|
Spoilered the quote.
+ Show Spoiler [EchelonTee's post] +On December 25 2011 16:30 EchelonTee wrote:Christmas season is really savaging this town huh -.- sigh. My thoughts at this point are in line with Cyber's, that at least some of the sheep voting that happened is suspicious. Personally I have my eyes on Shraft. Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 02:17 Shraft wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I dislike sephirotharg's post. I am going to put my vote on him until I hear what he has to say.
##Vote sephirotharg
After Dirk has started a case on seph, Shraft follows up with what looks like a pretty normal pressure vote; put some heat on the suspicious fellow to generate discussion, nothing wrong with that. Though he doesn't post any analysis on this, nor in his subsequent posts, that's not necessarily a red flag at this early stage in the game. However, after others have made their cases on jay and seph, he says: Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 19:33 Shraft wrote:
I'm going to read through his filter once again when I get back and try to be as objective as possible. Then I'll decide if my suspicion toward him was justified or not.
But instead of coming back and posting anything from seph's filter that he finds scummy, all he says is: Show nested quote +On December 25 2011 07:29 Shraft wrote:
All right, just read through the last two pages. I still think that seph has a higher chance of flipping red than jay. At first glance the cases on jay seem far-fetched to me. I'm going to read them through in detail once again now and make a more substantial post, but at the moment the chance of me switching my vote from seph to jay is slim. After the wagon has hit full steam, Shraft seems to just sit back and let the show unfold. I don't like this; not only does he shrug off concerns with jay by simply discrediting seph, he is content with letting seph go under without making a strong case in either direction, or even re-analyzing his position as he said he would. sephirotharg, who, though misguided, is now known to be unbiased, also noted this odd behavior from Shraft. At the moment I am suspicious. I will be looking forward for what you have to say regarding who you want dead and why.
I did re-analyze my position. It's when I "discredited" seph's case on jay that I determined that I wouldn't change my vote. Every point against jay was stretched too far, to make it appear as he was doing something scummy, when in fact there's nothing scummy about jay's post. It felt more like an attempt to escape the lynch than an honest try at finding scum.
|
RE: Who do you want to lynch and why?
At first I was going to make a post saying that I am kind of suspicious about Dirkzor, but then I refreshed the page, and I quite like his last post. Still, I have some issues with him.
First off, let's take a few of his initial posts:
+ Show Spoiler +On December 23 2011 23:47 Dirkzor wrote:
Also, it's been 12 hours since we started and several people have yet to post.
Mattchew
Shraft
minus_human (yeah one post saying you would be back in a few hours...)
EchelonTee
jaybrundage
Gogo!
We need more activity if we want to find scum. Otherwise it will be chaos come a few hours before lynch time! On December 24 2011 08:01 Dirkzor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 07:16 sephirotharg wrote:
A couple of questions:
For voting, need we specifically unvote? Or, if we merely vote for a different person, is it taken for granted that we unvoted the original vote?
Can the host/co-host please keep the player list up to date? I refer to it often, and it would be nice to have the reminder that hyshes has replaced Mattchew, for example.
And as a placeholder: ##Vote sephirotharg Why vote on yourself? Even if it is a placeholder? Why not vote on me or Shraft who you said you found suspicius? Put some pressure back? Shraft how did you realize that Mattchew was banned? I have opdated my post with the filters on page 3 if people want to use it. ( I used edit as it was a pre-game post that have no influence - ok?) Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 23:47 Dirkzor wrote:
Also, it's been 12 hours since we started and several people have yet to post.
Mattchewhyshes
Shraft
minus_human (yeah one post saying you would be back in a few hours...)
EchelonTee
jaybrundage
Gogo!
We need more activity if we want to find scum. Otherwise it will be chaos come a few hours before lynch time! minus_human EchelonTee jaybrundage Still waiting for you guys! (I left out hyshes since he "just" replaced Matt) On December 24 2011 21:18 Dirkzor wrote:This lynch looks worse the more people jumped on the wagon. Votes on Sephirotharg in order of appearence: Dirkzor Shraft GiygaS Sephirotharg jaybrundage Adam4167 EchelonTee Misder and Cyber are the only ones to qeustion this. Cyber targeted me and Misder targeted jay. Lest go through the reasons people voted for Sephirotharg: Dirk: Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 23:39 Dirkzor wrote:On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun  As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? I bolded what i found strange. You already state that you will be lurking. Early in game you want people to feel its okay that you lurk. No Mr. I won't allow it! Yes life gets in the way but you should make up for it when time permits. In that way people won't feel you are lurking if you have provided enough to talk about when you actually have the time. We all need to eat and sleep (work?) but if you don't carry your weight we don't need you. ##Vote sephirotharg and Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 07:46 Dirkzor wrote:On December 24 2011 03:31 sephirotharg wrote:On December 23 2011 23:39 Dirkzor wrote:On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? I bolded what i found strange. You already state that you will be lurking. Early in game you want people to feel its okay that you lurk. No Mr. I won't allow it! Yes life gets in the way but you should make up for it when time permits. In that way people won't feel you are lurking if you have provided enough to talk about when you actually have the time. We all need to eat and sleep (work?) but if you don't carry your weight we don't need you. ##Vote sephirotharg That's all well and good - I don't necessarily disagree with anything you say here. In general, lurking isn't optimal play, not for town at any rate. That said, you didn't actually provide any reason to vote for me here. You responded to my post, but gave no rationale as to why you placed your vote on me. Please do everyone the favor of explaining your actions. I do feel I gave a reason, but since english isn't my first language I'll try again. You are preemptivly excusing yourself for lurking. If people have the mindset that "Oh seph is lurking because thats what he does" you might try to get away with lurking later in the game. You could also point out later that you already said you would lurk. And I don't like that. I would say that my vote wasn't intended to get you lynched. Just spur some discussion - which it did. On December 24 2011 03:56 sephirotharg wrote:
RE: Giygas
This is a game of circles within circles son, and you'd best step to that right quick.
Weird accent aside, I'm merely stating that I find you, Dirkzor, and Shraft rather suspicious for voting so early and pushing hard. I think it's rather obvious why I wrote "the thing about lurking" - to generate some discussion, allowing scum to reveal themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the three of you flips red - but we'll see. I did not find it obvious why you wrote it. It did start some discussion but only because I (and others) noticed how silly it was to write. I'll keep my vote on you for now for the lack of better choices... Basicly a very weak vote based on a semi joke (the smiley) concerning his own level of activity. I did this because at this point we were only discussing policy lynches which don't really nets us any info since everyone disagrees anyway.
Shraft:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 00:15 Shraft wrote:Also, I don't like that sephirotharg explains in his first that he "sometimes lurks". From my experience, most of the times when people make preemptive excuses, they're mafia. If he was a townie, he wouldn't worry about looking scummy later on if he had some IRL task that he needs to do. Furthermore, I don't like how he starts his post with "I'm not skilled, but it's still fun " simply because it's another preemptive measure. and Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 02:17 Shraft wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I dislike sephirotharg's post. I am going to put my vote on him until I hear what he has to say.
##Vote sephirotharg
He adds to the case with the point about how he preemptivly excuse himself in his first post: "I'm not skilled, but it's still fun ". After that he places a vote that is very clearly a pressure vote. GiygaS:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 03:28 GiygaS wrote:On Sephiroth (goddamn you were hard to beat in Kingdom Hearts 2  ), I think his post is definitely scummy, and I'm placing my FoS on him, but I am not lynching him yet. I want to see more than one post out of him to decide if I want to lynch him, as I don't believe one singular post should ever be the reason someone is lynched unless it is really extremely crazy. I'm looking forward to his defense and responses to future questions I ask of him and Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 03:30 GiygaS wrote:
Ninja'd.
First of all, you expected to be voted on early? A town would never have that tendency.
You made a comment on your tendencies that just sparks excuses for yourself later on down the road, that's NOT pro-town.
Your last sentence didn't really "generate discussion", as that info was used as a footnote to other people's posts already.
