My horribad performance in my first game tells me I need this.
Student Mafia (New/Newish players welcome)
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
ey215
United States546 Posts
My horribad performance in my first game tells me I need this. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 12:52 xsksc wrote: I don't understand your part about lynch all liars. Think about it logically, if we say, "Lie and you're gonna get lynched" then no townie is going to lie, are they? It's not just to teach a lesson, scum benefit greatly from lies and deceit. I want lynch-all-liers in effect today. Also, on day 1 it's very easy for scum to post nonsense and get away with it, because day 1 can be such a mess, hell, sometimes the most active players are scum. Just because someone posts a lot doesn't make them town, lol. Look at the last newbie mini-game. Ciryandor was scum, and he posted more analysis than anyone, everyone assumed he was town and that was a big reason why town lost. Hi all! Lynch all Liars is rough, sometimes you need to use your head and be able to tell the difference between a lie and a misunderstanding or misstatement. In games where people are posting a lot it's very easy for people to misspeak not realizing what exactly they've said in the past. I would think some common sense would help here. If it's an outright lie, by all means lynch away. If it's a misstatement and we've got a better case on someone it's better to let it slide. On the lurker bit, I do think there's a time and place for lynching. If we don't have a case on someone it's better to lynch a lurker than someone active. If they're lurking then they're not contributing or giving us something to go on. Of course, if we've got a good case on someone it's better to lynch them. Looking forward to this. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 13:35 Blazinghand wrote: In fact, given that most of those people are European, it's fairly likely they're asleep. I'm going to discuss our other semi-lurkers. ey215 has made a single post so far: He basically says... absolutely nothing. He indicates that we need to use common sense about lies, and that we should lynch scum before lurkers if possible. That's very accurate, ey215, but it's clever how you've managed to say nothing of any import, and this is your sole post, AND you're awake (american). No substance, all fluff. Noob or Mafia? too early to tell. Another guy with literally 1 post that says nothing. obvious we shouldn't lynch people for misspeaking. And... of COURSE we need to figure out what to do as a group. We VOTE on the lynch. What do I think? I think you're either absurdly unhelpful or a mafioso doing a bad job of blending in. You're the same as the people who haven't posted yet, because YOU HAVEN'T POSTED ANYTHING YET. Posting in between games of LoL. So, we're asked our opinion on what we think about LaL and lynching lurkers, I share mine and then get called out for doing nothing but posting fluff? Would you rather we discuss the weather or just /random a lynch for the first day? The reason I talked about common sense is the last game youngmini got a lot of support for being lynched (Palmar mayor killed him) for essentially a misstatement. Yes, that kind of stuff does need to be pointed out. There's no reason to lynch someone for a misstatement. It is not unwritten or does not go without saying unless we actually agree to it. As for you're statements about lynching all lurkers unless someone gives you a "DAMN GOOD REASON', well having a scumread is one. Am I good with lynching a lurker today, sure but let's not go talking about how you've got a good scum read on anyone that's posted once. Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff. I'm fine with a lurker today, but I'm not deciding on which until closer to the deadline. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 14:42 Velinath wrote: Hi, this also feels noncontributive. I feel like what Blazinghand was looking for was more of an opinion on one of the matters we've been discussing in the thread. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to hear what you have to say about the Lynch All Lurkers policy discussed a couple of pages back. Adding questions but no answers isn't really posting content, at least not in my eyes. I'd just like to point out that Blazinghand is calling out people for giving their opinions. I guess if it's not groundbreaking then it's fluff. While I agree with you that just posting a question isn't enough, giving an opinion that agrees with others shouldn't be considered not participating. If we're going to win, the town needs to work together and discouraging newer townies to post by slapping them around when they do is probably not the right answer. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:05 Velinath wrote: What's your opinion on BKEXE right now, considering his third post? While I agree that any content (even agreement) is good content at this point, do you consider his posts contributory? I agree with what you said that he needs to add some more content, and I fundamentally disagree with his saying that we shouldn't lynch lurkers because they might be new. If they're not contributing, as long as we don't have a very solid lead, then I'm all for getting rid of lurkers. However, we need to be careful about what we define lurking as. If it's just they never post, that's easy. If it's they post, but only a couple lines then that's more of an decision to be made through analysis. I'd rather see a few posts a day that are failry well thought out and longer than a bunch of one liners that don't mean anything. Frankly, no read on anyone at the moment, but I'd like to see more from him. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:11 jaybrundage wrote: Well you could say blazinghand is coming off aggressive. However honestly i think its just scum hunting. You should be aggressive and state your opinion if you think someone is scum. And remember just because someones new doesn't mean there town. You could be new and still draw mafia. I honestly am not sure how to read BKEXE hes obviously new. But is he a newbie townie or a newbie mafia. This was his first post and while there was alot of discussion going on in the thread he just posts this. Not even commentating on what was going on in the thread. Then talking about what we need to do as a group. When we already were talking about policy lynches. I would not straight out call him scum at this point. I just dont see him as being pro-town I didn't think Blazing was trying to do anything but scum hunt. However, I don't fully agree with his methods. Creating a contentious atmosphere in a game full of newbies who are likely intimidated is probably not the best way to get the town working together. Did it get me to post more, sure. Will it everyone else? I'm not totally convinced. I'm also not sure browbeating everyone into posting is going to help us figure out the scum lurkers over the town lurkers. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:22 Blazinghand wrote: So, EY, you gonna respond to my post at any point? I still want to know why you called me scum. In case you lost it: You took that part out of context. My full post: Posting in between games of LoL. So, we're asked our opinion on what we think about LaL and lynching lurkers, I share mine and then get called out for doing nothing but posting fluff? Would you rather we discuss the weather or just /random a lynch for the first day? The reason I talked about common sense is the last game youngmini got a lot of support for being lynched (Palmar mayor killed him) for essentially a misstatement. Yes, that kind of stuff does need to be pointed out. There's no reason to lynch someone for a misstatement. It is not unwritten or does not go without saying unless we actually agree to it. As for you're statements about lynching all lurkers unless someone gives you a "DAMN GOOD REASON', well having a scumread is one. Am I good with lynching a lurker today, sure but let's not go talking about how you've got a good scum read on anyone that's posted once. Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff. I'm fine with a lurker today, but I'm not deciding on which until closer to the deadline. I was obviously continuing a thought on how calling out me for posting what you've defined as fluff when it was an opinion on the subject matter being discussed, and one that was at least mildly thought out makes it just as easy for someone to call you out for baseless accusations. Yes, to some extent that's all we have at the moment, but by god if no one wants my opinion don't ask. I was not calling you scum, but pointing out a hypothetical next time I label it more clearly so you can understand. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:24 Blazinghand wrote: You realize that if both scum and town lurkers don't have to post at all, there's no way to differentiate them at all? Even if I have to "browbeat" them into talking, it's better to have browbeaten info than no info. We don't have much to work off right now, so I'd rather produce some information. So far, 100% of lurkers who aren't asleep that i've targetted have come forward. Of course I'm not saying no one has to post, what I'm saying (and I think you know it) is that when they do post, and it's not just random troll shit that maybe calling them out isn't the best method to keep them posting. It worked on me because it pissed me off. It may not do so with someone else. I just don't want some random intimidated townie getting lynched because you deemed a paragraph or two on the question on hand isn't enough and decided to throw out a ##vote on them. I just don't think an combative atmosphere this early on is the way to go, and I think you're creating one. Oh, and thanks a ton for the snide remark about taking time out of my busy LoL schedule. If you think I'm going to sit here and F5 for two weeks every night you're wrong. I will step in and read, I will post, I will read filters but I'm not going to worry about reading every single post every time it comes up. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:34 Blazinghand wrote: Ah, my bad. I read: "I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations..." My contention is that you literally can't say that accurately, because my accusations have not been baseless, so the entire hypothetical is unreasonable. When I read it, I thought that either you CAN say my accusations are baseless, and you have a good point, or you CAN'T, and you need to withdraw that point. But yes, a hypothetical based on a patently false fact-- that's what that was. Please label these more appropriately in the future so I can understand. Yes, you do the same because you're contention that my first post was fluff was obviously a false fact so I assumed it had to be a baseless accusation. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:39 ey215 wrote: Of course I'm not saying no one has to post, what I'm saying (and I think you know it) is that when they do post, and it's not just random troll shit that maybe calling them out isn't the best method to keep them posting. It worked on me because it pissed me off. It may not do so with someone else. I just don't want some random intimidated townie getting lynched because you deemed a paragraph or two on the question on hand isn't enough and decided to throw out a ##vote on them. I just don't think an combative atmosphere this early on is the way to go, and I think you're creating one. Oh, and thanks a ton for the snide remark about taking time out of my busy LoL schedule. If you think I'm going to sit here and F5 for two weeks every night you're wrong. I will step in and read, I will post, I will read filters but I'm not going to worry about reading every single post every time it comes up. EBwhatevertheacronymis: In my last part I mean of course I will read every post, but I will take it in chunks not every single little post the second it comes up. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:25 Velinath wrote: I don't think that asking people to post is too much to ask. I see voting them (given the more than 40 hours till deadline) as an easy way to prod them into saying something. It's not as if the vote can't be removed once they post. I just think it's dangerous and is how bandwagons get started, of course at some point someone is going to have to start voting on someone I just don't want another new player coming in and seeing ##votewhoever a couple of times while trying to catch up and think that obviously that must be the person to vote for. As long as the rest of us are careful to not let the bandwagon get going, then I'm fine with whatever. It is just really easy to let one person make the decisions through sure force of personality or constantly posting ( I would think in a newbie game especially) by getting a ball rolling. As long as we're vigilant and step i and say, "Hold the fuck on that doesn't make sense" then I'm fine with whoever doing whatever they think will help the town win. Just like I think I've been doing the last few posts with Blaze. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:45 Velinath wrote: I don't think BH is saying this. Right now we have nothing on lurkers. If they throw out one-liners, as you said, it's a red flag. If they throw out well reasoned responses, that's not. It seems like you're assuming the town will follow BH's lead if he makes a judgment call, and that's not necessarily true. It's still early in the game, and the votes are only meant to provoke discussion right now. The threat of being lynched is far more effective than a simple "Hey, X, come post!" Neither you nor BH are helping the atmosphere of the town with what you're saying. I think both of you should step back for a second and think about how we're all trying to work for the good of the town here. I agree. (omygoshtwoword post I'm in trouble!) | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:43 Blazinghand wrote: Also, you'll note I've been nothing but incredibly polite to everyone except for you, who has been incredibly dickish to me. I would assert that I am creating a tense atmosphere attempting to draw out the mafia, but any combativeness here is coming from you, who keeps on trying to escalate our difference of opinion in a flame war. Prove me wrong about you, EY. Let's be friends. Fine be me, I do share some responsibility in the escalations and apologize. I felt like your first post on me was an attack and the following posts did not help. I have no problem working together to win this thing, I just fear a single personality taking over the discussion and will keep yo uin check if I think I need to. It's not a personal thing, just wanting what's best for winning this thing. I think as long as we both understand that we'll get along just fine. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:59 xsksc wrote: Pfffft, American's going to bed before me. Pussy! Damnit, couldn't resist one last F5. I'm old give me a little break it's way past my bedtime. I mean once you're in your late thirties you have to be up in time to beat the rush at brunch. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 16:02 jaybrundage wrote: Time Converter Map This should help you :D I got it bookmarked Ah nice, thanks! | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 04 2011 21:14 xtfftc wrote: If we say lynch all liars, townies will carry on lying like they always do. If we do lynch all liars, townies will eventually realise that they should stop. Activity doesn't prove that someone is a townie, of course. But if you have a town read on all the active players, lynching a lurker is great. 100% agree, this was pretty much my point anyway. And there's a lot of similar views expressed later in the thread by others, so can we say that we've reached consensus? If we don't get a good case, we lynch a lurker. Ok, just got back to the thread and I'll respond to things as I see them. I agree that we've reached a consensus to get rid of a lurker. That means lurkers, it's your time to step up and contribute. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 04:51 Grackaroni wrote: @Ey215 I'd really like to hear some of your strong town reads and who you think is being anti-town. You've already shown your opinion on Blazinghand but I'd like to hear your opinions Oddly enough, I think you'll find that while I'm not crazy about his methods I do think his play has been pro-town. I'm just not convinced it's optimal. I'm going to go make a googledocs spreadsheet with links to filters and then read everyone's. I'll get back to you in a bit, but as it's do shit around the house Sunday it may take a while. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
