort. None at all.
Compare that to the marginal amount of effort he put into calling myself, Palmar, and BC scum.
On November 27 2011 08:44 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 08:35 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
Here are some of my thoughts so far.
Mafia
Palmar
-Way too many people announcing their vote for him, with the official vote tag and everything. Claiming they love his plan, even though there REALLY wasn't any plan Palmar offered to begin with. Typical propaganda by the mafia.
-Most of his campaign relies on him proclaiming he is good as town, and bad as mafia.
-Already started working on his "people with ability to veto" list to veto people ending up on the suspect list. That includes himself. lol wut? Note that he wants 3 veto votes to prevent a person to be on the suspect list for DTs. That means there are at least 3 mafia members on that list Palmar proposed.
-Slightly suspicious about his adamant urge to kill YM. YM merely
WBG
-I'm not a fan of his DT plan. Unless prevented by an ability, mafia will get a kill every night. Meanwhile, the town's lynches are semi-blind and can be manipulated by the mafia. We are meant to follow a list, which itself can be manipulated through propaganda, waste our player resources (forced kills), and waste our vigilante shots all to slightly help out our detective(s) to figure out their sanity, the attempts of which can be all for naught by GF, Millers, and framers. If mafia gets a slightly favorable population ratio within the first few days, the game is over. No thanks. I'd rather have our DTs work independently, even if it is a gamble on them being competent.
-His claim that sandroba is mafia hangs entirely on his first lynch target, sinani206. Though I admit questionable, he puts way too much weight on that point alone.
BC
-The original creator of the DT plan. It is likely WBG modified it, as opposed to advising BC behind the curtains to fix it, because they wanted to create an extra face to compete in the elections, diluting the suspicions.
Town
sandroba
-Is against WBG's plan, with which I agree with; it is far too prone to manipulation and errors by DTs.
Can't Quite Tell
syllogism
GreYMisT
prplhz I think this guy is a good bet to be scum. Look at how detailed his cases are on the players he thinks are scum, and then look at his case for sandro being town. There's a huge sense of disconnect here between the amount of effort he put in to calling myself, Palmar, and BC scum and the amount of effort he put into calling sandro town. He also lists 3 null reads at the end for no particular reason. Why those 3, in particular? prpl I thought was scum, syllo I think is also likely to be scum. GreYMisT could be anything at this point. It's perhaps not so strange he picked syllo, since he focused on syllo+sandro and me+Palmar+BC, but it is indeed strange he chose to comment on GreYMisT and prpl. Well GreYMisT and prplz are/were in the election campaign. Duh......Syllo I found often to be there with Sandro, but did not quite have enough to say at the time. I was busy in the last 24 hours; just finished reading like 35 pages, I'll dump more posts as time moves. Sandro: I happened to agree with his criticisms of your strategy. Not much to say. Would you call me scum right off the bat if I did the opposite; if I had one liners about you and Palmar and an essay about Sandro? This is a legitimate question, answer it.
If GreYMisT and prpl were included because they were candidates, why weren't decon, annul, sinani, Erandorr, and kitaman included?
All of those players made campaigns about as strong as prpl and GreYMisT. In fact, prpl had more or less withdrawn by the time Hier posted this, whereas annul was still running, and kita (IIRC) was still running. Kita had 5 votes at the time Hier voted sandro for mayor.
I find this to simply be an excuse to choose certain players to list rather than list all of them.
On November 27 2011 09:45 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 09:19 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 09:12 Hier wrote:On November 27 2011 09:09 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 09:06 Hier wrote:On November 27 2011 08:54 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 08:44 Hier wrote:On November 27 2011 08:35 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 08:20 Hier wrote:
Here are some of my thoughts so far.
Mafia
Palmar
-Way too many people announcing their vote for him, with the official vote tag and everything. Claiming they love his plan, even though there REALLY wasn't any plan Palmar offered to begin with. Typical propaganda by the mafia.
-Most of his campaign relies on him proclaiming he is good as town, and bad as mafia.
-Already started working on his "people with ability to veto" list to veto people ending up on the suspect list. That includes himself. lol wut? Note that he wants 3 veto votes to prevent a person to be on the suspect list for DTs. That means there are at least 3 mafia members on that list Palmar proposed.
