Student Mafia (New/Newish players welcome)

On December 04 2011 21:02 xsksc wrote:
I'm by no means a veteran, I've only got 2 games under my belt! I just wanted to start the discussion off and make the new guys feel a little more comfortable

On December 04 2011 13:35 Adam4167 wrote:

We cannot have no-lynches in this game due to the voting rules.


I am all for lynching anyone who scum slips or is caught in an outright lie, as they're almost sure to be mafia. Lynching lurkers on the other hand, while I think they offer nothing to the town, also provides the town with very little new information and costs us an additional townie through a night-kill.
As previously stated in the thread, bored townies are more likely to go inactive/lurk due to not having a very interesting role, whereas a mafia member has two teammates who are relying on him/her to stay active and try to achieve a win.

On December 04 2011 21:58 BByte wrote:
Good morning afternoon, nice to get the game started.


On policies: Lynch all liars and Lynch all lurkers are useful tools for hunting scum and promoting valid town discussion.


Some random points:


Breadcrumbs alone can't confirm a claim, but they can still be useful in analyzing which claimant is the real one. Depending on who the claimants checked, whether any of those checks flipped is still valid information to use.


Back to reading the thread, more thoughts later. Also feel free to ask me anything, I'll be happy to discuss stuff that's not already beaten to death.

On December 04 2011 15:59 Velinath wrote:

Oh, absolutely. While I think that anyone who is willing to stick their neck out and be vocal about a given player is less likely to be mafia (as mafia has no interest in contributing to constructive discussion), I definitely agree that leading the town down an incorrect path is certainly a viable strategy and one that the mafia may be employing here.

That said, there's nothing in the posts from any of our active posters so far that screams "scum" to me - and so far our policy decisions are furthering a town agenda, IMO.

On December 04 2011 23:21 xtfftc wrote:
Tunkeg, I approve of the way you're pressuring but would you mind answering the questions you've been so happy to ask the others? Not just a summary of the thread activity but how this makes people more or less likely to be mafia. Who do you trust and who would you lynch?

On December 05 2011 00:24 xtfftc wrote:

Okay, I like you. I agree on Blazinghand (although some of his stuff is a bit meh), I have no read on Hassy (he hasn't posted yet...), and I didn't like jay's first post (it was a first post though).
I liked xsksc's straight to the point opening - no messing around being lazy or trying to blend in but directly kicking off a discussion. He hasn't done much since though. I didn't like how he jumped in defence of ey215 when what Blazing did was perfectly fine, and he sounds like he didn't want to understand my arguments about lal for some reason. I wouldn't call him mafia yet but he's on my FOS list.

[b]ey215 is my strongest mafia read for now though... Having to call out someone on scummy behaviour [b]two times just a few hours into a mini game doesn't bode well for that person.

On December 05 2011 01:49 Hassybaby wrote:
Ok, read through the thread now. A few things:



Firstly, I'm honoured that you think I'm a veteran, but you're totally wrong. I'm not a veteran in any way shape or form. This is my second game, and my first game was XLVII, and we all know how that went

Secondly, while I've already addressed this point to Blazing, I want to emphasize this one a bit more, because I'm wondering about your methods considering the game situation.

It's been just over half a day in a game that suddenly started, and you already have a scumlist based on the fact that people haven't posted? Really? The day lasts 48 for a reason dude; time-zones exist, as does RL. I've already mentioned to Blazing that I have been out all day, and I didn't even know that the game had started until I came back home. I suspect that there are one or two others in the same boat. So actually wait for responses before instantly preparing the gallows.

While its awesome that you guys are getting the ball rolling, you have to remember that pushing easy targets this earlier is actually very anti-town. You're basing your actions on very limited information, if any, and you're also discouraging discussions, and instead forcing players to defend themselves as opposed to looking at evidence and discussing THAT with people. At no point is that a good idea. This goes especially to you Tunkeg, because right now it feels like you're playing the Serejai role from XLVII. Accusing everyone isn't going to help. In fact, it can easily get you ignored in the thread. Accusing people is fine, but do it within reason considering situations in the game.



Agreed. Lurking in a game this small has to be discouraged, especially considering you won't lean anything through it. However, the pot should be stirred through responses of policies, not open call outs. You have an interesting way of getting people to participate. It may be working, but it really shouldn't be encouraged.There is no sense of cohesion if you start off by accusing people.

As for cases, I'll go back through everyone's filter one by one, and see if i spot anything. initial reads have not made me feel like there's a definitive scum read, or a totally strong one yet, but I may have easily missed something.

On December 05 2011 02:48 Hassybaby wrote:


I know you haven't. That bit was directed more at Tunkeg. If you look at his filter, there is a lot of accusatory posts there, which is why I mentioned Serejai. I just don't see his method to be constructive at this stage of the game.

On December 05 2011 03:52 Hassybaby wrote:
If I misinterpreted you, I am sorry. But to me posts like:



and



sound accusatory, on top of the list. So I hoe you can see why i said hat. However, if that wasn't your intention, I understand.

And no, I don't see either of you as scummy yet. As of now, I see both of you townies aggressively forcing discussions through different means, whether it be through voting like Blazing, or through hard-hitting questions like you do. I don't question the motives, I question the timings of them. While they have been successful, I think they're better served in the later stages of the day, as opposed to the start. In that way, you can have some backing to your questions as well, through quotes and possibly votes. I prefer seeing responses to questions about policies that town intends to implement, and then following up through that, like the lurker point I made with Blazing.

