EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XIII - Page 11
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Unforgiven_ve
Venezuela1232 Posts
| ||
|
Anacletus
United States733 Posts
In the beginning I was just being reckless to start up the conversations. I've said it multiple times, but I'll say it again, I have no interest in hanging anyone yet as everything is just inconclusive guesses. | ||
|
Hyaach
Singapore1737 Posts
On the BKE suspicions. I actually felt that it is a valid direction. If you filter his post, he does post often but its all fluff. There is never anything constructive to the town from him. You could argue that he pressuring everyone and asking of explanation is town play but it could also be mafia trying to fish out blue roles What say you BKE. On Anacletus While i hope it is your bad play. You could be the godfather and choose to appear innocent to all investigation. Anacletus, in your opinion who do you think is scum right now? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 00:22 ShiaoPi wrote: @austinmcc: Considering your thoughts on Anacletus: There is always the possibility of bad town play instead of scummy play. But doesn't the defense of Anacletus (or more the lack of) seem weird to you? Also his lack of good contributions? I guess bad townie play is always a possibility, but for now I stand by my vote. On the accusations on BroodKingEXE: You bring up some good analysis. I guess I overlooked those aspects of his posts because I was more busy defending my posts against him than analyzing. I'll have to reread his filter thoroughly though, before doing anything. I think that Anacletus has contributed very little. And that's generous. If I were breaking down everything he's posted, a statement that he reads BioSC as mafia is the ONLY remotely pro-town thing he's posted, and he doesn't back that read up or post a case, so it has absolutely no value. His lack of a defense does seem weird to me. Weird, but not entirely scummy, for a few reasons.
So that's my reasoning. He got no help, even though a mafia lynch this early would be crushing to the scumteam. He kept giving poor responses to everything, which makes it seem like he didn't sit down and think. I'm not saying we remove the FOS. I'm just rather see what happens if we let him be for a little bit. Make it known that he has no town cred, and needs to stop, really dig into the thread, and give us some good reads and analysis (Make a real case against BioSC if you think he's scummy), which we might not even care about because he lost his cred. If he doesn't give us anything useful, he's a great candidate for tomorrow. I just want to see what he does, how he plays, when he's not getting voted or questioned every 15 minutes in thread. But in my gut, his play screams "bad" more than it screams "scum." Whereas with Broodking, his posts, his logic, and to the extent that we newbies have meta, his meta, DO scream scum to me. | ||
|
BroodKingEXE
United States829 Posts
Jailbreaker. So far he has offered nothing to the conversation at all. He pointed out lurkers, defended himself, and gave a bunch of half-ass responses along with another unsupported scum list. He's trying to point fingers with no real direction, scum behavior to me. BioSC. His posts have for the most part been defensive. Even his big post against Darkfire was like that. He starts off saying that Dark is trying to push attention toward him, but then goes on to try and justify his past actions. The conviction seems more like a diversion to save his own hide than to lynch scum. + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 13:19 BioSC wrote: Alright, here goes. First, though, the guy's name is Anacletus. I'm going to assume the misspelling was simply a Freudian slip of the tounge >.< I'm suspicious of Darkfirex5. He seems to be trying to shift focus away from Anacletus, and this is why I think that. + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 10:58 Darkfirex5 wrote: Well though i still think Anecletus seems the scummiest, but he does make a... point i guess about BioSC id need more proof though than to change my vote to him, ill keep it in mind when reading his posts. I still find this a weak bandwagon forming as i stated before, does anyone want to respond to my post before? (feeling ignored D: ) He's already done this twice in this day, pointing out small flaws and meaningless details in my posts to try and get an argument started against me. My strategy to deal with it was to stamp it out. Just because I'm putting pressure on someone, though, doesn't mean I'm not looking for more reads. There are at least 4 mafia in this game, and town needs to find them all to win. By me saying I'm watching his posts, I mean exactly that. I'm trying to stay pretty crystal in my intentions in this game. Another I'm iffy about is Mufaa. He hasn't posted much, and has given a reason about jobs and shifts taking up a lot of time. His other posts are a question on when the end time for voting is (useless fluff, a mod post covered that), and a weak pressure on Ana. What I can't tell is if that is just shoddy town play, or mafia bussing. Either way, I need more posts from him to either change or strengthen my read on him. | ||
|
BroodKingEXE
United States829 Posts
On May 12 2012 01:32 austinmcc wrote: I think that Anacletus has contributed very little. And that's generous. If I were breaking down everything he's posted, a statement that he reads BioSC as mafia is the ONLY remotely pro-town thing he's posted, and he doesn't back that read up or post a case, so it has absolutely no value. His lack of a defense does seem weird to me. Weird, but not entirely scummy, for a few reasons.
