EPT
currently in a game so i guess ill
/in as replacement
Also, same question as last game - if cop can only find alignment, wouldn't Godfather always default to town (unless I guess they want to show as mafia as part of intricate plan)?
Newbie Mini Mafia IV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
currently in a game so i guess ill /in as replacement Also, same question as last game - if cop can only find alignment, wouldn't Godfather always default to town (unless I guess they want to show as mafia as part of intricate plan)? | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
Current thoughts so far: I really like the idea of the soft deadline to avoid last minute switching, but I would only implement it day 1. From personal experience (my 2nd game T.T), trying to enforce a soft deadline where everyone votes can be very detrimental to town as it has the possibility of stifling discussion / people rushing to make poorly built cases as Janaan mentioned. As for this idea of lynching lurkers, how would it interact with the deadline? Say we are at soft deadline and there are several lurkers. We vote one, and they happen to respond by producing good content and such. Then we would have to choose the next lurker, but that would bring us closer to the true deadline and thereby defeat the whole purpose. There isn't really a feasible way to choose lurkers with a comfortable cushion of time before the deadline. I'd rather we just start keeping each other accountable and make sure everyone is contributing right away. I know that in the ObsQT from prior games people have pegged mafia day 1, and I think we should aim for that goal, pressuring inactives so that we don't have to worry about last minute lurker switches. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 27 2012 10:50 JekyllAndHyde wrote: Okay sloosh. You were pretty active last game, why did you go lurking all of a sudden? /Hyde I decided to take a slower approach to the game. Last game I came out guns blazing, argued with a townie and then tunneled another one hard, allowing mafia to lurk and get away with posting fluff. I really want to fight my tendencies to tunnel / confirmation bias so I'm taking it as slow as I can. But being mindful of a deadline, I'll try posting what I have progressively rather than waiting until the eleventh hour to post a big case. Hopefully this will quell paranoia and promote a healthy town atmosphere. My current suspicions are on: ghost_403 I'm really not sure if this is unintentional anti-town play or soft pushing mafia agenda. 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. He seems to advocate, in the event we can't agree on a good mafia suspect, lurker lynches. Lurker lynches are good, but only to flush mafia out of hiding, as he says so himself. Right now this is a null post to me as I can see both town or mafia thinking this. However: On February 27 2012 04:43 ghost_403 wrote: @Janaan Nope. I would love to start lynching into the other non-posters and fluffy posters as well, but alas, I have only one vote. Although, I would expect more posting from a hydra. It seems between the two of them that at least one could post on here "Don't lynch me". His stance is consistent but questionable. He wants to lynch, not pressure to get people to post and produce content and thus flush out mafia. It's almost like he will policy lynch a lurker. Still null, but worth looking into. On February 27 2012 07:18 ghost_403 wrote: Just got back and I've seen a few things that I'm not too happy about  It seems that most of the discussion on this thread has been built around the idea of a soft deadline and a no-lynch day 1. Here are my thoughts on both of those. A soft deadline isn't really needed. At all. If your concern is that people change their votes at the last minute and mess up votes, there is a simple solution to that: we lynch people who change their votes at the last minute and mess up votes. I would rather lynch scum over people who mess up votes, 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. A no lynch day 1 is a bad idea. Pretty much, no matter who you are, a no lynch plays against your win condition, unless you're the Batman. As there is not the Batman in this game, no lynching goes against your win condition. Look at it this way: no matter your alignment, you win when there is no one else in the game. Period. 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. Responses to posts in thread: @chocolate If this wasn't a newbie game, I would lynch you for that post. @DoYouHas I think you're right on with that post. Not a big fan of the FOS thing, but whatever. I think it gives them room to run and hide. Instead, GO FOR THE KILL. @gumshoe See above. @fourface Start explaining yourself, or I'll start the bandwagon rolling. @phagga I stand by what I said. I would much rather lynch scum, but if I can't, I'll lynch lurkers. The town lost that game because they let Palmar double lynch every day. As far as those two specific cases, rgTheSchworz should have been modkilled, and I would have lynched Lanaia instead mderg if I had had the time that day. She had no case against him, and I would have pointed that out, regardless of my alliance in that game. There is a heavy fixation with lynching. It's no longer a means flush out lurking mafia from hiding. He threatens at least 3 active posters with the lynch. He emphasizes over and over that we have to lynch no matter the circumstances. Even if we don't have a good case, he is willing to lynch lurkers, unhelpful townies, and seemingly anything. I'm trying to see what motives a townie might have for needing to get lynches so badly, and I can't think of anything. ##FOS: ghost_403. (I'm ending it with FOS rather than a vote since I really want other people's input as I think that is the best way I don't go tunnel mode). | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 27 2012 13:24 gumshoe wrote: Sloosh: In regards to ghost, yeah, you'll see early on that I pressured him a bit, currently he's also my highest candidate of suspicion because before anything, he pushed other players to vote without voting himself... definitely worth tunnelling. That's the one thing I'm trying to avoid >.<; Anyways, with regard to the Choco case, I've been looking over his filter and trying to think objectively into it: it's really hard to gauge his alignment as there isn't that much content. I'm really interested in this though. On February 27 2012 09:37 Chocolate wrote: @ghost you thought I was scummy because I voted on a lurker? I don't see anything wrong with that at all, please explain why you dislike it. I think seeing them interact with each other can give us more substantial information (and it puts pressure on them if they are both mafia as they are paranoid at their interaction being put in the spotlight) | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 28 2012 02:52 ghost_403 wrote: I'm going to assume that pursuing a lynch on FourFace is counterproductive at this point. I still feel that we should be looking for someone to lynch day 1. I thought I explained myself well enough the first time, but I am more than happy to reiterate my position. Let's say that everyone agrees to no-lynch day 1. Instead of arguing and creating content, everyone agrees and nothing happens. The deadline from day 1 comes and goes, and the mafia gets to kill one random townie for free. Day 2 starts, and we are left in the same position that we were in Day 1, only now we have one less townie. This outcome has no benefit for the town. Instead, let's say that we agree to lynch a lurker. (Obviously, scum would be better. This goes without saying.) Now, we have people arguing over who is the better lynch. The lurkers are forced to interact with the town. Sides are picked, fights are fought, and maybe we lose a townie over it. Night 1 comes and goes, and we start day 2, AT WORST, down two townies. Instead of having nothing to go on, we have pages of content that we can analyze for inconstancies and patterns. The mafia are most likely going to kill people who are on the right track, giving us clues as to who they are. The town may be down a player, but has so much more information to go on. Of course, one could make the argument of "Well, why don't we just pretend to lynch someone." Empty threats aren't going to force people to interact with the town. The follow-through is important. And that is why I support lynching a lurker (scum would be better) day 1. When I get home, I'll take another look at the thread and throw in an opinion on who might be a good day 1 lynch. For me this clears some of my initial suspicions and pushes ghost into null read. He provides decent reasoning once pressured - my current read is that he is perhaps overzealous with his stance on lynching, treating it like a 100% policy, and not adopting a helpful attitude for town. ghost, I hope to continue seeing quality posts like these without having to FOS / make cases against you. As for his actual stance: While I strongly disagree with the idea of "lynching for information", I do agree that a no lynch should be a last resort than an easy way out. Otherwise it can give mafia an avenue of being non commital, which is the essence of lurking anyways. Right now that leaves me with Chocolate, as he hasn't yet responded. I don't think his case is worth voting for yet, but it defeats the whole purpose of the soft deadline if all we do is FOS and vote last minute. (Thus my preliminary, not necessarily final, vote will be on) ##Vote: Chocolate | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
It's going to end up a NL, and it should. We spent a large portion of D1 discussing the merits of a soft deadline for this exact purpose. Working to catch up on the thread more thoroughly and will address the stuff I missed. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
