EPTNewbie Mini Mafia IV - Page 5
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 28 2012 11:49 slOosh wrote: Crud - just got back home and am furiously trying to catch up on everything. It's going to end up a NL, and it should. We spent a large portion of D1 discussing the merits of a soft deadline for this exact purpose. Working to catch up on the thread more thoroughly and will address the stuff I missed. Hi new sloosh? I want old sloosh back, can you handle that? | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 28 2012 11:42 JekyllAndHyde wrote: So chocolate doesn't get lynched today...? If I keep my vote on Chocolate, then it's likely some people will change his vote towards him and get him lynched, which I specifically said I didn't want by this point. Da fuck ? Ok. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
glad to get rid of that spammy igabod though. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 28 2012 12:10 dreamflower wrote: It is! Though I was actually just trying to look for a spooky spaceship-looking picture. I didn't realize it was lego until just now. Still a cool picture ( : nice post. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 28 2012 22:10 k2hd wrote: Phagga, I think ghost says he'll take responsibility because he was the first to FOS ghost I believe. As to why he didn't unvote ghost... Well that's quite interesting too, let's see what he has to say. I Did unvote ghost >_< Mustafa not shown up, I was leaning ghost so that I could see if sloosh was suspicious, but chocolate seemed like he was the only one who has going to get lynched and I hate no lynches(unless it is analytically the best move) as I said before there is no reason a healthy town should ever no lynch. I stand by that. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 28 2012 15:13 slOosh wrote: + Show Spoiler + (Didn't want to stay up to do this, but also wanted as much feedback as possible ... so here it is) The Alderan Case: This case revolves in observing the context in which his actions occur in the thread. Analysis starts with his PBPA on Chocolate, who he thinks is "super scummy". + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: Note: this didn't start as a PBPA but it ended that way because literally everything he has done is scummy. Chocolate is super scummy to me right now. Says things like "our vote will probably end up being a lurker"... Who says this? Even if it is the case you're giving mafia free reign to post a couple BS posts and get out of the thread. He later goes on to say Pretty adamanent about this lurker idea, right? Wrong. NOT 3 POSTS LATER he's off his lurker train now, and onto the easiest target, namely, Fourface. Fourface, for reasons stated above is very likely not scum, but I could see Chocolate's beady little eyes now getting as wide as an anime characters in joy when he saw that Fourface made one of the most "interesting" (as to avoid getting in trouble) posts I've ever seen. Oh and this: I don't get this either. Why would you split your votes up? If it's for pressure here is a newsflash: Votes DO NOT = Pressure Pressure is cases, pressure is discussion, a one liner and vote in the vote thread doesn't cut it. Period. Then there's: Steve, how often did we sit around IRC last game and joke about the thread in the hour running up to the vote? Spoiler: It was every time. Scum are going to stay absent at the end of the day unless they need to affect the vote. Chocolate has conveniently positioned himself out of that responsibility but left the opportunity open that he might be there. Just priming his defense in case he needs it. There is some biased reads in this case, as it is very speculative in nature. With phrases like "even if it is the case", "I could see Chocolate's eyes (something about anime)", "Steve, how often ...". I first thought he was getting some confirmation bias and stayed quiet to see Chocolate's response. After this post, he throws up some speculation on ghost, based on his speculation on Chocolate. On February 27 2012 12:50 Alderan wrote: Also, if this reasoning stands I think Ghost is scum as well. Here's how I see this vote on Jeckyll going: - Ghost puts his vote on Jeckyll, cause you know they're pressuring lurkers and all. - Chocolate also puts his vote on Jeckyll, cause you know they're pressuring lurkers and all. - Ghost gets pissed in the scum qt by saying "dude back up off me, we don't need to get too associated with each other" - Chocolate is like "shit, how can I back out of this? Oh I got it! I'll say we need to diversify our pressure portfolio!!!!!11!!" - Chocolate votes on another random lurker. - Alderan figures it out. So he has his eyes on both Chocolate and ghost. When I post my case concurrently with his post on ghost, he refrains from responding to it saying On February 27 2012 13:16 Alderan wrote: I'm going to wait for him to respond to make a comment on your case. I've got a hunch. And later when Janaan want's to discuss ghost's actions, he does not discuss the matter at hand (ghost), but redirects focus onto Chocolate On February 28 2012 07:09 Alderan wrote: @Steveling have you been actively pursuing getting a replacement or no? @Chocolate aside from igabod who are you thinking is appearing scummy? Are you really getting a null read on everyone? To anyone who cares, I don't think Ghost_403 is that suspicious anymore. I realized that it is more likely that either Ghost or Chocolate are scum, Chocolate strikes me as someone riding the middle and keeping his head down. There is a clear leaning away from ghost and