My main issue with early pressure is that it makes it too easy to OMGUS it, unless there's a clear slip. But with the support of quotes that they have made over the past day or 2, you can make a clear case against them, and defences will be tested better.

Definitely going to commend the results though. Discussions have started, and now we can build cases, and really force people to respond.

On December 05 2011 04:08 jaybrundage wrote:

Ok you come out and call me a disappointment of the game And that i haven't been posting quality stuff. Thats Bullshit
I post what im thinking about. I gave my opinion on lynching policies. I said what i thought about Blazinghands aggressiveness
(which i agree with btw) And i gave my read on BKEXE. Who i think could very well be a noobie mafia.




But im curious how did i go from not posting quality stuff to being mafia. Seeing that i havent even posted from then to your next post. While i think posting your reads on people is good. You got the wrong person in your cross hairs. Moving on here's more stuff that i noticed

Ok so far i see adam has done quite a bit of lurking. He makes a single post at the start of the game.Correcting a mistake someone made about not being able to lynch. Then after ward after someone calls him a bored townie. He jumps on it claiming him self to be a bored townie. And then talks about mentions Blazinghand and Veli so called buddy buddy relationship. Soft claiming them to be mafia. He responds to Tunkegs questions and leaves it at that.

Im going to right my reads out in a little bit i just need more time to reread the thread

On December 05 2011 05:05 Grackaroni wrote:
@Tunkeg: also since you're here. I am curious why you painted Ey215 town in your reads. He is somebody that I am unsure of right now and all you explained is that "his posts so far says town to me. He is balancing out Blazinghand."

On December 05 2011 06:56 jaybrundage wrote:
And tunkeg i would like your response to my reads heck. I would like everyones feed back. lets get some discussion going

On December 05 2011 06:25 jaybrundage wrote:
My reads so far


Adam4167-
Ok so far i have a scum read on adam I you can see in my last post why
click He just comes off happy to stay off the radar I dont like how he is going about his game. Just posting ot barely keep up. And in general comes off apathetic. He says hes a bored townie but i think it could be a lurking mafia

BByte-
He has posted but not alot he seems content to just respond to people. He did comment about breadcrumbs which is true. Its funny because in my game of Mini Mafia X WBG claimed a blue role and because he breadcrumbed it people beleived him. He did post his reads on people which is good. I would like to see more posting from him. My question is what do you think of adam Bbyte
.
Blazinghand-
Blazinghand has been the biggest posting factor atm. Trying to keep people from lurking and in general trying to generate discussion. While it may not be kosher its seems like its working great. People have responded to his prods. My biggest concern is if he was mafia he would be doing a terrific job. I agree that he has been very pro town. But remember guys putting to much trust in someone is always a mistake. So be wary

BroodKingEXE-
Ok so far i posted a little to nothing. I gave my read on him before. clickerz Well i said previously that he gave off a non pro-town vibe off. I have to disagree now. Rereading his posts I just think hes just new town. Well he can be a bit hard to read i still think hes just a newbie that doesnt know whats scummy and whats townlike. However Regardless We do need to see some posts from you about what you think about other players. If you continue to post like you are you are prolly gonna get lynched. So post your content. If its wrong is not what matters what matters is that you gave your opinion.

ElectricBlack-
Ok so far ElectricBlack hasnt posted much so far. His last post was pretty good containing content about the lynching policies. His respond to BH and about how he though BH was doing a decent job of making discussion. I would really would like to get your reads on the town tho. He does bring up a good point while BH is prolly town we can completly rule anyone out as scum. Establishing thread presence is a good think for both townies and mafia to do. But again i would like you reads. So far i have a null read

ey215- Has posted alot. Mostly because of the arguement between him and and BH. BH called him out for a no content post ey responded by saying BH was making baseless accusations. And it escalated from there. Veli was trying to bring the heat down a bit (good by him). But eventually they decided to just settle things, ey defended himself well. Although to be honest im not sure of his alignment as far. He could be mafia who just did a great job defending himself or a townie who made sure that BH is not going to unchecked. Im going to keep my eye on him.

Grackaroni-
So far he has posted his reads and gave a good bit of content. Giving his reads and trying to keep everyone on the same page He mentioned that he agrees with hassybaby about not making straight up accusations like Tunkeg did so early in the game when people havent posted alot. Will i dont really agree with this. I think coming out with your town reads is always good. Premature sometimes but good. I do agree with his case on Adam tho so far hes still the scummiest in my book. So far i got a pretty good town read on him.