The reason why I haven't gone hard yet (aside from IRL conflicts cutting down my activity) is that I'm really working on improving my objective analysis. My past 2 games I have constructed cases like ~5 hrs before the deadline, and its been agreed upon that they were weak and full of confirmation bias. Instead this time I've focused on gathering as much information as possible without biasing myself. I'll be presenting my finds with my upcoming posts | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 28 2012 08:21 gumshoe wrote: Here he is the first person to attack ghost, he does so in a rather soft manner, taking a much less aggressive tone than weve seen out of him in the past. You then were the also first person to defend him He drops his suspicion of ghost for decent but not great reasons, last game steve eventually dropped his suspicion of me when no one else thought I was scum anymore, ghost could be just dropping his suspiciun of four face cause he saw how much heat he was getting for it. Sloosh then switches to chocolate who sloosh hasn't even really provided a case for, in fact the only reason sloosh really mentioned chocolate before was because he perceived that chocolate was interacting with ghost. Furthermore he doesn't even continue considering ghost as a suspect, he says he's null, last game we all had at least two suspects in the red, why does sloosh feel the need to drop ghost off his radar? I did call out ghost with a case. It was on the basis that he was aggressively pro-lynch, with the idea itself rather than pro-lynch against any specific people. I made a soft case, making the most of what I could with D1 knowledge, thinking something might have been there, as it seemed like he was pushing a reckless mindset onto town. He responded with a post clarifying himself, and I saw that he is logically consistent. On February 28 2012 06:12 slOosh wrote: For me this clears some of my initial suspicions and pushes ghost into null read. He provides decent reasoning once pressured - my current read is that he is perhaps overzealous with his stance on lynching, treating it like a 100% policy, and not adopting a helpful attitude for town. ghost, I hope to continue seeing quality posts like these without having to FOS / make cases against you. As for his actual stance: While I strongly disagree with the idea of "lynching for information", I do agree that a no lynch should be a last resort than an easy way out. Otherwise it can give mafia an avenue of being non commital, which is the essence of lurking anyways. Right now that leaves me with Chocolate, as he hasn't yet responded. I don't think his case is worth voting for yet, but it defeats the whole purpose of the soft deadline if all we do is FOS and vote last minute. (Thus my preliminary, not necessarily final, vote will be on) ##Vote: Chocolate I don't defend him, but change my stance on him. There is a difference, and I don't want facts to be misinterpreted as that will hurt town atmosphere. Null read does not mean I drop all my suspicions - it means I put the information aside to be able to take a comprehensive view of how D1 is unfolding. I know that in the last game, meta filled my mind with paranoia, leading me to tunnel so hard. I wish for none of that this game, from both myself or others, so please don't misconstrue me "dropping a case" when I'm actually putting it aside until more relevant information appears. Moving onto my vote on Chocolate - it is what I said it is. A preliminary vote. Why did we bother discussing the merits of soft deadlines and no lynching if we aren't even going to use it? I did not want to put my vote on igabod since 1) Putting it on Chocolate puts pressure on him to produce more content and reasoning, allowing us to have a better read of who he is, and true enough, he does. 2) Despite what people may think, I thought igabod was an easy way out. Having people voting for chocolate and providing their reasoning why can reveal more information than having people vote igabod and say "he hasn't posted". DYH picked up on it when he commented on how the bandwagon was rolling. Even with a no lynch there is much information to be gleaned, and going for igabod was not the way to do it. Will hopefully find time tomorrow to post my upcoming case. I expect to find time to do it in around ~14 hours. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
The Alderan Case: This case revolves in observing the context in which his actions occur in the thread. Analysis starts with his PBPA on Chocolate, who he thinks is "super scummy". + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: Note: this didn't start as a PBPA but it ended that way because literally everything he has done is scummy. Chocolate is super scummy to me right now. Says things like "our vote will probably end up being a lurker"... Who says this? Even if it is the case you're giving mafia free reign to post a couple BS posts and get out of the thread. He later goes on to say Pretty adamanent about this lurker idea, right? Wrong. NOT 3 POSTS LATER he's off his lurker train now, and onto the easiest target, namely, Fourface. Fourface, for reasons stated above is very likely not scum, but I could see Chocolate's beady little eyes now getting as wide as an anime characters in joy when he saw that Fourface made one of the most "interesting" (as to avoid getting in trouble) posts I've ever seen. Oh and this: I don't get this either. Why would you split your votes up? If it's for pressure here is a newsflash: Votes DO NOT = Pressure Pressure is cases, pressure is discussion, a one liner and vote in the vote thread doesn't cut it. Period. Then there's: Steve, how often did we sit around IRC last game and joke about the thread in the hour running up to the vote? Spoiler: It was every time. Scum are going to stay absent at the end of the day unless they need to affect the vote. Chocolate has conveniently positioned himself out of that responsibility but left the opportunity open that he might be there. Just priming his defense in case he needs it. There is some biased reads in this case, as it is very speculative in nature. With phrases like "even if it is the case", "I could see Chocolate's eyes (something about anime)", "Steve, how often ...". I first thought he was getting some confirmation bias and stayed quiet to see Chocolate's response. After this post, he throws up some speculation on ghost, based on his speculation on Chocolate. On February 27 2012 12:50 Alderan wrote: Also, if this reasoning stands I think Ghost is scum as well. Here's how I see this vote on Jeckyll going: - Ghost puts his vote on Jeckyll, cause you know they're pressuring lurkers and all. - Chocolate also puts his vote on Jeckyll, cause you know they're pressuring lurkers and all. - Ghost gets pissed in the scum qt by saying "dude back up off me, we don't need to get too associated with each other" - Chocolate is like "shit, how can I back out of this? Oh I got it! I'll say we need to diversify our pressure portfolio!!!!!11!!" - Chocolate votes on another random lurker. - Alderan figures it out. So he has his eyes on both Chocolate and ghost. When I post my case concurrently with his post on ghost, he refrains from responding to it saying On February 27 2012 13:16 Alderan wrote: I'm going to wait for him to respond to make a comment on your case. I've got a hunch. And later when Janaan want's to discuss ghost's actions, he does not discuss the matter at hand (ghost), but redirects focus onto Chocolate On February 28 2012 07:09 Alderan wrote: @Steveling have you been actively pursuing getting a replacement or no? @Chocolate aside from igabod who are you thinking is appearing scummy? Are you really getting a null read on everyone? To anyone who cares, I don't think Ghost_403 is that suspicious anymore. I realized that it is more likely that either Ghost or Chocolate are scum, Chocolate strikes me as someone riding the middle and keeping his head down. There is a clear leaning away from ghost and leaning toward Chocolate. The bolded post (which is without reasoning), sets up that only one of them is likely to be scum, and that is Chocolate. And yet when DYH provides some clear thinking into the situation, Alderan is all too quick to sheep him. On February 28 2012 08:29 Alderan wrote: I almost made literally the exact same post. The Chocolate thing is coming along too easily, I would have expected at least a case made against someone else. That in combination with his mildly sufficient answers have me reconsidering my vote. I would love for a case to come a long that was better, which is why I was asking everyone to come up with an opinion? I think Steveling is acting very suspiciously. I've found that after playing as scum, town is much more relaxing and less time consuming. I find it strange that he finds it the opposite. He instantly agrees with DYH, and drops his strong suspicions on Chocolate for "mildly sufficient answers". Its worth suspicion because soon after he picks it back up keeps trying to sway town to consider him. (I understand this is starting to look like a PBPA but it isn't. I'm trying to show how the development of his stance on Chocolate does not make sense within the context of the thread. There has been nothing on Chocolate between the time of his posts to either incriminate or absolve him (Chocolate). I recommend opening Alderan's filter and reading along with the actual thread to see how his posts align. Will continue analysis without posting quotes here.) Later on with his post with lists, and a couple of posts on Steveling, he shows preference again saying that since who he believes are townies are stacked against Chocolate, and since Steveling did not vote Chocolate, that both people should be lynched. His reasoning? Information - contradicting his openness to no lynch which is actually gives least information (in the sense that it does not give a 100% confirmed flip). Summary: Alderan has shown a great bias against Chocolate. He tries to focus people on him (such as Janaan when he posted about ghost) but is perfectly willing to drop it when DYH comes in to call out what is going on. Even so he picks it back up and tries to get people to look at it, and then tries to get something on Steveling started on the sole basis that he is involved with Chocolate. Conclusion: It could be a case of serious tunneling (which I doubt as he seemingly listened to DYH), but I find it more likely that he is casting confusion amongst town by setting up multiple suspects without good reason or case. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
Hopefully will find time during the day to follow up and drive discussion. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
