|
WHATEVER JACKAL IS A BOSS AND YOU'LL LISTEN TO EVERY FUCKING WORD HE HAS TO SAY!
/buddy
Now, clearly we have candidates. I'm now tabling the issue of lynching lurkers, AND "random" lynching. We're lynching to hit scum today, so anyone who doesn't vote to that end is going to be under heavy scrutiny tomorrow. None of these "placeholder" bullshits I've started growing accustomed to seeing...none of these "I'm going to leave my vote on this lurker to hope he'll contribute and then go AFK"
None of that. We're gonna try and lynch scum today. Any questions? No? Good. So who's scum guys? I've got my eye on Risen based on his responses to/accusations of ET, and I'll be looking into his filter a bit later to see what I see. What about everyone else?
|
On April 08 2012 23:59 slOosh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2012 19:35 Toadesstern wrote:
Pretty easy. And yeah, you know I agree with VE when he said shooting/lynching lurkers is a nice thing to do. I agree that I don't like to lynch them early on because that gives so little information and it's really easy for mafia to just hop on lurker-wagons which essentially would give us 0 information. Of course that only works if we actually have vigs, so if there's no dead lurkers by the end of day 2 or day3 we might have to overthink that one.
So what is your conclusion on the matter of lurkers? Lynch them or no? Show nested quote +On April 08 2012 21:18 Toadesstern wrote:
I'd actually say Risen and WBG are the only ones being suspicious for me right now. I don't think ET is that weird.
However I liked the one post from Risen I quoted so that's given me a little townread.
Right now it really feels like what I thought about VE in storm. I had a bunch of things that made me think he's town, I had a bunch of things that made me think he's mafia and I didn't know what to make of that and he ended up being 3rd party but of course this is only day1 based on a couple hours of our game :p
To you WBG is suspicious but Kenpachi isn't? What exactly makes WBG suspicious?
1) Lynch them if we need to. I'd rather see them shot and have our lynches on people were we force people to take a stance as it's quite easy for mafia to be on a lurker-lynch and argue that that's just normal as everyibe did that as well and there's very little reasoning involved other than "the guy is a lurker". However telling people you think X is scummy, Y is scummy and Z is scummy because of *insert analysis here* and seeing all 3 flipping town is a little worrying unless you're a retarded compulsive vig like SOME PEOPLE tend to be. So that's why I'd like to have real lynches and keep the lurkers for our vig/vigs if we got some unless we don't have a legit real lynch candidate around. In that case lynching a lurker is fine as a safe option imo.
2) Funny you mentioned Kenpachi. He's the guy I'd like to shoot if I had to shoot someone other than wbg right now.
But that's not because he's suspicious but because he's Kenpachi. I totally hate that "style" and he will be a controversial topic at some point in this game imo. I doubt he's going to be helpful at all all game long and he's probably going to lurk all the time while sometimes posting a couple of oneliners that have nothing to do with the thread but may or may not benefit his own ability to judge people based on reactions.
That's how I feel about Kenpachi and long story short = he's a null for me and I doubt he's going to go highly either the one or the other way in reads so if I had to shoot it'd be a coinflip option which is bad but really a secure shot because it's not like shooting Kenpachi is going to harm the game like shooting a Vet would if that guy turns out to be a townie.
|
On April 09 2012 01:20 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2012 23:59 slOosh wrote:On April 08 2012 19:35 Toadesstern wrote:
Pretty easy. And yeah, you know I agree with VE when he said shooting/lynching lurkers is a nice thing to do. I agree that I don't like to lynch them early on because that gives so little information and it's really easy for mafia to just hop on lurker-wagons which essentially would give us 0 information. Of course that only works if we actually have vigs, so if there's no dead lurkers by the end of day 2 or day3 we might have to overthink that one.
So what is your conclusion on the matter of lurkers? Lynch them or no? On April 08 2012 21:18 Toadesstern wrote:
I'd actually say Risen and WBG are the only ones being suspicious for me right now. I don't think ET is that weird.