-Slightly suspicious about his adamant urge to kill YM. YM merely
WBG
-I'm not a fan of his DT plan. Unless prevented by an ability, mafia will get a kill every night. Meanwhile, the town's lynches are semi-blind and can be manipulated by the mafia. We are meant to follow a list, which itself can be manipulated through propaganda, waste our player resources (forced kills), and waste our vigilante shots all to slightly help out our detective(s) to figure out their sanity, the attempts of which can be all for naught by GF, Millers, and framers. If mafia gets a slightly favorable population ratio within the first few days, the game is over. No thanks. I'd rather have our DTs work independently, even if it is a gamble on them being competent.
-His claim that sandroba is mafia hangs entirely on his first lynch target, sinani206. Though I admit questionable, he puts way too much weight on that point alone.
BC
-The original creator of the DT plan. It is likely WBG modified it, as opposed to advising BC behind the curtains to fix it, because they wanted to create an extra face to compete in the elections, diluting the suspicions.
Town
sandroba
-Is against WBG's plan, with which I agree with; it is far too prone to manipulation and errors by DTs.
Can't Quite Tell
syllogism
GreYMisT
prplhz I think this guy is a good bet to be scum. Look at how detailed his cases are on the players he thinks are scum, and then look at his case for sandro being town. There's a huge sense of disconnect here between the amount of effort he put in to calling myself, Palmar, and BC scum and the amount of effort he put into calling sandro town. He also lists 3 null reads at the end for no particular reason. Why those 3, in particular? prpl I thought was scum, syllo I think is also likely to be scum. GreYMisT could be anything at this point. It's perhaps not so strange he picked syllo, since he focused on syllo+sandro and me+Palmar+BC, but it is indeed strange he chose to comment on GreYMisT and prpl. Well GreYMisT and prplz are/were in the election campaign. Duh...... Syllo I found often to be there with Sandro, but did not quite have enough to say at the time. I was busy in the last 24 hours; just finished reading like 35 pages, I'll dump more posts as time moves. Sandro: I happened to agree with his criticisms of your strategy. Not much to say. Would you call me scum right off the bat if I did the opposite; if I had one liners about you and Palmar and an essay about Sandro? This is a legitimate question, answer it. Yes, actually. I generally am critical of players who make contradictions in their play. If a player is hypocritical or makes logical contradictions, then I generally hone in on them and tunnel and pressure them repeatedly. If someone says things that show discrepancies or inordinate bias toward one side of an issue they are not involved in, then I also am suspicious, because I then wonder if they have a non-town agenda. If a player is not directly involved in an issue (such as this DT palmar/BC/me and syllo/sandro business) then I expect the amount of effort put into analyzing both sides to be roughly equal. If it isn't, then there is likely to be something hidden going on. It is advantageous for town to identify mafia as soon as possible and to provide large amounts of argument to accuse a player of being scum. It is advantageous for mafia to falsely accuse a townie of being mafia and to provide large amounts of argument for it to alleviate suspicion off of actual mafia members and to waste lynches. Sandro isn't being lynched after breakfast; I'm not in a particular rush to convince everyone he isn't scum. However, I do not believe he is mafia based on his argument against your DT policy. So it actually turns out that the paragraph under your name has relation to Sandro's case. So you just admitted that what you posted about scum could be taken from both alignment perspectives. Thank you, you pretty much just proved my point for me. What? You agreed that what I said could be interpreted as mafia or town equally. Then you said that just proved I'm scum. Excellent logic. You are rather desperate to have me out of the picture, are you not? Am I a threat to your scum campaign? Let me clarify. My logic has to do with how scum operate. They want to be unreadable. So, the entire focus of your post was on your scumreads, with literally no effort put in to convincing anyone that sandro is town. You also strangely included three other players, two of which you say are included because they are mayoral candidates. Yet, you don't talk about other mayoral candidates, such as sinani, annul, Erandorr, or kitaman. You could've easily said you were null on all of these (each with a campaign about as strong as GreYMisT's or prpl's) and I probably would believe you that you were mentioning those players based on their campaigns. But, you didn't. Now, if you look at only your scumreads, and omit the rest of your post, we see that your post can be made from either alignment. That's point number 1. If you instead eliminate only the first half, and include the town/null, you again can probably make that post from either alignment, but it's more likely to be a scum-aligned post because of the total lack of effort. This is point #2. Put them together, and the disconnect makes sense far more from a scum perspective than a town one. Scum are completely fine with destroying the credibility of town players. Early in the game, when there are so many of them, they are also fine in supporting certain players who are furthering their agenda; either townies they think will help them achieve their wincon, or their scumbuddies. Prplhz, I think, was the first campaign to get started, with a picture of a planet, or something. It stuck in memory because it was a post typed out before he received his role, hence very neutral. Greymist's campaign, I think, was the most recent to be