EPTfor not posting
Surprisingly Normal Mini Mafia XI - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
yomi
United States773 Posts
for not posting | ||
|
AcesAnoka
Belgium262 Posts
I haven't thought of it the way you just posted, Yomi. I need nreekay to explain himself though. | ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
| ||
|
WhySoMuch
132 Posts
On April 28 2012 02:14 yomi wrote: 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. Yeah, pretty much +1 to this post. I didn't care that he voted me, I figured it was just an early throwaway vote to gage a reaction Hence I really don't think yomi's vote on me was wolfy at all. Wolves don't make those type of votes, it's nreekay's vote on me that is sketch. Still waiting for him to come back and see what he has to say | ||
|
AcesAnoka
Belgium262 Posts
| ||
|
AcesAnoka
Belgium262 Posts
| ||
|
The_Zen_Man
Sweden202 Posts
WhySoMuch: I still find it strange that you were so aggresive towards me early in the game after i had only posted one post. I also find it strange that you barely mentioned Veriat who's first post was very similliar to mine. Said this before, but can you please explain you're actions here? Also, why didn't you aske yomi for further explination on his vote on you? Instead you voted on me and had some few posts where you conversed with yomi. This also seemed strange to me. Please explain. Yomi: Not 100% sure on you, but you seem to aggressive for being mafia. Maybe you should have given a better explanation than the one you gave when you voted. LazerMonkey: You seem to be very busy irl, but you could try to contribute a little. So far, i don't think you have contributed much at all. AcesAnoka: You seem suspicous to me. You're first comment was rather strange, but i know you shoulnd't judge someone too much based on what they first wrote. I think it was a good thing you put that pressure vote on yomi, after all it did give a response from him. Veriat: I find it strange that you posted a very similliar post just after mine. I do however like your post where you explain how we would gain information if nolynch. Try to contribute more. O.Golden_ne: I like your playing style. You encourage everyone to stay calm when they seem emotional and explain themselves when they seem suspicous. Pure-SC2: You have very good analytical posts, and you are one of the players that contribute the most. Keep it up! nreekay324 : Im not sure if you are lurking or just not able to post, but you seem really suspicious at the moment. Please explain yourself, and also your vote. | ||
|
yomi
United States773 Posts
this is not twilight | ||
|
WhySoMuch
132 Posts
On April 28 2012 03:05 The_Zen_Man wrote: If i have seemed inactive, i will try to make up for it now. Below i will give my opinions on a few players. WhySoMuch: I still find it strange that you were so aggresive towards me early in the game after i had only posted one post. I also find it strange that you barely mentioned Veriat who's first post was very similliar to mine. Said this before, but can you please explain you're actions here? Also, why didn't you aske yomi for further explination on his vote on you? Instead you voted on me and had some few posts where you conversed with yomi. This also seemed strange to me. Please explain. There were differences in his post that made me less suspicious of him. For example when you said "The village mislynched SIMPLY because they did not have enough information". This is just worded weirdly and extra careful. As for being aggressive, that's what I do, I don't wait til an hour left in the game to make my thoughts known. You made a post that I thought was weird, so I called you out on it. It forces conversation and gets discussion going. As for why I didn't vote or pressure yomi, because I didn't feel he needed it. I knew what he was doing, and I felt he was coming from a town's perspective, if I had felt otherwise I would have pressured him. @Yomi, again, it is second nature for me to right Villagers/Wolves, I have to consciously think town/mafia. | ||
|
nreekay324
46 Posts
Lots to go through, I’ll try to make it neat; Why I voted for whysomuch so early + Show Spoiler + It was an impulse post. When I saw that yomi voted for him, it triggered me. I played with yomi in a previous game, and I had to endure the aftermath of an overly aggressive play he made (more on this later). My reason was obviously unsubstantiated, + Show Spoiler + (i just really dislike twilight) No-Lynch Stance + Show Spoiler + I’ve alluded to before, and I’d like to state explicitly that I think no-lynch is a generally bad policy, with little exception. Other people have (whysomuch, lazermonkey) have made some points about this. It is very unlikely that by the deadline that town won’t have high-scum read targets to vote for. Sure, a mis-lynch would suck, but it’s not like we’re voting randomly. If there really aren’t clear scum choices, than we should no-lynch. This leads me to the next point, which is why I really think no-lynch is important. Generating discussion + Show Spoiler + More discusion = more info = better for town. If the town’s general consensus flirts too much with no-lynch, then it will encourage lurking. On April 27 2012 22:48 The_Zen_Man wrote: If we vote for a nolynch there