leaning toward Chocolate. The bolded post (which is without reasoning), sets up that only one of them is likely to be scum, and that is Chocolate. And yet when DYH provides some clear thinking into the situation, Alderan is all too quick to sheep him. On February 28 2012 08:29 Alderan wrote: I almost made literally the exact same post. The Chocolate thing is coming along too easily, I would have expected at least a case made against someone else. That in combination with his mildly sufficient answers have me reconsidering my vote. I would love for a case to come a long that was better, which is why I was asking everyone to come up with an opinion? I think Steveling is acting very suspiciously. I've found that after playing as scum, town is much more relaxing and less time consuming. I find it strange that he finds it the opposite. He instantly agrees with DYH, and drops his strong suspicions on Chocolate for "mildly sufficient answers". Its worth suspicion because soon after he picks it back up keeps trying to sway town to consider him. (I understand this is starting to look like a PBPA but it isn't. I'm trying to show how the development of his stance on Chocolate does not make sense within the context of the thread. There has been nothing on Chocolate between the time of his posts to either incriminate or absolve him (Chocolate). I recommend opening Alderan's filter and reading along with the actual thread to see how his posts align. Will continue analysis without posting quotes here.) Later on with his post with lists, and a couple of posts on Steveling, he shows preference again saying that since who he believes are townies are stacked against Chocolate, and since Steveling did not vote Chocolate, that both people should be lynched. His reasoning? Information - contradicting his openness to no lynch which is actually gives least information (in the sense that it does not give a 100% confirmed flip). Summary: Alderan has shown a great bias against Chocolate. He tries to focus people on him (such as Janaan when he posted about ghost) but is perfectly willing to drop it when DYH comes in to call out what is going on. Even so he picks it back up and tries to get people to look at it, and then tries to get something on Steveling started on the sole basis that he is involved with Chocolate. Conclusion: It could be a case of serious tunneling (which I doubt as he seemingly listened to DYH), but I find it more likely that he is casting confusion amongst town by setting up multiple suspects without good reason or case. glad to have you back ( : | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
Because i wanted it to happenat the time more so than anyone else, that said i felt there was a good chance chocloate wasnt scum becaise it looked like he was getting bussed, to that end i knew someone would have to pay if he flipped green, i was willing to take on that responsibility to get information, but dyh sorta talked me out of it when he said lynching for info is bad, to sum it up as i said before i hate no lynches, i feel like they make town stagnate, that said i was aware that chocolate could be town, in which case if i was willing to lynch him for information i had to be willing to take the fall for it if he turned out to be a mistake. Thats how my thought process worked, i wanted it the most i had to be willing to take the heat for it, besides in my opinion everyone should fall under a bit of suspiciun early in the game so scum cant pull a " you know this guy mightve been playing us the whole time" stunt. Is that wrong? I dont know lynch me. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
That last point was me bieng transparent, now im going to be anylytical. If chocolate flips red ive killed my own teamamte, if chocolate flips green i fall under suspiciun, as scum its an all around bad move, as town its a calclated risk. Now unless you want invole the m word(i dare you to say it) theres not much all to discuss about the matter. Any other questions? | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 29 2012 00:53 phagga wrote: It just came out of nothing. You mentioned Chocolate a few times, but failed to vote on him. You barely pushed him. I tried to push Chocolate the whole day, so why not make me responsible if he would flip green? Or what about Alderaan, who made the first case on Chocolate? Also, if a majority of people is voting Chocolate, everyone has some responsibility in it. Why would town want to single out a person only because of that one vote and make him/her responsible for a mislynch? That does not make any sense, sometimes townies get lynched because wrong decisions are made. But then you don't go and point finger at single person, instead you start analyzing who voted for that townie when and for what reason. Claiming responsibility before the lynch has even happened and before it is clear if it is a myslynch or not is utterly pointless. Unless you want to put focus on how you are helpful and care about town. But a townie normally does not have to do that. uh, Marry me? (I am not sure which word you mean. If you mean mafia, why not just write it? It's not like you're reading the insignia of The One Ring and Sauron can hear you.) the m word is meta. From my perspective at the time of the vote, I did vote for chocolate(it was an accident that I did not), so chocolate was one vote or two votes away from a lynch. I felt by putting myself out there I could get that last vote, but if chocolate did flip green then it would probally be because of that guy who said cmon this guys definitley scum