Purgatory Mafia - Page 95

On January 16 2012 10:42 Zephirdd wrote:
Alright, proposal: Whenever I say something, take the complete opposite. That should do it.

On January 16 2012 11:19 Grackaroni wrote:
I'm pretty suspicious of you're check HoD.
@HoD : Why did you choose to check Layabout? What led you believe he was a demon?

On January 14 2012 22:52 layabout wrote:
I will vote just before 8:00 KST.
You will know why.

On January 06 2012 22:47 layabout wrote:
having read through recent townie Palmar games:
nothing to see here (clicky) Palmar trolls and call people stupid
stundent mafia he was smurfing as electric black Palmar make lots of reads
election mafia read about half of this and filtered syllo+palamar hyra Arctocod, run for major and call people stupid
Steamship mafia Palmar analyses and calls people stupid
TL Mafia XLVII Palmar runs for major and calls people stupid

I have seen quite a lot of variability in how town Palmar behaves, after these i read resistance I(which isn't quite mafia) and responsibilty mafia in which palmar was 3rd party/scum.

In those games i could not confidently make inferences about his meta and correctly use them to determine whether he is scum or town, because there was not enough common day1 town traits that have become clear to me in the games of his i have read through, thoroughly. This was largely due to the variance in his play on day1.
I feel like i have spent quite a lot of time reading through his post but i feel like i would need to do more to establish a strong read based on his meta that i would confidently support.

On January 06 2012 22:14 layabout wrote:
What do all of these players have in common?
Blazinghand
Bluelightz
Dirkzor(?)
Grackaroni
HarbingerOfDoom
layabout
Tyrran
xsksc
Zephirdd

To my knowledge they (we) are all relatively new to TL mafia having played a small number of games each. It seems highly unlikely that any of us will have read a large enough number of games to have strong understanding of any other players meta.
If you do not have a strong understanding of a certain players meta you cannot use your own judgement of that players meta against them. You cannot compare their play to your idea of their meta and reach a conclusion.

Instead you are reliant on other players assessment of that player meta and how their play this game is supposedly incriminating. As town you should be reliant on your own judgements and reach your own conclusions and you should not vote entirely because somebody else has a reason that you cannot verify*.

Furthermore despite my limited experience of your various playstyles even i was able to spot an error in Wiggles "meta analysis
Palmar is normally a very aggressive and direct townie. He is not afraid to share his reads, to call people out, and to use his vote to pressure. He tunnels, and he is happy to call out bad play when he sees it. However, this is not the Palmar that we have in this game.


Apparently he often trolls day1 anyway? If players who feel that they know his meta disagree about what his meta is how can i or the others trust them?

Simply, voting for a player based soley on meta that does not come from your own judgements instead of voting based on your own judgements is either bad town play or scum play.
Mr. Wiggles is encouraging people to vote for bad reasons (from their perspective)

since at least half of the players in the thread have an extremely low chance of having solid enough meta on Palmar and Palmar isn't going to vote for himself, then the majority of town cannot justify an entirely meta based case vote on day 1.

-Similarly i cannot justify voting based on risk.nuke's meta.

-As far as i am concerned Grackaroni doesn't have any points worth considering against HoD.

-I also see no case against RoL.

Therefore we should go for a proper case with reasons that we can support, instead. We should lynch Grackaroni.

*well you could verify it by spending a long time going through past games but i doubt that anyone has the time nor the effort to spare to do so```
```are footnotes within footnotes better or worse than spoilers within spoilers?

On January 07 2012 15:03 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:

No, I accused you of being non-aggressive/passive, not of being inactive. Saying that you weren't very active at first in steamship doesn't have any bearing on the argument I am making.

Comparing these posts, which were 2 of your first 4 posts in steamship:
+ Show Spoiler +
to your play so far just seems incredibly different. It reads to me like you are playing scared this game. Scared because you're scum.

Underlined: In steamship, if town had lynched those 7 players you would have killed zephird, Greymist and cyber cheese, since Greymists role is what killed town after the roleclaim then that plan arguably would have won the game, so i don't get what your point is.

his original question was "Hey look - a list! Care to explain anything about it? Lists without reasons are pretty useless filler."
I wanted to make the point that given how vague this question was and given that i had raised suspicions about the players in the list i felt that it was redundant question. I then challenged him to make his first real contribution.
But alas my inept typing/formatting let me down.
And like every other person to lose an argument ever he corrects my grammar and ignores my point.

Underlined:Clearly a lot of people didn't have null reads on risk nuke as he had reached 9 votes before AND was under a lot of pressure at this time AND was lynched quite a while before the lynch deadline.

On January 06 2012 05:26 layabout wrote:
Grackaroni:
In this post his writes a pile of nothing to call HoD scum. my comments have been italicised

Emphasises the "Unless you have a counter" part. As if that justifies the don't talk about scum strats in an open setup stance. (it doesn't)

bolded: "Don't use meta from my first (but recent) game against me. I have changed. Use meta from a game where i was account sharing day1 when you try to analyse my day1 play, or use meta from another game". The "I've obviously adjusted my play" really doesn't hold weight given how few games he has played.

The sage on the other hand probably shouldn't claim unless he has 2 demons identified. If he claims with only one identified, 0% chance of reducing kp or reducing the corruption ability, demons have a roleblock ability, angels can kill the sage to make demons a larger threat to town thereby reducing focus on them. Still gain information obviously, but overall seems like a much weaker play than the seer claiming after finding an angel.

When he said just that the sage should not claim without two "demon" results?
If he was the sage it would make sense to add, "if they are going to be lynched then the sage should claim" because that is what he claims he is doing now.
According to day1 HoD the sage should not have claimed in day 3 HoD's position. Day3 HoD had zero demons identified.

top part just isn't valid.
+ you had no reason to mash your keyboard as if the other person is wrong and can't see it because you are wrong.

He posts what i think are townreads? Which is odd because he has called Spack and BL scum RoL is getting lynched instead of him, he hasn't commented on jackal other than (he was right about Palmar) and he then starts to attack me..

You then post very little to called Zephird, one of your bottom 6 un-town-like

On January 14 2012 08:12 layabout wrote:
Current Vote Count:
+ Show Spoiler +
Vote HarbingerOfDoom

if that is all you have to say then
vote Grackaroni

Conclusion:
risk.nuke's play does not math the town risk.nuke you may have come to know and love. He was willing to offer thoughts at the start when doing so was not useful and when it was easy for scum to do so. He has made excuses and promised content. He has yet to deliver that content. He has not been aggressive in calling people out as he has previuosly and has criticised syllogism for calling him out. He avoided has provided a very fluffy answer to HoD's question. He has contradicted his own declarations of good town play. He has avoided making any serious contributions now that we actuaaly have to decide who we are lynching. He has not made an effort to defend himself, but has called everybody voting for him scum.

Vote risk.nuke

On January 14 2012 22:52 layabout wrote:
I will vote just before 8:00 KST.
You will know why.