|
On November 25 2011 04:47 Nokarot wrote:
When people enact LaLiars policies, how do they differentiate someone like a youngminii who purposefully lied and a youngminii who may have forgotten what he previously said as a mistake?
They don't. And that's kind of the point, because regardless of whether a lie was purposeful or not it will get dissected and analyzed to death by the thread, potentially leading them down the wrong path.
Lying of any kind and of any motivation is seen to be a distraction and, by that definition, anti-town.
|
And, just in case minushuman and the bunny missed my enquiries of all the EBWOP-ing:
On November 25 2011 04:26 xtfftc wrote:Why?
On November 25 2011 04:43 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 04:31 IMABUNNEH wrote:On November 25 2011 04:26 xtfftc wrote:On November 25 2011 04:25 minus_human wrote:
Lynch younminii. Why? Lynch All Liars. Why are you defending minushuman's lack of argumentation?
|
While Sandroba ran for mayor as scum in pypi, he did it kind of half heartedly, the game multiple scum teams and in general I don't think it fits his playstyle, especially in a huge, long game like this. It just forces him to put extra effort into his cases and if he doesn't, we can just lynch him anyway. Mayor's extra votes aren't particularly useful as scum unless you manage to survive until very late, which would be quite difficult for scumdroba in a huge game like this, unless he opts to bus his team. Again, this just means I find it more likely that, in this setup, he would run for mayor as town than as scum.
To wit, vote for sandroba.
|
I can't believe I actually have to defend myself. Context context context.
When I said "I never said Palmar's scum play is better than his town play" I meant it in the context of him saying "In comparison it is (regarding his scum play being worse than his town play). Simply put, he made a strawman out of my argument, implying my argument revolved around his scum play being better than his town play. That wasn't in my original argument, and that is why I said "I never said Palmar's scum play is better than his town play".. IN MY ORIGINAL ARGUMENT.
This type of out-of-context accusations is expected in an 80 man game. If this were a normal game I wouldn't even have bothered defending myself.
|
FYI I still want Palmar dead just because he's caused so much trouble for me thus far.
|
United States615 Posts
On November 25 2011 04:58 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 04:35 Pigsquirrel wrote:
Your base argument seems to be “take the risk, if I am scum, you get a bad scum mayor, if I am town, you get a good town mayor”. Why should be take the risk? I would rather elect somebody who I am fairly confident is town than somebody who is likely scum but supposedly bad at scum. A lot of what you wrote about Palmar makes sense, but you haven't mention an alternative vote. Who is that player you are fairly confident is town that you'd elect? Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 04:47 Nokarot wrote:
When people enact LaLiars policies, how do they differentiate someone like a youngminii who purposefully lied and a youngminii who may have forgotten what he previously said as a mistake? It's a very good question. If that's a "lie" instead of a sloppy mistake, prplhz should be the next one to be lynched for lying about me (I am still waiting for him to answer to 1 and 2.
I'm still currently staying with BloodyC0bbler. Yeah, his DT plan is flaky, and if it doesn't see reform, I will change my vote. But his philosophy of transparency is good.
Yes, other candidates have thrown the word "transparency" around, but BC is the only one to provide an example of transparency. If other candidates start to provide examples of transparency that will work better than BC, I will switch.
|
Transparency is a terrible concept in a game like this. Way too many people can fly under the radar legitimately while the townies who decide to actually be transparent will be feeding the information straight to scum. Don't know why BC suggested the idea, is scummy for doing so.
|
hey guys im Kenpachi and im a townie
Welcome to Mafia newbies. i will lead the lurker masses to victory.
LaL is a exploited policy therefore it is flawed.
Autovote BC for mayor.
Too many pages
f u all
##vote BloodyC0bbler
|
Also it's kind of annoying how few veterans the game has, because it makes it awfully tempting to just lynch into them, despite what I said earlier. The scum team has to have quite a few vets to provide guidance and it's a scum team of 16. Even being a bit generous there are fewer than 20 veterans in the game, as far as I can tell.
|
We should start with Palmar.
|
|
|
ATTENTION
I'll make this short and sweet, and omit fluff, since fluff is only good if it's GM daypost fluff.
1. I don't care if you all want to make me mayor, as I'm not going to be explicitly running. However, know that I will be a very active scumhunter as long as I am alive (for obvious reasons). Vote me if you don't trust the other candidates.