So that's my reasoning. He got no help, even though a mafia lynch this early would be crushing to the scumteam. He kept giving poor responses to everything, which makes it seem like he didn't sit down and think. I'm not saying we remove the FOS. I'm just rather see what happens if we let him be for a little bit. Make it known that he has no town cred, and needs to stop, really dig into the thread, and give us some good reads and analysis (Make a real case against BioSC if you think he's scummy), which we might not even care about because he lost his cred. If he doesn't give us anything useful, he's a great candidate for tomorrow. I just want to see what he does, how he plays, when he's not getting voted or questioned every 15 minutes in thread. But in my gut, his play screams "bad" more than it screams "scum." Whereas with Broodking, his posts, his logic, and to the extent that we newbies have meta, his meta, DO scream scum to me. You can't keep a FoS on someone and be on the fence about them being scum. You obviously think he is town, but are setting yourself up so that it looks like you had suspicions on him. Hedging would allow you to say "I didn't think he was scum" if he flipped town. This strikes me as scummy. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Don't try and discredit me. Try and discredit that case on you. Or maybe you're hoping it sits there and gets buried before the end of D1 so that you don't get lynched. | ||
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5955 Posts
On May 12 2012 02:39 austinmcc wrote: It's a finger of suspicion. I'm suspicious of him. I've given my reasons that I think he's town and my reasons that I think he's scum. Don't try and discredit me. Try and discredit that case on you. Or maybe you're hoping it sits there and gets buried before the end of D1 so that you don't get lynched. I am actually pretty interested in what you have to say as well BroodkingEXE. Mind enlightening us? austinmcc seems to have made quite a good case against you, which I am inclined to give credibility. | ||
|
Hyaach
Singapore1737 Posts
If he was just going to continue ignoring it and hope it past *SCUM* or something else but since that isnt going to happen now after austinmcc and shiaopi has made it clear that they want an answer. what do you have to say BKE? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 00:18 Nova_Terra wrote: Vote Count: Anacletus(8): Hyaach, FirmTofu, ShiaoPi, Dahdum, Darkfirex5, Anacletus, BioSC, BroodkingEXE BroodkingEXE(1): austinmcc Not Voting(4): Mufaa, Jailbreaker, Crossfire99, Unforgiven_ve Currently, Anacletus is set to be lynched. Please feel free to PM me if my vote count is incorrect, just let me know. This appears to still be the vote. We've got less than 5 hours til lynch. My vote is locked in unless I see a great defense quick. Otherwise I'm assuming (a) Scum hopes the BroodKing case doesn't get read before the deadline or (b) Scumteam taking its time in QT to work out how to play things. Town, do us a favor. Don't let (a) happen. If we mislynch because we have bad reads, fine. We just need to work on our analysis, and that's one reason we're in a newbie game. But if we mislynch because of inactivity, that's not a good town environment. Especially people like Anac. You're voting yourself. If you want to, fine, but that doesn't really speak in your favor. | ||
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5955 Posts
##unvote I would assume that most people have read austinmcc's case now. Mind sharing your opinions? Thus far we got austinmcc's, hyaach's and my thoughts on them. Come on guys, post! | ||
|
BioSC
United States636 Posts
"Well, even though my posts were scummy, and the majority of town have been calling me out on it, and I've yet to offer anything positive to town, you guys forgave Ana, why not forgive me?" For now, my vote stays as is. As we wind down to time, though, what does that mean if Brood doesn't show up till night starts? What is our plan before then? Do we all switch the bandwagon to Brood for a last minute lynch? Or is it a last minute ploy by mafia to save scum that has been playing badly? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
As to a plan, I don't think we should discuss that. I do hope that votes swap over and we lynch Brood. However, if we start discussing in the thread, "If x happens, town should do A. If y happens, town should do B," then mafia knows exactly how to play the rest of D1. Find the outcome they want, act accordingly, and let town do the work. So personally, I'm more for everyone voting their strongest read. For me, Brood is the scummiest player. I think his content and his actions have been scummy, and they don't mesh up with his play as town in VIII. I think Anac's content and actions have been either scummy or just...bad play. Just more convinced on Brood, so he gets my vote. | ||