However I liked the one post from Risen I quoted so that's given me a little townread.
Right now it really feels like what I thought about VE in storm. I had a bunch of things that made me think he's town, I had a bunch of things that made me think he's mafia and I didn't know what to make of that and he ended up being 3rd party but of course this is only day1 based on a couple hours of our game :p
To you WBG is suspicious but Kenpachi isn't? What exactly makes WBG suspicious? 1) Lynch them if we need to. I'd rather see them shot and have our lynches on people were we force people to take a stance as it's quite easy for mafia to be on a lurker-lynch and argue that that's just normal as everyibe did that as well and there's very little reasoning involved other than "the guy is a lurker". However telling people you think X is scummy, Y is scummy and Z is scummy because of *insert analysis here* and seeing all 3 flipping town is a little worrying unless you're a retarded compulsive vig like SOME PEOPLE tend to be. So that's why I'd like to have real lynches and keep the lurkers for our vig/vigs if we got some unless we don't have a legit real lynch candidate around. In that case lynching a lurker is fine as a safe option imo. 2) Funny you mentioned Kenpachi. He's the guy I'd like to shoot if I had to shoot someone other than wbg right now. But that's not because he's suspicious but because he's Kenpachi. I totally hate that "style" and he will be a controversial topic at some point in this game imo. I doubt he's going to be helpful at all all game long and he's probably going to lurk all the time while sometimes posting a couple of oneliners that have nothing to do with the thread but may or may not benefit his own ability to judge people based on reactions. That's how I feel about Kenpachi and long story short = he's a null for me and I doubt he's going to go highly either the one or the other way in reads so if I had to shoot it'd be a coinflip option which is bad but really a secure shot because it's not like shooting Kenpachi is going to harm the game like shooting a Vet would if that guy turns out to be a townie.
EBWOP
OH and while talking about Kenpachi I actually forgot the most important part about your question: Why wbg?
He's doing bullshit right now. I know he doesn't like it when I do that on purpose to fish for reactions because there's very little you can do to actually prove what you did was on purpose to everyone else. You could be a mafia trying to do bullshit, you could be a town trying to do bullshit to get reactions and imo it's really hard to distinguish between those two.
So first of all I have no idea why he's doing bullshit and secondly I am pretty certain he hates people doing bullshit on purpose and thinks that's anti-town. So that's why I think he is suspicious right now.
The first part is something that makes him look weird and makes me want to figure out what's going on, the 2nd part (the meta one) is what makes him suspicious on top of just looking weird.
|
On April 09 2012 01:11 slOosh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2012 23:41 Tunkeg wrote:
As for a random lynch I am against a totally random lynch, but for a random lynch in the way we lynch the one who is the worst player.
Yeah I want some clarification here. It basically boils down to you supporting lynching the "worst" player. How does lynching the "worst" player help us?
Lynching the worst player or more importantly suggesting to lynch the worst players does this:
1. If lynch goes through and he flips scum. Great.
2. If lynch goes through and he flips town. Bummer, but still it was the worst player around.
3. If lynch doesn't go through we get to see who opposed the lynch and why. Who supported the lynch and why. Who said nothing and why.
4. No one bothers to discuss the proposed lynch and instead bickers about some stupid spreadsheet.
It is a random lynch in the way no one but scum and the player himself know the allignement of the player. Random lynches works best when they don't lead to lynches but only to discussions and people taking stances.
|
On April 09 2012 01:29 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 01:11 slOosh wrote:On April 08 2012 23:41 Tunkeg wrote:
As for a random lynch I am against a totally random lynch, but for a random lynch in the way we lynch the one who is the worst player.
Yeah I want some clarification here. It basically boils down to you supporting lynching the "worst" player. How does lynching the "worst" player help us? Lynching the worst player or more importantly suggesting to lynch the worst players does this: 1. If lynch goes through and he flips scum. Great. 2. If lynch goes through and he flips town. Bummer, but still it was the worst player around. 3. If lynch doesn't go through we get to see who opposed the lynch and why. Who supported the lynch and why. Who said nothing and why. 4. No one bothers to discuss the proposed lynch and instead bickers about some stupid spreadsheet. It is a random lynch in the way no one but scum and the player himself know the allignement of the player. Random lynches works best when they don't lead to lynches but only to discussions and people taking stances.