##Vote sephirotharg He adds nothing new other then to hesitate a bit before voting for seph (after his first defence). This could easily be jumping on the wagon that Shraft and myself started. sephirotharg:Well... jaybrundage:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 07:57 jaybrundage wrote:
Hey guys,
Sorry for not being to active. Internet is a commodity not always provided at my families house.
Ok lets get started. On policy lynches i think that there fine guidelines for how we should act and at the same time we should not follow them blindly and be the main reason we lynch someone.
Onto the good stuff. I think that the sephirotharg case is an interesting one. I do find his first post suspicious.
Trying to soft claim that lurking is ok is honestly pretty anti town. There is not reason to allow it or hint that it's acceptable or we gonna establish a bad town atmosphere. We need people to post what they think so we can get transparency.
I also fine the fact that sephirotharg posted a vote in himself really really weird to be honest. You know people think your suspicious if not just plain scum. Why would you put a vote on your self as a "placeholder" I honestly think its a distraction because why would mafia vote himself. But at the same time why would town vote for himself. Its a action that makes no sense. And when we are trying to get clarity why would you do that.
##Vote sephirotharg
Honestly you seem to want to be voting for the way your acting. Post a solid reason why we should not vote for you. Defend your self give people another case on someone you think is scummy. Something At this point several people was after seph. He was acting weird and voting for himself. An easy target to jump on and thats exactly what jay did. Nothing new added to the case. This is the point where my alarm bells started ringing. Why is everyone going for this kid? I find this very suspicious... Adam4167:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 08:19 Adam4167 wrote:Sephirotharg: On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? Your first post comes across as timid and making excuses for further down the track. Saying “I’m not skilled” only serves to devalue your opinion, which is something that no townie wants to do. It is however something that mafia wants to do, if he plans on flying under the radar. Your problem with lynching all liars is that it ‘narrows town focus’ too much. I disagree; someone caught lying to the town deserves all the scrutiny they get. I feel as though you are giving yourself an out in the event that you are caught lying later on. Lastly, your point on lurkers is just flat out questionable. If you didn’t have the time to devote to playing this game, then why did you sign up? As you can tell, there are several people who missed out that want your spot. You finish by tacking on some napkin math about how many days we have before lylo, which is unnecessary on page 4 when the game started on page 3. Its entirely fluff, discussing worst-case scenario’s on the first day is pointless and only serves as a distraction from us doing our jobs, catching scum. On December 24 2011 03:25 sephirotharg wrote:
Well, I'm a bit surprised this didn't happen faster.
Shraft, what do you want me to say? I merely made a comment based on my tendencies - if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town.
Add to my case the fact that I've already acted pro-town, in generating discussion with the last part of my first post, and I'm not sure how you can justify voting for me. On December 24 2011 03:31 sephirotharg wrote:
That's all well and good - I don't necessarily disagree with anything you say here. In general, lurking isn't optimal play, not for town at any rate.
That said, you didn't actually provide any reason to vote for me here. You responded to my post, but gave no rationale as to why you placed your vote on me. Please do everyone the favor of explaining your actions. Your second and third posts are also causes for concern. In your second post you state “if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town” in response to Shraft prodding you about your lurking intentions. Then in your next post, 6 minutes later, you say, “In general, lurking isn’t optimal play, not for town at any rate”. This just screams inconsistent. You claim your play style is pro-town, and then dismiss your play style as not optimal for town only 6 minutes later. On December 24 2011 03:56 sephirotharg wrote:
RE: Giygas
This is a game of circles within circles son, and you'd best step to that right quick.
Weird accent aside, I'm merely stating that I find you, Dirkzor, and Shraft rather suspicious for voting so early and pushing hard. I think it's rather obvious why I wrote "the thing about lurking" - to generate some discussion, allowing scum to reveal themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the three of you flips red - but we'll see. After demeaning Giygas by implying that you know something he doesn’t (interesting tactic for someone claiming to be “unskilled” in their first post), you claim that you think it’s ‘rather obvious’ as to why you are doing what you are doing. This just screams cop-out, you weren’t expecting all the heat you’re getting from your first few posts and now you are trying to rationalise it all as ‘generating discussion’. On December 24 2011 07:06 sephirotharg wrote:
@ Grack
It's not something I consciously decide at the beginning of the game; it arises mainly due to circumstances and whatnot - for example, in about an hour or so I'll be gone until late tonight, so don't expect much from me later on. I'll be around for the lynch deadline, though, and I intend to be active in the game. I've kept this thread open and refreshing since day 1 started.
@ Shraft
I'm glad that I'm not the only one playing subtly. So far, most people are playing their cards close to their chest, so to speak. When I'm active, I play more fast and loose. In your last post (as of the time of writing this) you announce your intentions to return to lurking until near the deadline so ‘don’t expect much form me later on’, so… you don’t plan on defending yourself after all of this? Your message to Shraft: “I’m glad I’m not the only one playing subtly” again just stinks of cop-out. Now that the PBP is over, I’m just going to be honest. You claim unskilled and then act like you are ‘laying scum traps’ by being subtle. You announce your intentions to lurk, which does nothing to help this town. Your play has been nothing but anti-town since your first post. Don’t lurk, get back here and EXPLAIN your actions. **And now that I’ve refreshed the thread, you’ve voted for yourself… AND edited “contradictory statements” out of one of your posts. I really wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, but the shoe fits here. ##Vote sephirotharg Gives a really long case on Seph. Nothing that stands out as brand new but some points where made that hadn't been brought up before. Also Adam made a great affort in posting this which I don't think a scum would do since Seph is already an easy target. All in all a good case imo.
EchelonTee:
Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 10:23 EchelonTee wrote:Was sister's birthday yesterday and went out last night, time to get on this. On seph: On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? Interesting how the seph is against policy lynches, as they could be easily used as a case on him. Self admitting lurking, then later claims he did this on purpose to see if it would arouse attention? Wat? Note how this post really doesn't advance discussion, especially his last paragraph; it sounds longer he is being analytical with his reasoning but all he is doing is stating the obvious, that we need day 1 lynch is a forgone conclusion. However this I'd still early the day, seph gets more suspicious/weird as we move on. On December 24 2011 03:25 sephirotharg wrote:
Well, I'm a bit surprised this didn't happen faster.
Shraft, what do you want me to say? I merely made a comment based on my tendencies - if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town.
Add to my case the fact that I've already acted pro-town, in generating discussion with the last part of my first post, and I'm not sure how you can justify voting for me. Acting smug about doing something scummy, as though you're being actually a super sneaky pro-town? Seems like Betty poor backpedaling to me. Pointing out your negative tendencies just emphasizes that you are anti town, but trying to present it as though its no big deal. there is little reason to state this from a town perspective; you are just giving yourself an excuse for bad play and/or scum play. I and others already noted that you haven't generated any good discussion, so at this point your case is looking worse. On December 24 2011 03:38 sephirotharg wrote:
RE: GiygaS
No, you misinterpreted my post - I expected somebody to notice that part about me lurking long before they did - I didn't expect to get votes so early!
You see, mafia will tend to push for a mis-lynch day 1 - and I don't mind putting myself out there as a target, if it lures them out of hiding. So, anyone who has pushed for lynching me, consider yourself on notice. More backpedaling with the justification for lurking. Very faulty logic, trying to claim people who are calling out your poor behavior are suspicious... For noticing that you are highly suspicious? No one is buying it. At this point I suspect this was a terribad GF gambit. On December 24 2011 08:14 sephirotharg wrote:
Because I don't desire to appear mafia? If I'm town, the last thing I'd want to do is contradict myself, so it seems natural to me to re-read my posts. This sealed the case for me. Seph's defenses have positively become shorter and shadier. If your were town, your would have no reason to fear being scrutinized for bullshit unless a) you're a terribad townie who is disrupting play, or b) scummy scum. There is little backing up what you have said. Voting for self = just plain weird, shows that you don't have a case on ANYONE else, if you had any way to defend yourself, your vote and your reasoning would be the way... And you have shown that you have no defense. that, coupled with your defeatist mentality means you're either faulty townie with a lynch, or scum. ##Vote sephirotharg Slightly similar to adams. It is a well thought out and worked out case. Nothing that really shines through as new but by now 5 others have already voted for speh and made cases. Since this is only day1 very little material is there to work with. I don't find this overly scummy but Tee is still jumping the easy target.