It forces people to make reads prior to the issue being resolved - it wouldn't do much good if Alderan was the only one to post and defend himself well and lurker mafia to come in and say 'oh yea I knew that and I agree'. Right now my greatest concern is the potential lurker issue. When the most active players go at each other, it gives even more hiding grounds for mafia - right now I only have semi-decent reads on ~3 people, and there is a total of 14. Replacements especially, please contribute / voice your thoughts - it will help us in the long run. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 29 2012 04:42 Alderan wrote: Sloosh- The thing I find most concerning about Sloosh is his change of pace from last game. I know he's said that hes slowing down his posting to try and clean up his play but he has been extremely lurkish. He pushes Ghost pretty hard, but ironically enough it was his case against Ghost that made Ghost less suspicious for me. He ends up taking an extremely soft stance on the matter. He then makes a case against someone (me) who had a very similar train of though in terms of vote targets to himself. I'll have to wait to hear his response to my rebuttal to discern more probably but I do have my suspicions. I really want to clear this up as it is incorrect. I did not push Ghost hard. I put up a case with a FOS, voicing my thoughts transparently to town. I think your interpretation that I am taking a soft stance is unjustified - ghost posted his reasoning to explaining his behavior, and I took that info and adjusted my reads accordingly. Even though we may have had similar suspects of suspicions, it is the reasons why they we think them suspicious that separates us, which is ultimately why I built my case on you (as I don't/didn't think you had good reasoning). You may have missed this post while you were typing up your reads, but I will wait and give opportunity for the new replacements to clear themselves before posting my thoughts. On February 29 2012 04:20 slOosh wrote: I would really like it if not only Alderan, but other people chime in their opinions and thoughts as the night and day progresses. It forces people to make reads prior to the issue being resolved - it wouldn't do much good if Alderan was the only one to post and defend himself well and lurker mafia to come in and say 'oh yea I knew that and I agree'. Right now my greatest concern is the potential lurker issue. When the most active players go at each other, it gives even more hiding grounds for mafia - right now I only have semi-decent reads on ~3 people, and there is a total of 14. Replacements especially, please contribute / voice your thoughts - it will help us in the long run. If you honestly think I'm evading/lurking, then just say so. But I think this is what is best for town in the long run (D3 onwards). I don't want to dominate this thread - it hasn't helped in my past experience and I want to play more like my first game style, which was more contributory rather than telling people what to do / believe. I'll be busy all tonight and will be unable to comment on discussion / the N1 results until tomorrow morning (CST). Please don't let the thread stagnate - even if it is night, time is a crucial commodity for town. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 29 2012 07:53 Chocolate wrote: As for the alderan case, he does seem to be moving around a lot too, but at least he is driving discussion. This is a dangerous mindset to hold as is untrue. There is a difference in a person driving discussion and discussion being generated about/around a person. In this case it is the latter, and it is easy for either mafia or town to defend themselves and thereby "create" content. It shouldn't be considered a town tell on that account, let alone the fact that there are mafia playstyles that are very active (zarepath in NMMIII comes to mind). Stuff revolving around Alderan: First off is the flushing of lurkers. I held off on commenting because of this exact reason, and we see nttea come out, sheeping my case. Could be a newbie townie unsure of how to contribute or a mafia supporting a mislynch, or a mafia busing a teammate under scrutiny to take attention off of themselves. Its good that people are keeping watch of everyone, and a few people have called him out. Please stay on that, and for everyone else keep an eye on that (it is counter productive if we all turn our attention to that since if case he is newbie town we just wasted the whole day, and it might turn into easy bandwagon on him, and we don't need whole town to pressure lurkers) Second: On February 29 2012 16:13 k2hd wrote: Sloosh, I wanted to ask you about this part of your case against alderan It does seem, as you say, that alderan is focusing hard on chocolate, but is he really trying to set up multiple targets? From what I can tell, at the point you made that post, he was only setting up chocolate and steveling to be scrutinised, and dropped his case against ghost. I think it's becoming more and more likely that chocolate is town, so if alderan were scum, why waste his vote on steveling, who he knew was not going to attract enough votes for a lynch? . I think we have different usage of the word "set up". Mine is more along the lines of what I bolded in your post, and what I wrote as my conclusion: " he is casting confusion amongst town by setting up multiple suspects without good reason or case". I don't think his goal was to pull off the mislynch D1 (I doubt mafia would be so brazen to do that last minute when it would result in intense scrutiny of whoever caused the last minute swing) - I'm saying that it is suspicious to cast suspicion on people without good reason. Third: I didn't bring this piece of information up since I wanted to see how Alderan, and others would respond to my case and his defense. If you look at his PBPA on Choco and read where the quotes come from in Choco's filter, you will realize that the quotes are not chronological (the 3rd quote is actually written before the 1st and 2nd quotes). This is why my suspicion remains on him - removing time stamps so people won't instantly be able to realize it to build a misleading case and cast suspicion on Choco. At best this is a biased townie who built the case with the mindset of proving that Choco is mafia. Was it an honest mistake? Maybe, but if we spend the whole game excusing potentially intentionally poor play by saying it is a newbie game we won't ever get anywhere. Stance on gumshoe On March 01 2012 00:07 gumshoe wrote: Whats wrong with trying to deduce motive? Please, if you guys have something better to say I am all ears, why is it pointless to discuss motive? This is our space, were supposed to feel comfterble here to talk as we please, the mafia are the ones who are unwelcome. As to the discussion revolving around the N1 Janaan kill - Phagga put it best himself: On March 01 2012 00:23 phagga wrote: We have no idea what the motives of the mafia are. We can only speculate. And if we speculate wrong, we might start hunting and lynching people for the wrong reasons, we will get WIFOM, it will create more uncertainty than facts. The only ones profiting from it will be the mafia. It is discussion that is inconclusive. We can try to guess what the mafia were thinking, but that is all it will amount to. A guess. Even if we discussed it over and come to a consensus, it is still at best conjecture that isn't strong enough to help find and lynch mafia. The reason why we should stop talking about it, is that it allows an easy avenue for mafia to contribute, because its ultimately meaningless - they don't fear saying anything condemning because everyone doing is just guessing and no one is going to be called out on a guess. I don't like gumshoe right now for two reasons: 1) Is the obviously weak accusations he is flinging at me. For someone who is obviously against the use of meta On February 29 2012 00:15 gumshoe wrote: Now unless you want invole the m word(i dare you to say it) theres not much all to discuss about the matter. Any other questions? his sole suspicion of me revolves around meta. I've clearly explained the intentional change in my playstyle, and he tries casting suspicion on me, and getting others to do it for him. On February 29 2012 15:11 gumshoe wrote: DYH think about it from scums perspective, alderaan is one of the biggest players, his primary suspicion happens to be a town, what better way to throw doubt on Alderaan? Personally I think we should just look back at the people who were trying to build cases against alderaan. a few come to mind, one in particular has been acting strange all game, you might know him, after all, he killed you in a past life. Not only is it suspicious for him to do this, I have to divert attention and time addressing this each time so people don't start thinking like him and start ignoring my cases and discussion points, and it is really hindering my ability to generate quality posts. Zelblade basically built a case while I was writing up this post. Will read over it and Alderan's response when I have time during the latter part of the day. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 01 2012 02:21 Alderan wrote: + Show Spoiler + On March 01 2012 01:55 slOosh wrote: Mindset correction: This is a dangerous mindset to hold as is untrue. There is a difference in a person driving discussion and discussion being generated about/around a person. In this case it is the latter, and it is easy for either mafia or town to defend themselves and thereby "create" content. It shouldn't be considered a town tell on that account, let alone the fact that there are mafia playstyles that are very active (zarepath in NMMIII comes to mind). Stuff revolving around Alderan: First off is the flushing of lurkers. I held off on commenting because of this exact reason, and we see nttea come out, sheeping my case. Could be a newbie townie unsure of how to contribute or a mafia supporting a mislynch, or a mafia busing a teammate under scrutiny to take attention off of themselves. Its good that people are keeping watch of everyone, and a few people have called him out. Please stay on that, and for everyone else keep an eye on that (it is counter productive if we all turn our attention to that since if case he is newbie town we just wasted the whole day, and it might turn into easy bandwagon on him, and we don't need whole town to pressure lurkers) Second: I think we have different usage of the word "set up". Mine is more along the lines of what I bolded in your post, and what I wrote as my conclusion: " he is casting confusion amongst town by setting up multiple suspects without good reason or case". I don't think his goal was to pull off the mislynch D1 (I doubt mafia would be so brazen to do that last minute when it would result in intense scrutiny of whoever caused the last minute swing) - I'm saying that it is suspicious to cast suspicion on people without good reason. Third: I didn't bring this piece of information up since I wanted to see how Alderan, and others would respond to my case and his defense. If you look at his PBPA on Choco and read where the quotes come from in Choco's filter, you will realize that the quotes are not chronological (the 3rd quote is actually written before the 1st and 2nd quotes). This is why my suspicion remains on him - removing time stamps so people won't instantly be able to realize it to build a misleading case and cast suspicion on Choco. At best this is a biased townie who built the case with the mindset of proving that Choco is mafia. Was it an honest mistake? Maybe, but if we spend the whole game excusing potentially intentionally poor play by saying it is a newbie game we won't ever get anywhere. Stance on gumshoe As to the discussion revolving around the N1 Janaan kill - Phagga put it best himself: It is discussion that is inconclusive. We can try to guess what the mafia were thinking, but that is all it will amount to. A guess. Even if we discussed it over and come to a consensus, it is still at best conjecture that isn't strong enough to help find and lynch mafia. The reason why we should stop talking about it, is that it allows an easy avenue for mafia to contribute, because its ultimately meaningless - they don't fear saying anything condemning because everyone doing is just guessing