If you're town, and I'm pretty certain you're not, what rationale do you use for putting forward a lynch based upon a players W/L record? What possible benefit does that bring to the table?
I would be asking you this no matter where my name happened to be on your spreadsheet.
What does this tell us after the lynch? What info do we gain from lynching an apparent idiot?
It's very easy for scum to propose this to a town on day 1. There is absolutely no risk involved if you're wrong. It's a simple "Oh well he's an idiot" and then move on.
I have no problem with proposing a lynch for reasons that occur in the game but you've gone a bit over the top.
|
On April 09 2012 01:29 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 01:11 slOosh wrote:On April 08 2012 23:41 Tunkeg wrote:
As for a random lynch I am against a totally random lynch, but for a random lynch in the way we lynch the one who is the worst player.
Yeah I want some clarification here. It basically boils down to you supporting lynching the "worst" player. How does lynching the "worst" player help us? Lynching the worst player or more importantly suggesting to lynch the worst players does this: 1. If lynch goes through and he flips scum. Great. 2. If lynch goes through and he flips town. Bummer, but still it was the worst player around. 3. If lynch doesn't go through we get to see who opposed the lynch and why. Who supported the lynch and why. Who said nothing and why. 4. No one bothers to discuss the proposed lynch and instead bickers about some stupid spreadsheet. It is a random lynch in the way no one but scum and the player himself know the allignement of the player. Random lynches works best when they don't lead to lynches but only to discussions and people taking stances.
Alrighty I'm awake. Stop trying to push your lynch suggestion as "random". It wasn't. Having said that I can almost understand what you were trying to accomplish. Just drop it, though. It's useless discussing why you did it at this point. What you should be focusing on is how people responded to your suggestion (both pro/against)
As for my tunneling of ET, sorry about that buddy, but someone summed it up almost to perfection earlier in the thread and I'll quote them...
+ Show Spoiler +On April 09 2012 00:12 Adam4167 wrote:Risen, I don't agree with what you are saying in regards to EchelonTee. You are voting him based on semantics over whether calling someone suspicious is an accusation. I think your case is paper thin and the fact that it gathered additional votes is concerning.Fourface, posting cases riddled with sarcasm is not helpful at all. It clouds the point you are trying to make and makes reading your posts more difficult then necessary. Stop it. Show nested quote +On April 08 2012 23:41 Tunkeg wrote:And I am in. Besides a very nonsaying back and forth between ET and Risen this day have thus far been very uneventful. Not even the usual LAL discussions have been started, and no crazy gamebreaking strategies have been suggested. No real subject have been offered for discussion so I will give you my own: How do you guys feel about a no lynch on day 1? What are your thoughts on random lynches? I want to avoid a no lynch on day 1, because we want information and we want to know who vote who and why from the get go. As for a random lynch I am against a totally random lynch, but for a random lynch in the way we lynch the one who is the worst player. And objectively speaking this is jackal58. At least this is the case for games started and finished in 2012 thus far. He is 1-7 in win loss with 1 draw. In my walkhrough of the games in 2012 (Kaller game and the resistance games not included) he is dead last with Jitsu and myself following behind. + Show Spoiler +So you guys want to go random lynch on jackal's ass? Tunkeg, in this post you mention the 'back and forth' between ET and Risen yet you don't comment on either's alignment or your thoughts on their dispute. What are your thoughts on both of them? Lynching Jackal over him having a poor performance this year is ridiculous. We are not here to lynch bad players, only scum.
