|
On February 01 2012 18:12 Simberto wrote:
Also, i hate to be the one pointing this out, but has CosmosXAM completely vanished?
No he hasnt. Look a few posts above yours and you will see that he has posted a few hours before you.
On February 01 2012 12:16 CosmosXAM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2012 12:09 Adam4167 wrote:After rereading the thread in its entirety, ive noticed something. Zarepath pushing CosmosXAM as a lynch candidate on day 1 stemmed partly from CosmosXAM pointing the finger a Chocolate for being 'suspicious'. This is a textbook example of what is known as a 'Chainsaw Defense', which is when one mafia gets attacked by a townie, another mafia attacks the accuser to deflect suspicion back on the townie. Its right Here at the bottom of that horrible WIFOM'ey defense of FakePromise. Add on top of this, both times I've called him mafia, hes come out of lurker mode. I'm seeing too much in favor of voting for Chocolate, and not enough redeeming him. ##Vote ChocolateOne thing that sticks out to me in Simberto's filter is the continual redirects onto balt11t. And There Are Lots And Lots Of ThemSo I guess I am posed with the question of was he doing this to pick up the 'town cred' after we inevitably killed balt? (because lets face it, that was going to happen, sooner rather than later) Interesting points, after reading a lot of previous posts I think that my new top three that might be mafia (I know there is only two left) would have to be chocolate simberto zelblade though I doubt both simberto and zelblade would be mafia together, still not even close to 100% on any of these so i think I will hold my vote off for a bit.
I dont think that leaving the thread for a few hours = "completely vanished". Stop trying to redirect attention of yourself.
|
Ok, honestly, what do you expect me to do? Only talk about myself the whole day, and hope that we nolynch as a result because not enough people are convinced of my guilt, and then proceed to do that for the rest of the game?
I think that i have explained everything people might find suspicious about me enough. Now, i hope that enough people believe me that i do not die today. And, while me not dieing is obviously an important goal i try to accomplish, since it would be bad for town to lynch a towny, it is also not the only goal i have. Because this game is not only about me surviving, but more importantly about finding mafia. I will of course still answer any remaining questions you might have about my behaviour, but i don't feel like i can accomplish a whole lot by only talking about the only person of whom i am absolutely and 100% sure that he is town, which is me.
Thus, I will not waste the rest of this day which might very well be my last here by doing nothing useful at all. And regarding DT checks, it is very important to realise that those are at best unreliable in a game where there might be both a godfather and a miller. While they are of course important in finding out stuff, they should not be seen as dogmatic truth beyond reason. I am also quite sure that someone will now explain that pointing this out is totally scummy, when it is, in fact, not.
Don't think you are the first one to think about this, i, too, was a bit surprised by the sudden accusations towards me at the beginning of a new day, and came to the conclusion that i might be a miller. However, i also realised that it would not be particularly smart to expose that idea to town and thus expose our DT. Chocolate, however, apparently did not think that far.
|
Now, to do something a bit more useful with my time, i will post whom i think is mafia, and why.
Firstly, as i pointed out before, Chocolate
Not really a lot of posts, and those posts consist of nearly no content, and none of that content is new. Acting like he is concerned about lurkers day1, and then lurking like no other for the rest of the game. Only ever talking when directly attacked. When posting, he mostly points out obvious things noone can object to, and tries to avoid antagonising anybody. Slooshs point about his day 3 reads also still stands. Just read his filter.
Second, Bromancipate
I will go into a bit more detail here. Similarly not enough content, and especially not a lot of new ideas. States he would be back for new developements before the lynch Day1 , but completely ignores the zarepath case. In this this post, take a look at how he goes to great lengths to explain stuff about why a townie would never ask for a DT investigation, and acts like it is his own idea. Also note how this is after the point where zarepath is already dead. And now take a look at the end of this post by DoYouHas, which has the exact same ideas in it, but two pages earlier. Most of the rest of his posts are explanations why he does not post as much, or references to his last game. Other then that, there is one case against SS, which is also not very controversial material, and, if my theory is correct, also is only an attack on a towny. Recently, we have minor defense for zelblade, which could be an attempt to pull a zarepath and look good by defending a towny who still gets lynched.
And then we have the whole list business, which is basically textbook scum play, act like you are contributing, producing large posts which look impressive, but basically don't have any information in them, at all. Also, those lists don't even contribute to finding scum, they just analyse who people believe is scum, or who you can easily get lynched without a lot of problems. This sounds more like information mafia would be interested in, then town. Also, his reasoning for this:
Bromancipate
Lists are only scummy if they have no purpose and you provide nothing else. There is a very clear reason for mine, I want a succesful lynch and that requires people being aware of others intentions. We will have a real problem if we don't narrow our lynch candidates to two or at most three. Chocolate is certainly not helping himself but it is hard to tell whether he is in a similar boat to zelblade, just not sure how to post. His lurking, voting patterns and his determination to respond only when required is really what is making him look bad. He can redeem himself if he contributes as we have bigger fish to fry. SS however is still responding in an aggressive manner to being questioned and has subsequently disappeared.
