I will have a probable schedule conflict with this game. I will be out of town and out of touch for the weekend of March 2-4.
@GMarshal - Put me back in coach! It wouldn't be game ruining at all :D
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I will have a probable schedule conflict with this game. I will be out of town and out of touch for the weekend of March 2-4. @GMarshal - Put me back in coach! It wouldn't be game ruining at all :D | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I'm feeling pretty good about this game. Dreamflower/Qatol are quick to quell bad manner. I think you have gotten some of the kinks out of your posting style gumshoe. I now know what Alderan is capable of. Good mix of the new and semi-new. Hope this fills up fast. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 25 2012 11:56 EchelonTee wrote: Show nested quote + On February 25 2012 11:54 Alderan wrote: No I mean we all JUST played a game with each other for the most part, so we're going to be especially quick to point out the differences in play, whether it means anything or not... I'd watch out for that, eh DYH? I'd be down to /in as a replacement, but I have had 4 games played, so I'll just be watching Oh ET. I just loved how my case was thrown out because I was focusing to much on slOosh's meta. Only to have you come back at me with a meta argument. (Oh, and btw, the heart of my case was STILL the fact that slOosh had provided no reads up until my case, not meta) The hypocrisy of my lynch was stunning from both of you. But perhaps if we are going to continue to discuss last game we should move it back to that thread. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Something I want us to consider this game is creating an early fake deadline for voting. After getting into the obsQT last game I made note of a comment that greymist made, "I have never seen a last minute vote change hit scum, ever." (which was later corrected to include 1 exception). I think creating a fake deadline 8-12 hours before the actual deadline would help insulate us from last minute vote switches, and would also give us another point in time to gather meaningful analysis when people are having to take hard stances,. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Do we get to know how many scum are in the game? | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 26 2012 12:38 Janaan wrote: Day 1 post says 4 scum But it also says one of them is Qatol, so is it 3? | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I agree with gum on the no lynching, however: On February 26 2012 12:39 gumshoe wrote: 1: Please wait a little while into the game before making accusations, mafia love conflict, they thrive in it, there is no plus side to you getting into a fight with a fellow townie, so wait a few hours till your sure someones scum before you post a case on them, and if someone does something scummy early on, make a note of it, don't just blurt it out, scum slips are much more useful as part of a bigger picture, and if scum are comftarble they are more likely to make more mistakes. Do not use this as your guide. There are plenty of guides linked in the OP which will give you a more nuanced view of how to play and what to look for. That being said, gumshoe isn't wrong, but he isn't presenting all the options. When you post you need to have a purpose for that post in mind. There can be many motivations behind posting a case against someone, or even just pointing out a 'scum slip'. Try to post to cause the greatest effect. If you follow gumshoe's suggestion here and hold back what you see until you can compose a strong case, that is fine. If you decide to use what you have in order to pressure a person, that's great too. Don't pick a fight with a person because you think they are scummy. Objectively apply pressure, create cases, and persuade others to your point of view. Conflict is a useful tool, and putting someone under the gun can give you as much evidence against them as letting them relax and mess up on their own. Conflict is not where mafia thrive. Pointless conflict is where mafia thrive. The point is, have a purpose to your posts and use your head. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 26 2012 13:47 Janaan wrote: The thing about pressuring is it can get the person talking, and you can use what they say to determine more about them. Some scum might even break under the pressure. If you wait until you have a full case, all that it could potentially take is one long decent defense post, and you'll never hear from him again. Or, maybe they never post enough to make a decent case. Then you're stuck. In other words, "I agree with DYH". There are plenty of guides and coaches, let's stop giving advice. In regards to lynching lurkers. I never know how I feel about it until the day develops more. I definitely am open to it, but I have no set opinion until I have an alternative to weigh it against. Lynching lurkers is only viable to me if there is a lack of strong cases or consensus available. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
FourFace I don't like that his first post places unwarranted suspicion on the hydras. He could argue that he was just putting pressure on them, but this post On February 26 2012 20:58 FourFace wrote: Either way i + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=315559#2 ... to apply some pressure. But it's rather harmless shows he doesn't quite understand how to put pressure on someone properly yet. I also don't like his lack of opinion on the soft deadline (thanks for the phrase slOosh). He says he is waiting for a thorough pro/con discussion. But a few of us had already provided pros, so in order to be ambivalent to the idea he must have had some cons in mind, but chooses not to post them. On February 26 2012 18:13 FourFace wrote: 1. I'm a total scrub at this game btw, playing my debut game with you hansom TL-ers. I like the theme, reminds me of Dexter's Lab when the bacteria took over his family and he had to get into the dodgeball suit and kick their asses. 2. I support the idea of lynching lurkers over lynching suspicious individuals although if someone starts spamming protocol and tips about how you should play, with the excuse of this being a newbie game, it kinda bothers me and I might vote against such a person. I recommend keeping things concise (with the exception of day 1, because we have to get to know each other, so posting stuff about voyager and whatnot is welcome since it's an indication of ones personality and a hint to what you can expect to hear from that person in the future.. even though gumshoe makes the impression of being a couple arrows short of a quiver I think he sets the right tone to be followed but for this first day only) Generally I'd like people to post pros and cons when they want to implement a policy, for others to get an idea about weather the motives behind it are benevolent, malicious or incompetent in nature. 3. No no lynch policy pro/con (that i can think of): We got 10 for town and 4 scum, starting probabilities for lynching are 10 to 4 for an innocent townie and 4 to 10 for scum. After each day 1 townie gets shot by mafia so if another townie gets lynched it's 8 to 4 chances to lynch a townie after second day's vote and 4 to 8 chances of lynching scum and so forth. If someone could make a tree diagram real quickly listing probabilities for lynching either town or scum up until day 6 or so and multiply the probabilities that would be appreciated (without doctor or vigilante interference first to get a general idea). Worst case scenario is lynching town every time for 2 consecutive days which means game over after day[3]. Best case would be lynching scum every time in which case town wins at the dawn of the fifth day with 6 town alive and 0 scum. So is it advisable to lynch the first day without any concrete evidence, i have no idea. Some math boy-genius figure it out, but all in all (considering detective, medics and player behavior) my gut tells me that the success-rate of a lynch is a curve which drops the first couple of days and reaches it's max at the LYLO point. We can either plan our build for that lategame where success-rate is high or we can gamble and lynch right away. Either way we need to know the math to get an idea of the setup and we don't have much time to figure out what is more important.. gathering information or action. If we don't lynch then tomorrow will likely be 9 town to 4 at which point the worst scenario would be game over after day[4] with 5 town to 4 scum at the LYLO point on day[3], which sounds way better for me (gaining a day), but again this is without vigilante/medic/strategy which I think would inflate towns chances even more. 1. Lowering our expectations of him. Not a big deal, it is a newbie game. 2. Wants to lynch lurkers over suspicious people... unless they are posting advice and protocol. That is what would make a person suspicious enough to FourFace that they need to be voted over a lurker. Seems a bit off to me. At best this statement is wishy-washy and means nothing. At worse it reveals FourFace to have a skewed point of view. 3. This whole section says 1 thing of value. In a worst case scenario, a no-lynch on day1 gives us 1 more day of play before game over. The rest is pointing out the obvious, needless speculation, and trying to get others to jump on board with discussion about the setup. I think that the majority of this first post, while big, says almost nothing. Very suspicious. (I'm taking the spoilers out of this next one) On February 26 2012 20:58 FourFace wrote: Pro no lynch on first day: If we get to Day[2] with 2 townies missing .. how much info do you get from that? We need successful lynches for info to spring, Janaan. We are scientists, remember? We need a statistic edge and we'll build on it with what info comes along. Vote for who you think benefits the town the least but refrain from lynching on the first day. You can gather info from who gets shot and whether you get saved or not. Plus on Day[2] the DT made check, or possibly even gets roleblocked, or saved, or shot by friendly fire. And also if we lynch today we have no DT support because he hasn't made his check yet. I wouldn't know what to make out of the lynch info even if against all odds it turns out to be scum, as it could be one of their plans to sacrifice one of them by bandwagoning on his lynch and playing the "i would have tried to stop the lynch if i was scum" card all game long. Sort of like a 5 pool, sacrifice drones for early aggression. Con no lynch on first day: One of the methods mafia use to win is stall so we need decimate their numbers quickly, 40 percent chance is acceptable, and we get to sack those who aren't active enough for town to collaborate successfully. I doubt that someone who posts conclusively will be a candidate so it's either lurker or BS spammer, either way no big asset to town so why not start right away. Either way i http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=315559#2 ... to apply some pressure. But it's rather harmless Pro - Not vote for who you think is scum, vote for who you think benefits the town the least. Pro - FF seems to want to rely on blues to provide us with information. And speculation on who gets shot by scum tends to be WIFOM and useless. FF downplays the value of information gained by a lynch, up-plays the value of information gotten by a mafia hit. And goes back to blues for actually figuring the game out. This is a very wrong way of looking at the game. Con - First off, it isn't a 40% chance, it is closer to a 29% chance. 4/14, not 4/10. Secondly, FF has wandered into random lynch territory instead of staying on pro/con for nolynch. I don't like it one bit. Con - Just like in his pro-nolynch argument he is espousing voting for those who are least valuable to town, not scum. I italicized the statement in this section that I just hate and think betrays FF's attitude. On February 27 2012 05:32 FourFace wrote: I knew this was going to be fun. Had a LOL moment already; gumshoe says "Glad to have you on our side Alderaan ( : as for absolutes do you mind making decisions like that on a day to day basis?" and Alderan is like: "What do you mean?" Seriously wtf did you mean bro? Anyway I am disapoint about Steveling not reading this thread from start to finish. If he would have realized what a hydra is (i didn't know either until i did read .. THE WHOLE .. thread from START 2 FINISH and my eyes are still functioning properly) (DO THIS NOW if you haven't already GOOGG we'll be waiting THANK YOU!) Also certain circumstances made it so that I already have an idea of a case bait set up. The trap is up and running as we speak. At this point I can only say that there's an elephant in the room and whether people see it or not, mention it or not will give a mass check on all @Janaan why JekyllAndHyde and not some other lurker? I don't know, lynch me I asked you all to have a purpose in mind when you posted things. So what is the purpose of this post? From what I can see the purpose of this post is to foment conflict between gumshoe and Alderan, to undercut/place suspicion on Steveling, and to hint at a secret strategy. Also, wtf is with this statement, "I don't know, lynch me". As to that secret strategy, I sure hope an integral part of it is letting us know that a trap is out there. Because if it isn't then all you have done is made people more afraid to post for fear of stepping into your trap. So if your trap doesn't depend on letting us know that it exists, you are acting very scummy. ##FOS: FourFace | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