You are 100% correct, sir. The case was total shit, and the fact that anyone could bring themselves to vote for ET is mind boggling. It started off as a small semi-serious joke b/c in my last mafia game someone had said only mafia post smileys or something like that, and it turned out the smiley poster was mafia. Then ET overreacted and so I thought to myself, "Ya know what? I fucking hate when no one discusses anything. It completely ruined my last game of mafia, so lets get this game rolling."
Guess what fucking happened, so much discussion. Is it based on something entirely useless? Yes. Guess what else is generating discussion based upon something entirely useless? That idiotic list. But guess what we have now? A shit ton of discussion that we can look at. As the day goes on I'll post my reads in one giant, spoilered post. Last game posting all my cases (in spite of discussion being pro-town) got called out as being scummy b/c apparently only scum would shit up the thread with "useless" analysis. So now I'll just wait and post my "useless" analysis in one giant post towards the end of the day.
|
Guys you can't adopt the strategy of killing the guy with the worst ratio. You'll just be making his ratio worse making him an even bigger candidate to get lynched the next time he plays and so on... even though he's just as likely as anyone else to be 'guilty'. It's pretty ludicrous strategy. A bad player will be bad whether he's on town or mafia so there's no inherent advantage to either side in targeting 'bad players'.
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! At first you were probably like "what are we going to do?" but then you realized BH is here to save you.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/E5GUT.png)
So I'm gonna go over this hard and fast, just like you like it baby
4F starts off in what is my opinion a wholly unlikeable and anti town fashion: link
He almost immediately retracts his unbelievably bad idea, which I would give him credit for if he had any reason for other than "I don't want to get lynched, as I am scum and my wincon requires me not to get lynched" (link)
and I find his vote on S.T to be entirely unsatisfactory, much like my last girlfriend was (link)
"Why is it unsatisfactory blzinghand"
Here I show you. his reasoning for the S.T vote is a crappy quote a short, unfocused case. Was S.T a bit too wordy in his reply? Verbose in his defense? Well, then that's in S.T's court, surely. But let's take a look at S.T's filter for a moment:S.T Oh hay S.T is in fact a lurker.
So... 4F doesn't like the idea of lynching a lurker, he says "lurkers are a weak faction" and that going after them is what scum would do. Personally I think that's wrong. But even assuming that's right, isn't that exactly what 4F is doing?
"What's going on here blzinghand I don't understand"
Well, S.T is a lurker. Does he have some posts? yeah. but he's posted fuck all shit this entire game. Your post count doesn't determine your lurker status, your content count does. Assuming 4F is wrong, well, he's a moron scum trying to lynch someone who's inadequately defended himself. And assuming his thoughts on lurkers are right, then he's scum since he's trying to push a lurker lynch.
Either way...
##vote fourface
please detour in my direction, my brother.
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On April 08 2012 23:17 VisceraEyes wrote:
Attention Town! Blazinghand is now officially too quiet for my liking! If he's not in here by halfway through the day, I move that he be our very first lurker lynch!
Who's with me?!
Nobody. you hear that cricket chirping? that's the sound of a crickent because it's silent.
"why is it silent blzinghand"
it's silent because nobody wants to get on your dumb wagon with your dumb oxen and leave council bluffs, KS, to travel to Williamette River Valley because all you have is 10 grandfather clocks and a hat. Why would you pick that as your starting gear?
it's cause you have no idea what you're doing
|
On April 09 2012 01:50 sputnik.theory wrote:
Guys you can't adopt the strategy of killing the guy with the worst ratio. You'll just be making his ratio worse making him an even bigger candidate to get lynched the next time he plays and so on... even though he's just as likely as anyone else to be 'guilty'. It's pretty ludicrous strategy. A bad player will be bad whether he's on town or mafia so there's no inherent advantage to either side in targeting 'bad players'.
Take this post for example. He's clearly AGAINST your silly plan to lynch the guy with the worst W/L on your list, which should be pro-town play, right? But he's giving me scum vibes... why? Because he's posting the most useless, common sense answer possible so it looks like he's contributing.