Hassybaby-
Ok so Hassybaby got outright accused of mafia with out even posting. Maybe we should go with people guts and just lynch him lol. Well his first post comes out and talks about the LaL policy. He mentions that we should not just lynch a lurker or liar if we have a good read on someone. I think that we all agreed on this. He then talks about how he doesnt like Tunkeg accusations However i mentioned before i dont think It is the wrong thing to do to put your reads out there. I personally like waiting for everyone to post but regardless. He then tells Tunkeg that He is accusing people to much. I still disagree with this. Tunkeg is generating discussion. I honestly think aggressive scum hunting is completely fine. I don't agree with him on his points. Weather he is scum or not is hard to tell i would like his reads before jumping to conclusions

Tunkeg-
Ok So i have mixed feelings on Tunkeg First off he comes out with his alignment posts and calls out a nonposter and me as being scum. Honeslty i think you should let people post before calling them mafia lol. I do like how he is poking and generating discussion. While i think his biggest disappointment thing was still stupid which he mentions as well. Hassy mentions that he thinks tunkeg is accusing to many people early in the game. But i think that while Tunkeg has said somethings that i dont neccesary agree with i do think its furthing a town agenda. I do think hes coming off protown even if his accusations are not always right. Tunkeg what d

Velinath-
Well as far i see Veli as being at townie. he talks about the policies a good bit Actually alot but that what the current conversation was about. he kind of gets on BKEXE case. Which i kinda did at the start as well Its really hard to read BKEXE but i still do think hes a townie. And then he gives his reads alot of them were null reads but it is still hard to place alignments on people this early in the game. I do find his amount of posting comforting tho. Makes it a bit easier to disguish his alignment.

xsksc-
Ok so i like his first post. It pretty much generated the discussion we had on policy lynches and so forth it was good to get out of the way. He mentions posts about breadcrumbs not proving blues which i agree with. talks about policies a good bit. and then tell BH to not be trigger happy. Its kinda funny that everyone gave an opinion on BH. Again aggressive scumhunting is good imo and making people post is great. He got called out on not scum hunting. Which i kinda agree with. he started the conversation about lynching talked about that for a while and then goes and doesnt give much of his reads or even analyzes any posts. I want to see his reads but im leaning scummy

xtfftc-
Well so far i dont really agree with his policy posts. I do think lynch all liars is a fine policy. He mentions that last minute lynches are a bad thing and i have to agree. he strongly agrees that everyone should post regardless of how we get them to post so he agrees with BH method. He calls out Ey as his strongest mafia read tho. Ill have to go over ey's posts again. As my read was no where near strong on Ey. He also mentions that While people can buddy up for instance BH and Veli that they can often be town and posts an example Syllogism and Sandroba. I do agree that both. So far a null read. I would like to see more of your reads tho

Well thats what i got so far plz everyone tell me what yall think this took fucking forever thank god for filters tho.

On December 06 2011 00:30 xsksc wrote:
Lol. I said you were suspicious because your read on me changed drastically when I said nothing between your posts. I'm not setting you up for a lynch, it's just suspicious.

On December 06 2011 00:41 xsksc wrote:
Oh and your analogy of me going from mr smiley face to mr fuck you guy made me laugh. Thanks! Yesterday there was nothing to argue, so we discussed policy. Today has been a lot more controversial, and I defended my stance on pressuring someone who made an anti-town move, sure I lost my temper a little, but if you read it in context the guy wasn't even listening to me.

The main points of your case on me seem to be... me going after easy kills and not being a super nice guy today? Right... I've placed one vote all game, and that was on the guy with 2 votes on him. I didn't discredit you, I just pointed out a MASSIVE inconsistancy in your reads, something that has been echoed by others too. I appreciate the effort you're putting in, it's good. It's just a bad case.

Could you please explain how I went from "town educator" to scum, on your read list, without me actually posting anything in between? Major inconsistancy and you need to back it up.

On December 06 2011 00:44 Tunkeg wrote:


You have to do better than that to lose my vote. And you have to find a better candidate for lynch (be it me or anyone) or else I am sticking with you. My read never changed drastically. I said it in my first post that you IMO had not made any usefull posts, just helpfull, giving you a powerfull role. I then was asked to post my views on town, I decided to do it with the three I considered most likely scum at the moment coloured. And then I wrote on your case "It is his way of gaining trust, while not really providing any pressure to anyone or other pro town activities." I say that is pretty much the same, even if I prematurely labeled you scum.

+ Show Spoiler +

On December 06 2011 00:45 xsksc wrote:
I'll consider the case on hassybaby, gonna filter him. There are several people I'd like to lynch for being retarded but that's probably not the best idea :/

On December 06 2011 01:02 xsksc wrote:
Tunkeg, your case on me is shit. You say I haven't done anything useful? I've participated and created more discussion than anyone in the game, apart from Blazinghand. Also, your read did change drastically, all of a sudden you had this hunch that I'm scum, that for some reason you didn't have a couple of posts back? Bullshit!

It's a lot harder to make a case on someone when you're scum. I was scum in my first game and I remember how difficult it is to fabricate evidence on someone innocent. This is what it looks like you're trying to do right now, you haven't got anything solid on me and suddenly you're trying to make town think I'm a good lynch.

Every point of your case against me is weak and half-assed. I mean seriously, you expect people to believe I'm scum because I'm not being so welcoming and friendly to the newbies today? As for the easy kills part, I actually said I think an Adam lynch would be a good idea. I pressured EB sure, not because he was an easy target, but because he posted something blatantly anti-town. Do you disagree with this, if so, why? The discredit part is what amuses me the most though. I pointed out a major inconsistancy in your post, so what?

Finding inconsistant statements is a great way to find scum!
##vote: Tunkeg

On December 06 2011 01:24 xsksc wrote:
First of all, don't use WIFOM to argue a case, scum LOVE that.
I'm tired of repeating myself today, so I'll say this one last time. I never jumped on any easy targets. EB was not an easy target. We had a pretty massive debate about anti-town plays and my stance on pressuring. I don't see how you can possibly think this is hiding behind an easy lynch. If you think I am hiding behind any other "easy targets" please provide evidence, rather than just using the term on me. Also, please tell me why you think my play thus far has been poor.

