EPTOk therapist, you didnt answer the first part of my question from the post before, " If you didnt prefer one lynch over the other, why would you flop ( in a suspicious manner between two bandwagons) To gossemerr? Then you say you thought it was the right thing to do to flop off of lyter to gossemerr. why? The case was pretty much based on one point that didnt even really need to be answered by gossemerr, and was filled with a bunch of useless fluff...
Newbie Mini Mafia VII - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
Ok therapist, you didnt answer the first part of my question from the post before, " If you didnt prefer one lynch over the other, why would you flop ( in a suspicious manner between two bandwagons) To gossemerr? Then you say you thought it was the right thing to do to flop off of lyter to gossemerr. why? The case was pretty much based on one point that didnt even really need to be answered by gossemerr, and was filled with a bunch of useless fluff... | ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
| ||
|
Bocki
Germany98 Posts
I wasnt there yesterday in the final hours so I didnt see lyters defense. But I dont think that I would have choosen someone else anyway. The problem is: We chose lyter because he was so quiet, so he wouldnt bring much to the table. After he defended, you chose gossemeer because he started the bandwagon. Thats both pretty random, but that is normal for day 1. This is not a defense for gossemeer, I dont think anyone can really make a decision right now about who is scum and who is not. But since we are all relying on very little right now: I support gossemeer in his diagnosis of BlueyD. He made some good statements. Lets see what BlueyD says to that. | ||
imallinson
United Kingdom3482 Posts
| ||
|
BlueyD
Canada437 Posts
---------- Gossemerr, I'm being attacked for making jokes now, really? I'll tell you, there's two reasons I'm making jokes. First... it's fun! Second... I wanted to see who jumped on them to try to make a case look better than it is. Grats, you did. ---------- Lyter's reason: - OMG Goss says he doesn't want to lynch lurkers and then puts a vote on me for lurking! My reasons: - Goss says he's meta-switching and his reason makes no sense to me - Goss then seems to revert to old meta despite saying he'd change Are they the same? Lyter's reason and my 2nd reason are similar, I'll grant, and I'm ready to accept your defense against it: you were just pressuring. Do tell us you're ready to switch your vote away if he posts something of quality next time you pressure-vote, however, not just "Gotta start somewhere." Not switching afterwards is entirely justifiable as well given the situation: gotta save your own skin. The first still looks to me like something scum would do, and that's the bigger one of the two for me: You suddenly decided lynching a lurker is bad, when one of the big 2 lurkers was scum last game. Explain. You haven't even come close from doing so, instead choosing to attack me on jokes. ---------- Therapist is another suspicion for reasons already mentioned by others, but I'll add my weight in asking him why he switched if he thought both votes had equal value. I'll add that he was lurker #2 on my list before the vote, so he really needs to pick up his play. ---------- imallinson, let's be honest here: you can't play neutrality in this situation. There were two likely lynch candidates, and they were tied. You're the tiebreaker! You owe it to the town to examine both cases and pick who dies, because one of them will die anyway, and your pick won't. Instead, you went "nope! not getting into this". This is an "avoid blame" move, not a "find the best lynch" move. I can understand the initial switch away from Lyter, who suddenly had a better post than a lot of people in the game. I can't really understand not switching back to either him or Goss once you knew that one of them would die. | ||
|
imallinson
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On April 06 2012 00:14 BlueyD wrote: imallinson, let's be honest here: you can't play neutrality in this situation. There were two likely lynch candidates, and they were tied. You're the tiebreaker! You owe it to the town to examine both cases and pick who dies, because one of them will die anyway, and your pick won't. Instead, you went "nope! not getting into this". This is an "avoid blame" move, not a "find the best lynch" move. I can understand the initial switch away from Lyter, who suddenly had a better post than a lot of people in the game. I can't really understand not switching back to either him or Goss once you knew that one of them would die. Well by me not switching to Goss I effectively chose Lyter. However, I still stand by the fact neither of them had good reasons to be lynched. | ||
|
LazinCajun
United States294 Posts
| ||
|
Therapist.