and no one is going to be called out on a guess. I don't like gumshoe right now for two reasons: 1) Is the obviously weak accusations he is flinging at me. For someone who is obviously against the use of meta his sole suspicion of me revolves around meta. I've clearly explained the intentional change in my playstyle, and he tries casting suspicion on me, and getting others to do it for him. Not only is it suspicious for him to do this, I have to divert attention and time addressing this each time so people don't start thinking like him and start ignoring my cases and discussion points, and it is really hindering my ability to generate quality posts. Zelblade basically built a case while I was writing up this post. Will read over it and Alderan's response when I have time during the latter part of the day. Sloosh this is getting repetitive.... - You say I'm just defending myself and that's where I'm generating content. If I'm correct I have posted more player analysis than anyone in this thread. Just because they are not "Super long, one post a day posts" (that I did last game when I was scum; that you are doing now) doesn't mean I'm not generating content. - I didn't remove the stamps, it's just much easier to copy and paste and then add quote brackets. They are out of order because the post was not set up chronologically but topically. I wanted to put all the posts on lynching lurkers together, and then I wanted to talk about his lynch deadline availability. - I don't know how you can call me a biased towny, I've said multiple times that my Chocolate case was not that strong, I've taken into account other's input, and I've posted new cases to see what others thought about it. This is how you scum hunt, and it's also the best way to maximize reactions of the town for more reads. Any other questions? After reading zelblade's third party advice, it does seem like I think you are suspicious for not playing to a certain degree of aptitiude that I expect from you. It may just be our paranoias playing off of each other from the previous game, and I really do want to avoid a tunneling mentality. The intent of that last post was not to implicate you, but to explain my reasoning, correct what I thought was illogical thinking, and update my current reads. On that note, I've read over zelblade's analysis of gumshoe and find myself agreeing with him for the most part. It really messes with my read when he actively looks for a replacement / encourages others to lynch him, but as testsubject893 has pointed out, maybe it should not be considered as an alignment tell as either party could do that. Now aside from all that stuff, I have a huge problem with his last post: On March 01 2012 04:00 gumshoe wrote: Seeing as there is no going back now I will address every point against me, first off in terms of my accusation against sloosh, it was founded on a similar basis as to the one now up against me, that sloosh's behavior has changed drastically since last game just as you believe mine has, I never considered that strong enough evidence to lynch sloosh, I wanted to find someone associated with him and lynch that individual, if that person flipped scum, I would have a basis against sloosh, if that person flipped green I would back off, at the time that person was ghost, but since that point in the game I have lost most of my suspicion against ghost, reason being that ghost seems to care about his image and has criteria as to when he should drop his suspicions. Now the only persons who seem connected to sloosh are those accusing him, one of which is me and another is Alderaan, so I am content for the time being to put aside my suspicion of him and pursue the lynch of a lurker so that we can limit our casualties. Also zell blade I would rather you never have stated that information at all, nothing good can ever come from discussing non hit night actions. He advocates a lynch on an individual associated with me (independent of how scummy he thinks the player is likely to be), to gain information on my alignment. I really don't know how he couldn't have thought this one through - he is willing to trade a player (townie or not it doesn't seem like he cares) for more information (we lynch to rid mafia, not for info) so he can build a case against me (on whom he has suspicions solely on meta). Couple this with his insistence on discussing the night action and dangerous discussion revolving around blues, distracting town from focusing on generating useful content and finding mafia and allowing them an avenue to "contribute" My preliminary vote is cast: ##Vote: gumshoe | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
zelblade you forgot to put the vote in the vote thread | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
It is really disconcerting that the main cases / lurker of D1 should fade away once the spotlight has been taken off them. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
Its a solid case, and strangely enough, Alderan has totally ignored it and focused on my case alone, even though it was a response to his question: On February 29 2012 06:58 Alderan wrote: Jekyll, what do you think about the current cases at hand, namely the ones against Chocolate, myslef, and k2hd. I thought he responded decently against my case, so I put him in null, and I really want to hear his defense of this before casting a vote on him, as I believe I am suspect to confirmation bias after being so involved in discussion with him and want to approach it with a clear, refreshed mind. As for k2hd (considering him independently of Alderan) His filter doesn't bring up that much content after N1 is over, and I was giving him the benefit of the doubt as he is a hydra (therefore more busy etc.), but after this post, there isn't any reason I should On February 28 2012 22:04 k2hd wrote: Also, I should be able to post more in the 2 upcoming days, because I don't have uni. Again, all posts on k2hd account by BassInSpace. His D2 posts consist of little tidbits on the N1 actions, the confusion around roleblock and then a small question on my Alderan case, ending with calling out nttea (who rightfully should be called out - seriously where is this guy?). Its hard to get a proper read because of the lack of content in his filter, but that in itself is a tell - I'm leaning mafia lurker. Now as for their interactions, it is really strange. Alderan puts up a case against k2hd, but as Hyde points out he drops case and suspects Janaan. k2hd seems to suspect Alderan, but (if you follow his filter), he never gets a response, and for no clear reason he drops his suspicions on Alderan and starts soft defending him when the heat on him starts turning up. As individuals their actions are suspect. As a pair their actions are even more suspect - perhaps they are faking an "argument" early game creating safety nets where if one flips the other won't be suspected. I don't think this is pure speculation as both of them drop their cases on each other, and they dropped off their interaction around start of D2. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
Right now our votes are spread between 4 suspects, and it is critical that we rally and focus on the best possible choice. It could be the case that more than 1 of them are mafia, but even then we should be unified in which one to lynch. Thinking about our friends in alternate timezones, they may not be able to read your case and we can't really bank on Alderan and k2hd posting satisfactorily and I think in this situation a soft deadline would also be helpful. But I trust your judgement - we need content from everyone and not just a few of us. I just want us to be mindful of the situation that we are in. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 02 2012 02:50 Alderan wrote: Ok guys, sorry about the absence, was going to take the afternoon off after my last post but then I got caught up with some GF shit all night last night. Let's see what we got here: I think I can address all of Sloosh and Jekyll's worries about me in one sentence: A person can have more than one case active at a time, especially when the town is as inactive as this one. Look, I posted a couple cases of people I find scummy at the end of the night/beginning of the day period to see what everyone thinks about the cases. Sloosh I used to think you were just playing poorly (while ridiculing my play nonetheless) but now I realize you are just misleading the town to cast suspicion on me. I did not drop anything, I'm suspicious of multiple people, ya know, because there are more than one scum. Then you had this post: What in the hell does that even mean? Again you continue to try to discredit my name, my cases, and my contributions for seemingly no reason. You already admit that you don't find me as suspicious as you originally did with your first case, so why the blatant cut down. Its a really big jump to say that my general agreement of Hyde's case on you is intentionally misleading the town to cast suspicion on you. I agree with the points and lean mafia on you - how is openly expressing my stance misleading? And no I'm not discrediting your name in the second quote. Read the whole post in context. We are dangerously close to the lynch deadline with votes spread among multiple people, and I'm emphasizing the need to rally and make a decision. The bolded part is because I think some people (especially the newer ones) are timid and want to hear all the voices and cases out in the open and discussed, but I'm being realistic and pointing out that time is not a luxury. It's not a blatant cut down and I think you are starting to take everything I say about you personally. Please look objectively. Please read that second paragraph everyone. We need consensus or we will be driven to no lynch again. This cannot be. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 02 2012 03:11 Alderan wrote: Your vote is on gumshoe, would you consider switching it to k2hd? 