On December 06 2011 01:32 Tunkeg wrote:


All right I will go through the post where EB, adam and BroodKingEXE have been talked about in a non-favorable way. That might take some time.

On December 06 2011 01:37 xsksc wrote:
I want you to show me where I'm hiding behind an easy lynch!

On December 06 2011 01:36 xsksc wrote:
Non-favorable? Lol. Hiding behind an easy lynch = / = having a non favorable opinion

On December 06 2011 01:55 xsksc wrote:


I asked you to point out the easy target I'm hiding behind, you still haven't done this. I am not bickering about the details. I'm asking you to simply back up your case. Your whole case seems to be built up around me being this scum who just jumps in on the easy targets, please actually show me an example.

On December 06 2011 01:45 Tunkeg wrote:


What I am saying is that the ones you have called out and put pressure on are those three players. You voted and you made a case out of nothing on EB (sure some would say he was anti-town cause he wanted to spite Blazing, but Blazing have gone abit over the top, and I can see why people might get pissed off at him) and you put BroodKingEXE as town lurker/maybe scum and Adam as Possible lynch. All those three you put out in red in this post:

+ Show Spoiler +

On December 06 2011 01:49 Grackaroni wrote:

@He voted for xsksc earlier on the basis that he was not doing much scumhunting, your case is now fairly outdated and xsksc has been participating a lot in the thread. I'm curious if his recent posts have made you stick to your original feeling or changed your mind.

I'm sorry that I probably wont be back on for 4 hours.
The tunneling between you guys is good and helps to develop reads, For people watching though try to remember that there is still a chance that this is a townie vs townie argument, and that the scum might be smiling right now without having to act.

My read still makes me think that Tunkeg/Hassybaby are the best votes today
I would reccomend wasted votes that arent going to lead to a lynch please take a stance on a more likely candidate.
the votes on Veli/Jay are wasted votes, they are not going to be lynched today.
If nobody wants to put votes on BByte or BroodKingEXE i would suggest you change yours as well.

[B]On December 06 2011 00:44 Tunkeg wrote:


You have to do better than that to lose my vote. And you have to find a better candidate for lynch (be it me or anyone) or else I am sticking with you. My read never changed drastically. I said it in my first post that you IMO had not made any usefull posts, just helpfull, giving you a powerfull role. I then was asked to post my views on town, I decided to do it with the three I considered most likely scum at the moment coloured. And then I wrote on your case "It is his way of gaining trust, while not really providing any pressure to anyone or other pro town activities." I say that is pretty much the same, even if I prematurely labeled you scum.

[spoiler]






[/spoiler]

On December 06 2011 02:12 xsksc wrote:
Oh god, having to repeat myself again? #1 I was against an adam lynch, show me the post where I'm actually FOR a case against adam. #2 You seriously think my 2 and a half page long pressure on EB was hiding behind an easy target? I made my stance on pressuring him pretty clear already. #3 Broodking? I called him a lurker because he was lurking, which funnily enough, is a scum trait. Please actually show me the posts where I'm using people as an easy target and we can stop this bullshit.



This sums it up nicely, thanks.

And yes, it's probably obvious that I'm incredibly frustrated at the moment. I should have gone to bed hours and hours ago, I got sick of having to repeat parts of my posts over and over to EB and more recently, Tunkeg.
So I'd like to apologise for calling you retards, and for losing my temper earlier. It happens to the best of us but I was totally out of line.

On December 06 2011 06:46 Grackaroni wrote:

I do believe that xsksc is town and did side with him against you. in fact I started getting suspicious of you a while ago. if you are looking for somebody to blame for putting pressure on you, I started agreeing with the suspicion of you changing his mind about him after Jaybrundage asked me what I thought of xsksc. I am probably one of the reasons you got a lot of attention, but I have been making my own decisions


I don't like that you are accusing me of "parroting xsksc." He is on my town list and I have been siding with him but I am still making my own decisions. My vote was on Adam at the time and it simply didn't seem like you were going to be lynched and I'm still not positive you are mafia.

BByte has not contributed and has a stupid (what seems to be an OMGUS) vote on Veli. I think that this is just a bad move but it is possible that he purposely put his vote on somebody not going to be lynched to distance himself from any blame.
Is it likely that he is scum? probably not.
Will he contribute at all to the game? Even more likely not.
I've said throughout the game that we should look for a strong analysis on the active players before we look to lynch a lurker.
I feel we have done a lot of analyzing and it is unlikely that we will agree on who is mafia in the time we have left. , I don't want to join your bandwagon on xsksc and the only other person who had a chance to be lynched was xsksc/adam

It looked like from the tunneling between xsksc and You that 2 sides were beginning to form
Me supporting xsksc and Xtfftc supporting Tunkeg. Perhaps this should be looked at for future reads but I'm not sure it says too much about anyone's alignment. It is entirely possible that both you and xsksc is town.
I still feel that Hassybaby should be looked at as a target for the lynch. If you want to know why once again read EB's case.

If you would like to accuse me of being scum, please look through my filter and build a case. I would much rather you do that than mildly hinting that I have been "parroting" Xsksc.