United States207 Posts
DId you guys really jump on the Lyter bandwagon intending to go all the way and lynch him no matter what? I don't see what the advantage of doing that could possibly be. There's a difference between pressure moves and kill moves. | ||
|
era
United States268 Posts
| ||
|
era
United States268 Posts
On April 06 2012 02:24 Therapist. wrote: As I saw it, the main reason we were voting for Lyter to begin with was to apply pressure and get him to post. It was successful and he did post and he defended himself, so there was really no reason to continue voting for him since he really didn't say anything scummy at all. Therefore, both votes did not really have EQUAL value anymore. I would have liked for Gossemerr to defend himself at that point and get the conversation going, but pretty much everyone either got set on their original Lyter vote for whatever reason or just didn't show up/discuss at all before the deadline. It was an unfortunately inactive time which cost us a lack of additional information in my opinion. DId you guys really jump on the Lyter bandwagon intending to go all the way and lynch him no matter what? I don't see what the advantage of doing that could possibly be. There's a difference between pressure moves and kill moves. I went on the Lyter bandwagon just to pressure, when Lyter defended himself I switched my vote to gross, Gross never defended himself and since there was never really a good case for Lyter I felt like everyone should have switched to Gross. Why lynch lyter vs gross if lyter actually defended himself? | ||
|
Gossemerr
United States195 Posts
On April 06 2012 00:14 BlueyD wrote: 1.Gossemerr, I'm being attacked for making jokes now, really? I'll tell you, there's two reasons I'm making jokes. First... it's fun! Second... I wanted to see who jumped on them to try to make a case look better than it is. Grats, you did. ---------- Lyter's reason: - OMG Goss says he doesn't want to lynch lurkers and then puts a vote on me for lurking! My reasons: - Goss says he's meta-switching and his reason makes no sense to me - Goss then seems to revert to old meta despite saying he'd change Are they the same? Lyter's reason and my 2nd reason are similar, I'll grant, and I'm ready to accept your defense against it: you were just pressuring. 2.Do tell us you're ready to switch your vote away if he posts something of quality next time you pressure-vote, however, not just "Gotta start somewhere." Not switching afterwards is entirely justifiable as well given the situation: gotta save your own skin. The first still looks to me like something scum would do, and that's the bigger one of the two for me: You suddenly decided lynching a lurker is bad, when one of the big 2 lurkers was scum last game. Explain. You haven't even come close from doing so, instead choosing to attack me on jokes. 3. 1. Way to continue being an ass on a forum. The second line is a convenient excuse for making jokes. 2. Why would I say this? If I did, then he would have no reason to really post anything of quality without being worried about being lynched. 3. Yes I did explain, please read the following. On April 03 2012 09:40 Gossemerr wrote: Was not expecting this to start so soon... Anyway, before I was for lynching lurkers D1, but I think my mind has changed. Lurkers are not really a problem D1 considering they have been town usually in my experience. I would like to make an educated lynch on someone who is leaning scum this time around, or a no lynch if nobody fits the bill. Regarding the stuff on BlueyD: doesn't seem very scummy to. First was an obvious joke, next few are just explaining things after being called out. Bold: Ya one last game was scum, but the other 5 I have played with have not been. On April 05 2012 11:07 Gossemerr wrote: Okidok. I will take the blame for that wagon. Even though I didn't even make a case so there shouldn't have been one in the first place. I voted to pressure him to talk. I WAS planning on retracting my vote if he said something of worth. Life stuff got in the way and couldn't post until earlier. I would have retracted my vote, but if I did -> I would die and it would be a for sure mis-lynch. And yeah my mind has changed since EVERY SINGLE time I have voted to lynch a hardcore lurker D1, they have been town. How the hell didn't I explain my stance in that quote BlueyD? I never said I wouldn't pressure peeps. Moving on, I'm going to post an analysis tonight after food, ect. Read the bold again. I would like to point out that I did not "attack you". Just pointed them out. Its an entirely different meta this game, when you didn't joke around last game -> which you completely ignored from my analysis in your "defense." Actually I don't think you even defend yourself at all; just asked me to repeat myself AGAIN. | ||
|
era
United States268 Posts
2. Why would I say this? If I did, then he would have no reason to really post anything of quality without being worried about being lynched. How would you saying that you will change your vote if lyter post something of quality make him not post anything of quality? I don't understand please explain yourself. | ||