This is just wrong. Not only does his list not help in accomplishing those stated goal, it also gives the impression that it is more important how many people have someone on their suspicious list, instead of actually having good arguments WHY that person is suspicious. Also, he is linking Chocolate with zelblade, probably in the hopes of zelblade getting lynched and Chocolate looking good subsequently.
Also, note how this theory lines up perfectly with the votes both on day 1 and day 2. On day 1, we have mafia split 2/2 between both lurker lynch targets, which we now assume are innocent. Then, when zarepath is targeted, they focus on FakePromise, inflating his vote count with 3 mafia votes to make others who just want a lynch more likely to target him, while zarepath keeps his own vote away to stay a bit less suspicious. On day 2, they are both among the last people to vote and lynch zarepath.
Interestingly enough, zelblade is not on that mafia list. That is not because i necessarily think that he is cleared, i just noticed that this mafia team makes a whole lot more sense then any that has zelblade in it.
|
The thing is, if I was just trying to pressure Simberto, this is the point where I would back off. The quality of his posting has gone up since my accusation, and some of his defense actually sounds pretty good. However, I want to get a lynch on Simberto, so I go back to my original case against him and it still holds strong. The three pillars of that case
1. Simberto did almost nothing with his influential position.
2. Simberto has a scummy voting record.
3. Simberto has had logical flaws that favor mafia.
are the things that Simberto has had the weakest defenses against. So I am going to hold my vote on Simberto and I hope 2+ more of you will vote him as well.
|
im sitll holding my vote for zelblade
he hasnt convinced me that he is not mafia since you cant recover from defending zarepath
|
On February 02 2012 03:48 DoYouHas wrote:The thing is, if I was just trying to pressure Simberto, this is the point where I would back off. The quality of his posting has gone up since my accusation, and some of his defense actually sounds pretty good. However, I want to get a lynch on Simberto, so I go back to my original case against him and it still holds strong. The three pillars of that case 1. Simberto did almost nothing with his influential position.
2. Simberto has a scummy voting record.
3. Simberto has had logical flaws that favor mafia. are the things that Simberto has had the weakest defenses against. So I am going to hold my vote on Simberto and I hope 2+ more of you will vote him as well.
I think 1 is not a good reason to lynch me. It is true that i had an influential position, but i also did not have scum reads of which i was reasonably sure. I never felt confident enough of any read to reasonably push a lynch from it. Maybe i should have used that influence to pressure people more effectively, but that is hardly damning evidence.
2 is true for about half the remaining town.
3 is important, but really only interesting if you go into more details with that. I feel that i have explained my reasoning at all points you mentioned. If i have not, point out which i missed or where you do not find my answers satisfactory.
As an alternative, i propose that we lynch Chocolate today. I have made my reasons why i think he is scum clear in my above post, and also note that you will never gain more information on him then you have now because he posts about 1 post without content a day. But you will always gain more information on me, since i post stuff. This also means that if you really want to lynch me, it is more useful to do that later since that means you have a larger body of information that suddenly increases in relevance when i flip green.
Of course, i am not really a fan of splitting town like this, because even though at the moment we have a pretty sound numerical advantage, this still means that we give a lot of the decision-making power in a lynch to mafia. But to me it is still better when there is only one of the two choices which is a clear error instead of accepting my death, which i absolutely know is bad for us.
But i still hope that we can agree on lynching Chocolate instead, whom i find much more obviously scummy then myself, and for whom i think most people agree that he looks scummy, too. While I might be a more dangerous mafia if i were mafia, i also don't really see the case against me having anywhere near as much substance as the one against Chocolate has. So the question is if you would rather lynch someone who might or might not be mafia, and is more dangerous if he is mafia, but also more useful if he is not, or someone who very, very likely is mafia, but not really destructive if he is, and not really helpful if he is not.
Of course, i also still hope that people realise that i am actually innocent, but even if you are just not really convinced about where i stand, Chocolate is a better target.
|
Gah, the three whom I said I thought most likely to be mafia before are still in my mind, but now things are getting so convoluted that its just hard to make up a decision about any of them. I think its time to start looking for whoever is posting A LOT after someones analysis (especially about them) and seems to be trying to clog this up.
|
Ok, i will go to bed now. I hope i am still alive tomorrow, but if i am not, take a look at what i wrote before with the knowledge that i flipped green.
Also, i think that you need to be a bit more careful in your investigations, it seems to me that some here start an investigation with "he is guilty, how can i prove that?", instead of "is he mafia or town, what can i find out?", which is obviously a pretty bad way to go about things.
|
On February 02 2012 06:46 Simberto wrote:
Ok, i will go to bed now. I hope i am still alive tomorrow, but if i am not, take a look at what i wrote before with the knowledge that i flipped green.
Also, i think that you need to be a bit more careful in your investigations, it seems to me that some here start an investigation with "he is guilty, how can i prove that?", instead of "is he mafia or town, what can i find out?", which is obviously a pretty bad way to go about things.