On December 06 2011 07:43 Tunkeg wrote:
Having read up on the three most likely candidates for a lynch today (Those three are Adam (2votes in), Bbyte and Hassybaby.), and ElectricBlacks write up on Hassybaby I have the following thoughts:

From scummiest to towniest I'd go for Bbyte>Hassybaby>Adam.

Bbyte simply have posted to little and to little content.
Hassybaby is pretty much a no-read at the time. But one major bad thing is that he haven't posted for ages.
Adam I am leaning town on, and I do not want to see him lynched.

Seeing that xtfftx have unvoted xsksc, he will not be lynched tonight. And as bad as this looks, I will also post my vote on Bbyte, to avoid any surprises. But I really feel Bbyte have been bandwagoned here, but rather him than the other two.

##Unvote: xsksc
##Vote: Bbyte

On December 06 2011 07:55 Blazinghand wrote:
It takes like 15 minutes for the bot to register it. Don't worry, it'll happen.

On December 06 2011 10:33 Blazinghand wrote:
Discuss nothing this night. If you have something to post, write it up and post it 24 hours from now-- do not give the mafia any additional material to work with until after they've made their decision. If you think you're about to die and have some grand revelation to make, make it 1 minute before the night ends so the mafia can't base their kill off it.

See you guys in 24 hours.

On December 07 2011 04:59 Tunkeg wrote:
What I find more interisting is the lynch on BByte. As I said before putting my vote on him, I feel he got bandwagoned, but out of the three candidates he was the "best". How do you guys see this lynch in hindsight? Was it the best we could do, with the information we had?

On December 07 2011 04:15 Velinath wrote:

Going off your assumption that someone will end up dying tonight, why should we hold off on posting analysis? The more conversation that we can have before night ends, the more that the dead townie will be able to contribute before they die. Given this, I feel that we stand to gain more by posting analysis earlier so that we can discuss it with all of the town voices.

On December 08 2011 01:18 Velinath wrote:
For those who missed Jay's lies:

He MIGHT have pulled off more reads than Hassybaby but that's about it. I didn't tagteam him after that post, the lynch was essentially locked in at that point and I stated that lurking was antitown.

I voted BByte before BH did, this is just s straight up lie and he should be lynched for this alone.

I defended Adam in an earlier post, check your facts

"like he always does" - that's why I voted BByte before BH started a wagon on him. that's why I defended Adam when he was getting a bunch of votes. Pathetic.

Lynch the liar.

On December 08 2011 01:51 jaybrundage wrote:
Tunkeg i would like your input on my case against Veli and BH

On December 08 2011 03:39 jaybrundage wrote:
Alright tunkeg are you still going to go for xsksc then for mafia?

On December 08 2011 03:51 jaybrundage wrote:
Why do you say bad for the game? And how could it be a big tell?

On December 08 2011 05:53 ey215 wrote:
Alright, did some reading while eating.

Here seems to be the brunt of the xscsc/Tunkeg dilemma. Tunkeg, even in his initial read that he mildly flipped on on xsc sounded like he had some suspicions. After a change in his read, xsc lost it on him and they bickered causing Tunkeg to tunnel in further. Tunkeg even admits in a post today that his case was "thin".

I honestly think that this is the case of two potential townies going after each other. From everything I read, xsc's case on Tunkeg was very weak and again tunkeg called his own case "thin".

Something I did find odd is they both argued against the BByte lynch and yet still ended up voting for him.

Here's my read: Tunkeg Town
xsc: null.

I'm not convinced that xsc is scum, and would like to see his replacement do some posting so we can go from there and I do feel that Tunkeg has been doing what is in the best interest of the town up to this point. I'd have a hard time voting for either at the moment.

On December 07 2011 21:53 Tunkeg wrote:
Just read up on this during lunch, and while just reading through it really fast I have to say that the case you guys are building on jay, and the reasoning behind it is thin. 3 votes allready? Was it the the kill on EB that changed your mind?Many thought my case on xsksc was thin, but this is thinner, and it allready have 3 votes.

On December 08 2011 06:08 ey215 wrote:


My apologies, I misread that statement. So you still stand behind his replacement as very likely mafia?

On December 08 2011 06:34 Tunkeg wrote:


Ah, you are putting me on the spot here now. I would say he is the one I have the most scum read and scum feel about. Very likely is pushing it a bit far though. But he is definately the one I would go for atm.

On December 08 2011 06:45 xtfftc wrote:


You lynch your best read. You don't start looking for excuses for when the player you're voting for flips town.


You didn't want to get into the "pissing match" with BH, you were forced to by his aggressiveness. And using lurking as a proof that you haven't been staying under the radar is a pretty solid point if you're building a case against yourself.

You were out of the picture when every good mafia wants to be: during the last ~12 hours before the deadline, so you did a great job.



I answered to him after he mentioned me and I don't see how his death changes anything.

What is there to be said about EB? His play was arrogant and trollish. He was obviously a veteran smurfing, who thought it would be fun to frustrate the townies (refusing to vote just when he was asked to the most active player in the game just because he felt like irritating us) and then giving us a great demonstration of how a town player has to prove his innocence when attacked. He posted a great case that lacked obvious flaws - and then he was happy to go inactive again. He came back to announce that he's found the whole mafia team - but didn't bother providing any analysis on two of the players he accused. And he also made sure to notify us that the Bbyte lynch was pushed easily...