Note to town players. Discussion is pro-town. Making common sense posts isn't generating discussion, it's blending.
|
On April 09 2012 01:37 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 01:29 Tunkeg wrote:On April 09 2012 01:11 slOosh wrote:On April 08 2012 23:41 Tunkeg wrote:
As for a random lynch I am against a totally random lynch, but for a random lynch in the way we lynch the one who is the worst player.
Yeah I want some clarification here. It basically boils down to you supporting lynching the "worst" player. How does lynching the "worst" player help us? Lynching the worst player or more importantly suggesting to lynch the worst players does this: 1. If lynch goes through and he flips scum. Great. 2. If lynch goes through and he flips town. Bummer, but still it was the worst player around. 3. If lynch doesn't go through we get to see who opposed the lynch and why. Who supported the lynch and why. Who said nothing and why. 4. No one bothers to discuss the proposed lynch and instead bickers about some stupid spreadsheet. It is a random lynch in the way no one but scum and the player himself know the allignement of the player. Random lynches works best when they don't lead to lynches but only to discussions and people taking stances. If you're town, and I'm pretty certain you're not, what rationale do you use for putting forward a lynch based upon a players W/L record? What possible benefit does that bring to the table? I would be asking you this no matter where my name happened to be on your spreadsheet. What does this tell us after the lynch? What info do we gain from lynching an apparent idiot? It's very easy for scum to propose this to a town on day 1. There is absolutely no risk involved if you're wrong. It's a simple "Oh well he's an idiot" and then move on. I have no problem with proposing a lynch for reasons that occur in the game but you've gone a bit over the top.
Ignore the spreadsheet and ignore that you were the target of my "random" lynch proposal. Do you see no benefits to discussing random lynches? And especially random lynches with named targets?
The lynch itself isn't the point of a random lynch, as it is just a game of chance if we lynch like that. It is the information we gain by discussing the random lynch that is the point. In this case I doubt we will get to much information out of it, as there really aren't no threath to the target (you), and people haven't really bothered discussing it. But if done right you can get alot of information from it.
|
On April 09 2012 01:51 Blazinghand wrote:
Well, S.T is a lurker. Does he have some posts? yeah. but he's posted fuck all shit this entire game. Your post count doesn't determine your lurker status, your content count does. Assuming 4F is wrong, well, he's a moron scum trying to lynch someone who's inadequately defended himself. And assuming his thoughts on lurkers are right, then he's scum since he's trying to push a lurker lynch.
Every other person who posts is so quick to accuse people of frivolous shit. You say that I'm a lurker because my statements were 'fuck all shit'? What sort of deep and compelling analysis are you looking for in the first few pages of a mafia thread? What's important is for everyone to get a few words in and start to develop some actual relationships to analyze over the coming days?
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On April 09 2012 01:59 sputnik.theory wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 01:51 Blazinghand wrote:
Well, S.T is a lurker. Does he have some posts? yeah. but he's posted fuck all shit this entire game. Your post count doesn't determine your lurker status, your content count does. Assuming 4F is wrong, well, he's a moron scum trying to lynch someone who's inadequately defended himself. And assuming his thoughts on lurkers are right, then he's scum since he's trying to push a lurker lynch.
Every other person who posts is so quick to accuse people of frivolous shit. You say that I'm a lurker because my statements were 'fuck all shit'? What sort of deep and compelling analysis are you looking for in the first few pages of a mafia thread? What's important is for everyone to get a few words in and start to develop some actual relationships to analyze over the coming days?
Check out my posts that is how you be useful. See this post you just made here? This one that's you pretending to be mad because you as scum got caught? That's not helping anyone. hell, it aint even helping you.
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
Man I should consider moving over to ST I didn't realize the butthurt was so strong in this one
|
Hey Blazinghand, why are you jumping on the new guy? You just want an easy way to boss your way into the game? An easy way to look helpful, when you actually are just bullying the new kid on the block?
|
|
|
On April 09 2012 02:13 Tunkeg wrote:
Hey Blazinghand, why are you jumping on the new guy? You just want an easy way to boss your way into the game? An easy way to look helpful, when you actually are just bullying the new kid on the block?