Basically, the problem I have with these three posts aren't the content in itself, rather the lack of it. I said earlier on that I think it's basically a null tell when people encourage each other to contribute. I still stand by that, but posting multiple posts lacking content is an indicator that you want to look as if you're contributing even though you're sharing very little of your own thoughts.
The list posts bring nothing new to the table, they're just empty contributions. The post "analysing" each vote for sephirotharg in fact contains very little analysis. It's basically just quoting every post and then summing them up in three sentences. This is not scummy per se, it's just that I get the impression that people are of the opinion that dirkzor has contributed to the discussion/scumhunting in the thread, while in fact most of his posts are lacking content.
+ Show Spoiler [Last part of his post analysing the vo…] +On December 24 2011 21:18 Dirkzor wrote:
To conclude this wall of text I find Jay scummy. He jumped the wagon early with no really evidence or thought behind it other then what others had already pointed out. When misder goes after him he quickly counter attacks pointing out how misder havn't done anything but discuss policy lynches.
Misder later case on him is really solid and i agree with most of it.
Edit before posting: I seem to have missed that Grackaroni have also voted for him. Wont go into his posts now. Also while writing hyshes have voted for him aswell. So now the number is at 9 votes on seph.
This wagon is going to easy at the moment. Either scum have already given up on seph and is then pushing him hard or we found a very bad townie. I'm leaning bad townie.
##Unvote
##Vote jaybrundage
The problem I have is that he switches his vote to jay while referring to Misder's case as "really solid". This quirks me because I had earlier read through Misder's case and I thoughts it was (no offense toward Misder) kind of poor. Let's look at Misder's case (my comments are bolded):
+ Show Spoiler +On December 24 2011 11:23 Misder wrote:The more I read seph, the more I read noob :/ I've read Ver's analysis on Mafia XXX multiple times, and I know the way I was thinking when I was mafia. The first post is the only thing I read that is preemptive defense. 1) It's not even preemptive defense- all it is is saying lurking is natural 2) It's not the only post- nothing after that post seems the way I would play at all as scum. Just seems like a frustrated townie to me. 3) Similar to 2, his play is anti-town, but I highly doubt he's scum (for example, voting for yourself is anti-town, but difficult for scum to do; or leaving the game- thats anti-town, but something I would not expect scum to do). It's almost like he's not trying to be careful of what he's doing (besides the editing I guess) I'll let seph defend himself though. On jay, let's just say its a gut read, and I'm feeling very good about it. I do only have 4 posts to work with right now. We can look at them though. Post 1"Trying to soft claim that lurking is ok is honestly pretty anti town. There is not reason to allow it or hint that it's acceptable or we gonna establish a bad town atmosphere. We need people to post what they think so we can get transparency." This is pretty much the discussion between the Lynch all Lurkers policy lynch. However, framing it so that one side = scum is really not logical. Otherwise, jay is saying that GygaS and Cyber_Cheese are scum as well. Misder is putting words in his mouth. Jay did not frame it so that one side = scum. He simply said that "Trying to soft claim that lurking is okay is honestly pretty anti town". Anti town != scum. And claming that lurking is okay is anti town."I also fine the fact that sephirotharg posted a vote in himself really really weird to be honest." The "to be honest" part is something minor, but I don't like it. It's like saying, "I'm scum but even to me its really weird." It's more likely a writing habit of jay's than anything else. Attempting to equate it to "I'm scum but even to me it's really weird" is just silly."Why would you put a vote on your self as a "placeholder" I honestly think its a distraction because why would mafia vote himself. But at the same time why would town vote for himself. Its a action that makes no sense. And when we are trying to get clarity why would you do that." This isn't going anywhere, and there's no point to it. It's just saying, placeholder vote could be scum or town. I agree that this is mostly nonsense from jay, but it's not really scummy."Honestly you seem to want to be voting for the way your acting. Post a solid reason why we should not vote for you. Defend your self give people another case on someone you think is scummy. Something" A fake attempt to generate more discussion when in reality, doesn't do anything. If you agree that this is just a fake attempt to generate discussion, then surely you must agree that Dirkzor's posting of lists combined with encouraging the people on said list to be more active is also a fake attempt to generate discussion. Encouraging people to post is not scummy in itself.Post 2"Plz address these concerns." Same as before. Same as before. "If your town tell use everything you know so that we have tools to get scum." Basically, bluefishing. Really? No.Post 3Compare this line: "Hm I find it interesting that you choice to vote for me." with one of his Student Mafia post ("But im curious how did i go from not posting quality stuff to being mafia.") Surprisingly similar. This meta is surprisingly weak. You can't excerpt single sentences from his posts in Student Mafia, compare them to single sentences from this game, and believe that it holds any evidence (or even indicates in the slightest) that jay is scum?Also similar: same post from above- "And if you want to make a case on me go for it." and another post from Student Mafia ("I dont mind if you think im scummy. Just make a real case for it.") Same as above."So far you posted everything about policy lynches which is a great discussion starter. You have to move on sooner or later. You then vote for me with practically nothing. You claim i haven't contributed but all you talked about was policy lynches." Attacking me as defense, basically saying "Misder isn't qualified to attack me because he only talked about policy lynches". We can compare this to him and Adam and xtfffc in Student Mafia, although in that case, he did attack Adam first. Yet another post in Student Mafia ("If you wanna call me me scummy come out and say it im done with people soft claiming someones scum with out a real reason behind it. I honestly think that bullshit like that is not going to help the town.") I agree that his attack on you was silly, but you still can't compare single sentences to each other and use it to indicate that someone is mafia. None of this meta holds any water at all.Although there is one good thing for him- he's not trying to act noobish like he did in the beginning of Student Mafia.
I find it really weird that he switches his vote while referring to this case as solid. The case Misder provided is all but solid. It holds barely any evidence at all. He doesn't even point to what he thinks is good about the case. He merely states that he "agrees with most of it". It just seems like an excuse to switch his vote. I thought this might be Dirkzor attempting to jump off the wagon that he started against sephirotharg (because he knew that he was innocent) in order to lessen the suspicion toward him, but that's a mere assumption and shouldn't be interpreted as more than that.
That said, his switch back to sephirotharg was pro-town (only mafia would benefit from a no lynch) although it didn't matter in the end. There is one thing I don't like about his vote switch though. He says "I want them both to hang - atleast to get info." which is something that makes me twitch every time I read it. "Lynching to get information" is something that mafia uses to rationalise a lynch on a player that they know is town. Town lynches to kill scum, not to gain information.
That said, I really like his last post concerning giygas, mostly because I hadn't noticed myself that giygas stated a lot of stuff without providing much reasoning. (The only post of giygas' that I had acknowledged before Dirkzor's post was "Yeah I believe jay in his defense, I'm sticking with seph.")
In the end, my post didn't turn out the way I originally thought it would. At the time I started writing this I was quite suspicious of him, but his last post lessened my suspicion toward him greatly.
|
Also, during night time, I feel that a bit of talking about how to organise blues might be in its place.
First off, we shouldn't use ANY lists about who medics should protect. They simply serve as a heads up to the mafia saying "avoid to hit these targets". I don't think that a vigilante list is of any good either. Lists are easily influenced by the mafia and therefore they should be avoided at all times. To a vigilante or cop, the only one who is confirmed town is himself. You should use your powers at your own discretion. If you are a power role, but don't know how to use your power you should not ask for advice in the thread, you should rather consult some guide. For cops and vigilantes I can recommend Ace's guide.
Bottom line: if you are a blue role, don't listen to anyone in this thread telling you how to use your power. Decide for yourself. If you are uncertain, consult a guide.
|
If we're going to win this, there are some players that'll have to start being a lot more active (I'm looking mainly at hyshes here). In fact town as a whole needs to be a lot more active, or else we're going to find ourselves at lylo in two cycles with insufficient information to work with.
