On February 28 2012 10:06 Chocolate wrote:
I said an hour ago I was going to switch
I said an hour ago I was going to switch
I'm actually an idiot. You're right.
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:06 Chocolate wrote: Show nested quote + On February 28 2012 10:04 Alderan wrote: On February 28 2012 10:02 Chocolate wrote: still no post, switching to steve. Steve, could you please post any and all reads you have at the moment? Me being someone you find suspicious, I find it odd that you switched to my target so quickly. I said an hour ago I was going to switch I'm actually an idiot. You're right. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:06 Chocolate wrote: That's odd alderan, I have null-worse reads on my accusers. Why won't you list the ones you think are town? I don't like post who is town, as those with town credibility are most likely to be hit. It's just how I operate. You will RARELY see me make a post about someone being town, at best they will get "less suspicious". | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:08 DoYouHas wrote: Show nested quote + On February 28 2012 10:06 Qatol wrote: It has come to my attention that the original edit for one of the posts was not included. It should be there now along with the first edit. I'll also confirm that he has not hacked the mafia QT. But apparently you will confirm that he is town... ? | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:14 DoYouHas wrote: It is possible Qatol is WIFOMing the crap out of us with, "I'll also confirm that he has not hacked the mafia QT." But otherwise he just confirmed FF as town. I see... I don't like to get into that kind of stuff, and urge the rest of you not to either. Task at hand, lynch, 1:45 minutes. 3 options in my mind are: Chocolate igadob Steveling I think a good compromise between my last post and the people on igadob/ We vote Steveling, we're killing a lurker that we don't know, and he's voting with the others that I find suspicious. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
| ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
| ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:41 DoYouHas wrote: This may have already occurred to you, but I don't trust Alderan atm. That is why I pick igabod for a lurker lynch over Steveling. If you don't want to policy lynch a lurker, I suggest we move towards a no-lynch. This should be good. We need to decide here shortly though regardless, and my vote is going to be crucial. If your plan to no lynch is assuming a modkill then it is inherently flawed and we shouldn't do it. I would still like to lynch Steveling rather than igadob, and potentially Chocolate ahead of igadob. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
The important thing to remember is we're not lynching this person because of fear that they will continue to lurk, because they will be replaced (if igadob votes last minute we lynch him tomorrow). We are voting because we are going into tomorrow with 0 reads about those players where we have a days worth on others, and all of the current cases could be excused by noob/aggressive town. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 28 2012 11:16 gumshoe wrote: Show nested quote + On February 28 2012 10:26 Alderan wrote: Is gum around? It's going to take mine and his votes as it stands now to get the majority. I'm here watcha need boss. Where do you stand on a no-lynch today? | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
| ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 28 2012 11:22 gumshoe wrote: I like what ghost said about him and chocolate, we lynch igo meh, we lynch one of them we can back track and look at the history of pressure, willing to lean chocolate right now because ghost actually brought that to attention which I really appreciate. I'm leaning Chocolate as well over igabod. I'm trying to decide where "no lynch" falls in my preference order. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
| ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
Fingers crossed on getting them replaced. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
As for the whole Chocolate/Ghost issue, I think it might be helpful for you to see the timeline of my thought process- - Searching through filters looking for suspicious people. - Read Chocolate's filter and think "Hey! All this stuff is absolutely bizarre, no ones made any concise cases yet, let's give it a shot". - While making post, realize that the voting three times in the first 12 hours of the game is really weird for anyone, scum included, so after I posted the Chocolate post I went back to see why he would have done it. - Make the "Ghost hypothetical" post prior to checking Ghost's filter. - Went back to check his filter, realized he was actually not suspicious to me at this point because he is playing far too aggressively, which is why I told Sloosh I had a "hunch" about Ghost. - Without posting that sentiment, I waited for Ghost to respond (just to get some more info), which he did more than adequately, and I dropped my suspicion of him. As for the DYH thing, I guess there is no way to corroborate this but the reason I posted in agreement of the idea that the Chocolate lynch was "happening to quickly" is because I legitimately believed that, and in fact had the post typed in the text box, only to be delete as Chocolate still had not responded himself and I wanted to wait and see his response before lowering the axe, if you will. I don't like defending anyone this early in the game prior to them having a chance to respond. Make them post under pressure, that increases the chance of slips exponentially. As for the end of the day yesterday, I was obviously torn between voting for a no lynch, a weak case, or a lurker who is getting replaced. The reason I appeared so wishy washy in the thread is because I was trying to be as transparent as possible about my decision. Essentially I was thinking aloud in the thread and trying to get people into a back and forth, which is much harder to deal with when you're scum then coming in, making a long post, and coming back in 12 hours. Hopefully this clears up some stuff. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