talked about, hence why it also got stuck in memory. As I said, I had to go through something like 35 pages in one go. I couldn't bring myself to go digging through that again to find quotes and whatnot. I did not deliberately forget to mention some candidates because a lot of people announced they would run much later in the thread, and their candidacies weren't the center of attention... like some other campaigns. My Sandro's case did not need a lot of text. It was an opposition to your campaign, which I supported. Did you want me to cut and paste the explanation of why I thought your plan was scummy into Sandro's section? In that case would you not have answered me because then the text sizes would look similar? Could you please safely direct me to a post in this thread vigorously defending someone's town alignment, as opposed to accusing someone of being scum? Is everybody in this thread scum? Oh, and speaking of scum... Do I have the potential of ruining your mafia plans in the future? No, really, I want you to answer this. Do I?
His excuse was that the players I mentioned weren't the "center of attention" unlike other campaigns.
What? How can you possibly say that prpl and GreYMisT had stronger campaigns than the players I listed? They ALL had relatively weak campaigns, and kita actually had 5 votes at the time Hier chose to vote for sandro.
It's indeed strange that Hier chose to omit these players in his list of reads, since if he truly wanted to list mayoral candidates there then he would've, at the very least, listed kita and annul, who had more serious campaigns than prpl at that point in the game.
On November 27 2011 10:43 Hier wrote:Even a townie can seem scummy at times. Instead of admitting that some of my points are worth considering, while insisting on retaining you town alignment, you simply call them terrible without any explanation. Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Again, what I say has nothing to do with the people I talk about and their alignment. So you say, mafia can surely mention other mafia brethren in their discussion. It alleviates suspicion, even if slightly. Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Nothing I say can make anyone else scum, it's their own words you have to look for. No, of course not. But the player that screams his/her intentional misinterpretation of other players' posts the loudest has a great advantage. That's how the game is played, and you and WBG are playing it correctly, because it seems the people are already starting to rally against me. It seems to be working. Good job.
Players are of course going to clamor about misinterpretations, because misinterpretations are what scum do.
Townies will accept that they have made a mistake and move on or change their angle. Scum don't, they will try to twist anything and everything to fit their agenda.
Hier can't refute the points I have made logically, so he turns to attacking me by saying I am screaming louder than he is in order to gain an advantage.
On November 27 2011 11:04 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 10:51 Palmar wrote:On November 27 2011 10:43 Hier wrote:Even a townie can seem scummy at times. Instead of admitting that some of my points are worth considering, while insisting on retaining you town alignment, you simply call them terrible without any explanation. On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Again, what I say has nothing to do with the people I talk about and their alignment. So you say, mafia can surely mention other mafia brethren in their discussion. It alleviates suspicion, even if slightly. On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Nothing I say can make anyone else scum, it's their own words you have to look for. No, of course not. But the player that screams his/her intentional misinterpretation of other players' posts the loudest has a great advantage. That's how the game is played, and you and WBG are playing it correctly, because it seems the people are already starting to rally against me. It seems to be working. Good job. You're ignoring the possibility of people voting for me because they think I make sense, and me being mad at you for using bad logic. Your point about my campaign resting on me being good previously in mafia is okay. Until you know my alignment, you cannot deduce anything about me based on how other people respond to me. If people allowed those kind of reads, then mafia would just buddy up with town all the time to get them hanged. It's stupid. If someone votes me with sketchy reasoning, you should go for HIM, not me. If you're not scum, you have two options. Believe me now when I say you're using incorrect methods to scumhunt, and they will not work. Or you can make a fool of yourself this game, and then learn. Irrelevant of my alignment, your methods suck at the moment. Try a new approach. You are right, people may be voting for you because you make sense, not because of you campaign, or lack of. However, a player of any alignment can "make sense", it simply depends on what you are making that sense. Early game, especially of this magnitude is about appealing to the mass of people, the majority of which are town aligned. Late game, though I have not seen it yet, I think will be very different. It is interesting how my original post was merely an expression of opinion, not a scumhunt, I thought it would go largely ignored. But it would appear that the mafia have taken note of my post, to my dismay. WBG ignored my question, but tell me, am I dangerous to you, mafia? You are also ultimately right about varying methods to playing the game. In the early stages key words, such as 'hypocrite', and intentionally diverging the attention of people off of main points of the discussion, where such a discussion can be detrimental to the mafia, are all excellent tools. As I already said, I will attempt to use them.