Before the game started (and also in the Looking For Coaches thread) some veterans suggested that there should be some experienced players in this game to help teach the newbies how to play properly. Instead we get a cocky smurf. There was no way to make a good guess about his intentions, which is the reason why I'm not all over Hassy at the moment. EB was good enough to make us do anything he wanted to as long as he was interested in putting a serious effort in the game, and I have no reason to believe that his intentions were pro-town, even after his flip. Ask veterans such as Sandroba and Palmar and they will tell you that the first thing a townie should do is to establish his/her innocence. The first thing EB did was to frustrate town and lose us half a day. So what good would it do to town to focus on him again instead of doing our own analysis? All you're achieving with this is disruping the discussion.

On December 08 2011 07:01 xtfftc wrote:
I've discussed it with my coach (he even made a guess as to who EB actually is) but the opinions expressed are my own.

On December 07 2011 07:24 Tunkeg wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Thank you for answering. I agree with your thoughts here. It is pretty hard to say anything about which votes are more suspicious. But if I am allowed to speculate I would think at least 1 scum was in on the lynch of BByte, and more likely 2 scums to secure it. 0 and 3 would be very unlikely IMO. 0 is unlikely because I think scum wanted to secure the lynch of a townie. 3 unlikely because then they would put all their eggs in one basket (if all 3 jumped in early), and a change in lynchtarget would mean that at least 2 of them would have to switch to secure themselves (that would cause suspicion). If not all 3 jumped in early it would be no point in jumping in late for a third scum unless the vote weren't secured (for a secound scum, yeah, for a third no).

So my view on the lynch yesterday is that there is likely to be two scums among the 7 who voted for BByte: Velinath, Blazinghand, xsksc, Grackorini, ey215, xtfftc and Tunkeg. And one among the rest. This is all speculations though, and probably not very usefull.

On December 08 2011 07:49 Grackaroni wrote:
Ey215 has been on every one of your bandwagons so far from Adam----> EB -----> BByte -------> JayBrundage.
@BH : Why is Ey215 one of your main town reads? I think he is just sheeping your vote.

On December 09 2011 02:45 Blazinghand wrote:
I like the probabalistic way of looking at things. If your pool is "people who voted for BByte and aren't Blazinghand or Velinath" you know more about it than I do since you know your own alignment. However, entering into this argument you have walked into the territory of WIFOM and expected mafia scrutinized actions. That is where I think you make a mistak e



There's a well-known mafia tactic known as "bussing" (from: to throw under the bus) in which two mafia players interact in an adversarial fashion if one of them is in danger, or just in general. For example, if BByte and EB with both mafia and the public opinion was moving to lynch BByte, EB might try to lead the charge, in order to prove himself innocent. However, for this to be believable they'd be aggressive towards each other beforehand so if either of them got in danger, they'd have a justification for bussing. "Oh, I suspected him all a long."

Mafia members, assuming they're not enormously incompetent (see: JB) will do their best to not appear to be working/voting together. You noted that it's probably a 2/1 split since they want to appear like normal voters. It stands to reason that they'd disagree and argue on other things, including each other's alignments, to appear like normal voters.

That being said, this takes nothing away from the probabilistic arguments. I just wouldn't go completely ruling out combinations like Grackaroni/ey215 or xsksc/xtfftc solely on the grounds that they got into an argument or disagreed on some issue.

Also, I'd like to hear your reasoning on the "Velinath is town" read, ideally something besides "Well he agrees with Blazinghand a lot and BH is town". Agreeing with me doesn't make you town. It's possible you've made this case and I just herped and missed it with all the JB interaction that's happened recently, so just quote yourself or link me if that's the case.

Is there a recorded final vote count for previous lynchings (day 1, day 2 etc?)

On December 07 2011 11:33 Velinath wrote:
First off, I was roleblocked last night.

Secondly, yes, I agree with this lynch. Scummy posts after Night 1 and the analyses posted? No question. Hassy can be saved for tomorrow.

##Vote: jaybrundage

On December 09 2011 02:50 Blazinghand wrote:
EBWOP: xsksc is now Starshard.

Also, Tunkeg and Starshard(aka xsksc) have not voted in this election. You guys have 7 hours left. Your votes are very important, and however you vote you must justify. Granted, assuming nobody changes their votes, you can't stop the JB lynch. But I, and many others, will judge you based on the reasoning behind your vote. So if you do something dumb like say make a post like this:


or this:


This kind of vote and justification is anti-town. So even though it's currently 7 JB, 1 Veli, 1 ey, cast your vote like whoever you vote is literally gonna get lynched, and justify your shit.

Just a friendly reminder.

On December 09 2011 03:53 xtfftc wrote:


Nice to see that at least one person is interested in looking at EY* but I'm really disappointed that everyone else chose to ignore it. You don't have to agree with my case but we have to catch three mafia, not one. We have a lead on BKE if Jay flips mafia but we need to keep the conversation going. We don't know if Jay is going to flip town or mafia, only mafia does. If it turns out that he's just a dumb townie and considering that everyone tends to keep quiet during the night, we'll be left with pretty much nothing at a LYLO situation when it comes to scum hunting on Day 3 (unless we get lucky with the blues' night actions). Don't rely on the few active players to win the game.

* I don't count Bluesomething because he looks like he's a newbie townie who strugling to form his own opinions. I expect a lot more of him tomorrow though; he should be able to post more analysis after being in the game for 48 hours.