You are absolutely right. There is a reason my case ended with a FOS instead of a vote. I had 3 things in mind when I made my case. 1. FF's early posting was either bad townie or scummy. I wanted to draw FF out and get a response from him in hopes of figuring out if he leans town or scum. My case wasn't conclusive on him as scum, but it was strong enough to warrant a response. 2. I wanted to move past the point of talking about policy and start getting into the real discussion. The best way of doing this is to give the town a solid piece of analysis to start playing with. 3. I wanted to gauge the responses of others to my case. (You kind of blew this for me when you posted, but that's ok.) After his response I am leaning town for FF. Why? Because of the timestamps. FF posted his fairly long response to me 66 minutes after I posted my case against him. If you look at his pre-game posts, FF was brand new and fairly oblivious to previous games (mentioning that he did not know the abbreviations and such). That tells me that it is VERY unlikely that he is playing off gumshoe's meta from last game for 2 reasons. I find it hard to believe that FF could have read my case, gone to a scumQT, asked for help, received it in the form of "play off gumshoe's meta", written up his post, and have it checked by that scumQT, and posted it in 66 minutes. It's possible, but super unlikely. That leaves me with the option that he read SNMM7 after this game started and decided on his own to play off gumshoe's meta, also super unlikely. So, to me, the craziness of his response is geniune. Which makes me lean town for him. For now. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I don't like Chocolate's play so far, his lurking and last couple posts. However, his 3 votes already on 3 different people despite a little amount of time in the thread is really conspicuous. His scum play in NMM3 was defined by trying to stay off the radar. That is at least enough to push him into null for me. I don't think we should lynch him today. Ghost is definitely on my radar as well with things like, "Just got back and I've seen a few things that I'm not too happy about" (I don't like that this mirrored how I started my case on FF). Also, "but I'm down with policy lynching. Townies, don't change your vote at the last minute and mess up votes. I will vote to policy lynch you." Ghost is playing pretty ballsy and I'm perfectly willing to let him to continue to do so. He does not earn my vote for today. I do want to vote Igabod. He is our hardest lurker so far, and he gave us a schedule which does not excuse him. 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. He has been available, but hasn't posted. With no clear case on anyone else, this definitely earns my vote for the soft deadline. ##Vote: igabod | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Right now I am very comfortable with my igabod vote. With how the conversation is being directed towards either a ghost lynch or a Chocolate lynch, I think igabod has a better chance of flipping scum than either of them. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 28 2012 07:33 NightFury wrote: I'm back at home. @ghost: After looking into your statement, you have addressed my concerns already. While I do not necessarily agree with your initial play style - you are being active and can address statements and inquiries. Show nested quote + On February 28 2012 06:32 Chocolate wrote: Hi guys I'm back. Hopefully I can format this correctly + 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 Show nested quote + I'll give them until ~6 EST to post but if they still haven't by them we should vote one. 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: Show nested quote + We should probably spread out our votes, don't need two people on one lurker yet imo 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: Show nested quote + That sounds like a good idea. I really can't see any problems with that tbh, and it works well for me because in the event of a massive vote swing I probably won't be online to provide input. 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. I got off the "lurker idea" because obviously it wasn't that good. I just wanted people to perhaps panic and get them to start posting. My idea was that votes DO=pressure, because noobs tend to panic a little when they see they are getting voted on. I said our vote will probably end up on a lurker because frankly that's what happened in my most previous game: most of the people lynched were either lurkers or scum, and most of the cases were on either lurkers or scum. I switched to fourface because I wanted him to keep posting, to see if I could get a good case on him. Obviously, he has continued, but hasn't adressed my points. I think he'll get replaced though so I'm going to hold off on voting for him for now. I'll try to make a case against someone shortly. That's my schedule, there isn't much to say about it. I'm in HS, and my parents make me get off the computer and my phone at 9 on weeknights, so I won't be online for the last hour of voting. + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 14:17 NightFury wrote: @Alderan I believe your case is good, but I feel it is slightly flawed. I'm not getting a very good town/scum read on Chocolate at this moment. While suspicious, I think he was overzealous with the mentality he had on the outset of the game and prone to a knee-jerk reaction. I'm unsure whether this is actually scummy or just reckless play. Also, out of curiosity, what does PBPA stand for? (Hope I don't butcher how TL handles quotes...) Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: 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. His full post goes more like this: Show nested quote + On February 26 2012 12:23 Chocolate wrote: It could be possible that someone makes a big scumslip but from the games I've played in a lot of the day1 pressure falls upon lurkers to get them to post, and since the pressure is on them the vote momentum is on them. Usually the lurkers are also new and some of their defenses are just based on OMGUS or accusing their accuser, instead of making insightful posts and contributing to prove their innocence. I'm not sure we will lynch a lurker on Day1, but it is the most likely outcome in my eyes. A few things about this. - This was posted on the very outset of the game. This irks me because he's already making predictions on previous games he's played. Also the fact that it's not later on since it could possibly be valid if we had no cases and a bunch of lurkers. - I'm interested in his previous two games here. He mentioned that "...the games I've played in a lot of the day1 pressure falls upon lurkers to get them to post...". I haven't looked at his previous games yet but I'm not sure if that's even a valid statement. If he's only played 2 games here then that's not a large sample size or it's possible that he has experience elsewhere and it's just a trend he's noticed. I will come back to this later after some analysis... also he mentions for us not to look. - He establishes the "vote to pressure" mentality early. This does come back later. - This was in response to an earlier statement by him since Janaan questioned why he thought the early deadline would likely target a lurker. Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: He later goes on to say I'll give them until ~6 EST to post but if they still haven't by them we should vote one. Pretty adamanent about this lurker idea, right? - He's maintaining his "vote to pressure" mentality. Namely he was looking at people who have yet to post listed by gumshoe. - At this point there hasn't been any significant cases. FF has already posted and some discussion has arisen... but no case when he posted. - As far as I can tell, he's just sticking to his ideology at this point. Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: Oh and this: We should probably spread out our votes, don't need two people on one lurker yet imo 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. - The case on FF hasn't been posted yet. - He's still sticking to his ideology of pressuring lurkers via votes. - I'm willing to be think that he just has a poor plan with "vote to pressure" at this point. So prior to his sudden switch to targeting FF (which hasn't happened yet)... I don't think he realized that "vote to pressure" wasn't a good idea. I'm not sure if anyone even tried to tell him this? Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: 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. - In short, this is also irks me. He went from adamant lurkers to FF. - He did mention that he would ditch lurkers if there was a huge scumslip or something of that nature. - However he may think it was a scumslip or something as a knee-jerk reaction. Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: Then there's: That sounds like a good idea. I really can't see any problems with that tbh, and it works well for me because in the event of a massive vote swing I probably won't be online to provide input. 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. - This may have been a taken out of context. I think he was referring to my second deadline suggestion (no quotes or @me, but he already commented on the first soft deadline and this follows my post). - Since it does not appear we are going to use a second deadline system, he can't use this as a defense priming technique if we don't use the second deadline. @Chocolate: Why would you vote for someone just for being weird? Or was there something especially scummy about it? As discussed in the thread, FF may not be scum just from his insanity defense alone. When I switched to FF,as I said earlier, I was trying to get him to post more. It didn't work, because he hasn't posted any real content since then. + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 14:22 Janaan wrote: Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 14:06 Alderan wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 13:59 Janaan wrote: One thing that stands out most to me about Ghost's posting is this gem right here Show nested quote + Another way to look at that is if you are still left during day 3 after 2 mislynches. There are 6 townies and 4 scum. The scum are either (1) forced to work together to stay alive, and are pretty easy to spot or (2) are going to sacrifice one of their own. Unless something goes horribly, horribly wrong, the worst case scenario for day 4 is 5 townies to 3 scum. No problem. He seems to think that it's perfectly fine for us to go 3 days without lynching a mafia, which would put us in a MYLO situation. Not exactly what I'd call a pro-town position to be in. His justification for saying this is pretty weak I think. 1. If the game gets to this point, scum obviously haven't been easy to spot, and it doesn't really get much easier. Sure, the "odds" might be more in your favor, but if you're in this situation, scum probably are pretty good at hiding in plain sight. 2. Yeah, scum might sacrifice one of their own. But 5 town/ 3 scum is still MYLO. I don't see how a townie could say that this is "no problem". Janaan, talk to me about Chocolate. I agree that Chocolate does seem a little wishy washy, saying stuff like then he seems to say at least slightly differently in his next post It seems to me that for the most part, though, his posts are fairly consistent with the idea of lynching lurkers in mind. I don't really know what Show nested quote + was about, and it does seem like he could be just trying to cover for himself so he can justify not being active near the voting deadline. Particularly when he did say that he'd most likely be online . 17-21 EST is the hours before the deadline, so he may've contradicted himself there. That sounds like a good idea. I really can't see any problems with that tbh, and it works well for me because in the event of a massive vote swing I probably won't be online to provide input. There's not really enough for me to call him scum right now, but he looks like he could be potentially. Saying something is probable and that I'm not sure of it doesn't seem contradictory to me at all. Isn't that what you mean when you say probably? 17-21 EST is right before the deadline except the last hour, so I'm notcontradicting myself. Honestly if your case on me is because of these that's pretty fishy, either you're sheeping or you're voting along with the mafia (possibly both). If there's anything I missed please point it out to me so I can address it. Okay. Why do you want people to panic and start posting? Getting people to panic is not a great idea because it can easily cause a lot of confusion. A townie panicking can make themselves appear suspicious and draw a lot of attention. Building a case off of panic doesn't make sense since the information you obtain may not be reliable. Yes, you could possibly cause scum to panic and get something - but how do you differentiate this from a townie? Also you mention this is to target newbies? How does experience dictate which role they have? I feel this strategy to begin with is extremely flawed and should not be a viable option. In hindsight, going after FourFace with that strategy was a bad idea (maybe his insanity defense was just a panic defense). But you don't even listen to your own philosophy. You wanted to build a case against him by making him post more. But you don't even present a case of your own - you just outright vote for him. I did take a look just now at your previous game with SacredSystem (only looked around Day 1 btw). Once again, the plan didn't even work. I would like you to explain how this plan worked in your eyes. He wasn't inactive. The vote wasn't even against him - he started off against someone's analysis about random lynching. He was town! Same thing with the person you immediately voted for because he didn't mention anything (he claimed he was at school, perfectly fair). Also, you were mafia in the previous game. I don't necessarily want to try to use posting meta in this game but now this is a bit too much. If you're mafia, the idea of causing someone to panic and gather a lot of attention benefits the mafia team. It leads the town down a useless path unless the person can defend themselves well... but a newbie panicking may not perform that too well. The big question I have for you: why are you using the same strategy to cause newbies to panic if you're truly town? How can you differentiate townie panic versus mafia panic? As of right now given the new circumstances - I do not believe you are town. ##Unvote: Ghost_304 ##Vote: Chocolate NightFury, you wanted to know what I thought was invalid in your post. If I read this correctly your main point here is the pressuring someone with a vote causes panic which leads the town to make poor reads on a person. Sometimes true, but not always true. A panicking player's quality of post will probably go down, but you also are more likely to get posts that reveal their motivation, making pressure very very useful. You are using something that a townie would quite reasonably do to convince yourself of Chocolate's guilt. (In hindsight "invent" was a poor choice of words) | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Gumshoe, I do agree with you about slOosh's attitude this game, it isn't helpful. However, I do genuinely think he took quite the blow with the endgame of SNMM7. His passivity does not condemn him for me yet. I would like him to get more involved, but I'm not going to vote him yet. I do have another suspicion after going through the thread again. However, it is more that this person has tingled my spidey sense, I don't really have a case yet. I will wait until night 1 to bring up those things because I don't have a strong enough case to push him and I don't want us to lose focus. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