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5955 Posts
As crappy as it was Anacletus did try to defend himself. He still is one of the bigger scumreads right now and as austinmcc argued correctly he has absolutely zero credibility right now. So as scum, who might attempt to sway town's discussion he is worthless at the moment until he steps it up and starts to give us reasons to believe him again. BroodkingExe on the other hand just disappeared, ignoring the case completely and if you examine the last two posts of his you will see the recurring things austinmcc mentioned in his case. He again shifts a bit of focus on other people who have not really been called out until now, but does not start his own case (see this:+ Show Spoiler + Okay I've looked at the filters and have come up with two other people I view as posting scummy. Jailbreaker. So far he has offered nothing to the conversation at all. He pointed out lurkers, defended himself, and gave a bunch of half-ass responses along with another unsupported scum list. He's trying to point fingers with no real direction, scum behavior to me. BioSC. His posts have for the most part been defensive. Even his big post against Darkfire was like that. He starts off saying that Dark is trying to push attention toward him, but then goes on to try and justify his past actions. The conviction seems more like a diversion to save his own hide than to lynch scum. His other post calls out austinmcc as scummy for repeating his beliefs on Anacletus (that he is a bad townie but not necessarily mafia). BroodkingEXE's post were done after austinmcc's case against him and yet he managed to ignore it completely. So either 1) He did not see/read austinmcc's post (highly unlikely) 2) He did read it and chose to ignore it as he seems safe enough with the current votecount So the only way to get him into talking seems to be to unvote one by one and making him think of his own position of less than secure. I just want to hear more from him, if we do not get him to talk and Anacletus is lynched, at least we will know Anacletus' role and from there on we have more room to expand our discussion. Either way they are both top priorities for pressure/questioning regardless of whom we lynch today. | ||
|
BioSC
United States636 Posts
My second half of the post was more of a discussion starter than a concrete plan for us to follow. As of right now, the only people on and even discussing the case this close to lynch is you, me, and ShiaoPi. If you want to get your lynch case through, the best way to do that is discussion, and by trying to convince the 4 non-voters as of yet to vote your way, but even then, I feel like the case against Anac is already too stacked against him to change. | ||
|
BioSC
United States636 Posts
| ||
|
Nova_Terra
Switzerland1190 Posts
| ||
|
Anacletus
United States733 Posts
On May 12 2012 01:13 Hyaach wrote: There is basically 8 hours left in this day. We are hard pressed against time. On the BKE suspicions. I actually felt that it is a valid direction. If you filter his post, he does post often but its all fluff. There is never anything constructive to the town from him. You could argue that he pressuring everyone and asking of explanation is town play but it could also be mafia trying to fish out blue roles What say you BKE. On Anacletus While i hope it is your bad play. You could be the godfather and choose to appear innocent to all investigation. Anacletus, in your opinion who do you think is scum right now? I actually don't agree with you guys in your suspicions of BioSC being mafia. I also think that Dahdum and Mufaa are also citizens as well. My best guess as to who is mafia would be BKE I guess, but I'm not too certain which is why I haven't really raised my voice in this instance. | ||
|
Crossfire99
United States1529 Posts