How do you guys feel about jay? Do you still want to off him or do you think that there's better targets? I think his play is more in line with an emotionally invested townie than scum. My scepticism toward the jay lynch probably stems from the lackluster cases on him. I'd argue that we'll gain less information if we keep arguing jay, and that it'll probably be wiser to bring forth new information on other (less discussed) players, and that we should leave jay to the vigilante(s). The problem with that is that we might not even have one. Anyway, if people find jay scummy they'll probably present more cases pinpointing his scummyness, so hopefully that problem will work itself out.
Anyway, I have a new candidate for today's lynch.
As the new lynch target I present to you, GiygaS! I first caught sight of him when Dirkzor pointed out his attitude toward jay.
His first five posts are (more or less) stuff of no value, arguing policy lynches and general advice. It's basically filler, and thusly I won't analyse it.
His first interesting post is this one:
On December 24 2011 03:28 GiygaS wrote:First of all, shut up about policies people. I know I won't back down on not implementing them, and Cyber_Cheese won't either. This whole discussion on which policy is better was really only good for generating the first bit of discussion, but now we have people ignoring actually important events to talk about this shit. Stop. On Sephiroth (goddamn you were hard to beat in Kingdom Hearts 2 ), I think his post is definitely scummy, and I'm placing my FoS on him, but I am not lynching him yet. I want to see more than one post out of him to decide if I want to lynch him, as I don't believe one singular post should ever be the reason someone is lynched unless it is really extremely crazy. I'm looking forward to his defense and responses to future questions I ask of him
Here, he makes it overly clear that he is not jumping on some bandwagon without thinking it through thoroughly first. This is not a bad habit (to think things through), but from experience, only mafia feel the necessity to announce their thoughtfulness explicitly in the thread. A townie will gladly jump on a bandwagon on loose advice based off of one post in order to pressure someone, whereas scum are scared of voting because it attracts unwanted attention.
Just before GiygaS posted the message above, Sephirotharg posts (GiygaS was ninja'd):
On December 24 2011 03:25 sephirotharg wrote:
Well, I'm a bit surprised this didn't happen faster.
Shraft, what do you want me to say? I merely made a comment based on my tendencies - if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town.
Add to my case the fact that I've already acted pro-town, in generating discussion with the last part of my first post, and I'm not sure how you can justify voting for me.
After this post, the oh so thoughtful GiygaS posts:
On December 24 2011 03:30 GiygaS wrote:
Ninja'd.
First of all, you expected to be voted on early? A town would never have that tendency.
You made a comment on your tendencies that just sparks excuses for yourself later on down the road, that's NOT pro-town.
Your last sentence didn't really "generate discussion", as that info was used as a footnote to other people's posts already.
##Vote sephirotharg
Notice how he went from being very hesitant to vote for Sephirotharg to voting for him without providing much thought or reasoning at all. (This happened over a span of two minutes - his first post was made 3:28 and his second 3:30.) This means that all it took was two minutes and a rather contentless post from Seph to turn the thoughful GiygaS into voting-aggressively-without-providing-much-thought-GiygaS. Seems rather odd and inconsistent to me. The only thing that might be interpreted as scummy in Seph's second post is that he tries to proclaim his actions as pro-town, but even taking this into consideration, it seems strange that this would be enough to warrant GiygaS's change in his attitude toward Seph.
After placing his vote, GiygaS is content to sit back and wait for the day to end without providing much thought on the cases presented on jay. Nor does he provide any additional thoughts on why he wants sephirotharg lynched. This is what Dirkzor discovered. He simply states:
On December 25 2011 04:49 GiygaS wrote:
I just read seph's defense and I've skimmed throught his whole jaybrundage thing. I'm not sure on him, and not nearly as much as I am on Sephiroth. All I heard in the defense was literally "I'm not mafia, would mafia do this?" can of defense, let alone how many times he mentions "I'm town", or that he's just a noob with a bad strategy. If I read honestly from him one more time I'm going to scream D:
Reading through the rest now.
This is just a contentless post attempting to make it appear as though he actually cares about how the lynch is going or making it appear as though he is contributing and actively thinking about choosing the best target for the lynch. Observe that he just uses blanket statements. He doesn't put any effort in pointing out what is wrong with the cases or just what he doesn't like (more specifically) about Seph's defense.
On December 25 2011 05:23 GiygaS wrote:
Yeah I believe jay in his defense, I'm sticking with seph.
This is straight up buddying with jay. There is not a single reason for a townie to ever simply "believe" another player. The only healthy attitude to have as a townie toward other players is to never give them the benefit of the doubt. Always question them. Always demand of them to provide thoughts and reasons to back their statements. To buddy up with someone is foolish. This is pure anti-town play.
Only when he gets called out by Seph he provides more food for thought, and even then he provides only general fluff and makes no real effort to refer to anything specific. Here's the post:
On December 25 2011 06:49 GiygaS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2011 06:38 sephirotharg wrote:On December 25 2011 05:23 GiygaS wrote:
Yeah I believe jay in his defense, I'm sticking with seph. Care to expand on that? Why do you believe Jay and not me? Lay out your reasoning, convince others. That's the town play. A lot of the stuff on Jay is twisting words to say he's mafia. While the first evidence against you was indeed flavor text (the lurker thing), most of he stuff on you now is how you've reacted to things IMO. Meanwhile Jay only has weird flavor text twisting against him. BTW, I think the reason he hasn't scumhunted yet is there's pretty much him and you on the chopping block. That and I just get a tone of voice thing in yours that makes it seem you're way more concerned about getting lynched than Jay is, which I usually associate with a mafia.
To conclude: GiygaS is a scummily scummy scum! When day turns to night, I want his body to hang on the gallows of Liquidia!
##Vote GiygaS
|
On December 27 2011 03:01 Dirkzor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2011 00:55 Shraft wrote:RE: Who do you want to lynch and why? At first I was going to make a post saying that I am kind of suspicious about Dirkzor, but then I refreshed the page, and I quite like his last post. Still, I have some issues with him. First off, let's take a few of his initial posts: + Show Spoiler +On December 23 2011 23:47 Dirkzor wrote:
Also, it's been 12 hours since we started and several people have yet to post.
Mattchew
Shraft
minus_human (yeah one post saying you would be back in a few hours...)
EchelonTee
jaybrundage
Gogo!
We need more activity if we want to find scum. Otherwise it will be chaos come a few hours before lynch time! On December 24 2011 08:01 Dirkzor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 07:16 sephirotharg wrote:
A couple of questions:
For voting, need we specifically unvote? Or, if we merely vote for a different person, is it taken for granted that we unvoted the original vote?
Can the host/co-host please keep the player list up to date? I refer to it often, and it would be nice to have the reminder that hyshes has replaced Mattchew, for example.
And as a placeholder: ##Vote sephirotharg Why vote on yourself? Even if it is a placeholder? Why not vote on me or Shraft who you said you found suspicius? Put some pressure back? Shraft how did you realize that Mattchew was banned? I have opdated my post with the filters on page 3 if people want to use it. ( I used edit as it was a pre-game post that have no influence - ok?) Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 23:47 Dirkzor wrote:
Also, it's been 12 hours since we started and several people have yet to post.
Mattchewhyshes
Shraft
minus_human (yeah one post saying you would be back in a few hours...)
EchelonTee
jaybrundage
Gogo!