I like parts of this post - especially the xsksc+EY bit, although I would have to seriously consider one of them being town if Jay and BKE are both red - but focusing exclussively on voting patterns is dangerous. Townies vote for various reasons, so if you're going to analyse the vote, you have to look at all the factors surrounding the decision. Even if the whole mafia team was on the Bbyte lynch (which is very much possible, although I wouldn't count on it), there's some townies on it as well. You don't take into consideration the reasons why those you have townie reads of voted for him, yet you use the vote on its own as a factor when narrowing your mafia list. Why is it perfectly fine for someone you consider to be town to vote for Bbyte, yet someone you are suspicious of is worth lynching for doing the very same thing?

Also, analysing the probabilities while excluding your own town reads and then pushing a lynch depending on the results doesn't help the rest of us.

On December 09 2011 04:05 xtfftc wrote:
Okay, I have limited time, so tell me who you want to me to have a more in-depth look at tonight (or you can have shorter analyses of two/three players, etc.). I consider Grackaroni to be town and I'm less and less suspicious of Veli. My view on the two of you (BH and Tunkeg) hasn't changed - I think you're both town (remind me to go over trusting players you consider to be town even if they're not confirmed if you want to hear why I'm doing it). I'm willing to give Starshard a break even though I would have lynched xsksc, and I'm expecting him to step up and contribute more during Day 3, just like Bluelightz. If Jay flips town, I'd say that EY, xsksc and Adam are the mafia team. If Jay flips red, I think that his partners are BKE and EY/xsk.

On December 09 2011 04:21 xtfftc wrote:
I've been looking at EY for a very long time now :D I can carry on with analysing his posts though; there's a lot of stuff to be looked at.





Yeah but this defeats the whole purpose of your probabilities analysis. If you agree that lynching them for doing something a lot of people did, then you can simply reduce your argument to "there's bound to be mafia on the Bbyte lynch, so I'm going to exclude the ones I consider to be townies and will take a closer look at the rest."

I'm sure you can see why I have an issue with your logic: you value my vote on Bbyte the same as xsksc, even though I spend a lot of time fighting against it and xsk jumped on board in the blink of an eye. Of course, if I'm mafia I may have faked it in order to have an alibi for the Bbyte lynch - but in this case you should be analysing the reasoning I provided and not the actual vote.

On December 09 2011 04:24 Blazinghand wrote:
By the way, Tunkeg, who are you going to vote for?

On December 09 2011 04:42 Velinath wrote:
Hi!

I'm not sure if it's really eneded, but I'll justify my vote on jaybrundage now - as I've said before, the suspicions from his posting style after the Night 1 post gave me cause for concern, and coupled with the previous cases on him I felt that he was a better lynch target for today especially given his tendency to be vocal (unlike the largely lurking hassybaby, who was much less likely to misdirect the town). Following my vote, JB scumslipped quite hard against both myself and Blazinghand, and outright lied to try and distract everyone from the evidence against him, thus solidifying my opinion of him as scum.

I would also like to point to something that I believe Tunkeg pointed out recently, that jaybrundage and BKEXE (another of my current scum suspects) have been defending each other all game.

On December 08 2011 13:37 Adam4167 wrote:


I don't see what you see at all.

I see BKEXE quote BH's book that he wrote on jay, ramble on about policy (a bit late in the piece for this really..), then dump his vote on jay after calling him an idiot. Oh and don't forget declaring how new he is... again.

Your case on BKEXE was exactly where I was heading with the next day (assuming I survive the night.). It was well done and did a good job of highlighting exactly how BKEXE has been playing thus far, however I am going to highlight something you missed: BKEXE and jay have been defending each other this entire game:
Here
Here
Here
Here
Here

BKEXE's more recent posts aimed at jay are nothing more than distancing because we have shifted focus onto them.

It is just a smokescreen, do not buy into this nonsense.

On December 11 2011 07:47 layabout wrote:
your guess was not educated
it was stupid

On December 11 2011 08:15 layabout wrote:
im not posting a my read on every single player list and i will explain why in postgame when there will be no danger of me criticising the entire thread and derailing discussion

my take the bbyte lynch: it was not a great lynch because the reasons given for voting for him were weak and his behaviour did not make him seem likely to be scum.
but it was a day1 lynch and he was lurking and i do not think it is reasonable to expect to lynch mafia on day1, he was lurking and there weren't strong cases for alternate candidates. so i accept that you all lynched him

do i believe that 0,1,2,3, scum voting for him was equally probable? no. do i believe a specific circumstance say 1 scum is more likely? no
because we do not know who the mafia are and we do not know how they think or what their plan for the game is. the only things we know are that they are in the thread they win when they are equal or greater in number to town.
the rest of our information comes from the thread from what we read in the thread.

any thoughts or suspicions about what the mafia will do are of very limited usefullness
because speculation about how mafia will leads to "circular reasoning that results from trying to determine the choices of an opponent who acted with full knowledge that their behavior would be subject to scrutiny."(from mafiawiki)
this is why your guess is unreasonable
mafia know that people may look at voting patterns and so they can try to act unlike what you expect or like what you expect because they expect you to expect them to act unlike how you would expect them to.

trying to follow through such reasoning is unhelpful as it leads nowhere and as such reasoning dependent on the expected behaviour of the mafia has no value