will still be people, like yourself, that would oppose that and vote for a person instead. We can use that information to decide everyone standings. The time before deadline will also give us information, as we can observe how people act then. The quality / quantity of information can vary drastically with a town that has a lot of votes and cases and from a town that has some votes, a few cases, and some no-lynches. It goes beyond who voted for who, it’s who voted for who and why they did so. People have to build cases to vote for people, and cases = more discussion. “Meta-game”? (yomi) + Show Spoiler + People have mentioned meta-game elements, specifically yomi’s quick-post. Specifically, Golden + Show Spoiler + On April 27 2012 13:33 O.Golden_ne wrote: I've seen yomi's play before and i understand he likes to be aggressive, and i like his aggression.. i just hope it isn't misplaced aggression and i want him to explain to me why he has picked WhySoMuch other than for his pro-first-day-lynch attitude and his contrary views on the percentages of lynching. i think you have to pick your battles and maybe lynching people with opposing views might not be the key, opposing views lead to discussion, which leads to correct eviction. On April 27 2012 16:27 O.Golden_ne wrote: Perhaps the small shred of logic yomi has shown in his lurking argument makes him less suspicious than Nreekay? Pure SC2 + Show Spoiler + 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. Both Golden and Pure SC2 cite yomi’s previous game, in which he played blantantly aggressively and voted early off of little (no) evidence. I know this, because I was in the same game yomi was in. His play severely impacted that game, and it was still on my mind in the beginning of this game. What I find interesting however, is that both Golden and PureSC2 are making the beginnings of yomi’s town case FOR him, with the previous game serving as “meta-game evidence”. This is suspicious to me. They are beginning yomi’s defense case for him, why not let him make it? Further, if yomi decided to use this “meta-game evidence to make a case for himself eventually, I would be highly suspicious of yomi, because it could be a perfect mafia play. If other “townies” began the defense for yomi, it’d go down a lot better. However, I can’t make a claim against yomi because he really hasn’t said much. So, ##FOS: Golden, PureSC2. thezenman + Show Spoiler + Your filter consists of 1)lynch vs no lynch opinions, 2) defensive questioning, 3) a brief overview summary opinions on people. This shows me that although you been posting, you lack substance in your post. Your opinions on people are rather general, or they are merely in dull agreement with others. ##FOS @lurkers; post!!!!! get into town discussion @everyone else; keep posting!! there has been lots of discussion going on, and lots of things analyzing needs to be done. don't be afraid to keep it coming. @yomi; waiting on some concrete analysis ##FOS Golden, Pure SC2, thezenman for now, ## unvote | ||
|
nreekay324
46 Posts
| ||
|
nreekay324
46 Posts
| ||
|
Mordanis
United States893 Posts
About 2 weeks ago I had some Food Borne Illness, and I was on my computer a lot for quite a while simply because I could get to my bathroom fairly quickly. Mafia seems pretty optimal, because going to the head gives you time to think and you don't have any constrictions (e.g. its hard to play SC because you might have to pause for God knows how long). | ||
|
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
@AcesAnoka - His posts are just scummier and scummier. Something to add on the case against him are the last posts before he goes to bed. He first is very suspicious about yomi, but when both Golden and Splinter posts some good cases against him he quickly responds with: On April 28 2012 02:24 AcesAnoka wrote: ##unvote I haven't thought of it the way you just posted, Yomi. I need nreekay to explain himself though. I understand that he needs to go to bed but basically what he does is fleeing from all the allegations by saying '' this case was bad, hope u forget about it till tomorrow''. @The_Zen_Man Must say that he is acting way to defensive atm. At least if he is in fact a towine. Up untill just an hour ago all he had posted was defensive posts in response to WhySoMuch. He then makes a summary posts which just made me even more puzzled. His conclusions just seem to be way off. The one I was most suprised about was: On April 28 2012 03:05 The_Zen_Man wrote: AcesAnoka: You seem suspicous to me. You're first comment was rather strange, but i know you shoulnd't judge someone too much based on what they first wrote. I think it was a good thing you put that pressure vote on yomi, after all it did give a response from him. It's almost like you didn't read anything but the very first pages. Alot of people, me including, have been thinking that AcecAnoka's behavior was more then just strange. This is NOT only due to his first post but mostly due to the yomi-debate. And I don't understand what you mean with I think it was a good thing you put that pressure vote on yomi, after all it did give a response from him.. The only thing yomi said was what everyone was thinking: that he was just trying to start a discussion. Now this is alot WIFOM. But it IS possible that AcesAnoka were trying to go for a cheap bandwagon on yomi and when he realized that it all failed utterly he was quick to abandon the ship. His scumbro The_Zen_Man tries to to cover his teammate by giving him a relativelynice review in his summary post. Imo The_Zen_Man seems like a confused townie tho and not lynch worthy at all atm. AcecAnoka on the other hand seems quite a bit suspicious to me still. | ||