We need more activity if we want to find scum. Otherwise it will be chaos come a few hours before lynch time! minus_human EchelonTee jaybrundage Still waiting for you guys! (I left out hyshes since he "just" replaced Matt) On December 24 2011 21:18 Dirkzor wrote:This lynch looks worse the more people jumped on the wagon. Votes on Sephirotharg in order of appearence: Dirkzor Shraft GiygaS Sephirotharg jaybrundage Adam4167 EchelonTee Misder and Cyber are the only ones to qeustion this. Cyber targeted me and Misder targeted jay. Lest go through the reasons people voted for Sephirotharg: Dirk: Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 23:39 Dirkzor wrote:On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? I bolded what i found strange. You already state that you will be lurking. Early in game you want people to feel its okay that you lurk. No Mr. I won't allow it! Yes life gets in the way but you should make up for it when time permits. In that way people won't feel you are lurking if you have provided enough to talk about when you actually have the time. We all need to eat and sleep (work?) but if you don't carry your weight we don't need you. ##Vote sephirotharg and Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 07:46 Dirkzor wrote:On December 24 2011 03:31 sephirotharg wrote:On December 23 2011 23:39 Dirkzor wrote:On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? I bolded what i found strange. You already state that you will be lurking. Early in game you want people to feel its okay that you lurk. No Mr. I won't allow it! Yes life gets in the way but you should make up for it when time permits. In that way people won't feel you are lurking if you have provided enough to talk about when you actually have the time. We all need to eat and sleep (work?) but if you don't carry your weight we don't need you. ##Vote sephirotharg That's all well and good - I don't necessarily disagree with anything you say here. In general, lurking isn't optimal play, not for town at any rate. That said, you didn't actually provide any reason to vote for me here. You responded to my post, but gave no rationale as to why you placed your vote on me. Please do everyone the favor of explaining your actions. I do feel I gave a reason, but since english isn't my first language I'll try again. You are preemptivly excusing yourself for lurking. If people have the mindset that "Oh seph is lurking because thats what he does" you might try to get away with lurking later in the game. You could also point out later that you already said you would lurk. And I don't like that. I would say that my vote wasn't intended to get you lynched. Just spur some discussion - which it did. On December 24 2011 03:56 sephirotharg wrote:
RE: Giygas
This is a game of circles within circles son, and you'd best step to that right quick.
Weird accent aside, I'm merely stating that I find you, Dirkzor, and Shraft rather suspicious for voting so early and pushing hard. I think it's rather obvious why I wrote "the thing about lurking" - to generate some discussion, allowing scum to reveal themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the three of you flips red - but we'll see. I did not find it obvious why you wrote it. It did start some discussion but only because I (and others) noticed how silly it was to write. I'll keep my vote on you for now for the lack of better choices... Basicly a very weak vote based on a semi joke (the smiley) concerning his own level of activity. I did this because at this point we were only discussing policy lynches which don't really nets us any info since everyone disagrees anyway.
Shraft:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 00:15 Shraft wrote:Also, I don't like that sephirotharg explains in his first that he "sometimes lurks". From my experience, most of the times when people make preemptive excuses, they're mafia. If he was a townie, he wouldn't worry about looking scummy later on if he had some IRL task that he needs to do. Furthermore, I don't like how he starts his post with "I'm not skilled, but it's still fun " simply because it's another preemptive measure. and Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 02:17 Shraft wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I dislike sephirotharg's post. I am going to put my vote on him until I hear what he has to say.
##Vote sephirotharg
He adds to the case with the point about how he preemptivly excuse himself in his first post: "I'm not skilled, but it's still fun ". After that he places a vote that is very clearly a pressure vote. GiygaS:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 03:28 GiygaS wrote:On Sephiroth (goddamn you were hard to beat in Kingdom Hearts 2 ), I think his post is definitely scummy, and I'm placing my FoS on him, but I am not lynching him yet. I want to see more than one post out of him to decide if I want to lynch him, as I don't believe one singular post should ever be the reason someone is lynched unless it is really extremely crazy. I'm looking forward to his defense and responses to future questions I ask of him and Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 03:30 GiygaS wrote:
Ninja'd.
First of all, you expected to be voted on early? A town would never have that tendency.
You made a comment on your tendencies that just sparks excuses for yourself later on down the road, that's NOT pro-town.
Your last sentence didn't really "generate discussion", as that info was used as a footnote to other people's posts already.
##Vote sephirotharg He adds nothing new other then to hesitate a bit before voting for seph (after his first defence). This could easily be jumping on the wagon that Shraft and myself started. sephirotharg:Well... jaybrundage:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 07:57 jaybrundage wrote:
Hey guys,
Sorry for not being to active. Internet is a commodity not always provided at my families house.
Ok lets get started. On policy lynches i think that there fine guidelines for how we should act and at the same time we should not follow them blindly and be the main reason we lynch someone.
Onto the good stuff. I think that the sephirotharg case is an interesting one. I do find his first post suspicious.
Trying to soft claim that lurking is ok is honestly pretty anti town. There is not reason to allow it or hint that it's acceptable or we gonna establish a bad town atmosphere. We need people to post what they think so we can get transparency.
I also fine the fact that sephirotharg posted a vote in himself really really weird to be honest. You know people think your suspicious if not just plain scum. Why would you put a vote on your self as a "placeholder" I honestly think its a distraction because why would mafia vote himself. But at the same time why would town vote for himself. Its a action that makes no sense. And when we are trying to get clarity why would you do that.
##Vote sephirotharg
Honestly you seem to want to be voting for the way your acting. Post a solid reason why we should not vote for you. Defend your self give people another case on someone you think is scummy. Something At this point several people was after seph. He was acting weird and voting for himself. An easy target to jump on and thats exactly what jay did. Nothing new added to the case. This is the point where my alarm bells started ringing. Why is everyone going for this kid? I find this very suspicious... Adam4167:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 08:19 Adam4167 wrote:Sephirotharg: On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? Your first post comes across as timid and making excuses for further down the track. Saying “I’m not skilled” only serves to devalue your opinion, which is something that no townie wants to do. It is however something that mafia wants to do, if he plans on flying under the radar. Your problem with lynching all liars is that it ‘narrows town focus’ too much. I disagree; someone caught lying to the town deserves all the scrutiny they get. I feel as though you are giving yourself an out in the event that you are caught lying later on. Lastly, your point on lurkers is just flat out questionable. If you didn’t have the time to devote to playing this game, then why did you sign up? As you can tell, there are several people who missed out that want your spot. You finish by tacking on some napkin math about how many days we have before lylo, which is unnecessary on page 4 when the game started on page 3. Its entirely fluff, discussing worst-case scenario’s on the first day is pointless and only serves as a distraction from us doing our jobs, catching scum. On December 24 2011 03:25 sephirotharg wrote:
Well, I'm a bit surprised this didn't happen faster.
Shraft, what do you want me to say? I merely made a comment based on my tendencies - if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town.
Add to my case the fact that I've already acted pro-town, in generating discussion with the last part of my first post, and I'm not sure how you can justify voting for me. On December 24 2011 03:31 sephirotharg wrote:
That's all well and good - I don't necessarily disagree with anything you say here. In general, lurking isn't optimal play, not for town at any rate.
That said, you didn't actually provide any reason to vote for me here. You responded to my post, but gave no rationale as to why you placed your vote on me. Please do everyone the favor of explaining your actions. Your second and third posts are also causes for concern. In your second post you state “if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town” in response to Shraft prodding you about your lurking intentions. Then in your next post, 6 minutes later, you say, “In general, lurking isn’t optimal play, not for town at any rate”. This just screams inconsistent. You claim your play style is pro-town, and then dismiss your play style as not optimal for town only 6 minutes later. On December 24 2011 03:56 sephirotharg wrote:
RE: Giygas
This is a game of circles within circles son, and you'd best step to that right quick.
Weird accent aside, I'm merely stating that I find you, Dirkzor, and Shraft rather suspicious for voting so early and pushing hard. I think it's rather obvious why I wrote "the thing about lurking" - to generate some discussion, allowing scum to reveal themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the three of you flips red - but we'll see. After demeaning Giygas by implying that you know something he doesn’t (interesting tactic for someone claiming to be “unskilled” in their first post), you claim that you think it’s ‘rather obvious’ as to why you are doing what you are doing. This just screams cop-out, you weren’t expecting all the heat you’re getting from your first few posts and now you are trying to rationalise it all as ‘generating discussion’. On December 24 2011 07:06 sephirotharg wrote:
@ Grack
It's not something I consciously decide at the beginning of the game; it arises mainly due to circumstances and whatnot - for example, in about an hour or so I'll be gone until late tonight, so don't expect much from me later on. I'll be around for the lynch deadline, though, and I intend to be active in the game. I've kept this thread open and refreshing since day 1 started.