(I ask again because it is not clear in the role descriptions.) | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 28 2012 09:56 phagga wrote: Show nested quote + On February 28 2012 09:47 DoYouHas wrote: We don't know igabod is getting modkilled. There is every chance that he will be replaced. Because of this I still think that he is our best lynch option. This argumentation is absolutely stupid. If igabod is getting replaced, then he was not playing the game at all. Therefore him lurking does not say anything at all about his alignement. He might even be a blue for all we know, and some real life matter keep him from playing. This is exactly the reason why we should NOT just lynch any lurker. So as long as igabod is not casting a vote, we should not try to lynch him. It is too late to swing a vote towards someone not Ghost/Chocolate/igabod or maybe Steve. I do not believe that Ghost/Chocolate should be lynched today. Yes, it is possible that igabod is not scum, we don't know. The reason we lynch igabod now is so that we don't go into day2 with a person we have absolutely no information on, which is not a situation I want to be in. That makes him a better lynch target than Chocolate or Ghost to me. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
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... | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Gumshoe, I think we might be in extraordinary enough circumstances to go for a no-lynch today. With at least 2 people being replaced/modkilled and possibly 3(FourFace). We are in a pretty bad place to be deciding our lynch, especially when 2/4 of the people we are considering lynching are among the ones being replaced/killed. I just don't think we should take the chance of a mislynch, a modkill, and a night hit leaving us 3 townies down at the start of day2. My opinion, igabod or no-lynch. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:44 ghost_403 wrote: @doyouhas Understandable, and a good answer. What are your thoughts on the ghost/chocolate thing going on at the moment? (To say this lynch is chocolate/igabod isn't quite accurate IMO.) I think you and Chocolate were both picked on because you were easy targets. I have null reads for both of you atm. I am not willing to vote you day 1 but you had better believe I will be scrutinizing both of you. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Alderan, my proposal for a no-lynch isn't assuming a modkill. It is because we have practically no information on 2/3rds of our lynch candidates (I don't think Ghost can be lynched now). Which is not a good place to be making a lynch decision from. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 28 2012 11:08 Alderan wrote: DoYouHas believes that you are both town so he's not going to buy it. On February 28 2012 10:57 DoYouHas wrote: I have null reads for both of you atm. I am not willing to vote you day 1 but you had better believe I will be scrutinizing both of you. Don't misrepresent me. I simply think that you cannot base the alignment of ghost based on the flip of Chocolate, or vice versa. Gum, a no-lynch isn't the end of the world, we are working with an incomplete set of information. Tomorrow the inactive situation will be settled and we can go from there. Lynching for information is bad. Welcome to the game Test, post lots. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
My actions to the contrary, don't waste tonight. I will be contributing when I return. I'm just a little burnt out atm and I need to fix that. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 27 2012 01:21 Alderan wrote: When I play mafia I HATE defining anything in absolutes, for example "we should NEVER no lynch", "X player is definitely town" etc. In my mind there are very real reasons we would want to no-lynch Day 1, namely, if there is a DEFINITIVE lack of reasonable cases at the end of the voting period, which we will have to determine. Also a Day 1 early vote deadline for me serves little to no purpose. I'd bet someone a dollar that by that time there will be someone who still has not posted yet, and there will be 2-4 people with only one introductory post. I liked this part of Alderan's first post, until he became the person who was scrambling the hardest to get a lynch at the end of the day. I'm curious what Alderan would define as "a DEFINITIVE lack of reasonable cases at the end of the voting period" if what we dealt with yesterday wasn't it. None of the cases against chocolate were all that reasonable, and the other two had posted practically nothing. He then tempers his initial statement with this post: On February 27 2012 02:45 Alderan wrote: Show nested quote + On February 27 2012 02:32 ghost_403 wrote: @alderan I really don't see any time where it would be advantageous to the town to not lynch. The town should first be lynching scum. If we can't find scum, we should instead lynch people who are not useful to the town. Lurkers fit the second criteria perfectly. By lurking, you are providing cover for the scum to hide, which is in every case bad for the town. I mean, look, I get it, if there's a hardcore lurker then we should lynch them, I'm fine with that. If there's not, and there are no adequate cases on who is scum I don't think it's worth it. Disclaimer: It is much more likely that we have an adequate lynch target than we don't. My point is that we don't rule the possibility out. This leads me to another curiosity. There wasn't that much to distinguish Steveling and igabod yesterday. Steveling did give us a few more posts and actually put in a request to be replaced instead of being modkilled->replaced. However, Alderan gives 2 reasons for his vote switch to Steveling: On February 28 2012 09:51 Alderan wrote: I honestly get the feeling Steveling is more likely to be scum than igabod, It's only on't a gut feeling, but let's be real, we're lynching lurkers, we don't have much else. ##vote: Steveling On February 28 2012 10:20 Alderan wrote: 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. The first post doesn't make much sense until you look at it with the second post. I see this as a sort of reverse of my feelings towards a Steveling lynch. I didn't trust Alderan, so I was unwilling to switch to the lurker of his choosing. He even states that he finds multiple people voting igabod to be suspicious. So why is he trying to convince that same group of people to switch over to Steveling? Why does he direct his efforts in an area almost guaranteed to not achieve his goal? With 4 of us on igabod, and at least 2 he finds supicious, he would have to convince people on the chocolate vote as well to get a lynch done. My point is this, for someone who started the game admitting there are real reasons we would end up at a no-lynch Alderan seemed afraid to admit the possibility that, at the end of the day, a no-lynch was our best option. Alderan's end of the day actions don't quite sit right with me. I wrote this a while back: On February 28 2012 02:51 DoYouHas wrote: I find myself agreeing with you fairly often, Alderan. But I've been burned by you before, so I'm keeping an eye out. I was clearly touchy about the possibility of Alderan buddying me. I found myself spotting many of the same things that Alderan pointed out on my first read through. He even echoed some of my logic from last game: On February 27 2012 15:17 Alderan wrote: Because I think you might be town I'm trying to help you set up your post so you will be taken seriously and given even an ounce of attention. As it stands now you are just being a nuisance. This is coming from someone who finds Janaan suspicions. I recognized that Alderan's initial case on Chocolate was not very strong. I was surprised when he posted this: On February 28 2012 08:29 Alderan wrote: Show nested quote + On February 28 2012 08:04 DoYouHas wrote: Anybody else think that this bandwagon is forming a little quickly on Chocolate? It wouldn't be so odd to me, but when I see a post like NightFury's which attacks Chocolate with points that are not very conclusive I start thinking that people are talking themselves into a Chocolate lynch instead of being objectively convinced. If you thought that he was our best lynch candidate because you found a few of thing things he said fishy and did not like his early lurking/middle of the road posts, that is one thing. But when you invent fairly invalid points to convince us that you aren't just sheeping the vote, it is very bad for town. Right now I am very comfortable with my igabod vote. With how the conversation is being directed towards either a ghost lynch or a Chocolate lynch, I think igabod has a better chance of flipping scum than either of them. 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. This set off the warning bells for me because he 'might' be trying to buddy me. Also, I was of the opinion that Alderan was one of the chief people directing our conversation towards Ghost and Chocolate. So I found it strange that he would so readily agree with a post that infers him having scummy motivation. Alderan, you will notice that similar to my FF case, this one isn't conclusive on you being scum. What I need from you is transparency. Don't waste your time defending yourself on the points I just made (unless something I said was completely untrue). Instead, I want you to write significant posts on what you think about me, slOosh, gumshoe, Janaan, and phagga. I know you do not like giving town reads, but I need to be reassured so I can start looking elsewhere for scum. I already stated that I think we are generally on the same wavelength this game, if I can trust you on top of that then we can go to work on this thread. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 29 2012 06:55 phagga wrote: Show nested quote + On February 28 2012 10:04 DoYouHas wrote: On February 28 2012 09:56 phagga wrote: On February 28 2012 09:47 DoYouHas wrote: We don't know igabod is getting modkilled. There is every chance that he will be replaced. Because of this I still think that he is our best lynch option. This argumentation is absolutely stupid. If igabod is getting replaced, then he was not playing the game at all. Therefore him lurking does not say anything at all about his alignement. He might even be a blue for all we know, and some real life matter keep him from playing. This is exactly the reason why we should NOT just lynch any lurker. So as long as igabod is not casting a vote, we should not try to lynch him. It is too late to swing a vote towards someone not Ghost/Chocolate/igabod or maybe Steve. I do not believe that Ghost/Chocolate should be lynched today. Yes, it is possible that igabod is not scum, we don't know. The reason we lynch igabod now is so that we don't go into day2 with a person we have absolutely no information on, which is not a situation I want to be in. That makes him a better lynch target than Chocolate or Ghost to me. Dude, seriously? You'd rather risk lynching an inactive townie instead of waiting for the next day when a new guy approaches that might actually help us? Why? He is not running away. When we lynch someone who is actually playing the game, we get so much more information and benefit out of it. -_-, You seem to want me to justify lynching lurkers to you. That is a waste of typing and I'm not going to bother. I thought I made my position pretty clear last night. On February 28 2012 10:21 DoYouHas wrote: Moving on then, Gumshoe, I think we might be in extraordinary enough circumstances to go for a no-lynch today. With at least 2 people being replaced/modkilled and possibly 3(FourFace). We are in a pretty bad place to be deciding our lynch, especially when 2/4 of the people we are considering lynching are among the ones being replaced/killed. I just don't think we should take the chance of a mislynch, a modkill, and a night hit leaving us 3 townies down at the start of day2. My opinion, igabod or no-lynch. I didn't trust Alderan so I wasn't going to vote Steveling. (Although objectively, Alderan is correct. Steveling was the better lynch.) And I was not going to vote Chocolate. So, igabod or no-lynch. Lynch lurker or no-lynch. Of the two I was advocating the no-lynch harder. Phagga, if you find my play suspicious, present a case. Stop throwing the fact that you don't like lurker lynching in my face. I don't like it either, but that is just where yesterday landed us. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I was largely absent for most of the night. That stops now. I'm going to put in the time to come up with a convincing case today and we are going to lynch us some scum. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Tomorrow when I delve into filters and such I will try to do so independent of that kind of thinking. I fell into it last game with MidnightGladius. It wasn't helpful then, it won't be helpful now. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
In a very general sense I think that we can draw a few bits of information out of this. The first is that it is pretty safe to assume that the mafia spread their votes over multiple people. This was something Alderan made a point of when he was scum in SNMM7. And it makes sense, without an overwhelming bandwagon, of course scum are going to split their votes up. The second thing is that because we were so desperate for cases and content to debate over, I bet that there are at least 2 mafia that spent most of day1 just skating by. Either lurking, playing very safe, or following others' lead. Lastly, I'm looking for players who were trying to nudge others into action. With how yesterday developed I think that just like SNMM7, the town was often heading in the wrong direction. Because of this, I think that at least a few of the mafia spent their time nudging townies further down the path of their incorrect reads. It is time we provide large, convincing cases against people. Cases that you feel passionate about, and will create real debate. Lets go to work people. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
NightFury Let us meander what NightFury has done so far this game.