Hier openly admits to not scumhunting here.
If you're not scumhunting, then posting opinions is pointless. It only serves to muddy up the thread, since unsubstantiated opinions are merely food for mafia, and generally can never be backed with anything solid.
If you're admitting that your opinions aren't backed with anything, then you are admitting that you are not fulfilling town agenda.
If you want people to ignore you, then you are even scummier. No town player in his right mind wants his posts to be ignored. Only scum want their posts to be ignored because they hate the attention it brings to them.
On November 27 2011 11:15 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 11:08 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 11:04 Hier wrote:On November 27 2011 10:51 Palmar wrote:On November 27 2011 10:43 Hier wrote:Even a townie can seem scummy at times. Instead of admitting that some of my points are worth considering, while insisting on retaining you town alignment, you simply call them terrible without any explanation. On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Again, what I say has nothing to do with the people I talk about and their alignment. So you say, mafia can surely mention other mafia brethren in their discussion. It alleviates suspicion, even if slightly. On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Nothing I say can make anyone else scum, it's their own words you have to look for. No, of course not. But the player that screams his/her intentional misinterpretation of other players' posts the loudest has a great advantage. That's how the game is played, and you and WBG are playing it correctly, because it seems the people are already starting to rally against me. It seems to be working. Good job. You're ignoring the possibility of people voting for me because they think I make sense, and me being mad at you for using bad logic. Your point about my campaign resting on me being good previously in mafia is okay. Until you know my alignment, you cannot deduce anything about me based on how other people respond to me. If people allowed those kind of reads, then mafia would just buddy up with town all the time to get them hanged. It's stupid. If someone votes me with sketchy reasoning, you should go for HIM, not me. If you're not scum, you have two options. Believe me now when I say you're using incorrect methods to scumhunt, and they will not work. Or you can make a fool of yourself this game, and then learn. Irrelevant of my alignment, your methods suck at the moment. Try a new approach. You are right, people may be voting for you because you make sense, not because of you campaign, or lack of. However, a player of any alignment can "make sense", it simply depends on what you are making that sense. Early game, especially of this magnitude is about appealing to the mass of people, the majority of which are town aligned. Late game, though I have not seen it yet, I think will be very different. It is interesting how my original post was merely an expression of opinion, not a scumhunt, I thought it would go largely ignored. But it would appear that the mafia have taken note of my post, to my dismay. WBG ignored my question, but tell me, am I dangerous to you, mafia? You are also ultimately right about varying methods to playing the game. In the early stages key words, such as 'hypocrite', and intentionally diverging the attention of people off of main points of the discussion, where such a discussion can be detrimental to the mafia, are all excellent tools. As I already said, I will attempt to use them. you would not be dangerous to me if I were mafia because you are not making any sense. Any good scum player will agree that only townies who make sense are a threat to them. As scum, I'm not threatened by people who use bad logic. Hmm... you keep ignoring the fact that the basis of me thinking you are scum is not the ordeal with sinani. This is becoming rather stale, for an attempt at getting the town to lynch me. It may eventually work, because people search for keywords, not reading the entire posts. But... such poor moves are so tasteless and boring. No style at all.
Okay, so here we come across a contradiction.
There are two ways to solve this, both of which lead to us concluding Hier is more likely to be scum than town. Ready?