@ Shraft
I'm glad that I'm not the only one playing subtly. So far, most people are playing their cards close to their chest, so to speak. When I'm active, I play more fast and loose. In your last post (as of the time of writing this) you announce your intentions to return to lurking until near the deadline so ‘don’t expect much form me later on’, so… you don’t plan on defending yourself after all of this? Your message to Shraft: “I’m glad I’m not the only one playing subtly” again just stinks of cop-out. Now that the PBP is over, I’m just going to be honest. You claim unskilled and then act like you are ‘laying scum traps’ by being subtle. You announce your intentions to lurk, which does nothing to help this town. Your play has been nothing but anti-town since your first post. Don’t lurk, get back here and EXPLAIN your actions. **And now that I’ve refreshed the thread, you’ve voted for yourself… AND edited “contradictory statements” out of one of your posts. I really wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, but the shoe fits here. ##Vote sephirotharg Gives a really long case on Seph. Nothing that stands out as brand new but some points where made that hadn't been brought up before. Also Adam made a great affort in posting this which I don't think a scum would do since Seph is already an easy target. All in all a good case imo.
EchelonTee:
Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 10:23 EchelonTee wrote:Was sister's birthday yesterday and went out last night, time to get on this. On seph: On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote:For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary. With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? Interesting how the seph is against policy lynches, as they could be easily used as a case on him. Self admitting lurking, then later claims he did this on purpose to see if it would arouse attention? Wat? Note how this post really doesn't advance discussion, especially his last paragraph; it sounds longer he is being analytical with his reasoning but all he is doing is stating the obvious, that we need day 1 lynch is a forgone conclusion. However this I'd still early the day, seph gets more suspicious/weird as we move on. On December 24 2011 03:25 sephirotharg wrote:
Well, I'm a bit surprised this didn't happen faster.
Shraft, what do you want me to say? I merely made a comment based on my tendencies - if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town.
Add to my case the fact that I've already acted pro-town, in generating discussion with the last part of my first post, and I'm not sure how you can justify voting for me. Acting smug about doing something scummy, as though you're being actually a super sneaky pro-town? Seems like Betty poor backpedaling to me. Pointing out your negative tendencies just emphasizes that you are anti town, but trying to present it as though its no big deal. there is little reason to state this from a town perspective; you are just giving yourself an excuse for bad play and/or scum play. I and others already noted that you haven't generated any good discussion, so at this point your case is looking worse. On December 24 2011 03:38 sephirotharg wrote:
RE: GiygaS
No, you misinterpreted my post - I expected somebody to notice that part about me lurking long before they did - I didn't expect to get votes so early!
You see, mafia will tend to push for a mis-lynch day 1 - and I don't mind putting myself out there as a target, if it lures them out of hiding. So, anyone who has pushed for lynching me, consider yourself on notice. More backpedaling with the justification for lurking. Very faulty logic, trying to claim people who are calling out your poor behavior are suspicious... For noticing that you are highly suspicious? No one is buying it. At this point I suspect this was a terribad GF gambit. On December 24 2011 08:14 sephirotharg wrote:
Because I don't desire to appear mafia? If I'm town, the last thing I'd want to do is contradict myself, so it seems natural to me to re-read my posts. This sealed the case for me. Seph's defenses have positively become shorter and shadier. If your were town, your would have no reason to fear being scrutinized for bullshit unless a) you're a terribad townie who is disrupting play, or b) scummy scum. There is little backing up what you have said. Voting for self = just plain weird, shows that you don't have a case on ANYONE else, if you had any way to defend yourself, your vote and your reasoning would be the way... And you have shown that you have no defense. that, coupled with your defeatist mentality means you're either faulty townie with a lynch, or scum. ##Vote sephirotharg Slightly similar to adams. It is a well thought out and worked out case. Nothing that really shines through as new but by now 5 others have already voted for speh and made cases. Since this is only day1 very little material is there to work with. I don't find this overly scummy but Tee is still jumping the easy target. Note that the last quote is not his entire post, because I want to address the last part of it by itself later on. Basically, the problem I have with these three posts aren't the content in itself, rather the lack of it. I said earlier on that I think it's basically a null tell when people encourage each other to contribute. I still stand by that, but posting multiple posts lacking content is an indicator that you want to look as if you're contributing even though you're sharing very little of your own thoughts. The list posts bring nothing new to the table, they're just empty contributions. The post "analysing" each vote for sephirotharg in fact contains very little analysis. It's basically just quoting every post and then summing them up in three sentences. This is not scummy per se, it's just that I get the impression that people are of the opinion that dirkzor has contributed to the discussion/scumhunting in the thread, while in fact most of his posts are lacking content. + Show Spoiler [Last part of his post analysing the vo…] +On December 24 2011 21:18 Dirkzor wrote:
To conclude this wall of text I find Jay scummy. He jumped the wagon early with no really evidence or thought behind it other then what others had already pointed out. When misder goes after him he quickly counter attacks pointing out how misder havn't done anything but discuss policy lynches.
Misder later case on him is really solid and i agree with most of it.
Edit before posting: I seem to have missed that Grackaroni have also voted for him. Wont go into his posts now. Also while writing hyshes have voted for him aswell. So now the number is at 9 votes on seph.
This wagon is going to easy at the moment. Either scum have already given up on seph and is then pushing him hard or we found a very bad townie. I'm leaning bad townie.
##Unvote
##Vote jaybrundage The problem I have is that he switches his vote to jay while referring to Misder's case as "really solid". This quirks me because I had earlier read through Misder's case and I thoughts it was (no offense toward Misder) kind of poor. Let's look at Misder's case (my comments are bolded): + Show Spoiler +On December 24 2011 11:23 Misder wrote:The more I read seph, the more I read noob :/ I've read Ver's analysis on Mafia XXX multiple times, and I know the way I was thinking when I was mafia. The first post is the only thing I read that is preemptive defense. 1) It's not even preemptive defense- all it is is saying lurking is natural 2) It's not the only post- nothing after that post seems the way I would play at all as scum. Just seems like a frustrated townie to me. 3) Similar to 2, his play is anti-town, but I highly doubt he's scum (for example, voting for yourself is anti-town, but difficult for scum to do; or leaving the game- thats anti-town, but something I would not expect scum to do). It's almost like he's not trying to be careful of what he's doing (besides the editing I guess) I'll let seph defend himself though. On jay, let's just say its a gut read, and I'm feeling very good about it. I do only have 4 posts to work with right now. We can look at them though. Post 1"Trying to soft claim that lurking is ok is honestly pretty anti town. There is not reason to allow it or hint that it's acceptable or we gonna establish a bad town atmosphere. We need people to post what they think so we can get transparency." This is pretty much the discussion between the Lynch all Lurkers policy lynch. However, framing it so that one side = scum is really not logical. Otherwise, jay is saying that GygaS and Cyber_Cheese are scum as well. Misder is putting words in his mouth. Jay did not frame it so that one side = scum. He simply said that "Trying to soft claim that lurking is okay is honestly pretty anti town". Anti town != scum. And claming that lurking is okay is anti town."I also fine the fact that sephirotharg posted a vote in himself really really weird to be honest." The "to be honest" part is something minor, but I don't like it. It's like saying, "I'm scum but even to me its really weird." It's more likely a writing habit of jay's than anything else. Attempting to equate it to "I'm scum but even to me it's really weird" is just silly."Why would you put a vote on your self as a "placeholder" I honestly think its a distraction because why would mafia vote himself. But at the same time why would town vote for himself. Its a action that makes no sense. And when we are trying to get clarity why would you do that." This isn't going anywhere, and there's no point to it. It's just saying, placeholder vote could be scum or town. I agree that this is mostly nonsense from jay, but it's not really scummy."Honestly you seem to want to be voting for the way your acting. Post a solid reason why we should not vote for you. Defend your self give people another case on someone you think is scummy. Something" A fake attempt to generate more discussion when in reality, doesn't do anything. If you agree that this is just a fake attempt to generate discussion, then surely you must agree that Dirkzor's posting of lists combined with encouraging the people on said list to be more active is also a fake attempt to generate discussion. Encouraging people to post is not scummy in itself.Post 2"Plz address these concerns." Same as before. Same as before. "If your town tell