Can someone click on this and confirm I did it right? I would like everyone to be able to use it if they wish, but I don't do much with google docs. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 04:51 Grackaroni wrote: @Ey215 I'd really like to hear some of your strong town reads and who you think is being anti-town. You've already shown your opinion on Blazinghand but I'd like to hear your opinions Granted take these things with a grain of salt as I don't think you can really have a strong read this early. Also, if you're name's wrong blame me I'm typing it off my notepad and wasn't exactly checking for accuracy. Adam4167 - not willing to call pro town. Will see how he posts after sleeping it off. BByte - Has only posted a couple times, but I do think his posts were constructive and not filler. Blazing - Probably my strongest pro-town read. While I don't fully agree with his methods I do think he's been acting in the best interest of the town. Broodking - Right now as lurkers go, this is where I'm leaning to vote. All of his posts are short and don't really supply anything. It's time to step it up. Electicblack - Only posted once as my starting to write this, but was as solid post. No read. Grackaroni - Reading town. Besides that contributing. hasseybaby - Only posted a couple times, but I felt they were good posts. Defensive, but when being called out I don't blame him. jaybrundage - only note I have on him is that he's reading town to me. Tunkeg - Forced discussion on individuals by posting a list of how he's reading. I think this is pro-town. Velinath - Seems to be playing the middle on a lot of this. However, is willing to agree/disagree with points not people which I do think is pro town. xsksic - Started discussion, but really no read past that. xtfftc - Seems to be tunneling on me a bit. I do think it's from a good place though so at worst null read. I'd like to respond to the couple of people talking about me being defensive. Yes I was defensive, as a townie I don't want to get lynched and seeing my name go up as someone posting filler (which I don't agree was true) caused me to be defensive. This was specifically what I was talking about with Blazing's methods. It basically caused me to be defensive when there was no reason to be. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 06:34 Grackaroni wrote: The thing that really seemed suspicious about Ey215 to me was this. I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A LURKER TO LYNCH, I wish every one of these players would start doing their part and contribute to town. My first priority is to analyze the active players and if as a town we cannot agree upon a scummy player then we should choose a lurker because they will remain a null read. Instead of looking at active players your first priority is to look for a lurker to lynch, which i consider just finding an easy lynch without having to justify why you actually think that the player is scum. No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 07:15 jaybrundage wrote: BKEXE Nice great to see some content from you i do agree with you on adam but for different reasons I also think your town reads are pretty spot on. What do you think about my reads they actually are pretty close ot yours. Im curious what you thinkg about ey he has posted alot and is not in your reads. He posted a his reads but mostly town. And Ey if you had to choice a someone to vote for now who would it be. You said BKEXE. But i dont find him a viable vote imo I still think hes new townie unless i see a post that changes my mind about him anyone else on your radar Until he posted his last post, BKEXE was probably where I'd throw my vote. For the moment, that's just enough to get by. I'd like to see him answer your questions well. So now, if we were coming to deadline I'd probably vote for Adam4167. Feels like a lot of filler, and a couple of his points I haven't agreed with. I'm honestly not really solid on anyone at the moment. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 08:16 BByte wrote: ey215: Here you seem to state that we should get rid of a lurker. That seems to imply lynching, though it's not specified. Am I just misreading here? And here you're both arguing against a lurker lynch and for it? I disagree with you on lynching a lurker in the current situation. I don't really even think we have real lurkers at this point. There are already enough posts to get reads on people, and there will be more before the lynch. Of course activity can still be a factor in the evaluation. One policy post and one (drunken? ) response to some finger pointing isn't too much to go on. His response is somewhat accusatory, but he gives seemingly straight answers to the questions. Not a scum read for me, but of course we're waiting to hear more from him. The post you're referring to was answering one where it was talked about lynching a lurker without a proper read on anyone else. QUOTE]On December 05 2011 05:34 xtfftc wrote: On December 05 2011 04:06 Grackaroni wrote:In fact from what I've noticed is that people who are willing to outright make a connection with another player is usually town. (palmar/wbg in XLVII) Also Sandroba/Syllogism. On December 05 2011 04:49 ey215 wrote: Ok, just got back to the thread and I'll respond to things as I see them. I agree that we've reached a consensus to get rid of a lurker. That means lurkers, it's your time to step up and contribute. The post I agreed with said " If we don't have a case on someone it's better to lynch a lurker than someone active". This is the crucial point for me. [/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure I've been consistent since my first post that I think if we don't have a solid read we should lynch a lurker. Also that we shouldn't lynch a lurker if we do have a more solid scum read. I know it's a nuanced position but one that I think makes sense. My second post essentially says the same thing. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
For previously stated reasons: ##Vote: Adam4167 | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
He also stated in his first post that breadcrumbing is bad. While it is bad if it lets the mafia know that you're the blue role, it's important to get people's names into post so that if you're blue and get shot we can go back and figure out the people you've checked out. I'm fine with applying some pressure. ##Unvote: Adam4167 ##Vote: ElectricBlack | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 11:17 BroodKingEXE wrote: Hey BH what is up with this? You neglected to mention this fact until after EB refused to vote. Are you holding back any other pieces of information? Yeah, I'm missing this too. What the heck are you talking about BK? ElecticBlack's post: On December 05 2011 10:40 ElectricBlack wrote: I'd be much more comfortable lynching Hassybaby than any of the current candidates. I need to go to sleep now (it's well past midnight over here), I'll give details as for why this is in the morning. He says he's more comfortable lynching Hassybaby than everyone else then doesn't vote (as most of us have). Isn't that what Blazing's calling him out for? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 11:21 BroodKingEXE wrote: Oh Sorry I thought they were in two different posts. Crap, too slow thread's moving a bit in the last few minutes. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
G'night all. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 20:54 ElectricBlack wrote: Yes. Pressure is stupid. Either you're killing people or not. There should never exist no such thing as a pressure vote. But clearly we don't agree on that. I need to re-think my stance on you. I am not willing to commit to a lynch candidate at this moment, I will however within a few hours explain and elaborate on my statement about hassybaby. Ok, finally got back to the thread after a long day. I apologize that I haven't been back sooner. I'm going to respond to posts as I go through the thread so if anything I say gets contradicted later by someone else I want y'all to understand why. On this post where you say you're either killing people or not, I'm more than willing to kill you tonight. I don't vote only for pressure, if I put a vote on someone I'm willing to let them hang. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 05 2011 22:20 ElectricBlack wrote: This is the reason I suspect Hassybaby: The whole idea behind lynching lurkers is to use the day 1 lynch to get rid of one, this is simply because it's inevitable that town has worse reads on day 1 than any other day, so what you're sacrificing is a chance of catching scum, and the reward is better chance to hit scum in the later days. Statistically, the day 1 lynch is the least valuable one for town, because it has the least chance of hitting scum, so I think the idea of saving lurkers until later in the game is very bad. If we're going to use a lynch to teach lurkers a lesson, it'll be the day 1 lynch. I don't think we actually have a lurker in the game, so the discussion is irrelevant, but at the time HassyBaby was pushing an idea I can in no way see as town favored. Moving on.... Why do you want people to think you're new and bad? What is the reasoning behind that? Isn't the optimal way to play as town to come across as good as possible, because that makes people more likely to listen to you and be convinced by you instead of not listening to you. Not only that, but you're also shredding responsibility. If you're new surely you can't be held accountable for using bad logic, having bad reads and not playing optimally. If someone said I was a "veteran", I'd run with it, because that helps me get my points across, and it forces me to play very well. There are two factions in mafia, only one of them likes being ignored and perceived useless. And that faction is not town. Tunkeg is applying pressure by asking questions and analysing how people respond, Serejai just painted names red and gave no particular reason for it. Also, you seem to be assuming Tunkeg must be town? Interesting. Next post that caught my interest: And finally, even after all this time Hassybaby doesn't have as much to go on. He puts down a vote based on the reasonings of others, which obviously frees him of all responsibility for the lynch if it's wrong. And despite already having piggybacked onto someone else's reasoning instead of explaining his own thought process, Hassybaby decides to specifically state that the vote might be changed. There is no reason to do that, if he has a better scumread than BK at some point he can just explain that and change. Once again I feel like Hassybaby is attempting his best to not be responsible for his actions. If Hassybaby is town, he is doing his best to make sure no one listens to him, essentially making him useless. But the reasonable explanation is that he is scum. ##Vote Hassybaby Again, haven't read the whole thread yet. I do like this case EB. I do take issue with your first quote of Hasseybaby. I think this may be a case of misunderstanding. I think he was saying he didn't want to lynch a lurker Day 1 of the two days that we had to make the decision not day 1 in game time. I think he was saying day 1 real time as opposed to day 1 game time. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 06 2011 06:20 xtfftc wrote: Pretty much all I have on Adam is based on two of his posts that push pro-mafia agenda. Now that I think about it, I have a much stronger case on ey215, even though I decided to leave him for day 2. I don't have enough to convince Adam on my own and it seems that most of the others are happy to lurk or to vote for lynching Bbyte. Here's what I wrote on Adam earlier in case you're lazy and can't be bothered to check it out: + Show Spoiler + On December 05 2011 07:28 xtfftc wrote: * Adam posted something rather anti-town earleir though: There's two problems with this quote. The first one is that this is exactly what mafia want. They want to focus on someone saying one stupid thing and lynch that person. Ask your coaches if you don't agree with me: lynching someone over a single "scumslip" tends to be main reason why towns lynch an innocent on Day 1. The second is that he mixes a "scum slip" and "an outright lie". We had a lot of talk about LaL and a lot of you disagree with me. You want a strict policy on it and although I think it favours mafia, it can also help town, so it's okay. What is not okay is trying to tie "scumslipping" to the same policy without holding a proper discussion on what we consider to be a scumslip and what we consider to be someone overreacting over bad wording. This is very pro-mafia as it gives them an easy way to push for lynches. On December 06 2011 02:30 xtfftc wrote: Answering to what's been directed at me for first, then I'll re-read today's posts more carefully. Yes, Adam, you caught me: I'm encouraging bandwagons........................ Voting for someone who isn't going to get lynched is very pro-mafia behaviour. I did this in XLVII - I didn't like the main targets, so I tried to push some others (one of whom turned out to be mafia but that's was irrelevant at the time because he wasn't going to get lynched), then went to bed before making up my mind who of the main candidates to go for and basically ended up throwing away my vote. I got torn to pieces by the veterans after the game ended. WBG also tried to push for my lynch after the vote solely because of this - and he had every reason to. If you are mafia and you see that the main lynch candidates are town, it is very easy to vote for someone else in order to avoid being scrutinised after the flip. When you have to justify your vote for one of the main targets, you have to take sides, which allows others to have a better read on you. Also, if you're mafia in this situation, you can vote for one of your teammates to prepare yourself for later if he gets lynched. I wouldn't be surprised if it turnes out that you are bussing a teammate to gain some town cred, so I'll be looking closely at Jay as well. You just earned yourself a lot of red points. Not only for using terrible logic but also for trying to scare town for voting for someone who will get lynched. Just to clarify my terrible wording: "but also for trying to scare town for voting for someone who will get lynched" was a bit of an overreaction to him being unhappy with my original statement. I wrote "I'll make sure not to throw away my votw for an unlikely candidate by voting for someone who wont get lynched like I did in xlvii and I encourage everyone to do the sa,e." Adam responded with "Xtfftc, are you encouraging bandwagons with the section I have bolded?" This is very pro-mafia. Town has to consolidate their votes sooner or later because if we don't, mafia can easily swing the lynch one way or another. "Bandwagonning" sounds like a bad thing to do, so implying that not throwing away your vote is bandwagonning is a mafia thing to do. I'll check the thread again before going to bed. What exactly is this "much stronger" case against me again? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