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. And what's with the straw man arguments on phagga? Read his filter and it is very clear that he has expressed issues with gumshoe prior to his vote, and his change was his effort to help us consolidate today's lynch. What the heck nttea? Can you explain yourself before casting votes in secret? | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 02 2012 08:46 ghost_403 wrote: I'm going to assume that nttea has a good reason for that, and he'd better spit it out rather quickly. Also, he's not the only one with a ninja vote. XD ?? Did I miss something? | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 02 2012 08:52 ghost_403 wrote: He did it top of last page | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 02 2012 08:55 Alderan wrote: I've got a party tonight, will be unable to be here for the end of the vote. Is gumshoe the only shot of a lynch we have? As it is it looks like its between k2hd or gumshoe (3 votes on each). | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 02 2012 15:14 DoYouHas wrote: Let's not waste this night. If you have any things you have noted about people's play that you want to ask them about, I suggest we use this night time for that. Save scumlists and hard suspicions for tomorrow when they can't be used against us with the mafia hit. This is absolutely right. We should immediately pick up discussion - rereading over D2 we didn't make best use of our time early on due to the focus on the night action. We are essentially in a situation where we lack information, resulting in at best soft cases - we need information and the only way we can get it is through posting. nttea: On February 29 2012 13:42 nttea wrote: How about default lynch on alderan If we don't get any better ideas? I feel he worked extremely hard (but trying to not make it obvious) on making sure we didn't get a lynch done last day... What changed nttea? You voted just to escape the modkill. It's ok if you are unsure of your reads and such, it is more important that you post something so we know more about your alignment. Why the switch on k2hd? You did it pretty early on - is it that you think DYH & Alderan had better cases than me, zelblade and phagga? Why do you think they were better? k2hd: On March 02 2012 09:18 k2hd wrote: I had already said after phagga's post, that you had less pressure on you than chocolate, so it was safer for you to make such a claim when the chance of you being lynched was lower. As for this: I'd rather you not devalue my post like this. I voted for ghost because of his day 1 posting, AND his recent interactions with phagga concerning ghost. You may argue that what I said about day 1 was already covered, but not day 2 posts. I have read filters, and my vote stays on ghost. I'm willing to take the chance that gumshoe flips red and I look even more suspicious than I already do, but I do not think he is scum. Phagga + Show Spoiler + On March 02 2012 01:44 phagga wrote: Generally: I don't care if this is anyones first game on TL Mafia. This is a newbie game, noone has a lot of experience with TL Mafia. This game is here to learn, so please stop making excuses like that. I have already skipped several paragraphs who start with that, and I will continue to skip them in the future. DoYouHas: No, I don't agree. You accused him of not generating content. He agrees, but then only writes an excuse, and you are already giving him a free pass. Now there is no more pressure on him to generate real content, which is what would have given us more information on him. You left him of the hook way to early. Instead, I would have liked to see you call him out on his confession of not generating content, and pressure him more at least until he starts generating content. I noticed several times that people don't want to pressure someone anymore after the target went from scummy to towny. Why not? If you already started, pressure some more. Townies don't need to be afraid to get pressured. After all, they have no reason to lie, and if they write what they think and observe, than they have nothing to fear. And it will generate more information which will enable more people to judge better if someone is town or not. But if you let Nightfury of the hook like that, and nightfury gets lynched anyway and flips red, I will immediatly get suspicious about your reluctance to pressure him after making a case on him. - Chocolate - Gumshoe - Alderan k2hd: + Show Spoiler + On March 01 2012 22:16 k2hd wrote: Perhaps it is enough that chocolate is discredited, and you know you don't have the numbers to mislynch him without mafia stacking on him. At this stage, there is a low chance of chocolate actually being lynched and thus, flipping green, since there are multiple cases out on alderan, gumshoe and myself. It is also a convenient way of wasting a vote and not committing to anyone else, but as you say, I will wait to see what you have to say about others when you're done with their filters. I will try my best to see what you have to say in the morning before class. This is why I am placing a preliminary vote on ghost first. This is just not true. On the first day, my vote was on Chocolate the whole day. After this vote + Show Spoiler + On February 28 2012 07:36 NightFury wrote: ##Unvote ##Vote: Chocolate + Show Spoiler + On February 28 2012 08:36 phagga wrote: So, folks, I will be offline for the night in about 20 minutes. So far my vote stays on Chocolate. I have read a few interesting things about others (specially steveling), but so far nothing could convince me to switch my vote to another person. I still think Chocolate is our best lynch. On February 28 2012 10:00 phagga wrote: I'm off to bed now. My vote stays on chocolate. That was 2 hours before the deadline. There was still the possibility that he would get lynched. 40 minutes before the deadline JekyllAndHyde unvoted Chocolate. Chocolate: + Show Spoiler + On March 01 2012 20:58 phagga wrote: To k2hd: + Show Spoiler + On March 01 2012 19:39 k2hd wrote: I believe that chocolate is town. He's had a LOT of pressure put on him due to his sub-par posting on day 1, and had to defend himself left, right and centre for the rest of day 1. He's spent most of his time on defensive posts, and perhaps hasn't been able to focus on gathering much of his own evidence on other players. He is very aggressive in trying to force lurkers to post more by voting, but as was mentioned by DYH, this could just have been a poorly thought out way of fostering discussion. I understand that it may have been an easy way to avoid generating original content/cases of his own, but again, this is probably just the play style of a townie who is unsure of what to do, or who would rather not stick his head out too much. I did not check up on everyone's previous games, but from what I gather from what others have said, chocolate was mafia in his last game, had to tone down his posting because it was too aggressive, and hasn't played town before (unless he's had another game that I don't know about). There is also this post by chocolate: Why would he argue so confidently against a vote swing AWAY from him?1 Chocolate is also one of the first to start getting suspicious of alderan. After day 1, some of the heat was finally lifted off of him and focused on alderan by others. Following this, we have sloosh post a large case against alderan, followed by JekylAndHyde's case, and alderan is under more and more pressure. Instead of continuing his case against alderan, chocolate decides to launch a case against night fury of all people, who no one had posted any suspicions against yet. If he were mafia, why would he not join others in pressuring alderan (or the case that is piling up against gumshoe), and go for a target who would be harder to mislynch? I sincerely believe chocolate is town, and that some of those pressuring him hard are looking scummy to me. Those who voted chocolate on day 1: phagga, sloosh, NightFury, ghost I currently do not have as much info as I'd like on NightFury to say much about him. Sloosh's actions seem pro-town to me so far, and though he has not posted as much as others, his posts have generally been full of content. Now for the remaining two: Phagga has been trying very hard for a chocolate lynch the whole game.2 He takes a moment to call gumshoe out on why he didn't change his vote from ghost, and why he felt the need to "take responsibility" for voting chocolate if he flipped green, and then goes straight back to attacking chocolate. He is either getting tunnel vision with chocolate3, or trying to get the mislynch on him. Have a look at this post. He accuses chocolate of relying on the arguments of others, and voting lurkers (a policy which he did state at the start), but ignores the fact that it is chocolate who first brought up a case against alderan (albeit a rather lackluster one) and states emphatically that he will vote chocolate again on day 2, presumably for not coming up with original cases/evidence, when there was still 48 irl hours for chocolate to contribute on day 2 (day 1 had not even ended yet). This early vote behaviour was the same thing we called nttea out for when he wanted a default alderan lynch. Then we have ghost. His last few posts have all been aimed at chocolate. here they are Ghost and phagga engage in banter that seems like bullying chocolate to me in the first post, and the second post is unnecessary, because although chocolate did not do anything like make a new case, it was still a valid point. Nttea should not be posting like that, and if he is as clueless as he says he is, chocolate was only helping him. The way he analyses the chocolate quotes in the third post is very condescending in tone. He could have done so without putting chocolate down, as others in the thread have done. 1bI also do not trust this post made by ghost: Trying to gain the trust of the town by encouraging a chocolate or ghost lynch on day 1. If chocolate flipped green, suspicion may still have fallen off of ghost because mafia would presumably not make a post like this. I realise that this point is a bit WIFOM (I think I'm using the term correctly?). Basically, it seems to me that phagga and ghost are actively trying to discredit chocolate after his already shaky start, and possibly also get the mislynch on him. 1 You are aware that later in your post at 1b you quote ghost_403 who wrote against a vote switch away from him and chocolate, and say that that post is a reason you don't trust ghost_403? This is contradictory. 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. Nothing Chocolate said so far convinced me that he is not scum. That's why I still want him lynched. 