Like I said before, I think we probably have some dts who have found peoples' alignments and want to persuade others of their position without actually mentioning that they are dt.
On February 01 2012 14:02 SacredSystem wrote:
let me be clear right now my sole focus of suspicion is 100% on zelblade
This doesn't really help because ultimately to guarantee a vote for today you will have to vote for either me or simberto. Of course this works if you want a nolynch
On February 01 2012 22:48 zelblade wrote:
And wtf do you mean with the 2nd sentance? Are you saying that one of the people who quickly jumped onto simberto day 3 is the DT? (I am assuming that you are refering to a DT check when you say "investigated".
Yes
And also Simberto has actually been focusing on zellblade for even longer than I thought before http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=305805¤tpage=5#99
|
the only vote i feel confident in, is a vote in favor of lynching zelblade
|
non voters and voters of choclate can you please switch your vote over to zelblade
if the non voters switch over we can lynch zelblade, if the voters of chocolate switch over we would need 1 more of a lynch
|
On February 02 2012 07:43 SacredSystem wrote:
non voters and voters of choclate can you please switch your vote over to zelblade
if the non voters switch over we can lynch zelblade, if the voters of chocolate switch over we would need 1 more of a lynch
Maybe if you reiterated your points for why he should be lynched and show why he is the best candidate your case would be stronger. To me it just seems that you are tunnel visioning him and keep saying, "He defended zarepath, and is thus mafia"
|
On February 02 2012 07:28 Chocolate wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2012 06:46 Simberto wrote:
Ok, i will go to bed now. I hope i am still alive tomorrow, but if i am not, take a look at what i wrote before with the knowledge that i flipped green.
Also, i think that you need to be a bit more careful in your investigations, it seems to me that some here start an investigation with "he is guilty, how can i prove that?", instead of "is he mafia or town, what can i find out?", which is obviously a pretty bad way to go about things. Like I said before, I think we probably have some dts who have found peoples' alignments and want to persuade others of their position without actually mentioning that they are dt. Show nested quote +On February 01 2012 14:02 SacredSystem wrote:
let me be clear right now my sole focus of suspicion is 100% on zelblade This doesn't really help because ultimately to guarantee a vote for today you will have to vote for either me or simberto. Of course this works if you want a nolynch Show nested quote +On February 01 2012 22:48 zelblade wrote:
And wtf do you mean with the 2nd sentance? Are you saying that one of the people who quickly jumped onto simberto day 3 is the DT? (I am assuming that you are refering to a DT check when you say "investigated". Yes And also Simberto has actually been focusing on zellblade for even longer than I thought before http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=305805¤tpage=5#99
Ok. You are against a no lynch.
Simberto is still the only "best lynch candidate" in your mind as you have said earlier.
Prove your mettle.
Vote Simberto.
|
|
|
On February 02 2012 07:43 SacredSystem wrote:
non voters and voters of choclate can you please switch your vote over to zelblade
if the non voters switch over we can lynch zelblade, if the voters of chocolate switch over we would need 1 more of a lynch Right now you are the only one who wants to lynch Zelblade, and your actions are anti-town as it pushes us to a no lynch.
On January 28 2012 07:10 SacredSystem wrote:
chocolate is mafia
simberto is town Either Chocolate or Simberto will be lynched today. Vote one of them or be painted red forever.
|
Gosh.
SS switch your vote please. As choc has alrdy pointed out we rly need a lynch today and since it doesn't seem like I will be lynched, switch your vote to either sombrero or choc. We still need 5 to lynch. Don't waste your vote voting for someone who isn't likely to be lynched. And you keep mentioning that I defended zarepath when I have already stated that I wasn't and asked you to point out an instance when I did so. instead you just skip over my response to your case. How convenient.
Posting this from phone, on the way to school. Probably can check back before lynch.
|
dont we only need 4 to lynch
|
so zelblade clearly stood up in defense of zarepath and attacked me
he was never suspicious of zarepath at all,
then once zarepath fliped red he acted like he was actually a part of lynching zarepath
also im not sold on chocolate or simberto, if anyone wants to convince me, feel free to do so, but even if they are mafia i still view zelblade as being a safer lynch as he has he has yet to do anything that would convince me hes town
|
On February 02 2012 08:47 SacredSystem wrote:
so zelblade clearly stood up in defense of zarepath and attacked me
he was never suspicious of zarepath at all,
then once zarepath fliped red he acted like he was actually a part of lynching zarepath
also im not sold on chocolate or simberto, if anyone wants to convince me, feel free to do so, but even if they are mafia i still view zelblade as being a safer lynch as he has he has yet to do anything that would convince me hes town
On January 28 2012 07:10 SacredSystem wrote:
chocolate is mafia
simberto is town
No one should have to convince you. You are either lying or have SERIOUS TUNNEL VISION.
It is 4 to lynch ONLY if no one else votes (and 3 modkills happen). That is not likely.
|
EBWOP:
(2 modkills) 1 more vote pushes it up to 5 for lynch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