2. Support Alderan's case against Chocolate. 3. Support slOosh's case against Ghost. (At least that better have been what it was, because if it wasn't then his own points do not justify this statement, "Unless an exceptional defense comes up shortly, I am unlikely to change my vote.") 4. Switch back to Chocolate with some additional weak reasoning. 5. Debate the value of voting for pressure with me and Chocolate. 6. Come back after Chocolate recently. Now let's review things that I am looking for in scum atm.
2. Nudging other players along. 3. Pigeonholing Ghost and Chocolate as our lynch targets for day1. 4. Posting empty of helpful content. 5. Posting that shows they feel the need to apologize or feel under pressure (that isn't actually there). NightFury is guilty of all 5 of those things. 1. NightFury skated through day1 with a fairly short filter, and managed to not give any solid opinions on anyone except Chocolate and Ghost. He also bothered me with this: On February 28 2012 10:04 NightFury wrote: Anyways, I am off for dinner. I will not be back for some time (probably around the deadline). My vote remains the same. He says he will be back in around 10 hours (which is the deadline) but his next post is this one: On February 29 2012 06:28 NightFury wrote: Back from work. Going to catching up on the thread and posting my thoughts/opinions on current events. First order of business though: Greetings to all the new players. :D Which is a little over 10 hours past the deadline. I find it strange that he actively lurked and offered nothing to the thread when so much was happening in those hours leading up to the deadline. I get it that he had work and dinner and sleep and all sort of things. But I sincerely doubt that he did not check the thread in those 20 hours. And if he did check the thread, he has been so good about telling us when he is here and when he is absent, why didn't he post. There was tons to post about. 2. NightFury nudged me along an unhelpful path by suggesting a further deadline, which if I had agreed with would have wasted the town's time as the issue drew too much attention. He also nudged Alderan along with his support and tweaking of Alderan's case on Chocolate. He also nudged slOosh and Alderan along with their suspicions on Ghost. And it may just be me, but I think the way that NightFury pursued his case against Chocolate is remarkably similar to what zelblade did to me in SNMM7. 3. Not much needs to be said here. NightFury stayed on point with Ghost and Chocolate, and was definitely one of the voices getting them to be our top candidates. 4. I'm going to look past the early posts that all dealt with policy because it is too easy to point at those and say, "no real content". Instead lets look at the posts after that. His posts break down into essentially 4 things after he gets past policy. "I like Alderan's case", "I don't like that Chocolate is referring to past games", "I don't like Chocolate voting to apply pressure", and "I don't like that Chocolate switched to FF without quality reasoning". 5. NightFury is constantly updating us on him just getting back or him having to leave, or telling us when he won't be around. (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10) At first this didn't stick out to me, but after I noticed how pervasive these comments were in his posting I started thinking about some of the reasons he would be doling out so many updates to us. 1. He is overeager and just wants us to know when he is around/not around. 2. He wants to make us feel like we can account for him at all times so that we don't get suspicious about him not posting much. 3. Same as 2, but it is caused by a desire to cover up the time he is spending in a scumQT, and therefore unintentional. I see all these little unnecessary updates he has given us as little apologies or signs that he feels pressured by the town even though we haven't said anything. ##Vote: NightFury P.S. Honorable mention goes to k2hd. Many of my scum standards applied to NightFury here also apply to him. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 01 2012 12:43 NightFury wrote: Show nested quote + On March 01 2012 09:52 DoYouHas wrote: I believe NightFury is scum. NightFury Let us meander what NightFury has done so far this game.
2. Support Alderan's case against Chocolate. 3. Support slOosh's case against Ghost. (At least that better have been what it was, because if it wasn't then his own points do not justify this statement, "Unless an exceptional defense comes up shortly, I am unlikely to change my vote.") 4. Switch back to Chocolate with some additional weak reasoning. 5. Debate the value of voting for pressure with me and Chocolate. 6. Come back after Chocolate recently. Now let's review things that I am looking for in scum atm.
2. Nudging other players along. 3. Pigeonholing Ghost and Chocolate as our lynch targets for day1. 4. Posting empty of helpful content. 5. Posting that shows they feel the need to apologize or feel under pressure (that isn't actually there). NightFury is guilty of all 5 of those things. 1. NightFury skated through day1 with a fairly short filter, and managed to not give any solid opinions on anyone except Chocolate and Ghost. He also bothered me with this: On February 28 2012 10:04 NightFury wrote: Anyways, I am off for dinner. I will not be back for some time (probably around the deadline). My vote remains the same. He says he will be back in around 10 hours (which is the deadline) but his next post is this one: On February 29 2012 06:28 NightFury wrote: Back from work. Going to catching up on the thread and posting my thoughts/opinions on current events. First order of business though: Greetings to all the new players. :D Which is a little over 10 hours past the deadline. I find it strange that he actively lurked and offered nothing to the thread when so much was happening in those hours leading up to the deadline. I get it that he had work and dinner and sleep and all sort of things. But I sincerely doubt that he did not check the thread in those 20 hours. And if he did check the thread, he has been so good about telling us when he is here and when he is absent, why didn't he post. There was tons to post about. 2. NightFury nudged me along an unhelpful path by suggesting a further deadline, which if I had agreed with would have wasted the town's time as the issue drew too much attention. He also nudged Alderan along with his support and tweaking of Alderan's case on Chocolate. He also nudged slOosh and Alderan along with their suspicions on Ghost. And it may just be me, but I think the way that NightFury pursued his case against Chocolate is remarkably similar to what zelblade did to me in SNMM7. 3. Not much needs to be said here. NightFury stayed on point with Ghost and Chocolate, and was definitely one of the voices getting them to be our top candidates. 4. I'm going to look past the early posts that all dealt with policy because it is too easy to point at those and say, "no real content". Instead lets look at the posts after that. His posts break down into essentially 4 things after he gets past policy. "I like Alderan's case", "I don't like that Chocolate is referring to past games", "I don't like Chocolate voting to apply pressure", and "I don't like that Chocolate switched to FF without quality reasoning". 5. NightFury is constantly updating us on him just getting back or him having to leave, or telling us when he won't be around. (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10) At first this didn't stick out to me, but after I noticed how pervasive these comments were in his posting I started thinking about some of the reasons he would be doling out so many updates to us. 1. He is overeager and just wants us to know when he is around/not around. 2. He wants to make us feel like we can account for him at all times so that we don't get suspicious about him not posting much. 3. Same as 2, but it is caused by a desire to cover up the time he is spending in a scumQT, and therefore unintentional. I see all these little unnecessary updates he has given us as little apologies or signs that he feels pressured by the town even though we haven't said anything. ##Vote: NightFury P.S. Honorable mention goes to k2hd. Many of my scum standards applied to NightFury here also apply to him. I will be addressing your points in order. However, you do mention that I do not provide real content or opinion as well. I will be address that after the other details in your post as it pertains my to entire game experience up until now. 1. In regards to my absence. I was actually gone for the entire duration of ~20 hours. By off for dinner I was actually heading out with company. I did not return until much later than expected and immediately went to bed. I had a busy day at work and was not able to sit down in front of a computer. Was only able to do so when I got home. In terms of not commenting on the previous events, see below. 2. I believed that a secondary deadline would have been a good idea - locking in would prevent "last minute vote switches" if people went with it. Apart from some people either agreeing or whatnot, it effectively generated no discussion. And I believe it was Janaan who said it could have caused chaos, but I provided my rationale before. As for the Alderan tweak. I did support his case in general but I also stated that it was flawed (it lacked clarity). At that time, while Chocolate did seem scummy for the switch, I wanted to bring up the possibility that it may have just been reckless play. I don't see that as a nudge more as something to be re-evaluated. 3. No problems here I'm assuming? 4. I would like to address this entire point below. 5. I started this because it appeared everyone else would be doing it too. With reflection, you're assessment that I am overeager is accurate. As I mentioned in response to Chocolate, I am capable of getting excited. This was the motivation behind trying this. However, I know I have not been able to always perform it due to not always being at a computer and things do come up. I did not anticipate this action could be viewed in such a manner. In regards to not generating real content. This is my very first game of TL mafia (and of forum mafia to begin with). My #1 priority this game is to have a good learning experience. I've been playing solo this game as there are no coaches and I didn't know about hydras until the game was underway. I've been trying to post whatever I could to see if I could help generate discussion. But I have clearly not been able to do such. This may be due to what I think would be useful (second deadline, clarifying Alderan's case, pushing my case on Day 1...) has actually been useless? The problem I have is that I get swept under the rug whenever I do this. I only find myself being quoted by Chocolate (and for good reason) and the occasional other post. So I find myself reading over posts and thinking of what to contribute - but find a lot of things I did find out to already be stated. I do not see how quoting someone and saying "I agree" without any content is useful. I have no issue posting, but anything original just gets swept under the rug. Even you brought up how part of my case on Chocolate was useless and I was trying to determine why. But again, no discussion was generated. I'm at a point where I do not know how to generate discussion since my attempts have come and gone. I do feel being prompted (like right now) is good since it has a focus. Wow, that post struck me as... earnest. Very well, I'll switch my vote to k2hd. I'll present a more thorough reasoning as to why a little later. ##Unvote: NightFury ##Vote: k2hd | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Ghost and Phagga, do you agree with how I handled NightFury? Who is your greatest suspicion right now? slOosh, what is your current stance on alderan? on k2hd? does one effect the other? zelblade, you said that you agreed with slOosh that igabod was the easy way out. Who on the list of people who voted igabod do you find most scummy and why? Gumshoe, if we were to lynch someone, who would provide the most information? What are the conflicts currently in the game as you see them? How do you think the scum are behaving this game to bring us to this point? | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 01 2012 20:58 phagga wrote: 2 The question you should ask yourself here is: Is this something a townie would do? And if so, is it also something scum would do? I doubt scum would want to stay in the spotlight like that. Also, If you are town, and you feel strongly about someone being scum, what are you gonna do? - Try to push a lynch on that person even if people will not listen to you - let the person of the hook because noone listens to you, and pick another target I would be stupid to push his lynch so hard if I was scum and knew he was town. When he would get lynched and flipped green, everyone would be on my heels. You do not want that as scum, specially not so early in the game. This is wrong. It is equally as possible that mafia would tunnel someone that hard. Tunneling someone into a lynch, on a green flip, makes it very hard for the town to determine whether it was just bad town play or scummy play. It is an easy way for a scum to get into and out of the spotlight without offering anything more than a null read on them. It also lowers the town's expectations for them for the rest of the game. Similarly, being willing to back off a case is just as often a trait of a townie who has changed their mind as it is a scum who wants a bandwagon. WIFOM my friend, WIFOM. I also find myself oddly comfortable with either a k2hd, gumshoe, or Alderan lynch. I think they all have good reasons to be lynched, but I will wait a little longer to see what people think before I make my preference clear. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 01 2012 06:26 DoYouHas wrote: I'm digging through filters atm, but something I want to throw out there while I'm working on cases is a general view on how yesterday developed. When I look at yesterday, I see a lot of parallels between it and SNMM7. The main things being that there were a few cases that did not convince a majority, general confusion going into the deadline, and the threat of a no-lynch (in our case the threat became real). In a very general sense I think that we can draw a few bits of information out of this. The first is that it is pretty safe to assume that the mafia spread their votes over multiple people. This was something Alderan made a point of when he was scum in SNMM7. And it makes sense, without an overwhelming bandwagon, of course scum are going to split their votes up. The second thing is that because we were so desperate for cases and content to debate over, I bet that there are at least 2 mafia that spent most of day1 just skating by. Either lurking, playing very safe, or following others' lead. Lastly, I'm looking for players who were trying to nudge others into action. With how yesterday developed I think that just like SNMM7, the town was often heading in the wrong direction. Because of this, I think that at least a few of the mafia spent their time nudging townies further down the path of their incorrect reads. It is time we provide large, convincing cases against people. Cases that you feel passionate about, and will create real debate. Lets go to work people. I am particularly interested in Alderan's thoughts on what I said. If I am right and yesterday developed similarly to SNMM7, then Alderan should be able to give us an insider's perspective on scum, as well as identify 2-3 scum who are following a similar pattern to what they did in SNMM7. So Alderan, what do you think? | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 02 2012 08:45 slOosh wrote: I'm really inclined not to. Why? I gave consideration to it because I thought DYH had a case and wanted some feedback. It is less than 4 hours to the lynch deadline and still no explanation for his vote. I don't have as strong a read on him as I do gumshoe, so there really isn't reason to switch over unless people can give me reason to. Oh crap, I forgot I promised to make that case. ugh.... sorry everyone. I really do see k2hd as a better lynch than gumshoe atm, but as I mentioned before gum is on my list of acceptable lynches for today. The main thing is we don't no-lynch again. I'll try and type up a quick side by side comparison of those two ASAP, but I need to finish the dishes first. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
However, the reason I think k2hd is the better choice for us to lynch today is because gumshoe's play does not look planned or careful, it does not look like he is playing to an agenda. I accept the fact that gumshoe has a certain style, and it is entirely possible that he is using that to mask his scum play. That is why I'm willing to vote for him if it comes down to it. But the gumshoe of this game looks a lot like the gumshoe of SNMM7. I don't see him as acting particularly anti-town with the exception of dealing with zelblade and asking for a replacement. k2hd on the other hand makes a few posts every so often. They do have the sense of being planned and careful. He fits the profile for me of someone who is staying off the radar, while spreading lots of weak suspicion around. I also really don't like how he treated his vote in this post + 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 | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
##Vote: nttea | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
##Vote: k2hd | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I still think k2hd is the better lynch. On March 02 2012 06:23 Chocolate wrote: Final point for now is that I'm starting to find it a bit odd that DoYouHas has been agreeing with nearly every thing I said. Maybe trying to buddy me? Chocolate, could you please give me examples. I didn't notice I was doing this. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
As for voting nttea. I agreed with you. I put my vote on him because I think you vote the person most likely to be scum. Right now that is nttea. I still read what you posts critically Chocolate, and I definitely am not trying to buddy you. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I think that there are similarities to how our day1 played out and how day1 played out in SNMM7. I think that that it is a pretty decent place to start thinking about how the scum are playing this game. Is it speculation? of course. But it was helpful when I was deciding how I was going to filter the game looking for scum. I wanted to know if Alderan agreed with me (he did), and I wanted to get his perspective. You are not wrong posting that posting this kind of speculation is largely unhelpful to the game as a whole. However, it does worry me that you completely ignored my involvement in something you consider so questionable. And I'm going to preempt those of you who are going to come down on me for soft/chainsaw defending Chocolate and Alderan. That is not my intent even if that is the result. It's not a big distinction, but a true one. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 02 2012 23:29 nttea wrote: Show nested quote + On March 02 2012 16:20 DoYouHas wrote: First and foremost comes the lynching of nttea. He lurks all game, drops a vote in the voting thread without saying anything in this thread. And just happens to vote for a townie. There is no backing your way out of that. He is gone tomorrow. wait what townie did i vote on?! also spent what feels like an eternity sifting through posts and im just lost at this shit... if there is something good there im not the guy that will find it, plenty of time before next lynch though regarding the accusations against me I'll just plead insanity, and please keep looking for others even if you think im scum there's still 3 more to find. Weak shit i know im sorry but it's also still true. I thought you voted for gumshoe, sorry. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I don't care what nttea's alignment is, I don't care how well intentioned he sounds right now. He lurked for an entire day, after replacing a modkill, and then ninja voted. That means he gets lynched, period. I will not suffer that kind of play in any game I am in. The is the one instance where I will policy lynch the hell out of anyone. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 03 2012 01:00 zelblade wrote: Goddamm, wasnt expecting that flip. Thought that he was most definately scum.. guess I was wrong. I have a couple of suspisions. My primary one is actually that DoYouHas is scum. Firstly, I have already stated I am really suspicious of the way he dealt with Alderan on day 1. Despite thinking that Steve is the better lynch, he decides to leave his vote on igabod, stating that he does not trust Alderan, primarly because he got "burned" by Ald last game. This logic is clearly bullshit. He, at this point, has no reason to suspect Alderan - besides knowing that Alderan's scum play is good. At first, I thought that this might have been fear of Ald's scum play - and he instictively worried about that possibility. However, thinking further, I believe that a townie DYH would have made a case during the day, and pushed it hard, if he indeed did feel Alderan was scum. However, he did no such thing, instead waiting for night and letting a no-lynch happen. 1. Another thing that makes me suspicious is his stance on igabod. He states this on igabod: Show nested quote + We don't know igabod is getting modkilled. There is every chance that he will be replaced. Because of this I still think that he is our best lynch option. Why would he think this? For one, it is more often than not a townie which goes inactive and has to be replaced, and Im sure that DYH knows this. Yet, he still feels that igabod will be the best lynch, simply because he will be replaced. It makes no sense, and I think phagga sums it up nicely here. Show nested quote + This argumentation is absolutely stupid. If igabod is getting replaced, then he was not playing the game at all. Therefore him lurking does not say anything at all about his alignement. He might even be a blue for all we know, and some real life matter keep him from playing. 2. His case on Alderan rang more alarm bells for me. A large portion of it lies on how Aldrean has been attempting to "buddy" him, which I feel is complete bullshit. Again, this seemed (at first) to be him subconciously being afraid of Ald's scum play, but in reality, I believe that he is more likely to be fearmongering here. 3. Hyde also gives a good explanation why DYH's venture into the speculation of scums actions in day 1 in SNMMIV to aglin with scum's motives this game. I see no parallel at all between these two games, and I believe that DYH should be able to see this. This is most likely an attempt to derail the topic at hand, and indulge town in a useless topic for quite a while. Thankfully it didnt succeed though. Gumshoe's lynch is another area for suspision. Although he was on the "right" side of the lynch, I believe that it is a null tell, and may even be an indication of scum, considering the number of votes that were on gumshoe. 3.1 The reason for this is that scum will want to split up their votes, and it is rather likely that he is doing what Alderan did with DYH's own lynch last game - claiming that he didnt think gumshoe was scum and getting some towncred for the lynch. 4. Besides this, he is also really wishy washy about gumshoe. He states that he believes he is town based on his similar posting style - something which I feel is completely different (but that might be personal opinion, so w/e), but instead does not push against the lynch hard, citing that gumshoe might in fact be scum using his town meta as a cover. That is a bloody weak reason and we know it, and it is never enough for one to doubt one's innocence based on that and that alone. I would expect a townie in that sort of situation (thinking that a townie was to be lynched) to push against the lynch hard, and not apply some soft defense that wont stick. It seems that he wants the lynch to go through - yet doesnt want to be lynched for it. 5. Honestly, I could go on, as I feel that DYH's logic this game is really off. I believe that he is good, and should know better, which is also why I believe that he is scum. 1. I thought igabod was the best lynch because he was a lurker. When the choice was between what I thought was a bad lynch and a lurker. I chose the lurker. The point that he is going to be replaced simply means that he won't be dealt with with a modkill. Later I admitted that objectively Steveling was the better lynch. However, this is not an objective game. My fears that Alderan was trying to pull a vote switch made me dig in my heels and refuse to vote for someone of his choice. 2. My case against Alderan was never meant to push him for a lynch, it was to fish for more content from him. When he played scum he posted a case on Dimmuklok, and managed to avoid chiming in on most other things. So I drew a response and a number of opinions out of him. That was the point. 3. No parallels between this game and SNMM7? Really? Both had a person do something crazy early on, and was largely trusted as a townie because of it. Both had a lack of strong cases day1. Both have the more experienced players at eachother's throats. Both had 2 candidates with a number of votes on them without a majority towards the end of the day. Both threatened a no-lynch and had a 3rd candidate come up as a compromise. That is what I see, why don't you? 3.1 So you see no parallels between this game and SNMM7, but you agree with me and Alderan that scum likely split their vote (which is a parallel), AND you think that I am playing scum similarly to Alderan from SNMM7 (another parallel). SO, let me get this straight. You think that I am scum, that I gave an accurate portrayal of how scum are playing this game, made a point of bringing it back up and getting Alderan to comment on it, and that I wasted everyone's time with speculations that you seem to agree with and even use in your case against me. That is what is absurd. 4. I was wishy-washy about gumshoe, that is how I felt about him. I found things in his play that I did not like, but I also saw things that seemed pro-town. That is why I tried to convince people to lynch k2hd. I felt he was the better lynch. I have no strong defense for this accusation, wishy-washy is accurate. I had no strong read on gumshoe. 5. I do think I'm better than some, but my cases were never rock solid in NMM3, I just had more conviction. My scumhunting was remarkably poor in SNMM7. You want to use the meta that I'm better than this against me? You are wrong, I'm floundering in an unproductive town just as much as everyone else. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 03 2012 03:25 slOosh wrote: DYH: Before D2 I've been on the fence with DYH as on one side it does look like he is trying to contribute and drive discussion, but on the other he is flip flopping a lot and seems really unsure of his reads. I understand your desire to lynch the hard lurker - but I really don't want N2 and D3 to be dominated by discussion of the validity of policy lynches. My questions for you still remain: Show nested quote + Did you think that k2hd was a better choice solely based on comparison to gumshoe? Do you still think that he is a good lynch suspect for tomorrow? We need as much info as we can get and we can pick up discussion on nttea lynch if you still feel inclined to do during D3, but it doesn't make sense to do it now at night since you could die and mafia might WIFOM stuff up if your reads and stances aren't clear. No I didn't think k2hd was a better choice solely based on comparison to gumshoe. He was someone that I found suspicious when I was making my case against NightFury because he met many of the scum standards I was using to accuse NightFury. I do think he is a good suspect for tomorrow. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On February 25 2012 04:12 DoYouHas wrote: /in I will have a probable schedule conflict with this game. I will be out of town and out of touch for the weekend of March 2-4. This is your reminder. I will be leaving in ~3hours and I will be gone for ~50 hours. I cleared this with dreamflower before the game started, and I apologize. I hope to be back before day3 ends, but there is no guarantee of that. I will be around for the 3 hours, but I will be busy packing and such. Don't expect long responses. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 03 2012 06:58 ghost_403 wrote: Show nested quote + On March 03 2012 02:58 DoYouHas wrote: This will be the scummiest thing I say all game. I don't care what nttea's alignment is, I don't care how well intentioned he sounds right now. He lurked for an entire day, after replacing a modkill, and then ninja voted. That means he gets lynched, period. I will not suffer that kind of play in any game I am in. The is the one instance where I will policy lynch the hell out of anyone. I really don't like this post. At all. Punishing his behavior at the expense of the town is horrible play. (Also, saying it sounds scummy doesn't make it any less scummy.) We have no reason to believe that we have either a medic or a veteran in this game, meaning that we will almost certainly be losing a townie every night. If nttea is townie, that makes it 5 townies against 4 scum on Day 4. I don't like those odds. Of course, he could be scum, but I haven't seen anything from you or anyone else that would convince me of that. I'm not happy about the ninja vote either, but I'm afraid we might be throwing away the game with a policy lynch at this point. You have no reason to believe that there isn't a medic or veteran in this game. Are you blue fishing? As for nttea. I'm taking a stand. We let a lot of things slide because this is a newbie game. nttea is over the line. I won't let it slide and I won't abide that play going un-lynched in any game I am in. nttea, this is not an attack on you personally, I want you to keep playing and learning mafia. But I will not be moved on this point. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 03 2012 22:54 zelblade wrote: Show nested quote + On March 03 2012 04:03 DoYouHas wrote: On March 03 2012 01:00 zelblade wrote: Goddamm, wasnt expecting that flip. Thought that he was most definately scum.. guess I was wrong. I have a couple of suspisions. My primary one is actually that DoYouHas is scum. Firstly, I have already stated I am really suspicious of the way he dealt with Alderan on day 1. Despite thinking that Steve is the better lynch, he decides to leave his vote on igabod, stating that he does not trust Alderan, primarly because he got "burned" by Ald last game. This logic is clearly bullshit. He, at this point, has no reason to suspect Alderan - besides knowing that Alderan's scum play is good. At first, I thought that this might have been fear of Ald's scum play - and he instictively worried about that possibility. However, thinking further, I believe that a townie DYH would have made a case during the day, and pushed it hard, if he indeed did feel Alderan was scum. However, he did no such thing, instead waiting for night and letting a no-lynch happen. 1. Another thing that makes me suspicious is his stance on igabod. He states this on igabod: We don't know igabod is getting modkilled. There is every chance that he will be replaced. Because of this I still think that he is our best lynch option. Why would he think this? For one, it is more often than not a townie which goes inactive and has to be replaced, and Im sure that DYH knows this. Yet, he still feels that igabod will be the best lynch, simply because he will be replaced. It makes no sense, and I think phagga sums it up nicely here. This argumentation is absolutely stupid. If igabod is getting replaced, then he was not playing the game at all. Therefore him lurking does not say anything at all about his alignement. He might even be a blue for all we know, and some real life matter keep him from playing. 2. His case on Alderan rang more alarm bells for me. A large portion of it lies on how Aldrean has been attempting to "buddy" him, which I feel is complete bullshit. Again, this seemed (at first) to be him subconciously being afraid of Ald's scum play, but in reality, I believe that he is more likely to be fearmongering here. 3. Hyde also gives a good explanation why DYH's venture into the speculation of scums actions in day 1 in SNMMIV to aglin with scum's motives this game. I see no parallel at all between these two games, and I believe that DYH should be able to see this. This is most likely an attempt to derail the topic at hand, and indulge town in a useless topic for quite a while. Thankfully it didnt succeed though. Gumshoe's lynch is another area for suspision. Although he was on the "right" side of the lynch, I believe that it is a null tell, and may even be an indication of scum, considering the number of votes that were on gumshoe. 3.1 The reason for this is that scum will want to split up their votes, and it is rather likely that he is doing what Alderan did with DYH's own lynch last game - claiming that he didnt think gumshoe was scum and getting some towncred for the lynch. 4. Besides this, he is also really wishy washy about gumshoe. He states that he believes he is town based on his similar posting style - something which I feel is completely different (but that might be personal opinion, so w/e), but instead does not push against the lynch hard, citing that gumshoe might in fact be scum using his town meta as a cover. That is a bloody weak reason and we know it, and it is never enough for one to doubt one's innocence based on that and that alone. I would expect a townie in that sort of situation (thinking that a townie was to be lynched) to push against the lynch hard, and not apply some soft defense that wont stick. It seems that he wants the lynch to go through - yet doesnt want to be lynched for it. 5. Honestly, I could go on, as I feel that DYH's logic this game is really off. I believe that he is good, and should know better, which is also why I believe that he is scum. 1. I thought igabod was the best lynch because he was a lurker. When the choice was between what I thought was a bad lynch and a lurker. I chose the lurker. The point that he is going to be replaced simply means that he won't be dealt with with a modkill. Later I admitted that objectively Steveling was the better lynch. However, this is not an objective game. My fears that Alderan was trying to pull a vote switch made me dig in my heels and refuse to vote for someone of his choice. 2. My case against Alderan was never meant to push him for a lynch, it was to fish for more content from him. When he played scum he posted a case on Dimmuklok, and managed to avoid chiming in on most other things. So I drew a response and a number of opinions out of him. That was the point. 3. No parallels between this game and SNMM7? Really? Both had a person do something crazy early on, and was largely trusted as a townie because of it. Both had a lack of strong cases day1. Both have the more experienced players at eachother's throats. Both had 2 candidates with a number of votes on them without a majority towards the end of the day. Both threatened a no-lynch and had a 3rd candidate come up as a compromise. That is what I see, why don't you? 3.1 So you see no parallels between this game and SNMM7, but you agree with me and Alderan that scum likely split their vote (which is a parallel), AND you think that I am playing scum similarly to Alderan from SNMM7 (another parallel). SO, let me get this straight. You think that I am scum, that I gave an accurate portrayal of how scum are playing this game, made a point of bringing it back up and getting Alderan to comment on it, and that I wasted everyone's time with speculations that you seem to agree with and even use in your case against me. That is what is absurd. 4. I was wishy-washy about gumshoe, that is how I felt about him. I found things in his play that I did not like, but I also saw things that seemed pro-town. That is why I tried to convince people to lynch k2hd. I felt he was the better lynch. I have no strong defense for this accusation, wishy-washy is accurate. I had no strong read on gumshoe. 5. I do think I'm better than some, but my cases were never rock solid in NMM3, I just had more conviction. My scumhunting was remarkably poor in SNMM7. You want to use the meta that I'm better than this against me? You are wrong, I'm floundering in an unproductive town just as much as everyone else. 1) The definition of a lurker is someone who actually posts, but doesnt post anything worthwhile. Did you really think igabod was more likely scum than town? I dont understand why you would prefer having him dead as opposed to replaced. Chances are the "lurker" is more often town than scum either way, and the fact that he has flipped town further reinforces this fact. 2) So what do you think of Alderan now? 3) Yes. Perhaps the situation played out a little similarly, but no two games are the same. Besides, what makes you believe that scum did the same thing as last game? One of the "expereinced players" could easily be scum for one, or the candidates could be scum. You have zero reason to believe that scum played similarly according to last game. Why dont you see this? 3.1) Scum almost always split their votes day 1, for obvious reasons, unless the lynch is close and one of the two candidates are mafia. There is no reason to believe they did not do so, and having all of them dump their votes on a single person is just dumb. And no, I never said that you and Alderan were acting similary. Instead, what i meant is this: I believe that you didnt vote gumshoe, claiming that you thought he was town, to gain towncred when he flipped. Alderan did something similar to this going against your lynch and voting for someone else instead. Besides, how do you know what you think is an "accurate portyal" of scum's play? You do not know how they are acting. Another thing - what conclusions have you yourself drawn from this activiy? Note how you never actually do so, and never actually use this speculation to drive home a case. Which is why I dont see it as useful. Note that this still doesnt explain why you wanted to venture into this topic. 4) Isnt this a position scum love to be in? 5) You might be right on this point that I am expecting too much of you, honestly because NMMIII gave me quite the impact. However, I still do think that your logic is horrible, and dont believe that you believe in it. 1. If you make it through a day without posting, but are not being removed from the game, that makes you a lurker. 2. I did not like his early play with 1 case and lots of smaller posts. That is why I pushed him some. Also, I don't like that he has not posted in a while. However, (this is mostly from memory because I'm in a bit of hurry) he makes more sense some of you. I lean town for him atm. 3. You don't like my reasoning, so be it. I think that correlating events and situations hint at how the mafia are playing. You don't. I'm not wasting any more time on this. 3.1 bolded What is this? It was extremely clear what you said, you said that I did something similar to Alderan's scum play from SNMM7. As for the "accurate portrayal" talk. My actual words were, "You think that I am scum, that I gave an accurate portrayal of how scum are playing this game, made a point of bringing it back up and getting Alderan to comment on it, and that I wasted everyone's time with speculations that you seem to agree with and even use in your case against me." I never said that I thought that I had presented a completely accurate portrayal of scum play this game. Instead, my point is that you are using some of the same things that I brought up in my speculation to attack me. So you must think that I was at least somewhat accurate with my speculation. Italicized What conclusions did I make? What cases did I push forward with my speculation? This One I used my speculation to create standards which I used to scumhunt. I pushed NightFury with these standards. 4. Yes it is, but it is still the truth of how I felt. 5. I think the logic of your cases against me is equally horrible, so at least it is mutual. Something about zelblade that needs to be said. Many of us (including me) believed he is town because of the ridiculous and crazy response FourFace made to my initial case. However, with nttea flipping medic, we know that FourFace fakeclaimed doctor. I am of the opinion now that FourFace's craziness no longer exonerates zelblade. I am obviously biased against zelblade because I think he is making bad cases against me. All that I am asking of you is to put him back on the table when you are considering who is suspicious. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 04 2012 13:35 k2hd wrote: In response to zelblade: Despite the pressure on him, I am still not totally convinced that alderan is mafia. He stuck his neck out on day 1 with his case against chocolate (this is I believe the first case made in the whole game), and I don't see why mafia would do this. He drove a lot of discussion on day 1, and I don't see why mafia would want to do this, rather than letting discussion stagnate or focus on the wrong things (we spent a LOT of time debating the merits of a soft deadline). He was bringing the spotlight onto himself, increasing the chance that his posting would be scrutinised more closely (which happened). The above paragraph alone isn't enough, but his voting pattern also suggests town to me. He voted steve day 1 and me for day 2. He did not want a chocolate lynch (who I still believe is town from my previous post), or an igabod/nttea lynch, who has since flipped blue. I obviously know I am town (still unsure about testsubject), but alderan does not. He could've helped in getting a lynch on an easy target in igabod/nttea (at the time there was a real chance of igabod being lynched), but chose steve instead. On day 2 he votes for me and keeps his vote on me when there was still the danger of a no lynch. I hope he can explain his absence when he gets back. As for DoYouHas, I now find it VERY suspicious that after making these 2 posts (also used in sloosh's case): post 1 post 2 He still has not responded to this post (in regards to the nightfury issue): phagga's post The only post he makes addressing phagga's post is this one: + Show Spoiler + On March 02 2012 02:45 DoYouHas wrote: Show nested quote + On March 01 2012 20:58 phagga wrote: 2 The question you should ask yourself here is: Is this something a townie would do? And if so, is it also something scum would do? I doubt scum would want to stay in the spotlight like that. Also, If you are town, and you feel strongly about someone being scum, what are you gonna do? - Try to push a lynch on that person even if people will not listen to you - let the person of the hook because noone listens to you, and pick another target I would be stupid to push his lynch so hard if I was scum and knew he was town. When he would get lynched and flipped green, everyone would be on my heels. You do not want that as scum, specially not so early in the game. This is wrong. It is equally as possible that mafia would tunnel someone that hard. Tunneling someone into a lynch, on a green flip, makes it very hard for the town to determine whether it was just bad town play or scummy play. It is an easy way for a scum to get into and out of the spotlight without offering anything more than a null read on them. It also lowers the town's expectations for them for the rest of the game. Similarly, being willing to back off a case is just as often a trait of a townie who has changed their mind as it is a scum who wants a bandwagon. WIFOM my friend, WIFOM. I also find myself oddly comfortable with either a k2hd, gumshoe, or Alderan lynch. I think they all have good reasons to be lynched, but I will wait a little longer to see what people think before I make my preference clear. No mention of why he let nightfury off so easily. + Show Spoiler + On March 03 2012 04:10 DoYouHas wrote: Show nested quote + On March 03 2012 03:25 slOosh wrote: DYH: Before D2 I've been on the fence with DYH as on one side it does look like he is trying to contribute and drive discussion, but on the other he is flip flopping a lot and seems really unsure of his reads. I understand your desire to lynch the hard lurker - but I really don't want N2 and D3 to be dominated by discussion of the validity of policy lynches. My questions for you still remain: Did you think that k2hd was a better choice solely based on comparison to gumshoe? Do you still think that he is a good lynch suspect for tomorrow? We need as much info as we can get and we can pick up discussion on nttea lynch if you still feel inclined to do during D3, but it doesn't make sense to do it now at night since you could die and mafia might WIFOM stuff up if your reads and stances aren't clear. No I didn't think k2hd was a better choice solely based on comparison to gumshoe. He was someone that I found suspicious when I was making my case against NightFury because he met many of the scum standards I was using to accuse NightFury. I do think he is a good suspect for tomorrow. Or why I do not get the same treatment as nightfury. He left for his trip AFTER phagga made his post, and has ignored the nightfury issue. As for sloosh, I am on the fence, but leaning town. I am ready to re-evaluate after today's lynch, if alderan or DoYouHas are lynched and flip green. Btw, chocolate, can you not post like that (your phagga case). It was extremely hard to read. Still believe chocolate is town because I doubt mafia team would let him make cases like that... k2hd, you do not get the same treatment because you used a similar defense and you were second. You had the opportunity to play off of NightFury's response, so I was not going to treat you the same. As for the way I acted towards NightFury. After his response (which did strike me as earnest), I knew I wasn't going to make myself any more or less certain of his alignment by continuing to batter away at him. So instead I decided to play of an attitude I saw in his defense. Namely that he felt like he couldn't do anything that wouldn't throw suspicion on him. So I decided I would give him a strong town read from me and see where he ran with it. If he took my quick turnaround as a blank check to continue lurking or posting poorly, then he was probably scum. If he took my quick turnaround as a vote of confidence and his new posts showed that new confidence, then he was probably town. (note that this cannot work if I tell anyone about it) What has he shown in his more recent posts? Confidence and content. I lean town for him. As for you k2hd, I don't know what to think, in my quick read through of what I missed I did like a few of the things you posted. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
DoYouHas I'll just list things that add up to build up my read, as posting quotes is too messy and difficult to read. You can read his filter alongside as this is loosely chronological. - Voting patterns. I pointed it out above in his relation with k2hd. - His instantaneous drop of his NightFury case, only to pick it up on k2hd with the same reasoning. - Weird vote switch from k2hd to nttea and back - Flip flopping on gumshoe - Using "you voted gumshoe" as considerable reason for suspicion - Jumping straight for a nttea lynch, and not providing much anything else when probed for information It's hard to point out "scummy" posts because all his reads and stances are weak, unsure and flip flopping. He doesn't push or pressure for anything, and the only people he has gone after this game are easy to pick on players (Fourface, k2hd and nttea). Finally, add in the weird interactions between DYH and Alderan where there is sheeping and soft defending, asking each other easy-to-respond-to clarification questions, establishing "interactions" so if one flips the other isn't suspected due to them being missing from filters or whatnot. -Voting patterns. D1, I have rehashed this plenty. D2, Why should I have switched to gumshoe? You didn't need me to make a majority, if I had you would just be calling me out for bandwagoning instead of for being on the right side of a lynch. You will not convince me that I was wrong to vote nttea. You play like that, you get lynched. -Dropping of NightFury case I just explained. - Weird vote switch from k2hd to nttea and back. We had an iffy case against gumshoe, I was somewhat more confident in the ones against k2hd, and a person who had just done something unquestionably scummy. Even if it was a last minute vote switch and bandwagon, that is the best choice. You don't ignore scum tells just because they come late in the day. - Flip flopping on gumshoe. Wishy-washy yes, flip-floppy no. I made it clear that I did not think gumshoe was the best lynch, but if it came to it I was willing to vote him to avoid a no-lynch. - Using "you voted gumshoe" as considerable reason for suspicion. You will have to give me the quote for this one, I don't want to dig through my filter searching for this when a vote deadline is imminent. -Interactions between DYH and Alderan. I feel vaguely insulted by this. You know that Alderan plays solidly as scum. I have already mentioned that I look for these soft defenses and easy interactions when I am scumhunting. Yet you think that both of us would be stupid enough to be that obvious. If both Alderan and I were scum, you are right, we would not ignore eachother, but our interactions would also not be this stupidly obvious. Throw Chocolate onto the pile too. I have soft defended him by tearing down bad arguments against him. I do think it is amusing that zelblade accuses me with the assumption that I play well and you accuse me with the assumption that I play terribly. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
A no-lynch is the worst thing that could happen to this town (already inactive and demoralized). Alright slOosh, you win. I'll vote Alderan in spite of my leaning town on him. But you had better believe that if he flips green I am going to come after you with a vengeance night3/day4. ##Unvote: nttea ##Vote: Alderan | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Alderan points us at slOosh, dies, flips town. I think slOosh is scum. Jekyll thinks slOosh is scum. slOosh dies tomorrow pending acts of God. The question is this, who are his scum buddies? | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
slOosh's immediate response to the 'realization' that he had just spearheaded another townie was to blame it on everyone else. And now even though he just incorrectly pegged Alderan, he is perfectly confident that in spite of his own bad scumhunting and Alderan's defense of me, the other half of his initial case must be right. How is anyone possibly buying this? Just as a fun exercise, let's look at slOosh's responses to mislynching in his previous games. + Show Spoiler [SNMM7] + On February 23 2012 01:06 slOosh wrote: Ok. I'm back and catching up with the thread as I have been busy IRL and will be till tomorrow. Hopefully it won't stop me from responding and contributing. My stance on Mattchew - Show nested quote + the difference between me and sloosh is when townies don't vote his way he calls them scum, i just call them stupid He is probably correct. I went off the assumption that everyone has the same logic as me and if they didn't do what I would do they would be acting illogical hence mafia. I did not consider that people can be inexperienced. I responded negatively to Mattchew because he didn't say why my case was bad and it looked to me that he was distracting my case. I still don't like the basis of his case, that he did some filter pickings and chose 4 people who avoided each other. However, I cannot argue with results - it has promoted discussion and the suspects are posting more content. Objectively he is producing pro town content, even though it is through antagonistic means. I have to say he is leaning town right now. However, I am still waiting for his own reads. Enough content has been flying around and I want to see him to present a good case. The goal isn't content but using it to strengthen a case and lynch the strongest mafia suspect. I'm also going to have to retract my read on Alderan. That was just OMGUS or paranoia, and I can see where he is getting his case on me (even though I strongly disagree with the logic he uses, but as I stated above I'm realizing that not using my kind of logic does not necessarily equate with scum). Following post will address Mattchew's 4. + Show Spoiler [NMM3] + On January 27 2012 14:12 slOosh wrote: After cooling off, I have to reluctantly agree. I don't think me getting tunnel vision and attacking zarepath is helpful to town when there are still so many lurkers in the game. I'm willing to back off in order to punish inactives/lurkers. I do agree with MidnightGladius that Bromancipate is a good place to start. In both of these cases slOosh responds to mislynching by slowing down, reevaluating, and trying to get a better grasp on the game. Also, he tends to do this reevaluation by looking at other people's cases and putting his weight behind them. Does that look anything like his response to this mislynch? no. slOosh's biggest fear this game is that he loses it by tunneling the way he did in his 2 previous games. Does his response reflect that? no. He states that he tried his best to avoid it. Does he slow down? No, he instead throws suspicion on myself, chocolate, nightfury, and testsubject. Does he reevaluate? No, he comes after me with surprising certainty. Just the way he has handled his case against Alderan and me should be enough to get him lynched. But I know you will require more because you all love to frustrate me. So I will put together a bigger case on him. zelblade. I pointed out the fake claim because before it was only your word, now it is fact. That is a very important difference. I really dislike how you seem to be taking cues from slOosh who you also seem to have a town read on. I am confident in my town reads on JekyllAndHyde and NightFury. I lean town with Chocolate as well but that is less certain. I agree with Alderan that k2hd is probably town based off how slOosh used him in his case against us both. That leaves the 4 mafia in this list. 1. slOosh 2. Ghost 3. zelblade 4. Testsubject 5. Phagga Pull your heads out of the sand and let's get to work. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