use everything you know so that we have tools to get scum." Basically, bluefishing. Really? No.Post 3Compare this line: "Hm I find it interesting that you choice to vote for me." with one of his Student Mafia post ("But im curious how did i go from not posting quality stuff to being mafia.") Surprisingly similar. This meta is surprisingly weak. You can't excerpt single sentences from his posts in Student Mafia, compare them to single sentences from this game, and believe that it holds any evidence (or even indicates in the slightest) that jay is scum?Also similar: same post from above- "And if you want to make a case on me go for it." and another post from Student Mafia ("I dont mind if you think im scummy. Just make a real case for it.") Same as above."So far you posted everything about policy lynches which is a great discussion starter. You have to move on sooner or later. You then vote for me with practically nothing. You claim i haven't contributed but all you talked about was policy lynches." Attacking me as defense, basically saying "Misder isn't qualified to attack me because he only talked about policy lynches". We can compare this to him and Adam and xtfffc in Student Mafia, although in that case, he did attack Adam first. Yet another post in Student Mafia ("If you wanna call me me scummy come out and say it im done with people soft claiming someones scum with out a real reason behind it. I honestly think that bullshit like that is not going to help the town.") I agree that his attack on you was silly, but you still can't compare single sentences to each other and use it to indicate that someone is mafia. None of this meta holds any water at all.Although there is one good thing for him- he's not trying to act noobish like he did in the beginning of Student Mafia. I find it really weird that he switches his vote while referring to this case as solid. The case Misder provided is all but solid. It holds barely any evidence at all. He doesn't even point to what he thinks is good about the case. He merely states that he "agrees with most of it". It just seems like an excuse to switch his vote. I thought this might be Dirkzor attempting to jump off the wagon that he started against sephirotharg (because he knew that he was innocent) in order to lessen the suspicion toward him, but that's a mere assumption and shouldn't be interpreted as more than that. That said, his switch back to sephirotharg was pro-town (only mafia would benefit from a no lynch) although it didn't matter in the end. There is one thing I don't like about his vote switch though. He says "I want them both to hang - atleast to get info." which is something that makes me twitch every time I read it. "Lynching to get information" is something that mafia uses to rationalise a lynch on a player that they know is town. Town lynches to kill scum, not to gain information. That said, I really like his last post concerning giygas, mostly because I hadn't noticed myself that giygas stated a lot of stuff without providing much reasoning. (The only post of giygas' that I had acknowledged before Dirkzor's post was "Yeah I believe jay in his defense, I'm sticking with seph.") In the end, my post didn't turn out the way I originally thought it would. At the time I started writing this I was quite suspicious of him, but his last post lessened my suspicion toward him greatly. The reason for me to make the long fluffy post about who had voted for seph, and why, was because i wanted to see the timeline for the wagon on Seph. The conclusion i made was rather short but I still feel it gave me an overview over how it went down. The reason I didn't go more in-depth was that i ran out of time. I was getting ready for christmas and was leaving after that. I agree that some of my other post are kinda useless toward generating real discussion but can be perceived as such. I will do better!
What I am more concerned with was how you referred to Misder's case as "solid". Why did you think that case was good? I think it is pretty poor.
|
|
|
There is no need for you to post your thoughts about everyone in the game. Telling us who you think is town is irrelevant (and even anti town). We are not interested in who you trust and who you don't. If everyone outs their time reads and if there's people that are town and are believed to be town by multiple players, it's like painting a big fucking target on their back for mafia to hit. Instead of writing small analyses on every player in the game, focus on the one player who seems scummiest to you, and write a good case. Writing small posts about every player doesn't benefit town in any way.
|
EBWOP: It's supposed to be "If everyone outs their town reads[...]" not "If everyone outs their time reads[...]".
|
On December 27 2011 05:54 GiygaS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2011 05:36 Shraft wrote:
There is no need for you to post your thoughts about everyone in the game. Telling us who you think is town is irrelevant (and even anti town). We are not interested in who you trust and who you don't. If everyone outs their time reads and if there's people that are town and are believed to be town by multiple players, it's like painting a big fucking target on their back for mafia to hit. Instead of writing small analyses on every player in the game, focus on the one player who seems scummiest to you, and write a good case. Writing small posts about every player doesn't benefit town in any way. Mafia knows who's town and who's not. :/ If people can come to a consensus on who's townish for now, how is that a bad thing? I want people's opinions on this before I post the rest, for obvious reasons of my time.
Because if town has come to the consensus that A, B and C are likely to be town, that gives mafia all the more incentive to kill A, B and C. We'd rather have the mafia kill people whose alignment we are uncertain of. That way it it easier to narrow down the scum suspects. That's why it is not good if everyone knows veryone else's town reads.
|
|
|
On December 27 2011 11:35 Adam4167 wrote:
Shraft: Firstly, why are you telling Giygas to stop posting his analysis and waving it off as pointless? The more Giygas posts, the better able we are to discern his alignment, which I would think is something you should be very interested in considering you’re currently building a case against him. At this point, any chatter is better then nothing.
You’ve got an in-depth case building against Giygas, I find his turnaround towards jay to be a red flag until he clarifies it and also the way the seph lynch went down, I did have to raise an eyebrow at his ‘pressure-vote’ that stuck.
I'm not telling him to stop posting analysis. I'm telling him that if he is to post more analysis he might as well focus it on his scum reads, because that's what's important.
|
On December 28 2011 00:44 Dirkzor wrote:
I think Hyshes is a bad lynch. Not because I don't find him scummy, because I do. Scummy and useless. But thats why he is a horrible lynch target.
What do you mean with this? How is a scummy and useless player a bad lynch?
|
+ Show Spoiler [GiygaS's response on my case] +On December 27 2011 03:06 Shraft wrote:If we're going to win this, there are some players that'll have to start being a lot more active (I'm looking mainly at hyshes here). In fact town as a whole needs to be a lot more active, or else we're going to find ourselves at lylo in two cycles with insufficient information to work with. How do you guys feel about jay? Do you still want to off him or do you think that there's better targets? I think his play is more in line with an emotionally invested townie than scum. My scepticism toward the jay lynch probably stems from the lackluster cases on him. I'd argue that we'll gain less information if we keep arguing jay, and that it'll probably be wiser to bring forth new information on other (less discussed) players, and that we should leave jay to the vigilante(s). The problem with that is that we might not even have one. Anyway, if people find jay scummy they'll probably present more cases pinpointing his scummyness, so hopefully that problem will work itself out. Anyway, I have a new candidate for today's lynch. As the new lynch target I present to you, GiygaS! I first caught sight of him when Dirkzor pointed out his attitude toward jay. His first five posts are (more or less) stuff of no value, arguing policy lynches and general advice. It's basically filler, and thusly I won't analyse it. His first interesting post is this one: Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 03:28 GiygaS wrote:First of all, shut up about policies people. I know I won't back down on not implementing them, and Cyber_Cheese won't either. This whole discussion on which policy is better was really only good for generating the first bit of discussion, but now we have people ignoring actually important events to talk about this shit. Stop. On Sephiroth (goddamn you were hard to beat in Kingdom Hearts 2 ), I think his post is definitely scummy, and I'm placing my FoS on him, but I am not lynching him yet. I want to see more than one post out of him to decide if I want to lynch him, as I don't believe one singular post should ever be the reason someone is lynched unless it is really extremely crazy. I'm looking forward to his defense and responses to future questions I ask of him Here, he makes it overly clear that he is not jumping on some bandwagon without thinking it through thoroughly first. This is not a bad habit (to think things through), but from experience, only mafia feel the necessity to announce their thoughtfulness explicitly in the thread. A townie will gladly jump on a bandwagon on loose advice based off of one post in order to pressure someone, whereas scum are scared of voting because it attracts unwanted attention. This townie won't. I have a policy on myself that I won't lynch somebody off one post unless it's super uber duper scummy, which Seph's was not. I don't agree that only mafia will announce their thoughtfulness as at this point I was trying to slow down the suspicions on Seph until we got another post out of him.Just before GiygaS posted the message above, Sephirotharg posts (GiygaS was ninja'd): Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 03:25 sephirotharg wrote:
Well, I'm a bit surprised this didn't happen faster.