|
The_Zen_Man
Sweden202 Posts
Now, concerning your vote, i think the rest of the players would like to have a better explanation than the one you just gave. Bandwagoning on someone seems very suspicious on me, and it seems like scum-play. And as soon as people start finding you suspicious, like yomi, and votes for you, instead of explaining yourself properly you start a case against them. You seem to prefer when someone else is getting voted for no reason at all, but when you are voted for with a good reason you start a case against them. | ||
|
yomi
United States773 Posts
On April 28 2012 04:12 nreekay324 wrote: Both Golden and Pure SC2 cite yomi’s previous game, in which he played blantantly aggressively and voted early off of little (no) evidence. I know this, because I was in the same game yomi was in. His play severely impacted that game, and it was still on my mind in the beginning of this game. What I find interesting however, is that both Golden and PureSC2 are making the beginnings of yomi’s town case FOR him, with the previous game serving as “meta-game evidence”. This is suspicious to me. They are beginning yomi’s defense case for him, why not let him make it? Further, if yomi decided to use this “meta-game evidence to make a case for himself eventually, I would be highly suspicious of yomi, because it could be a perfect mafia play. If other “townies” began the defense for yomi, it’d go down a lot better. However, I can’t make a claim against yomi because he really hasn’t said much. So, ##FOS: Golden, PureSC2. um this is the worst thing ive ever read if yomi decided to use this “meta-game evidence to make a case for himself eventually, I would be highly suspicious of yomi, because it could be a perfect mafia play. are you saying my vote on whysomuch made you suspicious that I was mafia? and if not, what ARE you saying? If other “townies” began the defense for yomi, it’d go down a lot better. you mean if they didn't start it? im confused | ||
|
The_Zen_Man
Sweden202 Posts
The reason for my defensive stance is beacuse i've had to explain some suspicions on me, not really any more than that. If you read my filter, you would know that. It seems like you are trying to find suspicious behavior on me, and you are not afraid on going far in your accusations. You did manage to inflate a few comments on AcesAnoka to me being his "scumbro" .Is it because on of your scum-buddies got some heat and you are trying to direct eveyones attention elsewhere? nreekay324 for example has been getting some heat lately. Atm im not sure about you, you haven't posted enough for me to be sure of you. | ||
|
Mordanis
United States893 Posts
First off, he has one of the fewest post-counts. Secondly, He's bandwaggoning quite a bit. He goes from his post from the start saying As Pure-SC2 said, i share his opinion on the "no lynch" vote since this is a game full of newbies like myself, and there isn't all that information up in the air the first day, which we can use to base good lynches on. His next post You make a good point Golden, lynching luckers would be a good alternative. We might also want to keep an eye out for people who make contentless posts, and as you said act "scummy" and then his third post I noticed the same yomi, they are currently lurking. And back to the "lynch, no lynch" topic, yomi you make a good point is your previous 2 post. we can't just lynch for the sake of lynching, it needs to benefit the town. And just lynching a townie and not learning anything is just a waste. so personally i'd say lynch if suspicion be, and if not? i see no point in random lynching. Finally, he has his own opinion I have to disagree with WhysoMuch Lol no it wouldn't make me happy, but the information we gain from it outweighs the negative. We don't get information from No Lynch because no one dies. The only way we get information is if there is a competing wagon against it, and in that case, that information isn't useful until that said competing wagon dies. Even if nobody is lynched day1, we still gain a ton of imformation through our discussion. Even as we are discussing now, we are starting to get a picture on peoples view points, and where they stand. Sure we get more information when lynching, because we can start to analyse those who were for and those who were againts the lynch. But saying that no information is gained if we don't lynch is just false. Because we still get to anylase peoples behaviour. Unfortunately, a blanket anti-lynch platform seems very scummy to me. It gains the town nothing to wait and see who the mafia kills given how much time we have been given before the first day ends. If there were absolutely no way to guess who was scum, I'd agree that a no lynch is better than a totally random lynch. However, the first day seems a bit long so that we can have a very good discussion before our decision. + Show Spoiler [confession] + Yes, I have essentially flipped entirely from my earlier stance on lynching. I was however, under the impression that we were almost half-way to the first decision point when I first posted. I will do my best act on better information. | ||