2. I don't intend to direct blues this game, but I can provide general ideas for how blues should try to approach the game. We should not be relying on blues, we should be relying on the application of logic and reasoning to behavioral analysis of players in this game. I like BC's idea for confirming sanities, though. The faster we can confirm the sanities of the detectives the better, but there's no foolproof way to do that. The best way would be a plan similar to BC's, though, IMO.
3. I will read the thread often and thoroughly. I suggest you all do the same, as even after reading the thread 3 times you still miss things.
4. I will only support mayoral candidates who are coherent, active, and show a willingness to catch scum. Day 1 lynch is priority.
5. With that said, my #1 scumread for today is youngminii.
From what I understand, he's a vet player who hasn't played here in a while. He has devoted his entire time in game so far to derailing Palmar's campaign. However, one gem stood out to me in particular:
On November 24 2011 18:37 youngminii wrote:
This is a lie. Your scum play is better than your town play, according to memory. You have so much sway with the majority of people that if anyone actually calls you out once you have your tight rein on town, you'll get your herd to quick lynch the offender.
[QUOTE]On November 24 2011 22:05 youngminii wrote:
When did I ever say Palmar's scum is better than his town? That's just a strawman that Palmar invented to make his own points stronger./QUOTE]
He defends himself with this:
[QUOTE]On November 25 2011 05:05 youngminii wrote:
I can't believe I actually have to defend myself. Context context context.
When I said "I never said Palmar's scum play is better than his town play" I meant it in the context of him saying "In comparison it is (regarding his scum play being worse than his town play). Simply put, he made a strawman out of my argument, implying my argument revolved around his scum play being better than his town play. That wasn't in my original argument, and that is why I said "I never said Palmar's scum play is better than his town play".. IN MY ORIGINAL ARGUMENT.
This type of out-of-context accusations is expected in an 80 man game. If this were a normal game I wouldn't even have bothered defending myself.[/QUOTE]
Actually, yeah, that WAS in your original argument, youngminii.
Nice fail copout.
I will support a mayor who is coherent, logical, an active scumhunter, and who wants to lynch someone I think is scum on day 1. A good target would be youngminii.
If you don't like the current candidates, vote me if you'd like, I'll do my best to do all of those things. I'll be voting sandro for now though; he strikes me as town so far and Palmar has enough momentum and votes to carry him to mayor (I think he's a fine candidate too). Let's ensure scum don't get to office. That's really all I care about, ultimately.
If we have reasons to believe Palmar or sandro are scum, please make them public immediately.
|
United States615 Posts
On November 25 2011 03:01 Kurumi wrote:
remember
shitty campaigns or joke campaigns should be treated as derailing the thread and taking focus from town to look at it
that means they're scummy
yes
While I like this logic, we need to look at who's posting them. If a 27 post noob who's never played mafia before one, we can write it of as noobishness and "lolol I get to be mayor!!1!". But if we have vets posting wall-o-text after wall-o-text of pure flavor and theme songs, yeah, it's distracting.
In summary, noobs might run for mayor for no reason because they can, which isn't necessarily scummy.
|
son of a bitch broken quotes....EBWOP the last half:
5. With that said, my #1 scumread for today is youngminii.
From what I understand, he's a vet player who hasn't played here in a while. He has devoted his entire time in game so far to derailing Palmar's campaign. However, one gem stood out to me in particular:
On November 24 2011 18:37 youngminii wrote:
This is a lie. Your scum play is better than your town play, according to memory. You have so much sway with the majority of people that if anyone actually calls you out once you have your tight rein on town, you'll get your herd to quick lynch the offender.
On November 24 2011 22:05 youngminii wrote:
When did I ever say Palmar's scum is better than his town? That's just a strawman that Palmar invented to make his own points stronger.
He defends himself with this:
On November 25 2011 05:05 youngminii wrote:
I can't believe I actually have to defend myself. Context context context.
When I said "I never said Palmar's scum play is better than his town play" I meant it in the context of him saying "In comparison it is (regarding his scum play being worse than his town play). Simply put, he made a strawman out of my argument, implying my argument revolved around his scum play being better than his town play. That wasn't in my original argument, and that is why I said "I never said Palmar's scum play is better than his town play".. IN MY ORIGINAL ARGUMENT.
This type of out-of-context accusations is expected in an 80 man game. If this were a normal game I wouldn't even have bothered defending myself.
Actually, yeah, that WAS in your original argument, youngminii.
Nice fail copout.
I will support a mayor who is coherent, logical, an active scumhunter, and who wants to lynch someone I think is scum on day 1. A good target would be youngminii.