Shraft, what do you want me to say? I merely made a comment based on my tendencies - if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town.
Add to my case the fact that I've already acted pro-town, in generating discussion with the last part of my first post, and I'm not sure how you can justify voting for me. After this post, the oh so thoughtful GiygaS posts: Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 03:30 GiygaS wrote:
Ninja'd.
First of all, you expected to be voted on early? A town would never have that tendency.
You made a comment on your tendencies that just sparks excuses for yourself later on down the road, that's NOT pro-town.
Your last sentence didn't really "generate discussion", as that info was used as a footnote to other people's posts already.
##Vote sephirotharg Notice how he went from being very hesitant to vote for Sephirotharg to voting for him without providing much thought or reasoning at all. (This happened over a span of two minutes - his first post was made 3:28 and his second 3:30.) This means that all it took was two minutes and a rather contentless post from Seph to turn the thoughful GiygaS into voting-aggressively-without-providing-much-thought-GiygaS. Seems rather odd and inconsistent to me. The only thing that might be interpreted as scummy in Seph's second post is that he tries to proclaim his actions as pro-town, but even taking this into consideration, it seems strange that this would be enough to warrant GiygaS's change in his attitude toward Seph. While this is strange looking back on it, I will agree, I disagree with your conclusion. In my head at the time, I treated Seph as scum, he was already tunneled in my brain. Everything he said was wrong and scummy, you can see that based off my responses to his contentless post, treating it like it was big content. Again, apologies for tunneling.After placing his vote, GiygaS is content to sit back and wait for the day to end without providing much thought on the cases presented on jay. Nor does he provide any additional thoughts on why he wants sephirotharg lynched. This is what Dirkzor discovered. He simply states: I was content because I was out of the house, it's Christmas holidays and I had shopping and a basketball game to prepare for. Not to mention all my free time was on programming an rpg I'm making for computer science.Show nested quote +On December 25 2011 04:49 GiygaS wrote:
I just read seph's defense and I've skimmed throught his whole jaybrundage thing. I'm not sure on him, and not nearly as much as I am on Sephiroth. All I heard in the defense was literally "I'm not mafia, would mafia do this?" can of defense, let alone how many times he mentions "I'm town", or that he's just a noob with a bad strategy. If I read honestly from him one more time I'm going to scream D:
Reading through the rest now. This is just a contentless post attempting to make it appear as though he actually cares about how the lynch is going or making it appear as though he is contributing and actively thinking about choosing the best target for the lynch. Observe that he just uses blanket statements. He doesn't put any effort in pointing out what is wrong with the cases or just what he doesn't like (more specifically) about Seph's defense. I'm using blanket statements because I didn't want to point out the countless times it happened. I was trying to make it appear that I cared about the lynch because I did, but like you said I was gone for 24 hours.Show nested quote +On December 25 2011 05:23 GiygaS wrote:
Yeah I believe jay in his defense, I'm sticking with seph. This is straight up buddying with jay. There is not a single reason for a townie to ever simply "believe" another player. The only healthy attitude to have as a townie toward other players is to never give them the benefit of the doubt. Always question them. Always demand of them to provide thoughts and reasons to back their statements. To buddy up with someone is foolish. This is pure anti-town play. I'm going to explain this one sentence post here. I said (or I thought I did at the time) that I was going to look over the jay suspicions, and then I did and I posted my thoughts which were basically that the jay suspicions were null reads. Only when he gets called out by Seph he provides more food for thought, and even then he provides only general fluff and makes no real effort to refer to anything specific. Here's the post: Show nested quote +On December 25 2011 06:49 GiygaS wrote:On December 25 2011 06:38 sephirotharg wrote:On December 25 2011 05:23 GiygaS wrote:
Yeah I believe jay in his defense, I'm sticking with seph. Care to expand on that? Why do you believe Jay and not me? Lay out your reasoning, convince others. That's the town play. A lot of the stuff on Jay is twisting words to say he's mafia. While the first evidence against you was indeed flavor text (the lurker thing), most of he stuff on you now is how you've reacted to things IMO. Meanwhile Jay only has weird flavor text twisting against him. BTW, I think the reason he hasn't scumhunted yet is there's pretty much him and you on the chopping block. That and I just get a tone of voice thing in yours that makes it seem you're way more concerned about getting lynched than Jay is, which I usually associate with a mafia. Again, I'll be more in-depth with my analysis from now on when I can.To conclude: GiygaS is a scummily scummy scum! When day turns to night, I want his body to hang on the gallows of Liquidia! ##Vote GiygaS
- If seph was already "tunneled in your brain" and "Everything he said was wrong and scummy", then why'd you say you tried to lessen the suspicion toward him with your first post? If you believe he seemed scummy then you should want to put MORE pressure on him in to make him make even more mistakes, not try to slow down the suspicion toward him. Even with your explanation, this makes no sense from a town perspective.
- "I'm using blanket statements because I didn't want to point out the countless times it happened." Even if it happens countless times, pointing out a few (the onces of most importance) and explaining your reasoning is better than blanket statements. If you want to put even less effort in, simply quote his posts, spoiler them and bold everything that you don't like.
The rest of the defense is apologies and IRL excuses and as such, they aren't really open for questioning. I'll just omit it.
You promised analysis. I want to see it before I go to bed if there's going to be any chance at all for me to switch my vote.
|
Okay, so your case consists of:
- Quoting an old case
- An "artificial" post
- Something that you call a lie (and also mostly a null tell)
- Encouraging people to be aware of my posting
Addionally, you only analyse 2 of my ~30 posts in this thread. Make a real analysis.
|
Misder, you're only marginally less active than the average player in this town. That's probably why no one called you out. With this low activity we might as well RNG the lynches.
|
On December 28 2011 04:10 GiygaS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2011 04:08 Shraft wrote:Okay, so your case consists of: - Quoting an old case
- An "artificial" post
- Something that you call a lie (and also mostly a null tell)
- Encouraging people to be aware of my posting
Addionally, you only analyse 2 of my ~30 posts in this thread. Make a real analysis. Yeah I'm going to be honest, my case on you was pretty weak, which is why I'm only 60% thinking you're mafia right now. That changes to 75- 85% if Jay comes up as scum.
Yup, if jay gets lynched and ends up flipping scum, everyone that defended him should be scrutinized.
|
By the way, our votes are very spread out at the moment:
Shraft: hyshes
hyshes: Adam4167
Dirkzor: Cyber_cheese
jaybrundage: Misder, GiygaS
GiygaS: Shraft
The ones who haven't yet voted are: EchelonTee, jaybrundage and Dirkzor. We need five votes in order to reach a majority.
I think we need to force everyone to take a stance. What do you think about limiting the lynch to two candidates? Currently there's four candidates with 1 vote each. The spread votes are really nothing of value.
|
I've read through jay's filter again, and my scum radar didn't go off. Can anyone point me to the latest case on him? I don't recall reading any cases except seph's and Misder's cases on day 1, and I didn't like them. I encourage everyone that haven't voted for either GiygaS or jay to switch their vote onto one of the two. At this point in time it doesn't seem likely that we will lynch any of the other targets.
|
I am unsure of ET's (lol) alignment. As you said he hasn't said much. He has pretty much kept himself in line and not made much of a fuss. He might very well be scum, but I don't have any specific scum tells on him (nor many signs of pro-town activity for that matter).
|
They might as well be disinterested townies. That's why lurkers are so god damn annoying...
@Cyber_cheese
Your vote on hyshes does no good. We aren't going to get him lynched unless this thread suddenly becomes a lot more active and we decide to lynch a lurker. What about the case on GiygaS don't you like?
Lurkers... Lurkers are killing us slowly....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