Probably b/c the new guy is acting scummy? Why are you jumping on him for pressuring someone who isn't doing a very good job? Hiding behind the noob card is so easy for scum.
|
On April 09 2012 02:22 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 02:13 Tunkeg wrote:
Hey Blazinghand, why are you jumping on the new guy? You just want an easy way to boss your way into the game? An easy way to look helpful, when you actually are just bullying the new kid on the block? Probably b/c the new guy is acting scummy? Why are you jumping on him for pressuring someone who isn't doing a very good job? Hiding behind the noob card is so easy for scum.
Because I don't find ST very scummy at this point. I find BH's pressure more scummy in fact...
|
On April 09 2012 02:26 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 02:22 Risen wrote:On April 09 2012 02:13 Tunkeg wrote:
Hey Blazinghand, why are you jumping on the new guy? You just want an easy way to boss your way into the game? An easy way to look helpful, when you actually are just bullying the new kid on the block? Probably b/c the new guy is acting scummy? Why are you jumping on him for pressuring someone who isn't doing a very good job? Hiding behind the noob card is so easy for scum. Because I don't find ST very scummy at this point. I find BH's pressure more scummy in fact...
I find it very odd that you justify BH trying to find an easy way into the game by picking on ST rather than using the fact that he wrote a case on the guy who openly said he would be acting anti-town and doesn't care about the game. BH is acting pro-town by pressuring ST why did you ignore BH's analysis on fourface when writing that post? Your intent behind that post was purely to defend ST, not questioning BH's motivations.
|
On April 09 2012 02:38 Grackaroni wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 02:26 Tunkeg wrote:On April 09 2012 02:22 Risen wrote:On April 09 2012 02:13 Tunkeg wrote:
Hey Blazinghand, why are you jumping on the new guy? You just want an easy way to boss your way into the game? An easy way to look helpful, when you actually are just bullying the new kid on the block? Probably b/c the new guy is acting scummy? Why are you jumping on him for pressuring someone who isn't doing a very good job? Hiding behind the noob card is so easy for scum. Because I don't find ST very scummy at this point. I find BH's pressure more scummy in fact... I find it very odd that you justify BH trying to find an easy way into the game by picking on ST rather than using the fact that he wrote a case on the guy who openly said he would be acting anti-town and doesn't care about the game. BH is acting pro-town by pressuring ST why did you ignore BH's analysis on fourface when writing that post? Your intent behind that post was purely to defend ST, not questioning BH's motivations.
FourFace
There it is again.. the fourface said he would be acting anti-town. Where the fuck did that come from? The motherfucking "ninja vote". FFS Nefron tell em'
Nefron
Nefron
I'm with Blazinghand. Moron FourFace should've never suggested he can agree to a lurkerlynch especially so early on Day1.. it might get the lurkers posting.
And FourFace not announcing his vote in the thread .. omg. You'd actually have to check the voting thread too by clicking on the Subscribed Threads .. not only this one. Anti-town at it's best. I mean how can we attribute the time of the ninja vote to the actual action in the thread .. we'd need some kind of mechanic to list the time and date of the vote, right?
I can totally relate to that girlfriend reference.. because I'm cool too . I was like "I am disappoint" n shit.
A lot of other players would have considered the fact that BH thinks that FourFace thinks that lynching a lurker is a bad idea and that BH thinks that FF is actually trying to push a lurker lynch contradictory. Not so .. for you see FourFace didn't put any emphasis on the whole lurker stuff at all, and he didn't even consider SB to be a lurker, he just said that to point out how scared SB seemed to be to get lynched - but what this means is that FF is a moron scum and only me and BH know why because we're not morons
And definitely 4F accepted to not commit the hideous crime of ninja voting again only because his wincon requires him not to get lynched, and not because it caused the thread to clog up with reactive criticism from irritable people like zelblade, ghost_403, Hassybaby and Grackaron, noo
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MBNQS.png)