#1. Hier posted two reasons for me being scum. First was that I had a bad plan, and second was that I attacked sandro for his push of sinani on day 1. Case 1 is that Hier is telling the truth that the ordeal with sinani is a minor issue and wasn't a huge indicator of me being scum. In that case, Hier is putting disproportionate weight on one reason for me to be scum; that I had a bad plan. Thus, Hier has contradicted himself and is scum.
#2. Hier posted two reasons for me being scum, and he actually does find me pushing sandro day 1 for his sinani lynch target as very scummy. In this case, he is a liar and he is putting disproportionate weight on a single reason in order to call me scum, contradicting himself anyway.
On November 27 2011 11:31 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 11:22 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 11:15 Hier wrote:On November 27 2011 11:08 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 11:04 Hier wrote:On November 27 2011 10:51 Palmar wrote:On November 27 2011 10:43 Hier wrote:Even a townie can seem scummy at times. Instead of admitting that some of my points are worth considering, while insisting on retaining you town alignment, you simply call them terrible without any explanation. On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Again, what I say has nothing to do with the people I talk about and their alignment. So you say, mafia can surely mention other mafia brethren in their discussion. It alleviates suspicion, even if slightly. On November 27 2011 10:34 Palmar wrote:
Nothing I say can make anyone else scum, it's their own words you have to look for. No, of course not. But the player that screams his/her intentional misinterpretation of other players' posts the loudest has a great advantage. That's how the game is played, and you and WBG are playing it correctly, because it seems the people are already starting to rally against me. It seems to be working. Good job. You're ignoring the possibility of people voting for me because they think I make sense, and me being mad at you for using bad logic. Your point about my campaign resting on me being good previously in mafia is okay. Until you know my alignment, you cannot deduce anything about me based on how other people respond to me. If people allowed those kind of reads, then mafia would just buddy up with town all the time to get them hanged. It's stupid. If someone votes me with sketchy reasoning, you should go for HIM, not me. If you're not scum, you have two options. Believe me now when I say you're using incorrect methods to scumhunt, and they will not work. Or you can make a fool of yourself this game, and then learn. Irrelevant of my alignment, your methods suck at the moment. Try a new approach. You are right, people may be voting for you because you make sense, not because of you campaign, or lack of. However, a player of any alignment can "make sense", it simply depends on what you are making that sense. Early game, especially of this magnitude is about appealing to the mass of people, the majority of which are town aligned. Late game, though I have not seen it yet, I think will be very different. It is interesting how my original post was merely an expression of opinion, not a scumhunt, I thought it would go largely ignored. But it would appear that the mafia have taken note of my post, to my dismay. WBG ignored my question, but tell me, am I dangerous to you, mafia? You are also ultimately right about varying methods to playing the game. In the early stages key words, such as 'hypocrite', and intentionally diverging the attention of people off of main points of the discussion, where such a discussion can be detrimental to the mafia, are all excellent tools. As I already said, I will attempt to use them. you would not be dangerous to me if I were mafia because you are not making any sense. Any good scum player will agree that only townies who make sense are a threat to them. As scum, I'm not threatened by people who use bad logic. Hmm... you keep ignoring the fact that the basis of me thinking you are scum is not the ordeal with sinani. This is becoming rather stale, for an attempt at getting the town to lynch me. It may eventually work, because people search for keywords, not reading the entire posts. But... such poor moves are so tasteless and boring. No style at all. Sorry, you just keep getting worse, don't you? lolol. This is the last time I'll spell it out. You call BC scum because his plan was bad. You say that me calling sandro scum because I put disproportionate weight on him pushing sinani is a scummy thing of me to do. I tell you that you just contradicted yourself because you are, by definition, putting disproportionate weight on one thing that BC did in order to call him scum. You are failing to see how your own logic can be turned against you. This is why you are a hypocrite, this is why you are using bad logic, and this is (partly) why you are scum. I called BC scum not because his plan was bad, but because it had the potential to be utilized in favor of mafia. In turn, have YOU read any of MY posts? I have rather explicitly stated so. My secondary point about you was the fact that your only argument against Sandro was something that had no relation to mafia whatsoever. I have never contradicted myself. If anybody has doubts, please filter me and read some of my posts. It seems I was wrong about the game. It is not a game of logic, but rather of emotions. I'm afraid I will get lynched quickly because I am not good about controlling someone else's emotions.