In relation to Anacletus: So far he has said he has had no information + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 09:22 Anacletus wrote: I don't have any information. So no benefits and no doubts shall be given then I assume? My personal feelings as of right now is that BioSC is mafia. He's been super passive while we've been at each others throats and has been trying to redirect attention off of himself. On May 12 2012 01:01 Anacletus wrote: Yeah, it's just bad town play. I really hope you guys don't lynch me and let the cop check me or something. In the beginning I was just being reckless to start up the conversations. I've said it multiple times, but I'll say it again, I have no interest in hanging anyone yet as everything is just inconclusive guesses. -------------------------------------- Now onto BroodKingEXE: I will start with this quote from ausitnmcc. It is his case against Brood. + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 22:38 austinmcc wrote: My thoughts on Anacletus: His play does not feel like good townie play. I brought that up earlier, we've all discussed it by now, and I think we all seem to come to the same conclusion. While I would support a lynch of Anacletus, I think we have better targets. I'll look through his responses more today, but for now I would prefer to look elsewhere, and see how Anacletus continues to play. Right now, "not good townie play" is my read, but I'm not convinced that his play is scummy and not just bad townie play. However, we've got a quarter of D1 left, and I want to throw this case out and push it a little, see what comes of it. My top scum read: BroodKingEXE. BroodKingEXE filter - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=334707&user=233869 Skip 2/3 of the first page. It's pregame. He's active, vocal, chatting a lot with everyone in the pregame. Doesn't really mean anything. First posts: + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 12:53 BroodKingEXE wrote: /confirm Lynching lurkers in the early game not a good idea. My reasoning is that people need to be able to post before we persecute them. Something to think about lurkers, Mafia will try to lurk, but their posts will have more intent behind each one. Why? Every post they make is going to push its own idea of an agenda, but the more they post the more the idea could be misinterpreted. Before we lynch a lurker let's look at the intent of the post: a Mafia agenda push or a helpful Townie post. + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 13:18 BroodKingEXE wrote: Not true, lynching an inactive is a waste. Scum wants us to not lynch them. We can call lurkers out, and they have to respond. They don't respond, we start looking at them. Lynching, because they are lurkers is stupid. + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 13:48 BroodKingEXE wrote: What are you implying here? We should wait for everyone to post before coming to conclusions? That seems scummy to me, we should be analyzing peoples posts right now. You just created a reason for you not to post. Convince your not scum. ##Vote: Firm Tofu These aren't entirely incompatible. Lynching lurkers bad, pressuring them good, let people post before we jump to conclusions. That seems townie, fine and dandy, but then he fires off the very first vote of the game on FirmTofu. Why? Because FirmTofu posted + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 08:36 FirmTofu wrote: Hi again dahdum! I hope you aren't mafia again >< I'm all for lynching a lurker, but we should definitely wait a bit for everyone to have a chance to post. Look at the bolded part of Broodking's first post. Now back to me. Now back to the bolded part of FirmTofu's post. Now back to me. Anything? That's the same exact thought process. And yet when FirmTofu vocalizes that, Broodking fires off the first vote of the game. I still don't agree with that vote at all, even if it was just to "pressure" someone, because there's absolutely no grounds for voting someone because they express a thought you just expressed slightly earlier. From then on out, it's a series of one-liner and response posts, but never really DOING anything. Last night (eastern time), BroodKing had one of the longest filters, and yet the only substantive post was him voting FirmTofu off the bat. For example: + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 03:30 BroodKingEXE wrote: You can withhold your vote but you still need to scum hunt. + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 04:01 BroodKingEXE wrote: This post makes sense, Anacletus' play has been pretty wierd. I need to hear a response from him before I vote though. This line stood out to me. BroodKing threw out of FIRST vote of the game on Tofu, before there was play to analyze and before Tofu responded to anything. Why does he need a response now to vote? After that, he starts giving responses to other people, specifically ShiaoPi's reads, but doesn't