|
On April 27 2012 23:58 Pure-SC2 wrote:
@AcesAnoka - Yomi has a bit of a reputation from his last 2 newbie games and he tends to play the same way regardless of if he is scum or town. He's essentially trying to stir up discussion by posting "off the wall" (yomi feel free to correct me here if you'd explain it differently). Last game it got him lynched day 1 and he was town, so while it's good to pressure him like you are, bare in mind that this is essentially how he plays.
Yes, it might be his playstyle but it doesn't change the fact that he hasn't given any reason at all to vote for whysomuch, whilst I have now against him. We still have a lot of hours to go until the votes are counted and yomi has until then too give a valid reason, I don't think he'd explain himself if i DID'NT put some pressure on by putting my vote on him for the moment.
Eagerly awaiting your post,Yomi.
|
FoS stands for finger of suspicion. It's a way of telling someone you find them suspicious without voting for them.
|
Current Votecount
Yomi=2 Voted by: Jailbreaker, AcesAnoka
|
Sorry for not posting in ~24 hours, busy day at work + food poisoning = not fun. However, let me preface my message by saying that I believe that the most suspicious player here IMO is AcesAnoka.
Let me start with AcesAnoka. This is his first post:
On April 27 2012 00:31 AcesAnoka wrote:Hello everyone!  This is my first game of mafia but I already love it! The theme is amazing too, we're on a spaceship! On a more serious note, I think we've established that Day 1 should be a No-lynch, we should wait and see how the first night develops. HOWEVER, if its blatantly obvious that there IS one trying to hide something, not saying anything, things could change around. Thoughts?
Right off the bat, he takes a middle-of-the-ground position. He says that we've 'established' that day 1 should be no-lynch, then immediately counters his own point by saying "things could change around." This allows him to avoid aligning with any particular viewpoint, as seen by his response to Pure-SC2 here:
+ Show Spoiler +On April 27 2012 23:51 AcesAnoka wrote:A lot has happened when I wasn't here I see. I'll add my analysis now. first of all: Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:24 Pure-SC2 wrote:
@AcesAnoka - We need you to add to the discussion. You made a silly statement in your first post "I think we've established that Day 1 should be a No-lynch" which was by no means established other than a few people stating that as their preference in the absence of a better case.
The only other thing you've stated is not wanting to rush to voting. That is all you've contributed.
What is your read on Jailbreaker? From everyones posts so far, who are the two people you find most suspicious?
I agree that that statement was a bit silly(I could've said it was the preferred method by some including me at that time) But have you read the sentence after that? In that sentence I say that if it's blatantly obvious somoene is trying to hide something, is too agressive,... we should have a day 1 Lynch. Keep in mind also that at that point in time there wasn't many developments in this thread, which has now changed.(as did my opinion on not lynching) Also my post on not rushing to vote was because at that point WhySoMuch hadn't posted and some people were already a bit antsy Show nested quote +
Jailbreaker :
with all this nonsense talk about scheduals and lynch/no lynch, we're forgetting about the real issue here:
THERE'S MAFIA SCUM AMONG US.
I know it is day one, but does it have to be so passive? I don't want to vote for the wrong person based on three posts
------------------------------------------------------------ On to the part which is actually interesting, my analysis on what has happened the past day or so: First of all we see yomi voting on WhySoMuch with the reasoning: werewolves are gay (Read: no reason at all) He has yet to even explain WHY he voted on WhySoMuch, but when people actually vote on him (Jailbreaker) he immediately posts yet another one of his oneliners which add nothing to the discussion at all. Like WhySoMuch said nreekay's vote is a little bit odd too, he votes on WhySoMuch for the same reason as yomi(none). Taking a look at his post history he also hasn't contributed a lot, but now he ALSO votes for whysomuch for no apparent reason at all. Isn't that the same thing we've seen with Yomi? For now, until Yomi can properly explain his actions: ##Vote: yomi
In the sentence I underlined, he does two things: first, the attempt to avoid any sort of suspicion by aligning himself to the argument that seems safest, aka "there should be a lynch." His first post allows him to be sly and do this - if the conversation had steered toward no-lynch being a safe argument, he could have just as easily claimed he said there should be no lynch, and no one else has called him on it yet. Secondly, he contradicts his previous quote. " if its blatantly obvious that there IS one trying to hide something, not saying anything, things could change around." VS. " if it's blatantly obvious somoene is trying to hide something, is too agressive" Notice the wording. The first sentence, he says if someone is INACTIVE they look suspicious. In the second, he says if they're TOO active/aggressive they look suspicious. Either this is bad town play, or extremely suspicious as he is changing his wording to avoid any suspicion.