Why I found you suspicious the originally: - You had, prior to the very end of the day yesterday, exactly 1 productive post. - Your first point in said post was to say you didn't find FF very scummy. - Your second point was to find Ghost suspicious for the same thing that seemed to clear him for everyone else. - You soft agree with me about Chocolate. - You vote for a no lynch. You had no strong convictions, made no original cases, you simply agreed with other people sentiments, and then chose to vote for a no-lynch, the ultimate middle of the road move. Important note: Notice the fact that you voted for igadob is no where to be found in this reasoning. It's because that move is not inherently scummy, I found you and 3 others that were voting for igadob suspicious, which in turn lead me to believe that Chocolate could be scum. I had enough doubt however to choose to vote for either lynching the scummiest lurker in my mind, or no lynching. Why I find you more suspicious: - Opening sentence of your second meaningful post is "Now for those who are starting to suspect me." What a bizzarre way to start a post, I've never heard a towny be worried about being "suspected" - The rest of his post has absolutely no substance. - Spends 3 paragraphs saying he's going to be inactive a lot. - Says he couldn't make an informed enough decision to switch votes to get a lynch because of his inactivity. - Touts being the first to "bring igadob up. He was a lurker, you didn't do anything special, you just voted for a lurker. Who tries to make their actions look more meaningful than they are? Scum. - Agrees with Sloosh and Zelblade that I look suspicious. Makes 1 extra point about the case that was inherently flawed. You state that I was giving Janaan a pass. I wasn't. In case you did not notice all of those people were lurking really hard, except for Janaan, who was posting enough, just not making a stand on anyone, and that's what I was asking him to do. See what you guys think. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
Post number 1: + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 21:08 k2hd wrote: Right then. First off, FourFace. His posts sound like a town player who is very enthusiastic about playing things his way, and having fun with his writing style, hence the kooky posting, so I agree that we should take the heat off of him just for now... As for chocolate and ghost, I must say I have my suspicions regarding them as well. I'm not going to quote too much because I think others have done enough of that already while I've been away. Ghost seems VERY insistent on lynching. He's even against using FOS and wants to straight out lynch anyone he considers suspicious, as some have already pointed out. Then, when FourFace places a vote on jekyl just to "pressure" them, ghost posts this: Show nested quote + @fourface That's not how you apply pressure on someone to post. This is how you apply pressure on someone to post. It doesn't really say much about WHY FourFace is doing it wrong, and conveniently places another vote on jekyl. Then, FourFace presents himself as a better, and more possible target for a mislynch. Ghost accuses FourFace of scummy/crazy play, and it seems to me like he is out to get the easy mislynch again. Does he actually just think that FourFace is playing a very weird and seemingly nonsensical style? Maybe, but he has yet to unvote FourFace in the voting thread. Now for chocolate. I don't have as much to go on for chocolate aside from what's already been said, but I think it's interesting that he is voting for FourFace with ghost as well, perhaps hoping to start some sort of bandwagon? This part of his post: I'm going to vote for you for the time being because that was really weird. If you sufficiently explain yourself and start to make sense I will unvote you. Seems like a way of joining ghost in starting the bandwagon, while at the same time giving him the option of pulling out if the bandwagoning fails. I'm just not sure why you would actually put your vote into the voting thread at this stage, instead of just posting the thought and leaving it at that till FourFace actually DID post more so he could decide. To be fair to him though, he (seemingly) hasn't had the chance to read why posters such as alderaan and jekylandhyde don't think FourFace is scum yet. For now, I will remain suspicious of these 2 without voting yet, for reasons that will be explained below. I'm also very curious though to know why everyone is ignoring igabod. Up until now, his contributions have been these 2 posts: Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 00:04 igabod wrote: I just finished reading the thread. I agree with lynching someone day one. I also think that the fake voting deadline could work. Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 00:24 igabod wrote: I will be available most of the time on Saturday and Sunday. I won't have much time on Tuesdays. I have about 3 hours when I can post on Tuesday. All he has done is agree with what has been said so far (without even bothering to put it into his own words, or back his agreement up with his own logic), and since then we have heard nothing from him. Now I should say that this will likely be my last post from now until the voting deadline (the real one) because I have to head off to bed soon for class tomorrow, and will be in uni when the deadline is up. I have pretty much no breaks tomorrow either in between classes. Because of this, I will vote for a no lynch for today only. Since I will be away for so long, I'd rather not vote for a lynch on someone who posts a proper defense when they wake up, or if a better target presents themself and I'm not available to change my vote. Just to confirm, can I ACTUALLY vote for a no lynch, or does that only occur when there is no majority? I will actually probably come online tomorrow during a lecture just to check this post (and change my vote if I have to), wouldn't want to be modkilled for a stupid mistake like this Just fyi, If I cannot vote for a no lynch, I will be voting for igabod no matter what, because I won't have time to go through posts properly in a lecture to consider what everyone has to say. It seems like a safe enough option for now because I am sure I will not get a majority on him anyway at this stage, so this vote shouldn't have an effect on tomorrow's lynch. I'll be able to post more as I have Wednesday and Thursday off (GMT +11). ##vote: no lynch Post #2: + Show Spoiler + On February 28 2012 21:58 k2hd wrote: Now for those who are starting to suspect me. Ghost_403, I have already explained why I've been inactive (or "hardcore lurking" as you put it). I'm in Melbourne, Australia, which puts me at my most active when you are all busy/asleep it seems (with the exception of the new additions I guess). When you are all active, I am either in class or asleep. It is as simple as that. I can't discuss lynch options with you when you're up, and I can't bounce ideas off others or discuss things when -I- am up, which is why I've pretty much just been making 1 significant post each irl 24 hours. Note that I was able to post multiple times before the game started because it was a Sunday for me, and I was home. I am also going to repeat again that the other part of this hydra account is unable to play at all because of some stuff that has come up, so she cannot post for me. All posts up until now have been by me; BassInSpace, and I will be continuing to post by myself for the rest of the game. Gumshoe, I know you asked me to change my vote from igabod, but as already stated above, I was not going to because I could not consider all the new posts that had been made. That 1 sentence post where I said I would change from voting no lynch (which I couldn't do) to igabod was made on my ipod in uni, where I had no time to check posts aside from the one post asking the hosts if it was possible to vote no lynch. Alderan, I want to ask you now, do you think I'm still suspicious for "stacking" my vote on igabod to potentially save chocolate? I see that you yourself changed your vote away from chocolate, so I'd like to hear what your case is against me now. I already stated why I voted igabod. I had suspicions regarding chocolate and ghost like everyone else (was leaning more towards ghost in fact), but did not want to vote for either one in case they posted some convincing arguments while I was gone, and still have my vote on one of them because I wasn't around to change it. I was the first to bring igabod up, and voted for him because I didn't want to affect the outcome of today's lynch as I figured that sure, he was lurking, but was that by itself enough to convince others to vote for him? Turns out he did almost get lynched, but hey, I missed out on a LOT while I was gone. Not that it matters now anyway. Hi to the new entrants btw Sloosh, I find your case against alderaan very interesting. And just to add to what zelblade has said, here's this post by alderan: + Show Spoiler + On February 28 2012 01:28 Alderan wrote: Obviously we need to hear more from everyone, but here is who I'm specifically looking forward to: - Igabod - Chocolate - Janaan (In that, I would like to hear who you want to vote for) - Ghost_403 - Steveling I still like Chocolate as the lynch candidate for today, but I'm going to hold out as I wait for a response. Also I have more reads on Ghost, but again, I'd rather wait for him to respond so as not to jump the gun with divulging information. A note on Steveling. Last game he played a very "I'm a noob town don't lynch me" game as stated in one of his first posts in the scum qt. He obviously can't do this again if he's scum, because he knows I'm town, and I'll call it out. After playing a game with him it seems like he is a person who would use a shtick as scum. Steveling I'm telling you now, if a lurker scum is your thing, I'll find you. He wanted to hear about what those 4 had to say, but janaan is exempt from explaining himself, he just has to tell him who he's voting for. He has now stated that janaan makes him suspicious (in alderan's post regarding those among igabod's voters who he found suspicious), so we will have to see how convincing a case he posts for janaan, or if he is going to post a weak case and let someone else tear it down because it is not concrete enough, thus absolving janaan of any guilt. I say all this because I have also started to get suspicious of janaan. However, I don't think I have enough yet to be any more than moderately suspicious of either at this point (would alderan really shove himself into the spotlight this much if he were mafia? It must be awfully hard to keep from any slips this way... But I'm new to mafia, so who knows). I would like to hear from both of them first before going further with this. I'd also just like to sleep on this too, I've spent hours looking at everyone's filters, having over 10 tabs open and trying to find what I want in each of those tabs. Also, I obviously want to see what the night brings along. I'd