This post is like a politician talking.
"I didn't call BC scum because his plan was bad, but because it had the potential to be utilized in favor of mafia."
Isn't that the definition of a bad plan? If a plan is manipulable by scum, is it not a bad plan? Hier is arguing on the basis of semantics because he doesn't actually have a working argument.
His secondary point for me being scum is being used against him and he can't do anything about it because he knows he was wrong.
Lastly, he again throws in some unsubstantiated bull about mafia not being about a game of logic. If anyone is playing the game of emotions, it's Hier playing the "I'm new to mafia and this game isn't what I thought it'd be cry cry cry" game.
On November 27 2011 11:43 Hier wrote:
WBG, what is it that irks you about that quote?
As I have pointed out earlier, your case against Sandro had little to do with mafia itself, where as my case against BC and you, in fact, did.
You didn't point out anything.
You didn't even know what my case on sandro was yesterday but you accuse me of heavily weighting a singular point on sandro being scum but can't see yourself that you are heavily weighting a single point to call BC scum.
You're being purposely selective and you can't even argue against it other than repeatedly asserting that you're right and I'm not.
On November 27 2011 11:54 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 11:44 Palmar wrote:On November 27 2011 11:31 Hier wrote:
It seems I was wrong about the game. It is not a game of logic, but rather of emotions. I'm afraid I will get lynched quickly because I am not good about controlling someone else's emotions.
Lol, you're cute. >> Complain about it not being a game of logic Doesn't stop you from using invalid logic in your own posts. >> Complain about game being about emotions Tries to appeal to emotion. My logic was perfectly fine, but since you are likely mafia, it is expected that you would say that. That was not an appeal, I am trying to turn it into a logic game. I was afraid it was too transparent... strange. The tide is changing almost too quickly.
lol
On November 27 2011 14:28 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 14:09 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 27 2011 14:08 annul wrote:
another apathetic town costs us the game. whoop dee doo.
grats on staying on the dark shepherd despite overwhelming evidence supporting jumping ship. but all 27+ of you who voted probably voted on day 1 and havent cared since.
now we lose our double lynches. now we have to lynch two nightproof players who should have been townies but no.
dont sign up for this shit if youre not going to actually play the game. thats the best i can tell you if youre a noob. we dont want vote-and-run players who come in make 1 post and gtfo with a vote until the next cycle. hopefully you can see why this guy is on my 10 player list. For the same reason I am also on your list? Are we an inconvenience for you? Ignoring my main argument and calling my post illogical at first is one thing; you are trying to protect yourself. But after 5-6 posts of the same "you are illogical!" without contributing anything else it's becoming so obvious you are mafia, it's pathetic. I hope your mafia play improves, it's not even a challenge.
And now we see Hier resorting to the same types of play he is accusing me of using.
How does calling my scum play bad further Hier's argument? + Show Spoiler +
How does saying that I am trying to protect myself further Hier's argument that I am scum? + Show Spoiler +
How does calling my contributions useless without actually showing how they are useless further Hier's argument that I am scum? + Show Spoiler +
How does calling me obvious scum further Hier's argument that I am scum? + Show Spoiler +
For someone who is so adamant about making this a game of logic and not emotions, Hier is subjecting himself to a lowly ad hominem by saying my scum play is so obvious that he hopes I improve so that I am no longer a challenge.
On November 28 2011 06:25 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2011 06:17 Steveling wrote:On November 28 2011 06:10 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
As for the whole bit about double lynching at this moment in time. Why the fuck are we doing it? We have at the moment 9 modkills as we only know Ace is going to sub in. Chances are most of these are going to be townies and townies tend to be the bulk of modkills in games. So of 9 people we might get 1 or 2 reds IF we are lucky. More than likely we will have 9 townies. Why would you then want to double lynch? We would be down YM lynch, all of tonights shots, + all the modkills. If we don't have insanely good reads at this moment in time and miss lynch we lose another day towards lylo. My issue with this is the same people who are against vigi's shooting early and clearing out suspects are the ones pushing double lynch without 100% info. We have no idea if the mafia has their own vigis or lurker banes which could add even more KP ontop of their base 8. Wasting town KP, especially KP that the mafia can manipulate early on into the game baffles me beyond belief. The same people who opposed clearing out suspects with vigi's and dts confirming sanity are the same people pushing for the waste of double lynches.