|
BlueyD
Canada437 Posts
I would imagine last game is what makes the difference in your views on lynching lurkers, hence why I'm not looking at what you've played before that. If the defining events had happened before that, then your stance would also have changed before that, and you wouldn't be saying "I've changed my mind!" this game. If at least we had lynched a 'hardcore lurker' last game and he had turned out to be townie, then I would have understood you're changing due to an accumulation of events, with last game at the turning point. But the guy we lynched wasn't a 'hardcore lurker', to use your term. He posted a lot! I would say our 2 D1 lynch candidates (both townies) were on the chopping block due to terrible play (useless lists, spammy 2-liners, bad logic, strange voting pattern in one case, etc), not really due to lurking. They had legit cases on their butts day 1, unlike lurkers that just get lynched because "well, he's not posting much at all". Meanwhile, one of the 2 hardcore lurkers that game turned out to be scum after all. So that's why I keep 'repeating': I'm not entirely satisfied with 2 parts of your explanation. 1. The part where you consider games other than the last, which couldn't possibly be the catalyst for your switch now. 2. The part where you describe last game's day 1 as a lurker lynch when it wasn't. Nova might call this a 'tiny part of your metagame' but it still seems strange to me. ---------- The important part isn't the jokes, it's the analysis. I'm more at ease this game so I let myself joke around a little at the start/end of posts, but otherwise I would imagine the core of my posts - what you're supposed to be looking at most and taking seriously - looks about the same, and I'm still scumhunting actively. ---------- A reminder to others that Gossemerr is not my only suspicion, and the town will quickly scope in on you if you're trying to hide or posting only fluff. Goss has an advantage over all of you guys: He's active. I'll try to take a look at our less active players tonight. I'm out for now, back later. | ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
On April 06 2012 00:14 BlueyD wrote: Well, Nova, I'll also acknowledge that my meta has changed: I now know how to lynch on meta. Note that this is a justified change (unlike Goss's apparent switch), as I would have hit a scum last game (you) if I had done it and one of the veterans commenting after the game pointed out this should have been done... and that's a big part of why I'm now trying it this time. ---------- Gossemerr, I'm being attacked for making jokes now, really? I'll tell you, there's two reasons I'm making jokes. First... it's fun! Second... I wanted to see who jumped on them to try to make a case look better than it is. Grats, you did. ---------- Lyter's reason: - OMG Goss says he doesn't want to lynch lurkers and then puts a vote on me for lurking! My reasons: - Goss says he's meta-switching and his reason makes no sense to me - Goss then seems to revert to old meta despite saying he'd change Are they the same? Lyter's reason and my 2nd reason are similar, I'll grant, and I'm ready to accept your defense against it: you were just pressuring. Do tell us you're ready to switch your vote away if he posts something of quality next time you pressure-vote, however, not just "Gotta start somewhere." Not switching afterwards is entirely justifiable as well given the situation: gotta save your own skin. The first still looks to me like something scum would do, and that's the bigger one of the two for me: You suddenly decided lynching a lurker is bad, when one of the big 2 lurkers was scum last game. Explain. You haven't even come close from doing so, instead choosing to attack me on jokes. ---------- Therapist is another suspicion for reasons already mentioned by others, but I'll add my weight in asking him why he switched if he thought both votes had equal value. I'll add that he was lurker #2 on my list before the vote, so he really needs to pick up his play. ---------- imallinson, let's be honest here: you can't play neutrality in this situation. There were two likely lynch candidates, and they were tied. You're the tiebreaker! You owe it to the town to examine both cases and pick who dies, because one of them will die anyway, and your pick won't. Instead, you went "nope! not getting into this". This is an "avoid blame" move, not a "find the best lynch" move. I can understand the initial switch away from Lyter, who suddenly had a better post than a lot of people in the game. I can't really understand not switching back to either him or Goss once you knew that one of them would die. In response to the part to me, i just want to note that i find gossemerrs switch to be justified as well, i'm not sure if you read the scum qt last game but we really wanted a lurker lynch. simply cause its a free town death and you can push it well. That can easily justify that change in meta. | ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
| ||
|
Therapist.