also like to read more from jekylandhyde, who hasn't really taken a firm stance on anyone. So far he's put what he called a "placeholder vote" on Chocolate, which he changed to another placeholder vote on DoYouHas. He didn't REALLY want to vote chocolate, he didn't REALLY want to vote DoYouHas, and he didn't want to vote igabod because replacements were coming in, so that he could pressure them. This is while he has had access to the thread more than me. It seems like he may be stalling if you ask me. Show nested quote + I dislike the fact that so many decided to switch to igabod and eventually a no-lynch. I agree with sloosh that igabod can be considered the "easy way out", and I find it surprising that you guys actually think that he has a higher chance of flipping scum as opposed to choclate or ghost. He has posted nothing, and I dont see how you guys see that he is auto-scum. It is much more probable that he had some IRL issues or lost interest in the game, which says zlich about his alignment. zelblade, I voted igabod with plenty of time to go before the deadline, so he still had a chance to post after I voted. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
- I'm not sure I was scrambling the hardest to get a lynch, I think that if you go back and look through that last hour or so, I was legitimately torn with which direction to go, because admittedly my Chocolate case was not as damning as I'd originally hoped. - On voting Steveling rather than igadob. Here is my logic. Steveling had cast a vote, igadob had not. If Steveling was indeed an inactive scum, we could in all likely hood clear igadob's replacement. If igadob was scum we had much less information to work off of. I addressed some of the other things in my response to Sloosh. Let me know if you need any more clarification. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
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. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
2 lurkers. Steveling had placed a vote. Igadob had not. Both equally likely to get replaced. Both had not posted anything to give anyone a read either way. Lynch Igadob results in: Lurker lynched If town, no additional information. If scum, no additional information aside from voting patterns. Lynch Steveling results in: Lurker lynched If town, no additional information. If scum, evidence (not definitive) that igadob may be town, as well as voting patterns. Playing optimally, in the event that we would have lynched a lurker, Steveling would have been the correct choice. | ||
Alderan
United States463 Posts
On February 29 2012 06:21 ghost_403 wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 28 2012 10:02 Alderan wrote: I might have lied to you. I just went back to the voting thread and here is what I saw: igabod - 5 k2hd DoYouHas Chocolate Janaan Steveling Chocolate - 5 phagga JekyllAndHyde slOosh ghost_403 NightFury Of the 5 voting igabod I have suspicions of 4 of them. k2hd Chocolate Janaan Steveling Of the 5 voting for Chocolate I have town reads on 3 (and a half) of them. Obviously not going to list them. The way this looks to me, without one clear bus target is that we might be right. I think Chocolate may actually be scum. I think they are in a position where they have to stack on the inactive so as to save their team mate. Potentially changing my vote, what does everyone think? So, let me get this straight. Correct me where I'm wrong. 1) You think Chocolate is scummy and make a not terrible case against him. 2) He defends, adequately (according to you), and you decide that he might not be the best day 1 lynch. 3) You complain that people are busing against Chocolate, and change to a Steveling lynch. 4) You then go wishywashy in-between an Igabod lynch and a Steveling lynch, based on almost nothing. 5) You then make the above post saying that you think most of the people on the Chocolate lynch are townies and that they might be right. 6) Call Chocolate fishy. 7) Return to being wishy washy on the no lynch/lurker lynch thing. By the way, you were right on the Steveling thing. If I had been less sure that Chocolate was scum, I would have lynched him instead. Voting lurker? Not in my town. 1) Yes. 2) He never made a defense, I was just concerned about how fast the votes come together, then came his defense that I said was "ok", 3) I never complained people are bussing, I just said a case taking on legs that easily sometimes mean the scum are throwing votes onto them. 4) Not wishwashy, I've explained this enough times though. 5) I stand by that. 6) I stand by that. 7) Couldn't decide if my case was good enough to lynch. Decided it was not and put a vote on Steveling. | ||
| ||
Next event in 10m
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Pusan 207 Dota 2Dewaltoss 187 Leta 107 Sacsri 68 EffOrt 64 Zeus 62 Sharp 49 Terrorterran 28 Yoon 20 ForGG 16 [ Show more ] League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games Organizations StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • Berry_CruncH180 StarCraft: Brood War• aXEnki • intothetv • Gussbus • Kozan • IndyKCrew • LaughNgamez Trovo • Laughngamez YouTube • Migwel • Poblha League of Legends |
Replay Cast
TY vs Bunny
ByuN vs SHIN
TBD vs Classic
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
ESL Pro Tour
Reynor vs MaNa
GunGFuBanDa vs Spirit
Elazer vs Krystianer
SKillous vs MaxPax
Big Brain Bouts
Korean StarCraft League
Afreeca Starleague
hero vs Soulkey
AfreecaTV Pro Series
Reynor vs Cure
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
[ Show More ] ESL Pro Tour
BSL
Zhanhun vs DragOn
Dewalt vs Sziky
CSO Cup
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
Gypsy vs Bonyth
Mihu vs XiaoShuai
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
|
|