really add anything of substance. scummy + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 04:05 BroodKingEXE wrote: @Hyaach Why did you put your vote on Ancletus? You had just as much reasoning as him. That is none. On May 11 2012 04:33 BroodKingEXE wrote: WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH!!!! ShiaoPi are you defending Hyaach? A null read? He has provided zero evidence for his vote. Your whole list is terrible, it provides nothing more than a bunch "I'm leaning town, but you can never be sure reads". I smell a scumwagon. On May 11 2012 05:38 BroodKingEXE wrote: Your big post brings up a list of null reads. Its misleading due to its size when its content is a bunch of reiteration of events. Scum will make posts like this to make themselves seem useful. If you actually read your reasoning for voting for anacletus it is: he was not eager, a post lacking logic, and a bandwagon. The first two could be townie mistakes and bandwagons aren't very effective when people have strong objections to the canidate. On the other hand, you have voted with the person you first thought was scum and had dropped your suspicions based on...nothing. On May 11 2012 09:09 BroodKingEXE wrote: Just needed explanation for your vote/post. This canidate seems really rushed though, people haven't looked at his latest posts for signs of scumminess. I agree that his past posts are suspicious, but we need to look at his current posts. Too much like a wagon for me to vote for him yet. Note that at this point, ShiaoPi has just thrown out the first real list of reads we had from anyone. BroodKing posts a couple times concerning the list, but doesn't really add anything. While he gets information out of ShiaoPi, he doesn't really provide any himself. At no point in those posts does he agree with a read or disagree with a read, rather, he simply acknowledges that reads were made and ShiaoPi voted. This is also the first point we begin to move AWAY from the Anacletus discussion (which has run its course at this point), and BroodKing continues to ask for information based on ShiaoPi's vote for Anacletus. Finally, compare his filter from this game with his filter from Newbie VIII, where he was town. + Show Spoiler + There are some posts in a similar style to his posts here, but a LOT of @x and @y, what do you guys think about z. Lots of longer discussions, paragraphs, lists. SOME of that is because he was the lynch target D1 and so had to be active and defend himself. But his townie posts from VIII feel more robust and they contribute, whereas his posts so far in XIII do not. ------------------------------- Anacletus's play still feels more bad than scummy. I would like to let him live for now, and see if he starts to really contribute. Right now he has 0 town cred, so if he's mafia he can't actively muck up town discussion. If we back off the pressure, MAYBE he mounts a decent defense and provides some good reads, because...he's got to do that to get any cred back. If not? We lynch him later, or we see if we can get any information N1 from blue roles that push us forward. Compared to Anacletus though, BroodKingEXE looks actively scummy. So far he hasn't contributed anything of note except the first vote of the game, which made little sense. He's supports getting responses before voting, but then votes without a response from FirmTofu. He wants scumhunting and reasoning, but has provided none. Again, I'm not opposed to an Anacletus lynch, but I would prefer to lynch the player that seems scummiest, which is BroodKing. ##Vote BroodKingEXE ##FOS: Anacletus Dahdum, I'm especially interested in hearing your thoughts on this, as you read BroodKing to be scummy as well. I didn't really notice him until I looked through all the filters last night and realized he was my best scumread. Do you agree with my reasoning? Did you have different reasoning? I agree with some of what Austin has said because when I did my own read through of Brood’s filter, it is just a mess of garbage posts. He also hypocritically accuses Firmtofu and votes for him because Formtofu said to wait until everyone has posted before judging them evev though he said the same thing. But, I will say that his redeeming quality is that he is pretty active and is suspicios of these giant “here are my reads for every person in the game” posts. I don’t like these posts that much because as he pointed out, they are an easy way for scum to hide and seem like they are doing work, but in reality they aren’t. This means that he is less scummy in my eyes than Anacletus, but I am going to keep my eye on him in the future. ##Vote Anacletus | ||