3 I am aware that I am prone to tunneling Chocolate, and I am currently reading through several filters (again) to give an update on who else I think is fishy. I disagree. Scum does not want to be in the spotlight. People in the spotlight get analyzed more, and scum has to play a role / lie to look townie, so the chance that people will reveal their true role is higher. You will not often find scum that is going to play aggresively, and most of the time they won't get far with it because they have to hide too much. I think there's some confusion here, I'm talking about the vote count and low chance of mislynching chocolate on day 2, and how hard you were STILL pushing chocolate up until now, with the change to gumshoe. Notice I typed in the present tense in that post. What are your current thoughts on Alderan himself (rather than the case)? Or DYH? What do you think of phagga and ghost's alignments? Do you think they are townies making a mistake or mafia trying to pull off a mislynch on Chocolate? NightFury: On March 02 2012 13:30 NightFury wrote: @Chocolate - I'm not completely certain what to make of your statements. If I'm interpreting them incorrectly, can you be more clear please? I don't see a problem with this? I said you were most suspicious alongside Ghost relative to everyone else at that moment though. Not the most suspicious of everyone. I called your play toxic because at the time I did not believe randomly voting for individuals was a good method. In terms of method, we've been over it before. Two things. First, nowhere in my reasoning for you at this point did I say you couldn't address issues. Secondly, my reason for dropping Ghost in favour of you has nothing to do with addressing issues. I went after you for posting that you wanted to induce panic - which I strongly disagreed with at that time. Question for you though. Why do you think phagga is scum? From your filter, all I can see is that he has been focused on you as your sole reason. I don't believe that's convincing for him being scum. Anything else you'd like to add? That's unfortunate about gumshoe. Back to the drawing board. I'm out for the night! Both you and Chocolate should stop this - its extremely counter productive and unless you are fishing for information to build a case I recommend both of you drop this. What do you think of the k2hd cases and k2hd himself? You said leaning scum last time someone asked you - has that changed over the course of this last day? What is your current read on ghost? DoYouHas: On March 02 2012 09:56 DoYouHas wrote: When I look at gumshoe, I don't like the way he went after zelblade for claiming roleblock when that was exactly what zelblade should have done. 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: 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: 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 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? TestSubject893: On March 02 2012 06:41 TestSubject893 wrote: First of all, calling be the game's biggest lurker is blatantly untrue. nttea has only 3 posts, and has not posted reads, which I have. When you consider the amount of time I've been in the game (missing the first 60 or so hours), my posts per play time is comparable to JekyllAndHyde, phagga, NightFury, slOosh and k2hd. Concerning my statements about my inexperience: I legitimately believe that I am the newbiest player in this game. I have never played online before, which seemingly most other players have, and the "meta-game" of the people I've played live with before seems entirely different than it is in this game, almost certainly because of the increased length of days and nights. I've been having a really hard time analyzing any of this, because all of the things I knew before and I thought might apply to this game do not. I added those statements in hope that if I was do something wrong, people would correct and help me. Naturally, my difficulty analyzing the game has led me to not be able to come to many strong conclusions. Additionally, my joining the game late led to much of what I had to say already being said, as much of my time was spend on earlier content that had already been discussed. Concerning my vote today: Like I stated earlier, my early instinct was to vote for gumshoe, and despite good reasons brought up since then to vote for k2hd, gumshoe's lack of defense for his apparent blue-fishing have caused my opinion to stay the same. Additionally, although I had already made up my mind, his "analysis" of me began with false claims and harshly negative tone that were seemingly only an attempt to unfairly defame me. What is your stance on k2hd? You said that gumshoe was a better lynch choice based on his actions. How strong is your k2hd read and why? Please don't quote this post - or if you are, remember to spoiler or edit it out so only the section pertaining to you is there. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 03 2012 01:31 ghost_403 wrote: I agree with zelblade, a nttea lynch is not optimal town play. If nttea had ninja voted for gumshoe, I would be calling for his lynch right now. But he didn't; he threw it on a random player. As far as I can see, his vote had no benefit for the scum, without going into full WIFOM mode. That's not why a nttea lynch isn't optimal. It is wifom to say what benefits scum or not because we don't know k2hd's alignment. A nttea lynch is a bad idea because it doesn't pressure anyone and allows easy "contribution" - I pointed it out previously when I explained why I held back on my opinions On March 01 2012 01:55 slOosh wrote: First off is the flushing of lurkers. I held off on commenting because of this exact reason, and we see nttea come out, sheeping my case. Could be a newbie townie unsure of how to contribute or a mafia supporting a mislynch, or a mafia busing a teammate under scrutiny to take attention off of themselves. Its good that people are keeping watch of everyone, and a few people have called him out. Please stay on that, and for everyone else keep an eye on that (it is counter productive if we all turn our attention to that since if case he is newbie town we just wasted the whole day, and it might turn into easy bandwagon on him, and we don't need whole town to pressure lurkers) It is far from optimal as we are using one of our strongest tools - the lynch - and wasting it with all possible discussions and content by going straight for nttea. Even if he does flip scum (which I doubt), we would have wasted so much time and attention and it would be like a day 1 all over again. That being said, nttea please continue posting and clarify your posts. What exactly is your stance on Alderan? What do you think about k2hd and DYH? 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. Chocolate: On March 02 2012 21:44 Chocolate wrote: I continue to be suspicious of phagga because he was interested in lynching me on day 1 and lynched a town on day2 You've spent most of the game pointing out how suspicious of phagga you are, but haven't actually built a case that we can work with. If you are so sure of it, then please be clear instead of making little jabs here and there. I personally don't see the logic in how someone wanting to lynch you makes them necessarily scum, especially if you admit that you acted in a dubious manner D1 to generate content, and 8 people lynched town D2 - that means at least 4+ town there. I'm calling you out right now as all you've had are these weak interactions with people (NightFury, k2hd, ghost and DYH). If you are suspicious, bring a case to the plate, instead of pointing fingers. NightFury and TestSubject 893: I'm still waiting. You guys haven't produced much for us in terms of original content, pulling the newbie card (intentionally or not doesn't matter). It is N2 and plenty of content. Please address my questions and the new things that have occured in the thread. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 03 2012 23:14 zelblade wrote: I also love how sloosh ignores my case on DYH completely, not giving a firm opinion and just saying "was on the fence". I would expect him to either attack, agree with, or at least say that he would take a closer look. Give a harder stance if you are town please. Stop flip-flopping. I was taking a closer look with the very questions I asked. The reason why I didn't give a firm opinion is because it could very well have resulted in falsified or no information if I had called DYH scum and then asked him questions about k2hd. Everyone seems to think I've been lurking or something this game as I haven't come out with a big case. The reasons I left said - not only with DYH but I've been probing for relevant info for my cases. . Here are the final voting lists for D1 and D2 and the filters for the players. I will be referencing them rather than quoting to keep my post legible. My case jumpstarts off people's interactions with k2hd, whom I believe is town. Now I'm not going to spend the bulk of the case why I think he is town since that isn't the focus. Finding scum is, and with 4 of them still alive, interactions between players will become stronger and stronger indicators of alignments. That being said, I'm almost certain he is town - look at his recent posts. He has been more open, willing to answer direct questions (look at my filter - my questions basically revolve around k2hd and several times before that I've been poking him to see his responses). He is transparent and eager to share his reads and opinions, and I attribute his early game actions as shyness. With that I've pegged down these two players (I venture the other two amongst ghost, choco, nightfury and test, but haven't had a chance to look into it yet. We need focus anyways, posting full lists is redundant.) Alderan DoYouHas I'll be posting why I think they are mafia first based on their relation with k2hd, then later as individuals. Now open up the D1 and D2 lynch posts, and look for a trend. Where do the votes fall? D1: I've already expressed how I didn't like the igabod switch. on him, k2hd desires a no lynch first, and barring that wants to lynch a lurker (which a unsure newbie town would do). DYH (a more experienced player) hops on and tries to get something started, with his reasoning 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. I forget who but someone already pointed out how it doesn't make sense to vote like this. Steveling (test's predecessor) also hops on. I am inclined to think this was a potential bandwagon as it didn't seem like Chocolate was getting lynched. D2: Both Alderan and DYH are on k2hd. The gumshoe lynch was set, and yet there was reluctance on both players to lock in the vote. Wishy washy. Now look at their cases against k2hd: On March 02 2012 03:01 Alderan wrote: Now for who we should vote for.... K2hd has still not provided anything of value, under the guise of being a "noob town". Quite frankly I'm sick of responses like this. WE'RE ALL NOOBS.... hence the title of this game. Read filters and make cases. I say from this point forward we stop accepting responses like this. His vote is currently on Ghost_403. His reasons: - He thinks Chocolate is town. - Ghost voted for Chocolate. - Ghost made a slightly suspicious post (a point that I actually brought up initially) - Therefore Ghost is scum. What? It doesn't work like that. ##vote K2hd Totally weak. It is devalues k2hd's posting (so that people are less likely to listen), and sets up a straw man argument, one which k2hd addresses adequately here. His prior post here is also nitpicking through the filter, finding anything and painting it in an unfavorable light - a biased PBPA (which he has done before with Chocolate here.) On March 02 2012 09:16 DoYouHas wrote: 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. On March 02 2012 09:56 DoYouHas wrote: 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: 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: 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 On March 03 2012 04:10 DoYouHas wrote: 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. He points a finger at k2hd (right after his case against nightfury) citing that his reasons are similar, forgets to post his case until I bring it up, assumes k2hd is mafia because he isn't