First, town we need to pull this together. Blazing and I did not exactly give y'all the best example to go off of early on in this game day and I think we both regret, have learned from that, and have moved on to try to help the town. We can disagree, even vehemently, and still be civil. Getting everyone worked up in a tizzy so that they just fling accusations at each other is not what's best for the town. Active civil discussion is. Try to keep it turned to 9 instead of 11. Second, thank you to all that supplied lists of reads. I know this is not an easy thing to do day one and to some extent will have to go off of "gut" feelings and instincts. That we've come together, in general, to do this is a good stepping stone going into day two. These reads that many of us have supplied can be used later to help us scum hunt. Third, I've stated the whole game I'd rather lynch a lurker if we don't have a better case, and tonight I think that is the best option. While there are a lot of cases floating around there's not a single one I feel comfortable voting on. I especially am wary of voting for someone that's been pretty active as without a solid scum read we could be lynching some of our best townies, and I'd really prefer not to do that. Finally, after all that is said I will be moving my vote to BByte. I think we have some room to grow and move on, but we need active people to do that. ##Unvote: ElectircBlack ##Vote: BByte | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 06 2011 07:11 jaybrundage wrote: ey are you planning on voting for hassybaby. So far bbyte is gonna get lynched regardless unless we have a change.I would still like to see his defense. But so far it doesnt look good. But honestly last minute switches always put me at unease. I still plan to stick to adam i would like to see what he has to say about whats going on so far. And EB if you think adam is not a good candidate plz state why this post. Isn't going to change anything. Put in some content i would like to see more of your thoughts. But besides Hassybaby's case which was actually pretty good. And you arguing with xsksc which granted showed that you can post very well when you want too. Why give me this one liner it's not gonna change anything I voted for BByte on the lurker/not contributing line of reasoning. I was really hoping we wouldn't have to use it, but if someone's inactive even if town they're not really doing us any good. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 06 2011 07:28 xtfftc wrote: ..................................... Town doesn't lynch people for being bad. Town lynches people for being mafia. It's not like we get free lynches for the useless and the lurkers; it's the mafia who managed to distract town well enough and they're getting a free kill tonight as a reward. Again, absent a solid scum read I'd rather go for a lurker than someone active. Honestly, I don't have an even semi-solid read on anyone at the moment, so I'll take the lynch that could be right or if wrong not hurt us that much over the one that could be right or if wrong would hurt us greatly. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
I'd like to take the discussion in at least a mildly different direction and ask if we should be acting on the information we got by the mafia offing EB. Frankly, I was a little surprised they didn't go after Blazing unless they thought we'd have a medic and they'd be protecting him. Also, do they want us lynching one of the three people (if I recall correctly) that EB had focused on or did they get rid of him to shut him up and keep him from persuading us? I'm personally of the opinion that we should lynch the scummiest of jayb, xtf, or hassey and see where that leads us. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On the Jay case: yes, he was hedging but there's a whole lot of hedging going on early in the game. Is it because he's trying to not take a definitive stand so he can't be held accountable for it later or is it because he truly doesn't know and is offering options? To me it felt like hedging, he's been pretty definitive in some of his other posts. Ok, this got posted while I was typing this and going through filters: On December 08 2011 03:55 jaybrundage wrote: LOl question then why didn't you claim responsibility before instead of blaming the town. You know before i called you out Look at me im Blazinghand i use fonts and different text to make my point instead of analyze I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. ##vote: jaybrundage Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option. Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on. At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 08 2011 04:21 Blazinghand wrote: ey215, you're on the list of people I have a town read on. Could you look into xtsc/tunkeg debate a bit? I need to read up on it as well, but getting a solid read in there would also be good. Also, I can't throw out the possibility that Veli is bussing JB. I'll be examining his posting as well. If you could help with this that would be great. Replacement people: please try to get posting. We need you guys to develop a presence in the game asap. Sure, stepping out for a late lunch, but I'll get deeper into it later today. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
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. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 08 2011 04:56 xtfftc wrote: ... Town does not vote to punish bad play. Town votes to lynch mafia. Right, and right now the best case for scum I've seen is the one on jay. I don't think it's currently possible to be 100% sold on anyone at the moment town or scum. I've read the filters, and have nothing unique to add to the discussion so why clog the thread up even further? Am I supposed to be like, "FUCK YEAH WE'RE KILLING SCUM!" Besides BH, I don't think anyone is 100% sure on jay, but at the moment it's the best we've got. Hopefully it solidifies later in the day, or someone else catches something. ... How about making a case or pushing the discussion further with some analysis? I know I said I'm going to look at Jay and Velinath like 10 minutes ago but I can't allow ey215 to stay under the radar like this for another day. Yes, because I did such a great job laying under the radar before. Let's see, pissing match with the most active/aggressive player in the thread. Check. Getting myself warned for inactivity in big blue letters to point it out to everyone. Check. Great job I'm doing staying under the radar. Oh and you may have missed it, but let's see: Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on. At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. That's analysis of our current game state, and potentially pushing the conversation. You may or may not ever get a post with 10 quotes of someone from me. If I decide it is needed I will do it, but I'm not going to push some made up case that I come up with just for the sake of looking good. I've read the filters, along with the thread to get it in context, multiple times and have yet to see anything unique that hasn't been said. Anything you get from me on specific players will be a gut instinct or hunch and I don't like going on that. Can't wait for your case, I'll be happy to respond. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 08 2011 06:06 Tunkeg wrote: Just FYI I didn't say my case was thin, I said many thought my case was thin. Just wanted to clearify that. My apologies, I misread that statement. So you still stand behind his replacement as very likely mafia? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 08 2011 06:45 xtfftc wrote: Right, so next time I'll just vote and keep my mouth shut. My bad, that really helps town doesn't it?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. So basically, we should disregard all information that we've potentially gained in the last 2 days because you say he was trolling? I'm not focusing on him, I read up on others and think there is an avenue to explore with his killing because it didn't make sense. Why are you tying so hard to dodge any potential discussion? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
So we all agree that lurking is bad for town. No one denies that. We need all townies to post, so that mafia are pressured into we're able to distinguish town from mafia. And then you express your concerns that if we somehow manage to get all townies to post, we would have trouble figuring out "the scum lurkers over the town lurkers"... If they don't lurk, we are going to have reads on them and figure out their alignment. No townie would suggest that this is a bad thing. You're still missing the point on this one, there are two types of lurkers. Scum and Town. In a newbie game you're more likely to end up with a newbie lurker because frankly, we don't know how to proceed. I did not think browbeating lurkers was going to help us find the lurkers that are scum over the lurkers that are town. We'd just end up with some lurkers posting and then we lynched a town lurker because he couldn't be browbeaten into posting (because he was afk). Browbeating people into posting did us no good. In fact, it got you to try to start a vote on a vanilla townie, namely me. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 08 2011 07:30 xtfftc wrote: ey215. While personally I liked how EY posted a well written post at the very start of the game to put a stop to the idle chatting, this was a general post that set him up for a well-observed pattern in his play that BH nailed: EY's "contributions" are mostly general posts that say absolutely nothing of significance. Look at his filter. Apart from the BH discussion (which he was forced to take a part in after his initial overreaction to BH pushing the town forward), his activity has consisted of: - General gameplay/policy post - Pushing BKE, that easiest target around - General gameplay/policy post - Responce to Jay's half-accusation - General gameplay/policy post - Responce to BH's post from earlier (BH had to push him for it before EY posted it), garnished with an attempt to appeal to people's emotions ("but by god if no one wants my opinion don't ask"). - A deeper comment regarding gameplay - which would be good if it wasn't pushing pro-mafia agenda + Show Spoiler + He tried to scare town that what BH was doing was likely to lead to lurking townies doing stupid stuff that would get them lynched. This is anti-town because we need as much information as possible. Analysing someone's temperamental post is better than gambling with lynching a lurker. A lot of these things aren't bad on their own. There's nothing wrong with pushing a newbie a bit. But the pattern that can be observed is EY posting lots of general stuff without doing any analysis/actively looking for mafia. I can go on but the same can be seen in so many of his posts that I would have to spend the whole night working on the case. So from now on I will l focus on some of the major points I've covered earlier and pointing out stuff I've missed before. ey215's exchanges with BH from Day 1 are full of stuff to analyse. I have already discussed things such why no townie has a reason to react to BH's play like EY did... Or my personal favourite, "I'm also not sure browbeating everyone into posting is going to help us figure out the scum lurkers over the town lurkers." My responce: + Show Spoiler + On December 04 2011 21:23 xtfftc wrote: ......what? So we all agree that lurking is bad for town. No one denies that. We need all townies to post, so that mafia are pressured into we're able to distinguish town from mafia. And then you express your concerns that if we somehow manage to get all townies to post, we would have trouble figuring out "the scum lurkers over the town lurkers"... If they don't lurk, we are going to have reads on them and figure out their alignment. No townie would suggest that this is a bad thing. But there's a lot of other instances of scummy play. This bit, for example: Makes sense. He doesn't want townies to get intimidated into posting stupid things. But... Oh, wait, he is actually concerned that his might end up with a bandwagon because one person switches his vote all the time... At 15:39 he explains his opposition of BH with one argument, at 15:48 - with another. The problem with this is that he iis way too afraid to simply let the subject go; he did his best to "win" the argument I was responding to two different people, why is this so hard to understand? To further clarify the point I was making is not scummy it is important. I don't think voting haphazardly is a good idea. I'll go on and respond to your upcoming response, my vote on Jay is not haphazardly throwing my vote around. I think he's the best case and am willing to lynch him. the same way I was willing to lynch BByte.. I'm not even 1/4 through his filter... I will try to finish it at work tomorrow. In the meanwhile, I would like to encourage you to re-read his filter. It's been non-stop, up until the way he jumped on the Jay bandwagon while expressing his own disbelief for doing so just an hour ago (not to mention that he didn't provide a serious read on Jay either + Show Spoiler + On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote: On the Jay case: yes, he was hedging but there's a whole lot of hedging going on early in the game. Is it because he's trying to not take a definitive stand so he can't be held accountable for it later or is it because he truly doesn't know and is offering options? To me it felt like hedging, he's been pretty definitive in some of his other posts. Ok, this got posted while I was typing this and going through filters: I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. ##vote: jaybrundage Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option. Right, my fault for recognizing there was a bandwagon potentially forming and not being pleased that I couldn't offer any help to either A. Stop it or B. Confirm that it wasn't a bandwagon. You'll notice that this is consistent with my concerns about bandwagons above.I still feel BH's case is the one, especially after the stuff today, that is currently best. That does not mean I'm happy to making the vote. Also, what is there for me to gain as mafia by pointing out I'm jumping on the potential bandwagon? Where's the logic in that? Also, check out my last reply to him. There is more to come for those who are not convinced yet but I am nevertheless: ##Vote: ey215 You're welcome to your opinion, but you are wrong. I am town. I would encourage others to spend time elsewhere. I will answer any questions anyone has related to this case to the best of my ability. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 08 2011 18:57 Bluelightz wrote: Above Post Should Not Be Read because it is so messy xD Hmm My scumreads right now BroodKingEXE Leaning Scum - He has been filling the thread with some post's trying to "distance" him and jay as you can see in Adam's and BH's observation. Also, if JB flips scum we wil have a strong case on BKEXE Next, ey215 is leaning scum, when he says but then, I quote Grackaroni BH, has provided a good enough discussion so, ##Vote: Jaybrundage I fail to see how me claiming town when defending myself against a case claiming I'm mafia is unto itself scummy. If I was writing a case on someone else and using it as a reason for someone else to believe me, then I agree with out but that is not the case. By pulling that one line out of a post defending myself on a case you're intentionally trying to make it seem scummy, when it is not. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
For the record, I do think Tunkeg is onto something. I’ll start that by saying that I understand why he left himself out, but it would be wise of the town to remember that he too voted for BByte and needs to be looked at just as strongly as the rest of us. I’m not making that case here, mainly because after reading his stuff I don’t think he’s scum, but some other eyes on it would be nice. The only thing that has me concerned about him at the moment is the way he’s grabbed onto xttfc’s case against me, then managed to put my name twice into his lists on the probability lynches and then mildly pushed BH to look at it deeper, therefore potentially getting a bandwagon rolling. For today, I’m not that worried about it but look in the future how these cases and lynches of townies developed. I have come to believe that the mafia started laying the groundwork for future cases on townies in Day 1 so as not to appear to just be switching from one day to another. At the time that this case started against me, I was looking like I’d be a counter weight to BH and therefore might have some persuasive power around here. It has not turned out that way, but remember the context when this starts. At that point in Day 1, BH and I had our argument, got over it and moved on, then xtfftc comes around and decides that based off of being defensive and to make sure to hammer that point home cherry picks some quotes out of context and uses them six hours later to plant his seeds. + Show Spoiler + On December 04 2011 21:18 xtfftc wrote: Policy or not, everyone should be doing this. Mafia are bound to slip and they will also be reluctant to talk about their teammates slipping, so this is very pro-town behaviour. If you see something you consider to be a lie, mention it. You might be wrong but it's important anyway. And it will also help differentiate between townies who are hunting for mafia and the mafia players who are trying not to attract attention. (I still think that pushing for heavy policies is pro-mafia though, it takes the pressure away from them by allowing them to follow some simple guidelines) Town doesn't benefit from last minute lynches, mafia does. If you see someone suddenly pushing for a lynch near the deadline when there isn't enough time for a proper discussion, it is very likely that this person is mafia. Dude, no need to be so defensive. Blazinghand is trying hard to organise the town. I don't agree with some of his ideas but they are stuff to be discussed. There is absolutely no need for a townie to react like you did. Blazing's play so far is great. Then he gives this gem: ey215 is my strongest mafia read for now though... Having to call out someone on scummy behaviour two times just a few hours into a mini game doesn't bode well for that person. If I’m such a strong read, why didn’t you push to lynch me at all Day 1? I put forth the theory that no one responded really latched onto the idea, and you didn’t want to go out of your way to stand out that early. You’ve been setting up this Day 2 attempt at a lynch since yesterday. Also, while this is going on we get Grackaroni coming around and starts by giving this read on me: Ey215: He took a post from blazinghand calling him a lurker and acted very defensively. I believe that this is a trait that would be found among Mafia or Town. (I mean nobody wants to get lynched ) I think he is someone who I should watch more but he is contributing so he should not be lynched today. Then starts subtlety leading Tunked to me: On December 05 2011 05:05 Grackaroni wrote: Tunkeg doesn’t really bite: So they let it go for the day and don’t really try to get the bandwagon going. Now look what happens today, we get the case against me followed almost immediately by a post by Grackaroni trying to get BH to take a look: 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. The beauty of those two posts by Grackaroni is that they allow him to steer how other people my look at someone and get them to make the case on me, instead of he having to do it himself. He can let BH get or not get a bandwagon going, and no one remembers the actual post that started him down that road. I believe these two have been working together from the outset and the only side that could coordinate like that is mafia. Now, again I’d like to see xtfftc respond to some accusations about him without just brushing it off as trolling as he did with EB. Since EB was conveniently killed overnight, he wasn’t here to defend himself and xtfftc was let off scot free. Again, killing EB made no sense unless he was on to at least one scum in that list. I currently think it was two, Jay and xtfftc. I know you're asking yourself this townies, "But wait! You can't prove any of this unless you're town and we're not sure that you are!". Yes, I know that's why I expect that if the lynch goes through tonight you'll be able to use some of this on Day 3. So, my scum list: jaybrundage, xtfftc, Grackaroni Enjoy. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 07:45 Grackaroni wrote: For reference the first quote you took from me is very old That's why I said it "starts" with it. We're not accountable for what we said on day 1? . Your mafia team consists of the 1 person that everyone agrees is scum, Xtfftc, who voted and made a case against you. And me, who has been suspicious of you. You have a bunch of quotes from me asking people questions. I sincerely want to know why players like Tunkeg and BH continually think that you are town. Upon question Tunkeg's reads seem more inconsistent, his opinion of xsksc changed during a time when xsksc didn't even post. If anyone I was siding more with xsksc than xtfttc, look at Tunkeg/xsksc argument. I was more sure that Tunkeg was suspicious, xttftc voted for xsksc. From what I understand the basis of your case is that I am asking people questions to make them look more suspicious. I am simply asking questions to gain more information. This doesn't go as far as OMGUS, but perhaps you should consider that just because people seem to be against you, does not mean they are scum. Go out and give your own analysis instead of "asking questions". My case is not that you're against me, but that you and xtfftc are working together and have been from the start. I will grant you that my read on him is stronger than you, but of the people currently alive I think you three are the scum. Nice way of calling it OMGUS while trying not to make it appear you're not. Go refute my points other than, "I'm just asking questions." You'll notice that the other person to actually vote for me is not one I listed as mafia, but you instead and I'm still bothered by how flippantly certain people have been in not using the information we have from last nights killing. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 07 2011 03:43 Grackaroni wrote: THINGS TO CONSIDER NOBODY IS A CONFIRMED TOWNIE I've become concerned with BH's presence in this game. He tells people to vote for Adam for discrediting him ----> people vote for Adam He tells people to switch to EB for not voting -------> people switch to EB He tells people to switch to BByte ------> BByte is lynched He tells people to not talk at night ------> Mine is one of the first posts that's not his. I voted for 2/3 of these people; I feel like maybe I wouldn't have put my vote on them if BH had not suggested to. The town, including myself, have started sheeping him and treating him like he is a confirmed town. The last newbie game was lost because of too much trust in 2 players, 1 of them ended up being scum. I don't know if it's been different for other people, but the main reason I started believing BH was definitely town was his activity level throughout the game. He seemed to be actively scum hunting at the start accusing people, but in reality at the start of the game all he did was jump on people who didn't post yet because they were busy/didn't know the game had started. I believe that scum would more likely want to draw less attention to themselves but It's possible that BH is actually just a good player that posts and accuses a lot regardless of his alignment. I feel like we pushed the "easy" lynches of Adam/BByte and EB (before he started analyzing) This is fine for day1, but come day2 we better be more willing to look thoroughly into the players who have been active and are "contributing". (the chance that scum wouldn't have a single active player goes beyond unlikely...) My point about BH is this : He has a lot of town cred and has gained a very strong position as a trusted townie and a town leader role. Remember to remain cautious of him and that there are no truly confirmed townies. Everyone should be having their own opinions for the lynch tomorrow, not following BH's. My last point : ONLY MAFIA KNOW THEIR REASONS FOR KILLING A PLAYER let me explain, in this hypothetical situation I have been shot by the mafia. When you look through my filter do not use things I said as main parts of analysis because you cannot truly know why they would have killed me. When you looked through my filter after my hypothetical death, do not use arguments such as: OMG, HE WAS SUSPICIOUS OF TUNKEG THEREFORE TUNKEG IS MAFIA TRYING TO PROTECT HIMSELF! HE WAS SIDING WITH XSKSC, THEREFORE XSKSC IS MAFIA TRYING TO PAINT HIMSELF MORE TOWN! BH KILLED HIM BECAUSE HE SAID HE FELT BH WAS GETTING TOO MUCH POWER AND THAT TOWNIES WERE FOLLOWING HIM BLINDLY! just to be clear, I am not saying that BH is mafia, I'm just saying that he is not a confirmed town and that nobody should follow him blindly. IF things continued to go the same way as they went day1 and BH was mafia, there would be no hope for town to win. By the way BH, if they manage to get enough votes flipped onto me to lynch me today then I expect them to come after you Day 3. The post above lays the groundwork for it. Not too committal, but planting that seed of doubt. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 08:27 Blazinghand wrote: In fact, why would you even suggest that your lynching today is a possibility? o_O The math: We're currently at 8 - 3 They get me today and someone tonight we're at 6 - 3 Two more townies Day/night 3 and it's 4-3. Jay is scum, they get one tonight 7 - 3 Two more townies 5 - 3 I actually think today/tonight is pretty damn important. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 08:39 Blazinghand wrote: OK, so I understand the first paragraph: If we mislynch and they shoot someone there will be 6 townies, 3 mafia the next dya, and if it happens again, it will be 4 townies, 3 mafia. The 2nd paragaph states that... if we lynch jay and he flips scum... and they shoot someone... they still have 3 alive somehow? ???? Also, I could see why "we lynch a townie" is bad, but you still haven't answered why you think it's even possible that you could be lynched. Even if there are two mafias voting for Jay and they BOTH change their vote to you, Jay still has more votes for him than you. Sigh, you're right 7- 2 5 - 2 That's the point I was making, just forgot to take away one from the mafia column. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 08:44 Adam4167 wrote: Why is your math so doom and gloom? Its also incorrect. In your second scenario: Jay is scum, they get one tonight 7 - 3 Two more townies 5 - 3 I assume "Jay is scum" means "we hang Jay and he flips red". That means we go down to 7 - 2. Then you discount us from finding scum on day 3 with BKEXE a prime target after jay flipping scum. If there aren't any surprises with our lynchings we're 6 - 1 heading into Day 4. Hardly as bad a scenario as you're making it out to be here. You really think it's going to be BKEXE tomorrow? I don't, I think it's going to be me. Xtfftc has pretty much persuaded at least one non mafia. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 08:41 Blazinghand wrote: Current Votes: jaybrundage (7): Blazinghand, Adam4167, Velinath, ey215, BroodKingEXE, Grackaroni, Bluelightz ey215 (2): xtfftc, Tunkeg Velinath (1): jaybrundage Hypothetically, JB could change his vote to you, AND Star could come back and vote for you, AND two people could switch their votes from JB to you. This would cause you to go up to 6 votes and JB to go down to 5, and would require the cooperation of four (4) people, when there are currently 3 mafia in the game, and make it painfully obvious who mafia was. I recognize how persuasive Xtfftc has been and will continue to attempt to be. If he had gotten you to change his vote a few hours ago I do think I could have been lynched today, hence why you got my post on him and Grackaroni. I wanted to give as much information as possible for town to go off of when I flip town. After that I lost track of time, had no idea how close we were to deadline. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 08:54 Blazinghand wrote: Or he's persuaded one mafia. Maybe Xtfftc is town and Tunkeg is mafia? Think flexibly :D Plus, if the mafia wants you dead, they have very effecient ways of killing people, I hear. Hear that on the mafia QT? o_0 I kid, I kid. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 08:53 Blazinghand wrote: Ah. Well, I have no idea whether you're town or mafia, but I've got a pretty solid read on JB being mafia. There are 6 people for whom this is the same. Judging by the vote count, there are two people voting for you. I wouldn't worry too much. I think what really made the case fully was today. I noticed on one of the stickied threads that once your nailed as scum to basically don't say anything or nothing of substance so as to deny further information. Pretty much sums him up. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 08:58 Blazinghand wrote: I left out one other possibility: you ARE mafia, and people are on to you, and you're looking for a way to look town. o_0 I don't think jay is a good lynch target for tomorrow, since we're killing him in 1 hour. Damnit, you're on to my so well hidden plan! *shakes fist* | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:10 Grackaroni wrote: So you would rather follow BH to the end of the earth? a LOT of people sheeped him day1 which is just too dangerous. People were considering him a confirmed townie and if he was scum the game would be hopeless. BH or you? I take BH. I wasn't pointing out whether you were right or wrong on the sheeping. I was pointing out that there was a groundwork being laid to get him lynched if there is a doctor and they managed to save him (if he's town) tonight. Don't use me against him, if you think he's mafia go make your case. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:21 Grackaroni wrote: I didn't say one time in that quote that BH was mafia. Is this the only post you have for me "laying out my groundwork to lynch him after I fail to shoot him." BH is amazing at making analysis posts and secured a spot early as the town leader. Naturally people began to sheep him which I felt was dangerous because there are no confirmed towns. Build a real case against me. What you are saying is hypothetical, that my post telling people to make their own opinions and to not sheep BH because there are no confirmed townies is groundwork for lynching him. Real case on you posted above. You saw it, wrote it off and moved on. Not my fault you're choosing to ignore it. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:19 Blazinghand wrote: Nonononono there's no "taking" anyone. People here will make cases and do their best to support them. It's also possible that Grackaroni and I are both town, you know. There's no following anyone to the end of any earth. Please gentlemen go about your business and form reasoned opinions ._. Don't worry, I know where my vote's going Day 3. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:26 Grackaroni wrote: As you can see I can take a random quote from your filter and make the same case against you quite easily. You are saying that Blazinghand is attacking newbies by asking them for their opinions. You make an argument that it is perfectly fine for you to sheep other people. (which you have done all game long) He is slapping newbies around and discouraging others from posting - you are saying he is anti-town. Ah yes, but the case made about me isn't about me laying the groundwork for future lynches. It's about how I'm apparently scummy. The case I made about you/xtfftc is about how the groundwork for the case about me was actually laid out in Day 1 when I was looking like a much bigger threat to the mafia than I am now. And it's not a hypothetical, it was a prediction. It's also a way to stop you from doing to him what is being done to me without being accountable for it.. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:33 Blazinghand wrote: Well, you don't know. Maybe someone will present a good case for someone else, and you, being an open-minded and reasonable individual, will consider it! Or maybe your target will get shot by the mafia! Things happen. Trying to get me to hedge? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:39 Grackaroni wrote: Also I take it from this that you are voting me because we have been arguing Was there something in my defense that really tipped you off, if so do share. Here you said that your read on xtfftc was stronger than your read on me. You can't seriously argue that my defending myself has changed your reads that easily. I think you are tunneling too hard. It's not, the vote's going to xtfftc. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:42 Grackaroni wrote: Also, this kind of post is exactly what you were accusing me of earlier, you said that I was asking people questions to try to make them make cases for me. You're case on me is shitty and is exactly the same thing that you did here. You take some random quote, make up a hypothetical situation that I am plotting to lynch BH and that I am a threat to him; Perhaps you are hoping that he will build a case on me for you? That way you can continue to sheep his vote as usual No, my case on you is... I believe these two have been working together from the outset and the only side that could coordinate like that is mafia. That I may find further evidence of it is not trying to get anyone to do anything. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:48 Blazinghand wrote: Who is "these two" Also, if you find further evidence of it, please do present it! I'd be glad to investigate as well. xtfftc and Grackaroni I'll grant Grackaroni's premise that the part about laying the groundwork for you is hypothetical, but I weighed waiting to say something until it happens against saying something now against one another and deduced I wouldn't likely be around to make the case if they made one on you. To check out what I was saying you need to go back and start reading at Day 1 and assume I'm town. I'm not asking you to keep that assumption, but if I'm town you can see where they were trying to lead the discussion onto me. Then look at Day 2 and when they really went for it. Xtfftc committed to it and Grackaroni kind of nudged to try to get others going on it. You also need to read it in context, using the filters exclusively isn't the best for it. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:58 Blazinghand wrote: Do you have quotes? If not, I'll do this research, but if you had quotes + links that'd be sweet. It's in this post but I'd encourage you to go back and look at it on your own. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:57 Blazinghand wrote: Was there a particular piece of evidence that he posted his case right after seeing? Or could he have posted it earlier? If I remember correctly it was my vote on Jay that triggered the case today. Day 1 it was you and I fighting. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 09:55 Blazinghand wrote: Yeah It's pretty clear JB isn't town. If he were, he would have posted his final analysis by now. After he flips scum I'll spend some serious time doing a monster analysis of everyone before the night ends. There's a 1/3rd chance we don't have a doctor, and if that's the case, the mafia know the setup, so I'm gonna get shot. They'll have BKEXE do the shot so the watcher learns nothing. That being said, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping we have a doctor. When you're doing that analysis you might want to consider it in the context that Tunkeg provided. I wonder if we shouldn't look at 2 people in combination from the first days votes. I really do think he might be onto something there. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 09 2011 23:43 Adam4167 wrote: After reading everyone's filter (not just confined to this mafia game either..), I'm taking a more active interest in the xtfftc/ey215 situation. xtfftc, you seem so sure that ey215 is red, are you willing to stake your own lynching on it, if he flips town? I am not entirely sold on your case on him, maybe that might change after its finished. ey215, the main criticism of your play in TL47 was that you did nothing but tunnel WBG all game (he was town). Can you say the same thing is not happening here with Grackaroni/xtfftc? You've declared your intention to slap an OMGUS vote on xtfftc tomorrow, will it be supported by an in-depth analysis of every one of his posts? Good question, My intention is actually to go through a few other people's post history and see if I can find something there. I think I'm on the right track with my previous analysis but am willing to keep an open mind and see if I can find something better on someone else. Specifically, I'm going to go through jay's posts and see who he labeled as town or null and start there. I will say, don't expect a specific case from me before the end of today I've got another final in the morning and a crap ton of homework to get done before that. I maybe shouldn't have put that off until the last minute. On a side note, can someone link me the main case on BK? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 10 2011 06:23 xtfftc wrote: If you look at my posts from the last five days (Monday to Friday), you'll notice a pattern called "having a new job and staying away from TL during working hours" ^^ Did you see what was going on at the time? It was definitely not helping town. Mafia would want Jay waste the whole day after being caught. They would have had the very easy task to accuse Jay of something scummy (which is even easier for them since they have been talking with him all game long) and have an easy ride without doing any actual contribution. I asked BH and Veli to stop shouting and destroying the thread so that we would be able to do some scum hunting, and I think it worked as we had some more productive discussions afterwards. The mafia tries to manipulate people and this is way too open to be manipulation. Saying something such as "step away from our main target, he is dead anyway" isn't subtle or effective.. Unless you try to explain it with WIFOM, which doesn't work for a proper analysis. The whole "plan" would have only worked with a suicidal last minute switch that would have condemned the whole team for the sake of saving someone like Jay. Read my case(s) on EY again, please. It's not just voting - although bandwagonning all game long was part of it - but about the way he didn't commit on calling Jay scum but called for his lynch for being "anti-town" (he is either scum and has to die or he is a bad, anti-town townie who should be ignored) and making a scene out of admitting that he's bandwagonning but not bothering to post some analysis before voting. I also think that you should look at my Day 1 again. I posted a lot on xsk, I called out a few others as well (Adam, for example), and you'll see a lot of disagreeing with people. This didn't happen during Day 2 because pretty much everyone was happy to focus on Jay instead of trying to catch more mafia. No one tried to defend Jay and there was very little analysis of other players, so there was pretty much nothing to disagree with. I stated my reasons for keeping my vote on EY. Your reasoning is pure WIFOM in this case. Jay was obviously going to be lynched hours before I posted the bit you quoted, so what could a townie do in this situation? Vote for Jay and be accused of sheeping after BH and bandwagonning (remember Tunkeg and his analysis of the Bbyte lynch?) Or vote for someone else and be accused of not voting for the obvious mafia. Let's also consider me being mafia for the sake of discussing my actions. Vote for Jay and get accused of bandwagonning, or don't and be accused of not voting for the obvious mafia? It works both ways. Also, BH and I discussed my vote extensivelly and you can follow it pretty easily... No idea why you would chose to ignore it all but here's the end of it anyway: I give up, xtfftc is going to see whatever he wants about me. If other people believe it and I end up lynched for it so be it. It'll be on him. I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. There's my essential reasoning that I posted with my vote. I wasn't 100% sold, but so what if you're 100% sure around here all the time you're going to be wrong a lot. His behavior coming down to the vote going on him was very much not pro-town. I commend BH for getting him to do that. What am I supposed to do to please you? Go back and copy and paste whatever everyone else had already said in the previous couple of pages about him? Paraphrase it? BH made the best case, I voted with it. I'm glad he was persuasive. I think the fundamental difference between you and me is that you seem to care more about appearances and I care about results. Why is that? Also, I made a case about you/grackaroni go read the thread and respond, don't just brush it off as "he's either scum or bad town". That's not a valid argument. Assume for a minute I'm town, now go do some cases similar to what you did on me to someone else and see if they look similar. I bet they will. Stop tunneling. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