I think pointing the finger at yomi is fruitless as he hasn't said enough to get in trouble. It looks kind of fishy but if you look at his previous game you can just see his playstyle as being extremely similar to this, and he flipped town. I would post more analysis but I'm on a work break so I have to get back to it!
|
Also, finally after the second post AcesAnoka bandwagons on yomi and whysomuch in what could possibly be a distraction, as you already know that I think there isn't enough info on yomi.
|
I think the vote count is wrong? I thought it was:
Yomi 2 - JailBreaker, AcesAnoka
WhySoMuch 2 - Yomi, Nreekay
The_Zen_Man 1 - WhySoMuch
or did i miss something?
|
On April 28 2012 01:10 O.Golden_ne wrote:
I think the vote count is wrong? I thought it was:
Yomi 2 - JailBreaker, AcesAnoka
WhySoMuch 2 - Yomi, Nreekay
The_Zen_Man 1 - WhySoMuch
or did i miss something?
The votes weren't formatted correctly.
|
On April 27 2012 21:20 The_Zen_Man wrote:
Whysomych: In your 1st underline you write that i should know that we gain knowledge by lynching someone if i was a townie, which dosen't make sense to me. If i had or did not have that knowledge before would not really define wether im a townie or not, as anyone with experience in the game would know that. But your post before that makes sense now that i think about it. Who people vote for during the lynch, and how they act before is valuable information. Im very new to this game and i am sill figuring it out, so if i acted suspicous it is only because of that. Also, if i was scum i would push for a lynch rather that nolynch, as scum can easily go undetected in the early game and let us lynch a townie.
If u have further concern regarding me, please express them so that i can answer them.
It's more of a way a villager thinks, like everyone intuitively knows that we get more knowledge as we lynch someone but wolves tend to not use "deeper" logic.
I will lay off of you for now though, I still have you as a wolf though.
|
Right off the bat, he takes a middle-of-the-ground position. He says that we've 'established' that day 1 should be no-lynch, then immediately counters his own point by saying "things could change around." This allows him to avoid aligning with any particular viewpoint, as seen by his response to Pure-SC2 here:
In the sentence I underlined, he does two things: first, the attempt to avoid any sort of suspicion by aligning himself to the argument that seems safest, aka "there should be a lynch." His first post allows him to be sly and do this - if the conversation had steered toward no-lynch being a safe argument, he could have just as easily claimed he said there should be no lynch, and no one else has called him on it yet. Secondly, he contradicts his previous quote. " if its blatantly obvious that there IS one trying to hide something, not saying anything, things could change around." VS. " if it's blatantly obvious somoene is trying to hide something, is too agressive" Notice the wording. The first sentence, he says if someone is INACTIVE they look suspicious. In the second, he says if they're TOO active/aggressive they look suspicious. Either this is bad town play, or extremely suspicious as he is changing his wording to avoid any suspicion.
I think pointing the finger at yomi is fruitless as he hasn't said enough to get in trouble. It looks kind of fishy but if you look at his previous game you can just see his playstyle as being extremely similar to this, and he flipped town. I would post more analysis but I'm on a work break so I have to get back to it!