acting like he himself would (note that this is after rescinding his case on nightfury, built on many of the similar prefaces), and ends by saying that k2hd is a good suspect for tomorrow without any further reads. Alderan Most of my N1, D2 was spent pressuring Alderan. He is very defensive when I keep up the pressure. I note that I kept my suspicion on him because he didn't respond to Hyde's case, and he gets really defensive. On March 02 2012 02:50 Alderan wrote: Then you had this post: What in the hell does that even mean? Again you continue to try to discredit my name, my cases, and my contributions for seemingly no reason. You already admit that you don't find me as suspicious as you originally did with your first case, so why the blatant cut down. On March 02 2012 03:11 Alderan wrote: Hyde's case COMPLETELY revolved around me "dropping cases" which was clearly not the situation. I made two cases during the night period. That's it. Please look objectively? "we can't really bank on Alderan and k2hd posting satisfactorily".... There is only one way to take this sentence, regardless of the fluff you just posted above. I understand we need more contributions, and we need to come to a come to consensus which is why I'm dropping this fight with you. Your vote is on gumshoe, would you consider switching it to k2hd? Note that hypocritical backlash - he calls my post fluff while accusing me of trying to discredit him. So I leave him alone to see what he does with his free time (not spend defending himself from me). And the answer to that is nothing. After I drop my pressure he posts a few one liners. He ignores another one of Hyde's posts. I can't really give you guys anything more, since he just doesn't have content in his filter to work with. It is just enough to skate by without people giving attention to him. 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. Conclusion: k2hd is town Alderan is mafia DoYouHas is mafia. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
Right now our mutual group of suspects lies within - DYH, Alderan, TestSubject893 and ghost_403 ghost brings up a decent point in that DYH cannot respond and therefore pressuring and consolidating a lynch on people who are here will have a higher chance of success (as town suspects can clear their name / mafia suspects could slip) I still think we have "enough info" on him (its D3 and he has one of the more weightier filters; I don't know what else you want), but if its general consensus that people don't want to vote him yet without waiting for him to give his defense, then it is a waste of time discussing that. 1st priority is agreeing upon a lynch. We need everyone to post. Now if you have a strong case against someone else, bring it up now. Otherwise if you bring it up late (like k2hd D2) we will not have time to discuss and could make an avoidable mislynch. As for now I'm voting my strongest read otherwise. ##Vote: Alderan | ||
|
slOosh
3291 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. I would disagree with the methods you are using to determine alignment. You are comparing his actions to "optimal" mafia actions - excusing whatever he may have said or done on the basis that it isn't the best course of actions a mafia could have taken. This is not a good way to find mafia as 1) Hindsight bias is huge. This kind of thinking neglects the context in which actions were taken (such as what information was available at the time) 2) Mafia play like town, choosing perhaps "2nd choice" and can gain unwarranted "town cred" by choosing such actions. For instance, if someone defended themselves saying "if I was mafia I would have done this instead but I didn't so therefore I'm not mafia", you wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) accept that. Flip side should be same - your reads shouldn't compare a player to your idea of "optimal" mafia, but should rather compare to town (now what type of town such as timid, newbie, over aggressive is different for each person but it is more objective and doable). 3) Mafia are undoubtedly playing as a team, but don't want to be caught as a team. For instance if the other members were instigating a bandwagon that was going to be successful, another mafia member might defend the suspect (knowing they will flip green) to gain "town cred". That being said, I'm not here to argue whether Alderan or DYH is a better lynch. I'm here because I want us to come to agreement. I am willing to vote either unless someone can sway me otherwise. Will be extremely busy this Sunday, so I might not be able to be there right before the deadline, but will try checking in to see how discussion is headed and address any questions / concerns if I can. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 05 2012 01:46 ghost_403 wrote: The thing that really worries me at the moment is that there is a small subset of players who are controlling the conversation of today. If I was less suspicious of the two premier lynch candidates, I would be very concerned. Also, lurkers, stop lurking. You're really hurting the town at this point. It's not controlling if there is no one else posting. Seriously this town makes me want to cry. It's almost like everyone else has already given up or something. I mean, 2 pages since D3 started?? C'mon! Even if it is preliminary, we should all be casting our votes. Otherwise the mafia can easily just hang back and choose to swing the vote without giving reason, citing "oh we need a lynch today *insert suspect* seemed like the best choice and I really didn't want no lynch". | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
But are you guys serious right now? 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. On March 05 2012 09:01 DoYouHas wrote: So now I find myself between a rock and a hard place. The lynch is either going to be me or Alderan or no-lynch. 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 Says lynching someone who he thinks is a townie is better than no lynch. On March 05 2012 09:14 NightFury wrote: This isn't very good at all. Not much has happened at all and it's getting extremely close to the deadline. I'm glad DYH came back and has posted. Alderan on the other hand has been completely missing in action and hasn't done anything to mitigate the case against him. As I mentioned before, a no-lynch is too similar to a mislynch in our circumstances. ##Vote: Alderan Lynching because a lack of response on Alderan and a response from DYH rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the case itself. On March 05 2012 10:17 Chocolate wrote: Should I vote to lynch you or... I haven't been posting that much because the mafia is basically running the town now. I was thinking of getting myself modkilled to show you all my alignment so you would finally lynch my suspects, but I think it would be cheating because it's against my win condition, although it could help. Tomorrow I may do that if we really need to start lynching mafia. Says that tomorrow (as if we really start playing the game when its MYLO/LYLO) we may really need to start lynching mafia. Doesn't realize that his death would result in a loss (1 night hit, 1 modkill -> 4v4. Not to mention how strategic modkill is absolutely unacceptable) On March 05 2012 11:04 Chocolate wrote: I have to go to bed and will put my vote on alderan because I don't want a no ylnch. I look forward to lynching hos accusers tomo and ask that the vigi shoot sloosh Lynching someone whose main accuser he believes to be scum to avoid a no lynch. On March 05 2012 10:40 TestSubject893 wrote: I'm really sorry for my inactivity guys. I had a lot of really hectic stuff happen this weekend. Skimming over the thread, it looks like the general consensus is to lynch is Alderan, who, like I stated before, is high on the list of likely mafia for me. I'm trying to make time to properly catch up and respond to the posts that I promised I would (like this one), but I'm still really busy and can't promise I'll be caught up until tomorrow night. ##Vote: Alderan Voting based off consensus and an arbitrary percentage list without explanation. Back up your words with your actions. If you think Alderan is not scum, then you should have said it. Show me and the rest of town why. Convince us. Don't just give up and say that you don't want no lynch so you will agree to lynch someone you think is townie , or even worse listen to someone who you think is scum and lynch who he says we should lynch. Absolutely ridiculous. You guys seriously think I'm scum for leading a mislynch?? Bring it on. Half the town is acting like a bunch of chickens stricken with paranoia and fear, lacking direction and lynching the most active thing they see. Cool your heads, grow some spines and come back with the proper mindset. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 05 2012 13:58 DoYouHas wrote: gumshoe points us at slOosh, dies, flips town. 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? Oh you think everyone should lynch me? On what basis? On March 02 2012 09:07 gumshoe wrote: sloosh is more a gut thing On March 05 2012 10:00 Alderan wrote: Everyone's vote should instantly go on Sloosh. He's done nothing but belittle others (namely me and DYH) under the guise of active posting. He's also the Godfather, so a dt claim that he is town will only show scum who to hit. Honestly if there is a vig, shoot Sloosh tonight. Trust me. On March 05 2012 08:05 DoYouHas wrote: 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. On March 05 2012 08:52 DoYouHas wrote: -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. On March 05 2012 11:46 JekyllAndHyde wrote: I'll vote for slOosh /Jekyll A gut feel, a vanilla townie who "knows" I'm godfather, an OMGUSer and someone's accusation without a case. Then move on and get town to focus on other players. Sure. First thing I'll be doing Day 4 is ##Vote: DoYouHas | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