+ all of the stuff about poker is useless fluff
+ calling my post desperate do not address the point i made instead you are asking me to explain myself but you have not justified your actions which were anti-town and supported by poor assumptions

On December 11 2011 08:21 layabout wrote:
also removing 3 players from the list is quite a major step to take and you really didn't justify it
if they were your town reads they should be included but you could argue that because you think that their behaviour is town-like and that they would be the worst lynch choices on the list you should not exempt them becuase that defeatd the point of lynching players who voted for a town because for some (bad) reason you think 2 of the total players voting for that town should be mafia because that is what you expect mafia to do.
by eliminating players from the total you eliminate potential mafia and further reduce your chance of hitting scum.
(which was 50% in the optimal situation)

On December 11 2011 09:17 layabout wrote:
franky i think BXE is the best lynch target at the current moment in time but we still have scum to find and we need to scumhunt (analysis coming tomorrow)
so i decided to see why, you made a post in which you began by saying people would ignore you and then went on to make worthless speculation and unjustified assumptions
i feel that i have highlighted why this is this case very clearly

i cannot believe that you have not adressed any of my arguements but have instead tried to attack my possible motivation and you have mostly just provided fluff


justify them then!don't just say i made assumptions we need to in this game that is an entirely worthless statement
as was your poker "analogy" you just make general statement about making reads and how reads are more valuable the more time passes. This has nothing to do with what you had written

if you make an argument based on reasoning then you better have solid reasoning because otherwise your post holds no weight it is not helpful to town (unless it reveals that you are scum) because your entire argument relies on reason that does not withstand scrutiny


i think we are past the point of this being a useful exchange because you clearly don't understand or are ignoring the point that i have made
explain yourself and then try to help town by analysing behaviour

On December 11 2011 06:43 layabout wrote:
i would like to post analysis before i vote and i still have plenty of time to do so but as it stands i don't feel like i can justify a vote for anybody over broodkingexe
BKEXE if you are town please help!! because lynching a town today would really hurt our chances
and people have so confidently voted for you they have barely been posting
there has been very little discussion so far and so a mislynch would make today a huge waste of time that could have been spent scumhunting

On December 12 2011 10:57 Blazinghand wrote:


Yes. I am very upset. I will be having some very, very choice words with BKEXE after this game, should I be scheduled to encounter him in another.

There's nothing to be gained from be badmouthing BKEXE at this point, though.



So it seems.

If the doctor could bail me out again tonight that would be great . Maybe he's busy, though, so I'm going to crank out some analysis.

Assuming our doctor is shitty, after tonight, we'll be at 5 townies 2 mafia. If we still have both blues we should be looking reasonably solid, but we need a good lynch tomorrow. If the doctor is shitty/dead, we'll drop down to 3 townies, 2 mafia, and then we need hella solid lynching.

Let's get it right tomorrow, guys.

On December 14 2011 06:21 Velinath wrote:
I'm also going to ask at this point that other people start posting. We are almost halfway through Day 4 and so far it's been largely dominated by layabout (earlier), xtfftc, and myself. Where is everyone?

On December 14 2011 07:44 layabout wrote:
EBWOP below vote layabout are my comments

On December 15 2011 19:52 layabout wrote:
what specifically was good about town's play?
did i ruin the atmosphere when i joined the game?
will you forgive me tunkeg? <3

On December 17 2011 00:13 vaderseven wrote:
It was really fun coaching this game. Blazinghang, Tunkeg, and adam4167 were my 'students'. Blazinghand was fun to talk to and coach. Took a real ballsy approach to being a medic. He really stayed focused on scumhunting and was able to see past some things that normally distract from that.

Tunkeg played a lower key game and I wish he had contacted me before that slapfight with layabout got the point it did. I think that interchange is a great lesson that everyone in this game can pick up on about aggression, slapfights, and how those things really dont indicate alignment and how they can be used as tools (in the case of aggresion) or distractions (slapfights).

Adam died right as he was starting to use me.

On December 17 2011 02:37 Blazinghand wrote:


What was it? Was it "I think BH is scum should I lynch him?"

On December 17 2011 02:48 Blazinghand wrote:


Well, you know, if I WERE scum, I could have easily forced a mislynch day 4, and uh... yeah. Things would have been bad. That being said, I probably would have been less adamant about the JB Lynch on day 2 wifom wifom wifom wifom etc. I actually was not suspicious of Layabout, just because he was really putting himself out there-- I mean, I didn't think "oh he must be town" but he was putting some serious effort into his arguments, and given that he was coming in from being a replacement of a replacement, if he was scum he could be fairly cautious and respond to any criticism with "hey man I dunno why my predecessors did that either" or something. I thought his play was fairly pro-town.

On December 17 2011 05:58 wherebugsgo wrote:


If your theory about a player necessarily includes "awesome bussing" (particularly in a newbie game) you're probably thinking too hard and incorrectly.

From a scum perspective it hurts a lot more to lose a single player than town. Scum don't need to bus in order to win, and in fact they usually rarely do it.

I for one hate bussing; I only do it when absolutely necessary. This would only be true for me if my teammate was caught and there was no foreseeable way of saving him without taking massive suspicion. At that point you bus.

If you can find reasonable evidence for such a situation, you might have a theory. Nothing like that existed in this game, IIRC, so you go with the simplest explanation; BH and Jay could not both be scum.