"slOosh has been actively working to focus the town and find scum." "I am 99% sure that one of the two of you is scum, and I haven't decided which one it is yet." "@sloosh Stop tunneling DoYouHas." Oh the contradictions. First you hard defend slOosh, saying that he has been very pro-town (meaning you have a town read on him). Then immediately change that stance by saying that 1 of us MUST be scum and you aren't sure which yet. And you give advice to slOosh to stop tunneling me. You don't give advice to someone you don't have a town read on. Or in your case, someone who isn't your scum buddy. You want to appear on the fence between me and slOosh, but it is abundantly clear where your loyalties lie. Our medic is gone. We have no guarantees that we have a vet. We are about to walk into LYLO. That means that in order to lynch scum, without scum bussing one of their own, every single townie will have to line up behind a scum candidate. That makes this on the fence stance of Ghost's exceptionally anti-town. I was already pretty confident that I had all 4 scum in my list. Your posting has just made me more so Ghost. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 06 2012 05:33 ghost_403 wrote: @doyouhas I disagree with you, therefore I'm scum. Brilliant logic. Calm down. Try again, but you are still scum. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Read his filter yourself, it is not that long. slOosh has focused all his aggression against Chocolate, Alderan, gumshoe, and myself. And no, his case on ghost doesn't count, even he states that it was a soft accusation, easily made and easily lifted. It carried no weight. That means that slOosh has spent this entire game trying to bring down 4 townies. I am confident in my scumlist, and almost all of them have come after Chocolate at some point. Either it is a long term bussing strategy or he is townie. The first is ridiculous, the second is highly probable. Even now slOosh and Ghost try to bury my comments and attack the value of them. On March 06 2012 05:33 ghost_403 wrote: @doyouhas I disagree with you, therefore I'm scum. Brilliant logic. Calm down. I'll dignify that with a proper response when I get home. Oh yes, I am completely absent logic and he will deign to come enlighten my poor self when he gets home. Avoids the actual content of my post and belittles me in such a short post. Impressive really. On March 06 2012 06:56 slOosh wrote: Show nested quote + On March 06 2012 03:44 DoYouHas wrote: slOosh's immediate response to the 'realization' that he had just spearheaded another townie was to blame it on everyone else. And now even though he just incorrectly pegged Alderan, he is perfectly confident that in spite of his own bad scumhunting and Alderan's defense of me, the other half of his initial case must be right. How is anyone possibly buying this? It's like he don't even read my posts. Show nested quote + On March 05 2012 13:55 slOosh wrote: Since my last post (around 7 hours before deadline), I was busy as aforementioned and unable to read updates. I seriously did my best this game to hold back from tunneling this game, and put out something hoping people would input some objective third party perspectives on my case. What do I come back to? A bunch of people saying how they don't want to lynch Alderan but they somehow feel obligated to. You guys seriously disappoint me. I was open to voting either one of DYH / Alderan. When I last posted it was 2-2. When I came back I find a 7-2 with 4 votes casted with absolutely no reasoning. He somehow thinks I bear total responsibility for the mislynch and that the four (of whom he is one) are absolved due to my "spearheading" with a total of 3 posts after my case. I want to lynch DYH for reasons other than those listed in the case: He keeps putting weight on things that actually have no weight. This is the newest addition to my case. He also is showing really poor reasoning and OMGUSing anyone who doesn't like him. These things happened before and are still continuing - don't think that my initial case is static - its been building with the new influx of information. Strangely, his response to me doesn't actually respond to anything I brought up. The heart of my post was that slOosh's worst fear this game is tunneling and mislynching a townie. That fear has become a reality, do slOosh's posts reflect that? no. He redirects blame onto the 4 of us that voted after him. What does he do when I point this out? Redirects back onto the 4 who voted after him. His wasn't the vote that clenched that majority, so clearly those who did are more to blame than him. Never mind that it was his suspicions and cases that pigeonholed the town into a choice between 2 townies. No, whatever way that lynch went, slOosh would have been the reason a townie got lynched. And as for those 4 that you want to throw the blame onto. I am one, I have town reads on Chocolate and Nightfury. So no, I don't think theirs were scum bandwagon votes. I think theirs were votes of someone who wanted a lynch in a less than ideal situation. "He keeps putting weight on things that actually have no weight." I hope that those of you out there who are actually townies do not buy this. You currently have 3 people out there who you know for certain that their motivations are townie. gumshoe, Alderan, and yourself. Ignoring their suspicions and posts is pure folly. slOosh claiming they have no weight is absurd. Man I hope slOosh gets shot tonight. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Yes, a dt could push a scum check without revealing himself. But if he did claim then we could start this day with a confirmed scum (assuming that the dt claim looks legit). Which lets us work out the team. It is the best use of our time. If he has multiple town reads, it clarifies quite a bit. So yes, the dt should claim if he has ANY relevant checks. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Jekyll, I don't know what you will end up deciding. But if I read the sides on this as clearly as I think I do, your decision is going to be the difference between an all townie lynching of scum and a bus. ##Vote: slOosh | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On March 07 2012 08:36 slOosh wrote: Let me refresh everyone's minds of a recent post. Show nested quote + On March 06 2012 10:17 DoYouHas wrote: "He keeps putting weight on things that actually have no weight." I hope that those of you out there who are actually townies do not buy this. You currently have 3 people out there who you know for certain that their motivations are townie. gumshoe, Alderan, and yourself. Ignoring their suspicions and posts is pure folly. slOosh claiming they have no weight is absurd. Conveniently ignored are any of zelblade's reads, even though he just flipped town. Seems like you like to advice people but not listen to your own. You just like manipulation of dead townie's reads to paint me scum. You forget Alderan was the first to post PBPA on Chocolate, forget that gumshoe's suspicion is solely a "gut feel" but keep asserting the authority of dead people's posts. Wow, you're really grasping at straws now considering the post you quoted happened before zelblade died. There is no 'convenient ignoring'. In fact, I am really amused that you are the one to bring up how zelblade's death hurts my arguments against you. This morning in the shower I was musing to myself that the first person who brought up how zelblade's death discredits me was probably mafia (sort of like in the godfather where the rat is the one who proposes the meeting). It is just perfect that you are the one to do it, slOosh. It fits perfectly with your MO of trying to discredit me. See, it is true that zelblade was suspicious of me. It is also true that zelblade was on my list of possible scum. With 1 hit the mafia have thrown doubt both on my scumlist and on my aggression towards slOosh. zelblade is the perfect hit for framing me as scum. It discredits my case on slOosh, discredits my scumlist, and removes a townie voice that was opposed to me. Why would I do that to myself if I am indeed scum? So that I can make this exact defense? That is a pretty low reward for drawing suspicion back onto myself. Of course, you all could decide that this is speculation into why zelblade was hit and therefore WIFOM and moot. As for Alderan, he did post the first PBPA on Chocolate, but if memory serves, he was not the one that pushed Chocolate's lynch in the end. He was, however, the one who speculated that mafia would push the case of a townie over one of their own day1. And would ya look at that, 3/4 of the people I suspect to be mafia are on that list. I really should be thanking you slOosh, in your desire to discredit me, you narrowed my list to 4. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
The way I see it is that if Chocolate is scum, this has been the longest and most elaborate bus I've ever seen or heard of. I find that notion ridiculous. Therefore, Chocolate is town. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 03:09 GMT
#1002
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 03:10 GMT
#1010
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 03:11 GMT
#1015
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 03:12 GMT
#1021
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 03:17 GMT
#1030
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 03:22 GMT
#1040
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 03:56 GMT
#1057
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 04:01 GMT
#1059
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 04:21 GMT
#1066
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 04:41 GMT
#1070
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 18:29 GMT
#1081
| ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 18:52 GMT
#1082
NightFury played the hapless noob extremely well. J&H confused the hell out of me (though I blame most of that on them being a hydra). Phagga tunneled Chocolate a little too hard, though I blame myself for not bringing him around. Alderan, I really should have just started pushing people who would have cleared you early. Right from the start I realized we were thinking pretty similarly. If I had taken action to get a town read on you I think we could have torn the thread up. Ghost, when you posted those 2 quick posts after slOosh's defense, I decided you either just made a very very bad play or you were scum. They did sound rushed, they were contradictory, and they showed you sided with slOosh at that point. Whether or not that was true, that is how they came across. I didn't have a full case against you. But for me, just those 2 posts were enough. I should have realized that slOosh wouldn't have taken the risk of bussing you with his day1 case. But with how easily those suspicions were dropped by slOosh and Alderan, I thought slOosh might have been just being extra sneaky. k2hd, the fact that you were not posting often and you were posting extremely safe put you on both my radar and Alderan's. It took a scum vouching for your innocence before we would believe you. The scum team had you pegged as the DT day4. You in all likelihood would have been hit that night even if we lynched correctly. If your schedule permits it you have to take a more active role if you want to avoid being hit for looking blue by scum. gumshoe, it saddened me a bit to watch you get frustrated with the game and just start posting things that were wrong or had no benefit to the town. You showed last game that you can look at the game from a different angle, which is extremely valuable. Instead of looking at the lack of activity as a bad thing, take that opportunity when you know that the town isn't going to be posting new things that you need to respond to to read filters and generate content. zelblade, you need to start siding with me over slOosh. This is the second game you have picked up his cause and then offered a weak case against me. I wanted to believe that you were town. But the way you pushed me felt so much like SNMM7 that I started getting suspicious, and it also reduced my suspicion of slOosh. You threw a monkey wrench in my understanding of the game. Janaan, sad you got hit. | ||
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
March 08 2012 20:08 GMT
#1088
| ||
| ||
Next event in 1h 27m
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games tarik_tv18211 summit1g9087 FrodaN2375 shahzam1126 WinterStarcraft562 JimRising 371 NuckleDu161 Mew2King91 ViBE31 Organizations Other Games StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • musti20045 28 StarCraft: Brood War• gosughost_ 23 • Kozan • Laughngamez YouTube • Poblha • aXEnki • intothetv • Gussbus • Migwel • IndyKCrew • LaughNgamez Trovo Dota 2 Other Games |
Korean StarCraft League
Afreeca Starleague
hero vs Soulkey
AfreecaTV Pro Series
Reynor vs Cure
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
Zhanhun vs DragOn
Dewalt vs Sziky
CSO Cup
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] 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
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
|
|