|
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On April 28 2012 05:41 The_Zen_Man wrote: @Lazermonkey In that post a merely stated some of my opinions on some players.I posted several other similliar opinions on some other players. And concerning how i like how AcesAnoka put a pressure vote on yomi is because i liked it. We were all thinking why yomi voted, but we needed a statement from him. Also, the vote would tell us more why nreekay324 voted for whysomuch. + Show Spoiler + On April 28 2012 05:41 The_Zen_Man wrote: @Lazermonkey In that post a merely stated some of my opinions on some players.I posted several other similliar opinions on some other players. And concerning how i like how AcesAnoka put a pressure vote on yomi is because i liked it. We were all thinking why yomi voted, but we needed a statement from him. Also, the vote would tell us more why nreekay324 voted for whysomuch. And if AcesAnoka would want to go for a bandwagon on someone, why not whysomuch, who already had 2 votes on him? That seems to me like a town behavior. Also, if i was his "scumbro", wouldnt i support his voting on yomi before? Not vote with him or something, just some few posts about it. And yet i haven't done that. The reason for my defensive stance is beacuse i've had to explain some suspicions on me, not really any more than that. If you read my filter, you would know that. It seems like you are trying to find suspicious behavior on me, and you are not afraid on going far in your accusations. You did manage to inflate a few comments on AcesAnoka to me being his "scumbro" .Is it because on of your scum-buddies got some heat and you are trying to direct eveyones attention elsewhere? nreekay324 for example has been getting some heat lately. Atm im not sure about you, you haven't posted enough for me to be sure of you. That seems to me like a town behavior. Also, if i was his "scumbro", wouldnt i support his voting on yomi before? Not vote with him or something, just some few posts about it. And yet i haven't done that. The reason for my defensive stance is beacuse i've had to explain some suspicions on me, not really any more than that. If you read my filter, you would know that. It seems like you are trying to find suspicious behavior on me, and you are not afraid on going far in your accusations. You did manage to inflate a few comments on AcesAnoka to me being his "scumbro" .Is it because on of your scum-buddies got some heat and you are trying to direct eveyones attention elsewhere? nreekay324 for example has been getting some heat lately. Atm im not sure about you, you haven't posted enough for me to be sure of you. I feel you are just not reading/being stupid once again here. Alot of things in this post are plain wrong. And if AcesAnoka would want to go for a bandwagon on someone, why not whysomuch, who already had 2 votes on him? Both of the votes on AcesAnoka(or at least Yomi's, can't say too much about nreekay324 yet) were not serious. There was never a possibilty of bandwagoning here. Also, if i was his "scumbro", wouldnt i support his voting on yomi before? Not vote with him or something, just some few posts about it. And yet i haven't done that. No you wouldn't. Having two people out of a sudden sharing their opinions on a weak case would make you look scummy as hell. It's a common way to play scum, you split your opinions. So this doesn't prove your innocence. You did manage to inflate a few comments on AcesAnoka to me being his "scumbro" .Is it because on of your scum-buddies got some heat and you are trying to direct eveyones attention elsewhere? nreekay324 for example has been getting some heat lately. I even said in my post that my case on you and AcesAnoka being scumbros were a weak one. But the fact that you are still seem to think highly of Acec just makes me wonder more. Once again you post a somewhat confused post. It's like you aren't reading the posts well enough because you seem to miss alot of what is happening. You are still being overly defensive imo, which is not standard town play. And you always attack the one who are suspicious of you. First WhySoMuch, then nreekay324 and last me. Have it actually struck you that we might not be suspicious of you because we are scum but rather that we actually think your play is strange? Overall I still think your just town. I don't think your play looks like town, but it doesn't look like scum either. Going to bed now, will be much more active tommorow! | ||
|
The_Zen_Man
Sweden202 Posts
You say that the votes on whysomuch was not serious and that there wasn't a possibility of a bandwagoning, but you also say that you don't know about nreekay324 yet? That means there was a possibilty of it, as we are still unsure of nreekay324 position. In your post you say that mine was confusing, yet you post one that is contraticting and strange in response? The reason i seem defensive is because i have to explain myself whenever someone like you raises strong suspicions against me. | ||
| ||