If you don't like the current candidates, vote me if you'd like, I'll do my best to do all of those things. I'll be voting sandro for now though; he strikes me as town so far and Palmar has enough momentum and votes to carry him to mayor (I think he's a fine candidate too). Let's ensure scum don't get to office. That's really all I care about, ultimately.
If we have reasons to believe Palmar or sandro are scum, please make them public immediately.
|
You are wrong at your assumption nisani. You do want a mayor that can persuade the town on his reads and one that has good reads. Those players that can do this effectively and get scum lynched are the real threat to mafia. Those are the ones that should be protected to kills at night. By electing someone who is not likely to be a threat to mafia you basically waste the power of that position. Possibly their play is not solid enough for them to get nailed by using bad logic and getting townies lynched as scum and getting a lot of suspicion onto themselves and get mislynched as town.
Let me make this simple to: Putting someone not as experienced into office is worse compared to someone that is a high priority target for mafia if they are town. If they are scum it makes absolutely NO DIFFERENSE. Scum operates as a team, so whoever from scum you elect into office will have the exact same effect. So it's absurd not to aim for the highest gain in this spot, since going conservative provides you no gain.
Being mayor does not protect you from being lynched, it protects you from being hit. Guess what, if me or even palmar are scum, it's not like we are going to get hit at night in the first place. Assuming that we can look townie regardless of being mafia, as you said, it's not like we will be a target for vigs.
So despite me being elected or not I will post analysis and try to get people lynched. The only difference is as soon as I get some red killed I'm going to be shot dead if I'm not elected.
And again, I'm taking full acountability for my actions. Since I will be pushing my reads actively and arguing with those I don't agree with, it will be easy to see if I'm scum or not based on results and reasoning.
|
youngminii, I feel like you are only really digging yourself in a hole. You still, after all this time, have yet to really give any reasons not to trust Palmar. Whether what you've said is taken out of context or not (I don't believe it was) you aren't providing anything worthwhhile to lead us in to any other direction.
Going to take a break and do thanksgiving things.
|
sandro, thoughts on youngminii?
|
On November 25 2011 05:19 sandroba wrote:
You are wrong at your assumption nisani. You do want a mayor that can persuade the town on his reads and one that has good reads.
No, YOU are wrong. If a mayor is persuasive, it is bad because there is the possibility of them being wrong. Being wrong about a read is OK, but it is not OK when you are successfully convincing someone else that you are wrong IN ADDITION TO having a 3x vote.
A persuasive mayor that is scum is even worse. That is why I am voting for xtfftc; even if he is scum, he wont have too much power.
|
On November 25 2011 04:43 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 04:31 IMABUNNEH wrote:On November 25 2011 04:26 xtfftc wrote:On November 25 2011 04:25 minus_human wrote:
Lynch younminii. Why? Lynch All Liars. Why are you defending minushuman's lack of argumentation?
Because youngminii has already done something stupid, whether by being scum or by virtue of being a townie being something stupid. I wasn't directly defending minushuman, I was pointing out I fully agree with him, and he was awfully fast to pick up on it. When someone in essence says (summarising so I don't have to sift through inifinity pages)
"This guy is XYZ"
"I never said that guy was XYZ!"
"What I meant was, I never said that he was XYZ in my original argument that he was XYZ"
In this case it was about Palmar's play, which I've never seen before, so as far as the specific comments I can't verify their authenticity. But the guy directly contradicts himself, and then his defense for doing so doesn't even make sense. He's either scum, or a completely useless townie. Either way I personally would be happy to be rid of him. If you want to interprete my post as a "defense" of the guy who first picked up on it and actually pointed it out (I hadn't noticed previously), then yes, someone who picks that up quickly I'm more willing to trust than someone who can't keep his story straight in the first few HOURS of the game.
|
On November 25 2011 05:29 Nisani201 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 05:19 sandroba wrote:
You are wrong at your assumption nisani. You do want a mayor that can persuade the town on his reads and one that has good reads. No, YOU are wrong. If a mayor is persuasive, it is bad because there is the possibility of them being wrong. Being wrong about a read is OK, but it is not OK when you are successfully convincing someone else that you are wrong IN ADDITION TO having a 3x vote. A persuasive mayor that is scum is even worse. That is why I am voting for xtfftc; even if he is scum, he wont have too much power.
So in a game that's about persuasion, a persuasive scumhunter is bad in mayoral office?
Beyond that, all I hear from you is "derp derp derp derp"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