A new take on the DL issue. Any comments on that? Delaying DLs is a stalling tactic used primarily when the town is in a very comfortable position and can afford to spend some time further analyzing potential mafia players. Our town is not in such a position. We will have townies getting modkilled soon, and a lot of people mistrust the players in the office; our town is divided. Mafia cannot get an early population ratio lead and get away with it, because that is a sure way to lose. DL is a risk we have to take, otherwise we will just slowly die off while bickering about who we consider scum.
Fear mongering.
Pure fear mongering.
Mafia always begin gaining population ratio unless the town strings together a series of scum lynches. All of this is based on a single town player getting lynched day 1, which happens in the vast majority of mafia games.
Hier repeatedly says things that allude to town not being in a comfortable position and that we cannot afford to do certain things. He asserts that town is divided and "mafia cannot get an early population ratio lead and get away with it" and he asserts "DL is a risk we have to take" without actually providing reasonable evidence that the double lynch will actually help us hit 2 scum.
A double lynch really is only useful day 2 if we can guarantee two scum are hit with it. Otherwise, it's a waste of a double lynch that could be used on days 3 and later, when we are just statistically alone more likely to hit scum.
Fear mongering is a play on emotions, and Hier is guilty of it, which is certainly odd, seeing as he was decrying earlier that he thought mafia should be a game based on logic and not emotions.
On November 28 2011 06:32 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2011 06:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 28 2011 06:25 Hier wrote:On November 28 2011 06:17 Steveling wrote:On November 28 2011 06:10 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
As for the whole bit about double lynching at this moment in time. Why the fuck are we doing it? We have at the moment 9 modkills as we only know Ace is going to sub in. Chances are most of these are going to be townies and townies tend to be the bulk of modkills in games. So of 9 people we might get 1 or 2 reds IF we are lucky. More than likely we will have 9 townies. Why would you then want to double lynch? We would be down YM lynch, all of tonights shots, + all the modkills. If we don't have insanely good reads at this moment in time and miss lynch we lose another day towards lylo. My issue with this is the same people who are against vigi's shooting early and clearing out suspects are the ones pushing double lynch without 100% info. We have no idea if the mafia has their own vigis or lurker banes which could add even more KP ontop of their base 8. Wasting town KP, especially KP that the mafia can manipulate early on into the game baffles me beyond belief. The same people who opposed clearing out suspects with vigi's and dts confirming sanity are the same people pushing for the waste of double lynches.
A new take on the DL issue. Any comments on that? Delaying DLs is a stalling tactic used primarily when the town is in a very comfortable position and can afford to spend some time further analyzing potential mafia players. Our town is not in such a position. We will have townies getting modkilled soon, and a lot of people mistrust the players in the office; our town is divided. Mafia cannot get an early population ratio lead and get away with it, because that is a sure way to lose. DL is a risk we have to take, otherwise we will just slowly die off while bickering about who we consider scum. I can't believe people actually think this constitutes logic. This fear mongering is working, good job whoever started it (annul or syllo, one of you...) It's as if you were just waiting for me to post something... If we wait until the population begins to approach 50% mafia/town, DLs will not be enough to catch up with the mafia. They will just exterminate us much quicker than we can lynch them off. In this position specifically; if we weren't going to rapidly lose some townies to modkills (which, I admit, is yet to be seen how many of them are actually mafia, if any), then holding off on DLs would be good.
Again, unsubstantiated.
I already showed how we can use DLs starting on day 3 and still use all of them before we lose.
There are only 4 double lynches. Wasting one on day 2, as we are probably going to do, is not very productive, since that only leaves 3 left to use. If we last till day 6, and we've used double lynches this entire time, that means we will have lost the ability to lynch two scum at once. If we last till day 7 it's even worse.
Once again, fear mongering by repeatedly asserting that "we will not be able to last that long without DL!"
Hier makes the illogical assumption that early double lynches are the only thing stopping us from dying to mafia, when there are many other tools at our disposal other than a day 2 double lynch.
Hier, I'm waiting on that case that I'm scum.
|
EPT