I'm tired of saying that my word use was a bit off in that sentence, I already said in previous post it'd had been better if I said it were the better option, my point that 'things could change around' still stands though.
earlier post by me:
I agree that that statement was a bit silly(I could've said it was the preferred method by some including me at that time)
Also about being suspicious, doesn't it both hold true? If you're too agressive you are suspicious, if you're too passive (not saying a word,...) you're also suspicious.
Whats suspicious about me if I say that x is bad in one post and y is bad in another? They both are bad, are they not?
I explained that my vote for yomi was to get a response out of him as to why exactly he voted for WhySoMuch, there's still a lot of time and my vote is CERTAINLY not yet decided.
|
Also even if yomi has that playstyle that still doesn't change the fact he has to reason his voting
|
On April 28 2012 01:10 O.Golden_ne wrote:
I think the vote count is wrong? I thought it was:
Yomi 2 - JailBreaker, AcesAnoka
WhySoMuch 2 - Yomi, Nreekay
The_Zen_Man 1 - WhySoMuch
or did i miss something?
AcesAnoka is correct, incorrect formatting.
|
|
|
I agree that he has no reason for his voting, but he had exactly zero reason last time he played and he flipped green, meaning that his similar playstyle so far gives us zero indication that he is mafia because there is no deviation. I think it's bad town play, but bad town play is not necessarily mafia play.
[QUOTE]On April 28 2012 01:25 AcesAnoka wrote:
[QUOTE]
Also about being suspicious, doesn't it both hold true? If you're too agressive you are suspicious, if you're too passive (not saying a word,...) you're also suspicious.
Whats suspicious about me if I say that x is bad in one post and y is bad in another? They both are bad, are they not?
I explained that my vote for yomi was to get a response out of him as to why exactly he voted for WhySoMuch, there's still a lot of time and my vote is CERTAINLY not yet decided.
[/QUOTE]
Again, you leave no breathing room for what can be classified by your ruleset as "normal" town play. What exactly is too much or too little? It's suspicious because you try too hard to cover all YOUR bases and play defensively, instead of active investigation into who could be mafia. Generic posts like the ones you make provide nothing.
You wanted reasoning out of Yomi, and he already gave it.
[QUOTE]On April 27 2012 10:33 yomi wrote:
vote## whysomuch
werewolves are gay[/QUOTE]
It's bad 'reasoning,' rather nonexistent; however look at mafia X and you can see he just randomly votes for someone to incite reaction/discussion. Not defending him, as he could be mafia but I don't think anyone is going to get much out of him in day 1. Rather I would take a look at WhySoMuch's reaction to rule him as either suspicious/not, which I haven't had enough time to go through the entire chain of posts analytically yet.
|
Ah, the formatting broke; I'm not voting for whysomuch. Was just quoting. ##Unvote
|
Hi everyone,
So i've sat back and had a thought about how things are looking and here is my current read. I'm going to post my opinions before bed now, and then cast my vote tomorrow based on any discussion that ensues in the next few hours.
Currently my top 3 suspects:
1. Nreekay324 Filter
2. AcesAnoka Filter
3. Jailbreaker Filter
Reasoning:
Nreekay has been very elusive. He has lurked, and then jumped on someone else's vote in a fashion that leads me to think he was aiming for a bandwagon. He has had ample time to rebut to any accusations and explain his position on WhySoMuch but has still yet to be heard from. Lurking and impulse voting, i would be happy to lynch him if he can't seriously change his act.
AcesAnoka opened with some confusing statements, then lurked hard. While i understand one can't be active 24/7 i still feel like everything he has posted has been fairly fluffy with not much of substance to it. My read on his vote on yomi is that of the two (arguabley) most suspicious player (atleast, most talked about so far) yomi and nreekay, he would prefer to pick yomi: perhaps because if nreekay is mafia he wants to keep him alive. I feel nreekay appears far more scummy than yomi, and there may be a slight correlation between these two characters.