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. 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. On March 06 2012 04:20 ghost_403 wrote: @sloosh Stop tunneling DoYouHas. It's counterproductive. I am 99% sure that one of the two of you is scum, and I haven't decided which one it is yet. Let's reevalute the town and figure out who one of the other three scum is. (protip: think Chocolate) Give me some time to it look over. All I remember is him telling a vig to shoot me without providing reasoning. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 05 2012 10:17 Chocolate wrote: Should I vote to lynch you or... I haven't been posting that much because the mafia is basically running the town now. I was thinking of getting myself modkilled to show you all my alignment so you would finally lynch my suspects, but I think it would be cheating because it's against my win condition, although it could help. Tomorrow I may do that if we really need to start lynching mafia. On March 05 2012 11:04 Chocolate wrote: I have to go to bed and will put my vote on alderan because I don't want a no ylnch. I look forward to lynching hos accusers tomo and ask that the vigi shoot sloosh On March 05 2012 21:27 Chocolate wrote: We dont need to anymore imo. Sloosh hopefully dies tonight, if he does I think we should lynch testsubject to see if his list is any good. Then we can finish with phagga and zell. On March 05 2012 21:44 Chocolate wrote: Testsubjects list. Ganging up on me earlier. Being behind all the town lynches. I can't even build a logical case off this since it makes no sense. What the heck is his mentality? Assume he is a townie and imagine a townie thinking these things: - "Oh we are almost at MYLO, we should really start lynching those mafia now" - "I voted this guy so we don't get no lynch, but we should look to lynch everyone else who voted him" - "Hey Vig you should shoot this guy. Why? Just trust me" - "Hopefully the vig listened to me. Lets then lynch this other guy to see if his list is any good, and then lynch some of these other guys who don't like me" Slight exaggerations aside his play is red through and through. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 06 2012 08:07 Chocolate wrote: 1. If we hadn't lynched him there wouldn't be nearly enough evidence to convict my main suspicions. 2. Same as the above. To expand upon that, a last minute switch away from him a la me would keep everyone in the dark. 3. If vig doesn't act soon we'll end up lynching him or he'll die from scum. I am suspicious of you for being behind a lot of town lynches, as I am also. You will note that I was against them, however, and voted them out of necessity so we could gain information. If I had my druthers I would not have lynched them. 4. If you flip red I see no reason not to lynch testsubject. I am reevaluating um position on zell but I am convinced that you, phagga, and test are scum. Lynching people for information and evidence for your cases? Lynching someone you think is town when we are so close to MYLO/LYLO? Directing vig without reasoning or a case? Lynching someone to decide if lynching someone else is a good idea? I don't think so. There's absolutely no reason why you would think and act like this if you were town. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 06 2012 08:27 Chocolate wrote: Also guys, don't think me still existing is a coincidence. Now that we are so close to getting the mafia they are reverting to someone they had a strong case against earlier, but couldn't quite get the job done, to distract you all. Sloosh which 4 people do you most think are scum? I presume DYH and I top the list. Nice try, but I'm not biting. You are right to say DYH and you top the list. Posting the rest is essentially posting my reads on everyone as there are only 9 other players remaining (beside me), which does nothing to benefit town (as we can only lynch one at a time) and will only serve as a distraction. I'm not letting mafia shoot me, WIFOM discussion and lead a mislynch should one of my last choices be wrong. And being alive doesn't prove alignment either way; I'm pretty sure that mafia were trying to snipe blues. But how about you actually build a proper case instead of pointing fingers (or goading me into pointing at people for you)? All your current cases are just OMGUSes at people who think you are mafia. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 07 2012 02:34 DoYouHas wrote: Seems the battle lines have been drawn. Me, k2hd, NightFury, Chocolate vs slOosh, Ghost, Phagga, Testsubject. 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 This is the pinnacle of ridiculousness. You have drawn a clear line in the sand and distributed every player into two lots, solely on the basis of your assumption (yes it is assumption now, it is very clear you are twisting everything I say / do into painting me mafia). Let me refresh everyone's minds of a recent post. 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. On March 06 2012 22:20 k2hd wrote: I do also believe that sloosh has been actively trying to discredit DoYouHas ever since he came back. When alderan went MIA due to his RL issues and DoYouHas left on his trip, sloosh's posting became more active. He was effectively able to take over town discussion, and now that DoYouHas is back, sloosh aims to discredit him so that mafia have complete control over town. The authoritative and generally stronger posters in alderan and zelblade are now gone, leaving DoYouHas. Sloosh is trying to get the rest of the town players to stop listening to him, leaving him unopposed. For those who sheeped alderan, I really hope you don't take sloosh's posting as fact. Read things in context k2hd. I still think you are a townie (albeit a mislead one) which is why I bother to improve your reasoning and logic. My posting became more active. But so did zelblade's. How can you apply the "activity" logic on me but not zelblade? I didn't take over town discussion - I was one of the few who actually posted anything in this desert of a thread town. Really look at where your reads are coming from - because as I see it you are just sheeping DYH and Chocolate. On March 06 2012 22:20 k2hd wrote: He had an issue with alderan having more than one case up at a time (and clearly does not want a no lynch either) , because "we need consensus or we will be driven to no lynch again". But what did he just do on day 3? Bring up 2 extensive cases against DoYouHas and alderan at the same time. He then berates nightfury, chocolate, testsubject and DoYouHas for voting the way they did to avoid a no lynch. Sloosh could very well have avoided this situation if he'd just posted the case against his strongest scum read first (DoYouHas), and left alderan's case for later. Note that both cases are brought up when both players are conveniently unable to defend themselves until very close to the deadline. Again, hindsight and confirmation bias. I berated Alderan since all he was doing was casting suspicion on multiple people without the intent of actually finding and lynching mafia. You said it yourself - my cases were extensive. I didn't post them primarily for feedback on my read - I posted them primarily because I thought they were scum and wanted to lynch them. Reread what I highlighted in bold. I could have avoided the situation? Just think about the mentality you are sheeping off DYH. If I posted my one case and people didn't agree, don't you see a no lynch, or even worse, a thoughtless bandwagon lynch could have been the only outcomes? I did my best to offer my reads because people weren't in consensus, as the 2-2 initial vote split indicates. And really, you have to start reading for yourself man. On March 04 2012 11:46 slOosh wrote: As for now I'm voting my strongest read otherwise. ##Vote: Alderan This is all I can post right now, I'll be back later tonight to finish my thoughts. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 07 2012 09:50 DoYouHas wrote: 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. Hmm. I don't recall saying that. Let me requote myself. On March 07 2012 08:36 slOosh wrote: Seems like you like to advice people but not listen to your own. I never said anything about how zelblade's death is an indicator your alignment. I pointed out how you are so confident in prior dead townies posts but have not yet shown any consideration to zelblade's townie thoughts. A Logical Inconsistency. On March 07 2012 09:50 DoYouHas wrote: 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. Hmm. I don't recall that either. In fact, it was you who first posted and got him to sheep you on it. On February 28 2012 08:29 Alderan wrote: I almost made literally the exact same post. The Chocolate thing is coming along too easily, I would have expected at least a case made against someone else. That in combination with his mildly sufficient answers have me reconsidering my vote. Not only that, but 2/2 people I suspect are on Alderan's D3 vote list. Yea, I can manipulate and twist evidence too. Oh, and no problem on narrowing your list. It truly was "my desire to discredit you" that narrowed your list to 4. Not zelblade's death. No, that had nothing to do with it. On March 06 2012 03:44 DoYouHas wrote: That leaves the 4 mafia in this list. 1. slOosh 2. Ghost 3. zelblade 4. Testsubject 5. Phagga I grow weary and tired of your logical inconsistencies, your tireless OMGUSs and your forgetful memory. I can't believe I forgot to do this with my last post: ##Vote: DoYouHas | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 08 2012 07:16 phagga wrote: And so what now? I'm on my way to bed, it's 5 hours before deadline, and 4 people have not voted yet. A no-lynch is not an option. If I stay on Chocolate, I risk a no-lynch, if everyone else goes for sloosh and DYH. This is D3 all over again. The inactivity of the people frustrates me. I feel pressured to either vote sloosh or DYH, and I'm no fan of that. *sigh* I'm willing to vote for Chocolate this night if people still aren't convinced that DYH is mafia. Scum is scum and unless we lynch one of them we lose tonight. Doesn't really make a difference to me which one swings first. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
##Unvote ##Vote: Chocolate | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On March 08 2012 07:25 ghost_403 wrote: ##vote: sloosh If we lose, I blame the town. If we don't, whoo! I get a whole 'nother day to convince DYH not to lynch me. And ghost I can't believe you could take such a lackadaisical approach to the endgame. Voting chocolate buys us another day of discussion if you still aren't convinced that DYH is mafia. Don't just give up now. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
Hopefully I didn't overstep any lines - I played to my win con and it required some crafty mudslinging indeed. First time rolling mafia, and I gotta say its not as fun as townie, where you try piecing the puzzle together rather than stopping other people from doing it. But then again it was pretty fun to have people to talk to while playing the game (played so much IRC games while waiting for deadlines and stuff >.<) DYH I think you played really well that final day. I do agree that there isn't any point to posting full lists, and drawing lines cause people on the "other team" less likely to listen and cooperate with you, and gives information that is more helpful to mafia than it is to town. If anything, a full list should only be posted at night where you may fear death. I don't know how effective my play on my meta was this game, but one thing I'm learning is that it really should be disregarded especially in newbie games. Former impressions of players set can lead to subjective rather than objective evaluations of people. I know I did it in the last mini and saw hints of it here and there this game. Many times I wished I was playing with a fresh pool of people so I didn't feel restricted in my playstyle (or maybe that is just feeling you get playing as scum?) | ||
| ||