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. As I read it what he's saying: Adam - trying to get a lynch going on him early by saying that "I think he's a lurking mafia". Goes on a couple more times that day to try to get a lynch train going on Adam. I'd say this is a good thing for Adam. BByte - Basically agrees with him on breadcruming, but doesn't really give a read. BH - Starts laying the groundwork to get him when a lynch goes bad. BK - Backs off an earlier statement that he gave off a "non pro-town vibe". Then proceeds to paint him as a newbie town and even gives him some tips on how not to get lynched. EB - Listed as null read. Me - Thougth i defended myself well, then proceeds to state "He could be mafia who just did a great job defending himself... I'm going to keep my eye on him." I will allow others to read/not read what they want into this. Grackaroni - "I do agree with his case on Adam tho so far hes still the summiest in my book. So far I have a pretty good town read on him." Disagreed with him on one point, but was in a safe way to do so at the time. Hassybaby - Basically disagrees with a lot of what Hassy said in his few posts. Null read. Tunkeg - Points out Tunkeg had called him scum. Ends up with, "I do think hes coming off protown even if his accusations are not always right". I think this was his way to get Tunkeg off his back. This reads well for Tunkeg. Velinath - Uses the opportunity to reinforce BK as town, "Which I kinda did at the start as well its really hard to read BKEXE but i still do think hes a townie." Says, "Well as far as I see Veli as being townie" I honestly think this was a case of him just trying to get on Vel's good side. xsksc (was still him at this point): "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" I'll let you make your own read, I don't think I can do it in an unbiased way. So what do I take from all of this? I think it strengthens the case for BH, Adam and Tunkeg being scum. I think it puts the nail in the coffin on BK. It's enough additional evidence to at least convince me that the case on BK is stronger than any other case currently out there. Hell he even tried to reinforce the "newbie town" thing that a lot of Vel's case is built off of. Until I read this in context I hadn't fully comprehended the case on him. Nice catch on them defending each other all game Adam. From this post I'll be taking a further look at the filters for (listed in order of Jay's post): Grackaroni xsksc (but that's a pain in the ass at the moment) Vel (but if BK turns scum I think we're good there) | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 10 2011 08:03 BroodKingEXE wrote: I am now starting to suspect ey215 as scum First he accuses Adam, but he has no evidence: + Show Spoiler + On December 05 2011 07:00 ey215 wrote: First he says no one is looking for a lurker to lynch, but in the last sentence he says we should get rid of someone for not contributing. Okay, let's not look for lurkers, but still be able to lynch them for not contributing! There is no way to figure out if someone is lurking without paying attention to who is lurking! No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. This quote shows EY contradict himself. [spoiler] Here is another one of his contradictions. + Show Spoiler + On December 04 2011 14:55 ey215 wrote: Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff. Blames most established townie for starting a bandwagon. + Show Spoiler + On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote: Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option. Jumps on a bandwagon himself Wow that is a lot lies. While ey215 has voted he really does not make a good case look at the reason he votes for jay (I know everyone is going to say JB is dead so why care, but I am analyzing ey's random vote for him). Look: + Show Spoiler + On December 07 2011 13:58 ey215 wrote:I'm personally of the opinion that we should lynch the scummiest of jayb, xtf, or hassey and see where that leads us.No reasoning whatsoever first time he mentions JB is scummy. He even says in his read (the only time he analyzes JB) On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:Ok, back from my final. For those that might care I think it went well. On the Jay case: yes, he was hedging but there's a whole lot of hedging going on early in the game. Is it because he's trying to not take a definitive stand so he can't be held accountable for it later or is it because he truly doesn't know and is offering options? To me it felt like hedging, he's been pretty definitive in some of his other posts.Wait, he says jay is hedging but then he says there is a lot of hedging in the early game. How does that justify hedging? If everyone lurked in the early game does that make lurking okayOk, this got posted while I was typing this and going through filters:I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. ##vote: jaybrundage Votes for him nothing provided beforehand even states that he is jumping on a bandwagon, has not provided any info Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option.Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on.At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. And this random vote catches him in one last lie: + Show Spoiler + On December 08 2011 07:55 ey215 wrote: I was responding to two different people, why is this so hard to understand? To further clarify the point I was making is not scummy it is important. I don't think voting haphazardly is a good idea. I'll go on and respond to your upcoming response, my vote on Jay is not haphazardly throwing my vote around. I think he's the best case and am willing to lynch him. the same way I was willing to lynch BByte.. As soon as day hits EY is my vote. Well I guess getting me lynched would buy you one more day. A little obvious of a play to try to save yourself though isn't it? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
##vote: BroodKingEXE | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 10 2011 11:02 BroodKingEXE wrote: ##Vote ey215 + Show Spoiler + On December 10 2011 08:03 BroodKingEXE wrote: I am now starting to suspect ey215 as scum First he accuses Adam, but he has no evidence: + Show Spoiler + On December 05 2011 07:00 ey215 wrote: First he says no one is looking for a lurker to lynch, but in the last sentence he says we should get rid of someone for not contributing. Okay, let's not look for lurkers, but still be able to lynch them for not contributing! There is no way to figure out if someone is lurking without paying attention to who is lurking! No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. This quote shows EY contradict himself. + Show Spoiler + On December 05 2011 11:19 ey215 wrote: While I'm not convinced Blazing didn't push him too hard and thus pushed him away I do notice a couple of times that ElectricBlack has said not to vote for people unless it's going to put pressure on them. Blazing's vote alone may not be enough, but I'm willing to switch mine to apply said pressure. He also stated in his first post that breadcrumbing is bad. While it is bad if it lets the mafia know that you're the blue role, it's important to get people's names into post so that if you're blue and get shot we can go back and figure out the people you've checked out. I'm fine with applying some pressure. Okay you are putting some pressure on EB to get him to vote. ##Unvote: Adam4167 ##Vote: ElectricBlack On December 06 2011 06:43 ey215 wrote: Ok, finally got back to the thread after a long day. I apologize that I haven't been back sooner. I'm going to respond to posts as I go through the thread so if anything I say gets contradicted later by someone else I want y'all to understand why. On this post where you say you're either killing people or not, I'm more than willing to kill you tonight. I don't vote only for pressure, if I put a vote on someone I'm willing to let them hang. Wait, you just said you were voting for pressure. Don't you also say something about voting without evidence later? + Show Spoiler + On December 06 2011 07:18 ey215 wrote: I voted for BByte on the lurker/not contributing line of reasoning. I was really hoping we wouldn't have to use it, but if someone's inactive even if town they're not really doing us any good. Here is another one of his contradictions. + Show Spoiler + On December 04 2011 14:55 ey215 wrote: Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff. Blames most established townie for starting a bandwagon. + Show Spoiler + On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote: Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option. Jumps on a bandwagon himself Wow that is a lot lies. While ey215 has voted he really does not make a good case look at the reason he votes for jay (I know everyone is going to say JB is dead so why care, but I am analyzing ey's random vote for him). Look: + Show Spoiler + On December 07 2011 13:58 ey215 wrote:I'm personally of the opinion that we should lynch the scummiest of jayb, xtf, or hassey and see where that leads us.No reasoning whatsoever first time he mentions JB is scummy. He even says in his read (the only time he analyzes JB) On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:Ok, back from my final. For those that might care I think it went well. On the Jay case: yes, he was hedging but there's a whole lot of hedging going on early in the game. Is it because he's trying to not take a definitive stand so he can't be held accountable for it later or is it because he truly doesn't know and is offering options? To me it felt like hedging, he's been pretty definitive in some of his other posts.Wait, he says jay is hedging but then he says there is a lot of hedging in the early game. How does that justify hedging? If everyone lurked in the early game does that make lurking okayOk, this got posted while I was typing this and going through filters:I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. ##vote: jaybrundage Votes for him nothing provided beforehand even states that he is jumping on a bandwagon, has not provided any info Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option.Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on.At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. And this random vote catches him in one last lie: + Show Spoiler + On December 08 2011 07:55 ey215 wrote: I was responding to two different people, why is this so hard to understand? To further clarify the point I was making is not scummy it is important. I don't think voting haphazardly is a good idea. I'll go on and respond to your upcoming response, my vote on Jay is not haphazardly throwing my vote around. I think he's the best case and am willing to lynch him. the same way I was willing to lynch BByte.. As soon as day hits EY is my vote. This is my reasoning, where was EY's?. [spoiler] On December 10 2011 08:23 ey215 wrote: Alright, going on the line of reasoning that I had previously stated I would here's jay's first set of reads from Day 1: As I read it what he's saying: Adam - trying to get a lynch going on him early by saying that "I think he's a lurking mafia". Goes on a couple more times that day to try to get a lynch train going on Adam. I'd say this is a good thing for Adam. BByte - Basically agrees with him on breadcruming, but doesn't really give a read. BH - Starts laying the groundwork to get him when a lynch goes bad. BK - Backs off an earlier statement that he gave off a "non pro-town vibe". Then proceeds to paint him as a newbie town and even gives him some tips on how not to get lynched. EB - Listed as null read. Me - Thougth i defended myself well, then proceeds to state "He could be mafia who just did a great job defending himself... I'm going to keep my eye on him." I will allow others to read/not read what they want into this. Grackaroni - "I do agree with his case on Adam tho so far hes still the summiest in my book. So far I have a pretty good town read on him." Disagreed with him on one point, but was in a safe way to do so at the time. Hassybaby - Basically disagrees with a lot of what Hassy said in his few posts. Null read. Tunkeg - Points out Tunkeg had called him scum. Ends up with, "I do think hes coming off protown even if his accusations are not always right". I think this was his way to get Tunkeg off his back. This reads well for Tunkeg. Velinath - Uses the opportunity to reinforce BK as town, "Which I kinda did at the start as well its really hard to read BKEXE but i still do think hes a townie." Says, "Well as far as I see Veli as being townie" I honestly think this was a case of him just trying to get on Vel's good side. xsksc (was still him at this point): "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" I'll let you make your own read, I don't think I can do it in an unbiased way. So what do I take from all of this? I think it strengthens the case for BH, Adam and Tunkeg being scum. I think it puts the nail in the coffin on BK. It's enough additional evidence to at least convince me that the case on BK is stronger than any other case currently out there. Hell he even tried to reinforce the "newbie town" thing that a lot of Vel's case is built off of. Until I read this in context I hadn't fully comprehended the case on him. Nice catch on them defending each other all game Adam. From this post I'll be taking a further look at the filters for (listed in order of Jay's post): Grackaroni xsksc (but that's a pain in the ass at the moment) Vel (but if BK turns scum I think we're good there) On December 10 2011 10:26 ey215 wrote: Based on Val's case, Adam's adding onto it, convincing myself after looking through Jay's posts: ##vote: BroodKingEXE It's fun watching you try to save yourself by trying to get me lynched. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