JailBreaker's stance on yomi is reasoned on his assault on "lurkers". I felt this to be fairly aggressive play for mafia, thats why he is below the previous two. However the logic in his argument against yomi seems flawed, it appears he has targeted him solely for bandwagoning. His largest post to date appears that he is trying to appear helpful (a recurring theme) without doing a whole lot. For Jailbreaker to 'break' out of my 3rd place scum it wouldn't be hard, he would need to add a little more depth to his posting.
Thoughts everyone?
I'm reserving judgement on yomi at the present time, though his aggro play leads me to believe him to be town. His style is similar to Jailbreakers albeit it more active than re-active. The active nature makes him less suspicious to me then Jailbreakers. Currently i'm probably skeptical on yomi and he's probably next under JailBreaker.
@Splinter, @WhySoMuch, @PureSC2 i get town vibes from you three, don't let me down..
@Mordanis you seem town though i'm watching you very closely as you appear very guarded.
@Veriat @LazerMonkey You puzzle me. Get active or i'll start scrutinizing you alot harder and get a proper read on you.
|
Again, you leave no breathing room for what can be classified by your ruleset as "normal" town play. What exactly is too much or too little? It's suspicious because you try too hard to cover all YOUR bases and play defensively, instead of active investigation into who could be mafia. Generic posts like the ones you make provide nothing.
Have I in the past posts not made an analysis of what I've seen? As of now I'm just waiting for yomi to respond. Read all my posts please..
You wanted reasoning out of Yomi, and he already gave it.
It's bad 'reasoning,' rather nonexistent; however look at mafia X and you can see he just randomly votes for someone to incite reaction/discussion. Not defending him, as he could be mafia but I don't think anyone is going to get much out of him in day
Aye, I said in my post that that was his reasoning, but it isn't valid, and until he comes up with a valid reason to vote for Whysomuch he's suspicious to me. What's the point again in voting without a reason?
It might be Yomi's playstyle but it doesn't take away that just voting for the heck of it is a bad thing.
|
EBWOP:
@Veriat @LazerMonkey @The_Zen_Man You puzzle me. Get active or i'll start scrutinizing you alot harder and get a proper read on you.
|
On April 28 2012 01:54 O.Golden_ne wrote:
AcesAnoka opened with some confusing statements, then lurked hard. While i understand one can't be active 24/7 i still feel like everything he has posted has been fairly fluffy with not much of substance to it. My read on his vote on yomi is that of the two (arguabley) most suspicious player (atleast, most talked about so far) yomi and nreekay, he would prefer to pick yomi: perhaps because if nreekay is mafia he wants to keep him alive. I feel nreekay appears far more scummy than yomi, and there may be a slight correlation between these two characters.
'Lurking hard?'
I cant be on 24/7, I have school to attend too. While I'm home I try to post as much as possible and be as helpful as possible.(like now.)
About my vote on Yomi, he has posted a bit more and just seems more suspicious than nreekay at this point to me.
However, nreekay has not been posting a lot and he has the same reasoning in his vote as yomi (=none). He has to explain his reasoning.
I'm not trying to save nreekay by not voting on him, I'm just more interested to hear what yomi has to hear because hes most suspicious out of the two for me.
|
Hey I just have a quick break between classes. Ya my vote was just to cure the lack of posting. I posted my "reason" aka no reason just picking on someone.
##unvote
|
On April 28 2012 01:56 AcesAnoka wrote:
It might be Yomi's playstyle but it doesn't take away that just voting for the heck of it is a bad thing.
It really isn't though. No one was talking about anything before. Now they are talking about someone. It's not instant majority or anything so no one was ever in danger of being lynched. Voting is a good thing, everyone should vote early and vote often. It makes it tougher for mafia if they can't just fit in and vote really late. Mafia prefer if everyone votes late so they can fit in with other late voters and just bandwagon on to whatever case is best for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