that he died so I was willing to proactively adress that and perhaps take some of the pressure of a townie who might feel scared voting for someone who could be getting bussed. The point was I was trying to make something happen and was willing to say whatever to do so, even put my self out there, which as I said would either a) convince a townie to take the risk because he wouldnt be suspected or b) convince scum to take the risk and also put himself out there. It was not an effort to convince town that I am helpful, it was an effort to make something happen. No nothing did happen, and no you couldnt have know that i was trying take pressure off the next voter, so I wont blame you for suspecting me, but I have made my intentions clear, I am for allowing events to take place so that we always have more to discuss, is that wrong? I dont know lynch me. Any other questions? | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 29 2012 01:06 ghost_403 wrote: DON'T SPEAK OF SUCH THINGS. @gumshoe You claiming that a chocolate mislynch would be "your" fault is strange. Not sure what to make of that. Now, let's see what I missed. Wouldve been better if I said the v word  so what is my great and awesome evil plan ghost? I totally agree with phagga pressuring me, but I really dont like you just popping up and being like "huh isnt that suspicius". You want to know what it was all about? It was a thing of the moment, I was not laying any grand scheme or making my self look useful, I was trying to scrounge a couple more votes, maybe see if I could bait a mafia into switching onto choclate(seeing as mafia usually lurk in irc around the time of the vote) or get a town to feel comfterble enough to vote. Until you can offer me a more likely explantation as to why else I would try to make other players feel more comfterble about voting for chocolate I dont want to hear about why what I did was strange seeing as ive provided a perfectley rational reason(that just so happens to be the truth) to explain my actions. God I miss defending myself its such a rush, gotta get to class now will be back in an hour or so to read through all the filters. Dont like it? Lynch me. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 29 2012 01:22 ghost_403 wrote: @gumshoe I see what you were doing, that makes a bit more sense. I don't quite agree, but no problem there. Just for future reference, I don't find people who vote at the last minute scummy. I find people who vote at any point without good reasons scummy. This includes the people who couldn't give me a good reason last night when I asked them, such as Janaan and Alderan. I didn't press those at the time being because I felt that it would be better for me to push people who were on the fence towards a Chocolate lynch, as opposed to pointing out scummy behavior. More on this when I get home tonight. awwwwwww im sorry, ignore my last post. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 29 2012 04:20 slOosh wrote: I would really like it if not only Alderan, but other people chime in their opinions and thoughts as the night and day progresses. It forces people to make reads prior to the issue being resolved - it wouldn't do much good if Alderan was the only one to post and defend himself well and lurker mafia to come in and say 'oh yea I knew that and I agree'. Right now my greatest concern is the potential lurker issue. When the most active players go at each other, it gives even more hiding grounds for mafia - right now I only have semi-decent reads on ~3 people, and there is a total of 14. Replacements especially, please contribute / voice your thoughts - it will help us in the long run. grats on your zergling btw, I'll post all my significant reads soon. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
On February 29 2012 04:42 Alderan wrote: Sloosh- The thing I find most concerning about Sloosh is his change of pace from last game. I know he's said that hes slowing down his posting to try and clean up his play but he has been extremely lurkish. He pushes Ghost pretty hard, but ironically enough it was his case against Ghost that made Ghost less suspicious for me. He ends up taking an extremely soft stance on the matter. He then makes a case against someone (me) who had a very similar train of though in terms of vote targets to himself. I'll have to wait to hear his response to my rebuttal to discern more probably but I do have my suspicions. Gumshoe- I think we need a case from Gumshoe soon, he's been active but not assertive, he needs to post an original case rather thanto continue to just evaluate others' cases. Janaan- Extremely suspicious in my eyes, and after looking through his filter I think this case could be more suspicious than my k2hd case. Here is a quote from "Chocolate, of all the people with cases against them seems the most scummy to me, and I can't quite put my finger on why exactly." This quote sums up how he is playing to me. He's not making any original cases, he's not taking any hard stances. He defends with WIFOM constantly, and he has done nothing but agree with the most popular decision of the thread. Here is his filter. I don't have time to make a complete case on him at the moment, about to have to run to class, but just read through this filter and you'll see how useless he has been to the town up to this point. Will return with more after my classes, maybe even in class, if I'm feeling friskey. I'm uninspired to be frank, not nearly as exciting as last game, but i'll see what I can dig up. | ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
| ||