[QUOTE]On December 10 2011 12:31 BroodKingEXE wrote: [QUOTE]On December 08 2011 06:06 ey215 wrote: Yes, because I did such a great job laying under the radar before. Let's see, pissing match with the most active/aggressive player in the thread. Check. Wait a pissing match I must have missed something. + Show Spoiler + On December 04 2011 15:51 ey215 wrote: I agree. (omygoshtwoword post I'm in trouble!) Okay agree with Velinath for defending BH. That's not a piss at BH. + Show Spoiler + On December 05 2011 11:24 ey215 wrote: Yeah, I'm missing this too. What the heck are you talking about BK? Okay, agree with BH that my quote was misguided. Well, agreeing is not pissing on BH. + Show Spoiler + On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote: Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on. At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. Okay, suggests BH could be scum or EB has a correct read, yet he admits himself that it is a WIFOM logic based assumption. Well, admitting that your threat may or may not make sense if not pissing on BH. So he says that being over the radar involves a couple of light kiss ups to two of major players in town,and a WIFOM logic assumption. Well, the only over the radar thing I see here is a lie. Getting myself warned for inactivity in big blue letters to point it out to everyone. Check. Great job I'm doing staying under the radar. Wait, staying under the radar is not posting. You got warned for inactivity (not posting) and you say you were not staying under the radar? Oh and you may have missed it, but let's see: [quote]Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on. At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. That's analysis of our current game state, and potentially pushing the conversation. You may or may not ever get a post with 10 quotes of someone from me. If I decide it is needed I will do it, but I'm not going to push some made up case that I come up with just for the sake of looking good. I've read the filters, along with the thread to get it in context, multiple times and have yet to see anything unique that hasn't been said. Anything you get from me on specific players will be a gut instinct or hunch and I don't like going on that. Well this one kind of sums it up. He is not willing to defend his case, because he does not have anything unique to say. This is complete and utter BS. If you do not think it is worth the time to look for reasons to lynch the mafia, then I say you are mafia. Can't wait for your case, I'll be happy to respond.[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] Spoilered his horribly formatted post. I can't believe I'm responding to this. Apparently you weren't paying a lot of attention day one. I seem to recall BH and I getting into a pretty heated discussion, or in the colloquial a pissing match. No, staying under the radar would have been posting in that 24 hours at least once so as not to get warned. "Well this one kind of sums it up. He is not willing to defend his case, because he does not have anything unique to say. This is complete and utter BS. If you do not think it is worth the time to look for reasons to lynch the mafia, then I say you are mafia." Um, where did I say I wasn't looking? I said I didn't have anything unique to add to the case on Jay at that point. In fact, just above your red text I said: "I've read the filters, along with the thread to get it in context, multiple times and have yet to see anything unique that hasn't been said." You're cute BK, I like you. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 10 2011 17:20 xtfftc wrote: Morning everyone. I plan to post a lot over the weekend because I have very limited time during workdays. I have put enough time into EY, so I'll be leaving him alone for now unless I find something very convincing. Everything points to BKE being our best lynch today, so I won't dwell too much on why he is mafia. I will, however, analyse his relationships with the other players, because this would help us for next week. Apart from that, I'm not sure what to focus on. I really hope that layabout steps it up because xsk+Starshard have been having a very easy time. This is what I've been planning on doing as well. I think we'll find the third mafia by looking at how Jay and BK have been interacting with others from the start. Now that we've got two days of information from votes and one confirmed scum it should be easier to see patterns. I think we need to come up with some sort of a plan. Just like yesterday with Jay, I don't think that focusing too much on BKE will do us a lot of good. If he's town, he has to do his best to catch mafia, but if he's town, he'll be happy to waste our time like Jay did (BKE, there's two mafia players alive, so you need two cases, not one.). We need to discuss at least two more things: - do we still want to lynch a lurker if there's no good case (lynching a lurker later in the game is much better than earlier as we have more town reads)? I have mixed feelings on the lurkers. We keep hoping the fill ins will step up and help us out here and so far they really haven't. It would not surprise me if our third mafia comes from one of these two but it's damn hard to make a case against either. - if we have a DT, should he investigate the lurkerish players? I agree with Vel on this one, I'd rather the DT look at more active players, since if the lurking continues we'll likely look at one of the lurkers to lynch in the next couple of days. These are not for today but for the next few days. If you think there's anything else important to discuss for the late game, don't hesitate to bring it up. New guys! Get your post on, we want to know what you think is going on around here! | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 11 2011 01:45 BroodKingEXE wrote: BH, Are you saying that you will ignore EY's lies based on my illegible posts? I have yet to see anyone comment about EY bandwagoning on two of the votes. While I was wrong about Adam others were wrong about Bbyte too. It seems like everyone says I have been defending Jay the whole game from this post: Here Okay, I gave my read on him and defended him...once. On the vote against him I looked at his posts and gave info, others agreed with the vote (like EY) and gave no information whatsoever. xttftc would like to disagree with the bolded part of your post. Read my case(s) on EY again, please. It's not just voting - although bandwagonning all game long was part of it This is fun :D | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 12 2011 04:34 BroodKingEXE wrote: Updated EY scum read. I am now starting to suspect ey215 as scum First he accuses Adam, but he has no evidence: What I understand is he implies that he needs more posts to confirm his non-town read on Adam. Until he posted his last post, BKEXE was probably where I'd throw my vote. For the moment, that's just enough to get by. I'd like to see him answer your questions well. So now, if we were coming to deadline I'd probably vote for Adam4167. Feels like a lot of filler, and a couple of his points I haven't agreed with. I'm honestly not really solid on anyone at the moment. Adam has only made three posts in the game, none of them were fillers: 1) A question for the host 2) an opinion on the prompt, and 3) an flaw response to BH. This quote shows that EY likes to bandwagon. On December 05 2011 11:19 ey215 wrote: While I'm not convinced Blazing didn't push him too hard and thus pushed him away I do notice a couple of times that ElectricBlack has said not to vote for people unless it's going to put pressure on them. Blazing's vote alone may not be enough, but I'm willing to switch mine to apply said pressure. He also stated in his first post that breadcrumbing is bad. While it is bad if it lets the mafia know that you're the blue role, it's important to get people's names into post so that if you're blue and get shot we can go back and figure out the people you've checked out. I'm fine with applying some pressure. ##Unvote: Adam4167 ##Vote: ElectricBlack On December 06 2011 06:43 ey215 wrote: Ok, finally got back to the thread after a long day. I apologize that I haven't been back sooner. I'm going to respond to posts as I go through the thread so if anything I say gets contradicted later by someone else I want y'all to understand why. On this post where you say you're either killing people or not, I'm more than willing to kill you tonight. I don't vote only for pressure, if I put a vote on someone I'm willing to let them hang. In an earlier post, EY says no one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Yet in this case he has put a vote on someone he does not have a case on. He even said he had reasoning behind a lynch for Adam(although he did not), so why did he vote to lynch a lurker? He had plenty of time to build cases on either of these, but choses to go off and bandwagon on Bbyte after this. On December 06 2011 07:18 ey215 wrote: I voted for BByte on the lurker/not contributing line of reasoning. I was really hoping we wouldn't have to use it, but if someone's inactive even if town they're not really doing us any good. Firstly, how can he say that he is voting for someone not contributing. He has not provided evidence for either of his votes. While he has dug into xtfftc, he has not used any of that scum hunting to build a case. He also did not state a reason for his change in votes, as he did not provide a case for either of them. Here is another one of his contradictions. On December 04 2011 14:55 ey215 wrote: Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff. On December 04 2011 15:48 ey215 wrote: I just think it's dangerous and is how bandwagons get started, of course at some point someone is going to have to start voting on someone I just don't want another new player coming in and seeing ##votewhoever a couple of times while trying to catch up and think that obviously that must be the person to vote for. As long as the rest of us are careful to not let the bandwagon get going, then I'm fine with whatever. It is just really easy to let one person make the decisions through sure force of personality or constantly posting ( I would think in a newbie game especially) by getting a ball rolling. As long as we're vigilant and step i and say, "Hold the fuck on that doesn't make sense" then I'm fine with whoever doing whatever they think will help the town win. Just like I think I've been doing the last few posts with Blaze. He blames BH for starting bandwagons on people. Yet he jumps on four himself, after pointing out how bad they are in a postceding post. On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote: Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option. And here is why I think he bandwagoned on JB On December 07 2011 13:58 ey215 wrote:I'm personally of the opinion that we should lynch the scummiest of jayb, xtf, or hassey and see where that leads us. No reasoning whatsoever first time he mentions JB is scummy. He even says in his read (the only time he analyzes JB) that he was more of a townie. Hey that was kind of a defense of JB too. On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:Ok, back from my final. For those that might care I think it went well. On the Jay case: yes, he was hedging but there's a whole lot of hedging going on early in the game. Is it because he's trying to not take a definitive stand so he can't be held accountable for it later or is it because he truly doesn't know and is offering options? To me it felt like hedging, he's been pretty definitive in some of his other posts. Ok, this got posted while I was typing this and going through filters:I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. ##vote: jaybrundageFuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option.Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. Wait, he says jay is hedging but then he says there is a lot of hedging in the early game. How does that justify hedging? He defends jay a second time by saying this statement. Okay he then provides an anti-town statement that JB said, but provides no more evidence, and uses the EB killing (a WIFOM evidence) to try to rope in Tunkeg (which he later says is town, but is once again trying to prove mafia). And this random vote catches him in one last lie: On December 08 2011 07:55 ey215 wrote: I was responding to two different people, why is this so hard to understand? To further clarify the point I was making is not scummy it is important. I'll go on and respond to your upcoming response, my vote on Jay is not haphazardly throwing my vote around. I think he's the best case and am willing to lynch him. the same way I was willing to lynch BByte.. He bandwagons on four different people, but all his scum hunting involves Grack, xtfftc, jay, and I. This is a pretty haphardway to vote. He plans to vote for me and has already voted for jay (even though they had the majority on jay before he voted). Yet he has been on an active scum hunt on xtfftc the whole game. He has not even brought him up until after jay. I feel that he uses this scum hunt to distance him from xtfftc, but when I turn town he will try to turn the attention to others who voted for me. If the vote looks like it will go to xtfftc he will put his vote there. Hey BH, I think this is still too long, how should I use spoilers? Enough, we get it you think I'm scum. Even if you managed to convince enough people of that it would flip around on you the second I flip town. Which I will. Saying over and over again that I have lied (which I haven't) doesn't make it so. Stating over and over again that I bandwagoned, even after it's been pointed out by xtfftc in his case doesn't prove/disprove anything further. None of this is original, none of this is doing what others have asked you to do (find the second scum), and as others have pointed out at least one of your many posts against me contained an outright intentional misinterpretation by posting my quotes out of order. I may have missed it, but did you even answer any of the questions asked to you about that? I was already convinced that you were going to flip red, but this is just embarrassing. All you're doing is trying to not give anyone more information. Stop trying to save yourself and try hunting scum, that's what town members do. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
layabout I disagree with both of your cases vehemently. Remember, Xt has spent most of the last two days trying to get me lynched, but I think his vote patterns make sense. Day one, he's right he begrudgingly voted for BByte. Day two he made a case on me and placed his vote there. While I do agree it's best for the town if his vote goes on Jaybrundage I think at least his reasoning of keeping a vote on me when it was obvious Jay was getting lynched is good reasoning. I do however have an issue with him being worried about looking like he was jumping on a bandwagon. Don't worry about what it looks like when you vote, just try to make sure the vote makes sense and is highly likely to kill scum. If anyone looks bad from yesterday's vote it's Tunkeg, however you're "case" against him is really not particularly good. Maybe it's just a misunderstanding of what he was saying, but really his poker analogy is relevant (not filler like you called it) and an approach you can take to a game of limited information. It is folly to not use all information you get when coming to an educated decision on who you are going to vote for. I do agree he was wrong in listing only certain potential duo's of scum, but not wanting to put your own name on a list like that is probably pretty understandable. I think the townies that have played best so far are those that are not playing not to get lynched, but are playing to win and I imagine (not sure) it's a common new town mistake to play the other way around so they therefore appear scummier than they really are. You could be right, one or both of those guys could be scum but those cases aren't nearly convincing enough. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 12 2011 05:18 xtfftc wrote: Tunkeg and Velinath have been on BKE pretty much all game long. At first for him lurking, then for him making no sense whatsoever, and finally for him trying to twist people's words. Velinath in particular has posted the most on BKE, including a solid case. I have had a town read on Veli for most of the came (excluding some herp-derp moments during Day 2), so I was pleased to see him being consistent while re-reading the thread. Hassy and Blue, his replacement, have both been sheeping when it comes to BKE, without saying much. This is, in a way, consistent for them as well, considering that they haven't been doing much but lurking and sheeping. When I was going through Day 1 earlier today, I realised that Hassy warranted a policy lynch as much as Bbyte did. Blue seriously has to step up with a case during Night 3/Day 4. EY - openly sheeping (as per usual) and turns into a meanie once BKE makes accuses him of being mafia. xsksc - mostly quiet. No proper justification until... xtf - mostly quiet as well. I've called him an easy lynch (which he was at the moment) and I've also said that "I just can't imagine him being mafia". Once the link between Jay and BKE was revealed, I have started including him in my warrantable scum teams. No proper justification. BH - for the beginning mostly "mild scumleads". I thought they were just part of his less obvious pressuring for lurkers. On Day 2 he talks about BKE being one of the players he is "most suspicious of" and he also bases it mostly on the "literal figurative smokescreen" in defence of Jay. No proper justification. Is being a bit mean. Grack - no proper justification, later mentioning the link between Jay and BKE. layabout starts with (sort of?) agreeing that BKE is the obvious lynch, I think. "as it stands i don't feel like i can justify a vote for anybody over broodkingexe". layabout, could you clarify this, please? Do you think that BKE is mafia or not? You can keep your vote on me but you have to give us your read of BKE. A few people have urged him to contribute even if he's getting lynched tonight. BH has been a bit of a strange figure while doing this - urging BKE to post, then using some colourful expressions that have obviously frustrated BKE and may have deterred him from posting more. After he posted on EY, me and Grack have urged him to come up with a second mafia read. In conclusion, most of the town has sheeped on BKE (with Veli, Adam and to a lesser extent Tunkeg being the exceptions). I feel like there wasn't a proper attempt to change the direction of the lynch until late Day 3 and I agree that the third mafia player may have simply abandoned Jay and BKE to save himself/herself. As I was re-reading his earlier posts just now, I reached the same conclusion as before: bad townie. After Bbyte's lynch he finally stepped it up and started posting stuff and it became obvious that he was struggling to come up with his analysis. This was similar to Jay, with the main difference being that Jay posted much more filler during Day 1. But both couldn't keep it up when they were forced to provide their reads. I have yet to post on how BKE himself has posted on the other players but for now I don't see many promising leads. I'd sayu that the mafia is hiding amongst the quieter players but perhaps I'm seeing things this way simply because those who have posted a lot on BKE are my town reads anyway. ##Vote: BroodKingEXE EY - openly sheeping (as per usual) and turns into a meanie once BKE makes accuses him of being mafia. I'm so sick of your bullshit. Would someone explain to me how reading someone's case, going back and looking through a filter to see if you agree/do not agree with said case, coming to the same conclusion as the case and then casting an educated vote is "sheeping"? Do I need to post the same quotes I have either done in a previous post or the same stuff everyone else has on the person I'm voting for? I'm honestly asking so I can improve. Or is this just a case of xt being a jackass and I should let it go? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 13 2011 16:50 xtfftc wrote: BH went after Tunkeg. Lazy townie then. Ad Hominem much? So instead of addressing issues you declare Vel's a "lazy townie" and ignore any points he has or had not made? To make sure I kept unbiased I tried to stay clear of layabout making a case against you and even defended you. The best you can come up with to a townie who obviously has been paying attention and active throughout the game is "lazy townie"? That's not an answer to the questions about you. That's trying to make it look irrelevant just because you deem it to be so. It's also scummy as all get out. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 06 2011 07:26 xtfftc wrote: I'm going to bed, so I'm voting for Bbyte. It's not ideal but it's better than some unpleasant last minute surprise. ##Unvote: xsksc ##Vote: BByte I'm frankly not sure what has been brought up/not brought up re:xtfftc at this point but I do have a question about this vote. Wouldn't a last minute surprise be a good thing for the town in many cases? A last minute switch screams mafia. Just wondering on your logic. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
I've read all of it, but at some point quotes upon quotes upon quotes start to add up as to what has been said and what has not. Maybe I should have phrased it as, "I'm pretty sure this hasn't been answered." As for my thoughts, I'm on the fence and am still deciding how much of what I agree with what you and Vel are saying is my dislike of how he's tunneled me up until today and how much is rational. I can see how being one of two people that didn't vote for Jay and then making sure to be on the vote for BByte and BK doesn't look good. However, I'm not completely convinced that it is the contradiction you and Vel are making it out to be. Hence, why I'm asking him a question. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 14 2011 07:24 Velinath wrote: I would like to know what your opinion is as far as what I brought up in my last post, regarding his stance on "never vote townies" and then voting for someone who he believed to be town. It's a contradiction he needs to give an answer to the town for. I however don't think it's a definitive scum tell. I'd like to see his answer before drawing a specific conclusion. My vote may be based on how he answers those allegations. If he's scum number two who do you think is the third? | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 14 2011 07:37 Velinath wrote: Third scum might be Bluelightz (who still hasn't contributed - and it seems that EB's case on Hassybaby from Day 1 has fallen by the wayside, despite it being a fairly good case). I have nearly zero post content to draw from for Bluelightz though.. I don't think it's layabout because bussing with only 2 scum left in the game would be utterly retarded, and I feel that Tunkeg has played a town game thus far. As I have stated I have a strong town read on you and I also believe BH to be town based on filter. I'm not going to lie, at this point we've all said something that can be turned around on us as scummy and it's making it hard for me to pick out the scummiest of the lot. That's why I've thinking about the mafia's killing patterns and voting patterns more. It's just hard to make a case on it mainly because any time you do you get WIFOM yelled at you and it gets ignored. Now you have to make the assumption I'm town to go with this, but like either layabout our youself pointed out every single person that has died had pointed out xttftc and I can't see why you would. Do the keep hoping we'll up and off him? Until today no real case had gained any traction. I actually think he was the best shot for the mafia to get a two for one. If they kill him night two there's pretty good odds they could have gotten me lynched day three. Is that because they don't consider him a threat since he's been tunneling on me? I'd consider him a threat, he's pretty persuasive. I guess that's why it's WIFOM, since you really don't know why they do anything it's hard to use what they do as data. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
Do you still believe I am mafia and if so/not what has changed about your opinion over the last couple of days? On December 14 2011 06:52 ey215 wrote: I'm frankly not sure what has been brought up/not brought up re:xtfftc at this point but I do have a question about this vote. Wouldn't a last minute surprise be a good thing for the town in many cases? A last minute switch screams mafia. Just wondering on your logic. I'd like this answered as well. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
I'm not fully convinced either way by the case on layabout or the case on xtfftc. I am not comfortable voting for either at this point. Who I am comfortable voting for is Bluelightz. I find it highly suspicious that he wasn't modkilled, I find it highly suspicious that he's only ever posted when ti's been close that he might be modkilled and he's added absolutely nothing of value to the discussion and his "case" on layabout is absolute crap. I also think he's the mafia's roleblocker. ##Vote: Bluelightz | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 15 2011 03:41 xtfftc wrote: It depends. On Day 2 we had just one case and very limited discussion, so a switch that leads to a townie lynch would have been blatantly obvious. On Day 1 we had a few cases, so a switch could have been masked much better. As for bigger games, last minute switches almost always benefit mafia because there's more people voting and it's hard to distinguish between the lurking mafia and newbie townies. Thanks for the answer. Could you answer my other question as well please? "Do you still believe I am mafia and if so/not what has changed about your opinion over the last couple of days?" | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 15 2011 04:18 ey215 wrote: Thanks for the answer. Could you answer my other question as well please? "Do you still believe I am mafia and if so/not what has changed about your opinion over the last couple of days?" ebwop: Well ignore that. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 15 2011 04:17 xtfftc wrote: I still do. You've hardly given any opinions since I stopped tunneling you (with the only real contribution being you mostly disagreeing/somewhat agreeing with layabout's initial posts on me and Tunkeg, but this is not enough - and it would be wise for the two of you to disagree in the thread anyway) , so the only way I could change my opinion is if someone else acts in such a scummy fashion that leaves no doubt. Let's go quickly through the list of possibilities: BH - town. We all agree, I think. Tunkeg - town. He hasn't contributed a lot but it's enough for a good read. I'm sure that if he was mafia, we would have found reasons to put him under more pressure. Velinath - as much as I hate to say it, town. I would love to call him mafia but it makes no sense. Him tunneling on me so ferociously while committing many factual mistakes fits his play: he focuses on just one player (first it was BKE and now it's me) and he builds up his case as he goes, so he gets things wrong. Studying for his finals has had impact on his analysis as well. And even from a purely theoretical perspective... why would mafia need him to go after me like this when he wasn't a main target? Bussing layabout would have made much more sense than going all out after me. Bluelightz - the only player I can imagine being mafia if you flip town. But he's a lurker, and lurkers simply ruin the game because they are always a gamble. Remember Day 1 and me arguing against everyone about policies in general and Lynch All Lurkers in particular? How I kept saying that it sounds good in theory but in reality it doesn't work? We lynched Bbyte based on the policy but this didn't scare the others into contributing. Bluelightz is the latest example and we can't do much about it. If he doesn't care the post, he doesn't care if he gets lynched as well. So he's putting the town into a very shitty situation. If he's town, he's way too lazy - and if he's mafia, he's playing way too dirty. I have no ideas but hoping for a DT to check him - but we don't even know if we have a DT and whether he'd be able to do it before he dies. So it just sucks. I must say that I feel that the questions you've been asking as of late have been very pro-town. Although this is also good mafia play (asking good questions and appearing to contribute without puting yourself out there as much), it helps town. If you're really not mafia, you should back it up with more analysis because the game is almost over, one way or another. Again thanks for answering, it helps clarify some things for me. I'll respond to only one point and that's the last paragraph. The reasons I'm asking better questions is that I'm working on something in my head and am just not all the way there yet. I know we're down to the end of all of this and it's time to pull it out but I don't want to half ass a case like I did against you/grack. Actually, now that I've been thinking about it on BH, while I think we all agree he's town has anyone else found him to be less engaging since say the middle of day 3? Like he's almost stepped back a bit. I'm not sure why the change or if I'm just imagining it. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 15 2011 10:16 Forumite wrote: Tense! I wonder how he´ll flip. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
| ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
I think we have to go Tunkeg. The only way they were saving xt was by getting their two votes on him and then convincing a third to switch over. I suspect that's why xt got much friendlier to me there at the end. He thought he might be able to sway me to vote for layabout. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
On December 15 2011 16:08 Velinath wrote: Well, for what it's worth, I guess I can roleclaim now. I was the DT - hence my inexplicable tunnelling on xtfftc last day (I investigated him). It wasn't the best play, I suppose, but it was the best I could do with what time I had the last couple of days. This was also the reason I was suddenly so very very confident that ey215 was town for the last two days. I felt the suspicions on him were somewhat well-founded, but him coming up town meant that I could at least try and give something that I could refer back to later in the thread. Meh. Well played, all. A little bit unsatisfying conclusion, but c'est la vie I suppose. For what it's worth when I saw you post on me early Day 3 I actually said out loud, "Don't say that!" I can't believe they didn't catch it. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
I think you were wrong on the roleclaim call, here's why: We were at 5-1 if you roleclaim and Vel has 1 town that is still alive we win. Mafia kills you 4-1, Vel investigates someone else and either returns Scum of Town. We now have 5 people in the game, 1 DT, 2 investigated towns and 2 unknowns. Lynch one unknown Day 5 and if he flips town lynch the other Day 6. Game is over. If we don't have a doctor no one roleclaims and we're in the same place that we were before. There's a small risk there but I think a roleclaim at that point is +EV. | ||
ey215
United States546 Posts
Did you like having a veteran in the newbie game? I think overall it was good. I would like to have seen it play out longer to really decide whether it was good or not. Would you prefer the veteran did not smurf? No, I think smurfing is the way to go. If the vet does not smurf they are a huge target and also it would potentially lead to too much following of the vet. Would you prefer giving both factions a veteran? I don't know, I think it might be a huge advantage to mafia but I'm really not sure. Palmar question for you: You said that we were very transparent and good as town, what made it that way? | ||
| ||