United States207 Posts
| ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
On April 06 2012 02:24 Therapist. wrote: As I saw it, the main reason we were voting for Lyter to begin with was to apply pressure and get him to post. It was successful and he did post and he defended himself, so there was really no reason to continue voting for him since he really didn't say anything scummy at all. Therefore, both votes did not really have EQUAL value anymore. I would have liked for Gossemerr to defend himself at that point and get the conversation going, but pretty much everyone either got set on their original Lyter vote for whatever reason or just didn't show up/discuss at all before the deadline. It was an unfortunately inactive time which cost us a lack of additional information in my opinion. DId you guys really jump on the Lyter bandwagon intending to go all the way and lynch him no matter what? I don't see what the advantage of doing that could possibly be. There's a difference between pressure moves and kill moves. Okay, so now you're saying that the votes didnt have equal value, which is a contradiction. Also you joined that bandwagon and it seems like you, along with the other gossemerr bandwagoners, kinda didnt read through his filter because i think it was mostly self explanatory. the case was NOT GOOD, not a good reason to flip. at least the points presented now by blueyD might make sense, but those, not so much. Gossemerr had posted much more content than Lyter, whose only content was a faulty case to save his ass. Of course Lyter didnt say anything scummy, he didnt say ANYTHING! Also, as it is plurality lynch, I dont see why you would think we were just voting to get him to talk, as we have to lynch someone and he hadnt posted anything notable, and still hadnt when he died. | ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
| ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
Like me last game, as mafia, my meta was really bad and i was about to get lynched and then i changed it and acted helpful. had the people lynched me, the game could have been way 1 sided town. | ||
|
era
United States268 Posts
BlueyD starts off with linking his filter from last game where he is a townie, Why is he so quick to defend himself, what is he so worried about? If he is a townie he should not be worried about defending himself right from the start his actions will reveal that he is a townie, he should be more focused on finding scum but instead he quickly takes charge to proclaim his innocence. After making a joke in his first post he claims that he is "playing around before the game really picks up and I have to be more serious." If he is just playing around before the game picks up, why does he feel the need to defend himself so early and proclaim his innocence? Perhaps it is because he is scum. BlueyD is super focused on the meta, he explains meta for me in his next post when I ask about the relevance of the filter. On April 03 2012 05:33 BlueyD wrote: Here's the idea: It's sometimes possible to get hints on someone's role (green, red, blue) based on comparisons between the player's behavior in the current game and the player's behavior in previous games he has played. So he wants us to focus on the meta and links us his previous game where he is a townie, convenient isn't it? If we focus on the meta and his meta is almost the same as last game than obviously he is innocent. He also make this joke On April 03 2012 03:52 BlueyD wrote: By the way, my name is BlueyD, and I've been a mafiaholic for... How many years already? Nahh, this is my second game ever. Whats the point of this joke? I think hes trying to downplay his experience by saying that its only his second game, surely he cant have such an elaborate rogue if its only his second game. He later explains the reason for his jokes. On April 06 2012 00:14 BlueyD wrote: I'll tell you, there's two reasons I'm making jokes. First... it's fun! Second... I wanted to see who jumped on them to try to make a case look better than it is. Interesting that someone so focused on having fun and not being serious is so quick to defend himself at the start of the game and even giving us a filter from last game, what a nice guy. Another reason I think that he makes all these jokes is to seem innocent, Someone whos scum would never joke about being scum, right? You can especially see this in On April 04 2012 23:00 BlueyD wrote: Give us something to work with, Lyter, you can still save your own life! ##Vote: Lyter Cmon hes being so obviously overdramatic trying to make you think like he actually cares weather lyter gets lynched or not, he doesnt because he is scum. On April 04 2012 04:44 BlueyD wrote: This is why people threaten to lynch on lurking at the start of a game, even when they'd rather lynch on info: this is how we get information to work with in the first place. Another way is to threaten to lynch on meta, but good luck doing that in a newbie game. So BlueyD wants us to focus on meta but then he says that its hard to do that in a newbie game? Is he just trying to waste our time? After this he attacks gross pretty aggressively based on his meta change. He seems to contradict himself a bit here because he wants to lynch people based on a meta change but than says its really hard to do in a newbie game. Whats the point of trying to lynch someone based on meta than other than to waste time and spread misinformation? Lastly I want to talk about On April 06 2012 04:54 BlueyD wrote: A reminder to others that Gossemerr is not my only suspicion, and the town will quickly scope in on you if you're trying to hide or posting only fluff. Goss has an advantage over all of you guys: He's active. I'll try to take a look at our less active players tonight. After he defends himself from gross he uses scare tactics to try to scare people into posting stuff. Maybe because grossemere is not a good target anymore since he defended his meta change. He know needs someone else to accuse in order to get the suspicion off himself. Overall BlueyD seems pretty scummy at the moment. ##FoS: BlueyD | ||
| ||