|
BroodKingEXE
United States829 Posts
On May 11 2012 22:38 austinmcc wrote: My thoughts on Anacletus: His play does not feel like good townie play. I brought that up earlier, we've all discussed it by now, and I think we all seem to come to the same conclusion. While I would support a lynch of Anacletus, I think we have better targets. I'll look through his responses more today, but for now I would prefer to look elsewhere, and see how Anacletus continues to play. Right now, "not good townie play" is my read, but I'm not convinced that his play is scummy and not just bad townie play. However, we've got a quarter of D1 left, and I want to throw this case out and push it a little, see what comes of it. My top scum read: BroodKingEXE. BroodKingEXE filter - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=334707&user=233869 Skip 2/3 of the first page. It's pregame. He's active, vocal, chatting a lot with everyone in the pregame. Doesn't really mean anything. First posts: + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 12:53 BroodKingEXE wrote: /confirm Lynching lurkers in the early game not a good idea. My reasoning is that people need to be able to post before we persecute them. Something to think about lurkers, Mafia will try to lurk, but their posts will have more intent behind each one. Why? Every post they make is going to push its own idea of an agenda, but the more they post the more the idea could be misinterpreted. Before we lynch a lurker let's look at the intent of the post: a Mafia agenda push or a helpful Townie post. + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 13:18 BroodKingEXE wrote: Not true, lynching an inactive is a waste. Scum wants us to not lynch them. We can call lurkers out, and they have to respond. They don't respond, we start looking at them. Lynching, because they are lurkers is stupid. + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 13:48 BroodKingEXE wrote: What are you implying here? We should wait for everyone to post before coming to conclusions? That seems scummy to me, we should be analyzing peoples posts right now. You just created a reason for you not to post. Convince your not scum. ##Vote: Firm Tofu These aren't entirely incompatible. Lynching lurkers bad, pressuring them good, let people post before we jump to conclusions. That seems townie, fine and dandy, but then he fires off the very first vote of the game on FirmTofu. Why? Because FirmTofu posted + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 08:36 FirmTofu wrote: Hi again dahdum! I hope you aren't mafia again >< I'm all for lynching a lurker, but we should definitely wait a bit for everyone to have a chance to post. Look at the bolded part of Broodking's first post. Now back to me. Now back to the bolded part of FirmTofu's post. Now back to me. Anything? That's the same exact thought process. And yet when FirmTofu vocalizes that, Broodking fires off the first vote of the game. I still don't agree with that vote at all, even if it was just to "pressure" someone, because there's absolutely no grounds for voting someone because they express a thought you just expressed slightly earlier. From then on out, it's a series of one-liner and response posts, but never really DOING anything. Last night (eastern time), BroodKing had one of the longest filters, and yet the only substantive post was him voting FirmTofu off the bat. For example: + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 03:30 BroodKingEXE wrote: You can withhold your vote but you still need to scum hunt. + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 04:01 BroodKingEXE wrote: This post makes sense, Anacletus' play has been pretty wierd. I need to hear a response from him before I vote though. This line stood out to me. BroodKing threw out of FIRST vote of the game on Tofu, before there was play to analyze and before Tofu responded to anything. Why does he need a response now to vote? After that, he starts giving responses to other people, specifically ShiaoPi's reads, but doesn't really add anything of substance. scummy + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 04:05 BroodKingEXE wrote: @Hyaach Why did you put your vote on Ancletus? You had just as much reasoning as him. That is none. On May 11 2012 04:33 BroodKingEXE wrote: WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH!!!! ShiaoPi are you defending Hyaach? A null read? He has provided zero evidence for his vote. Your whole list is terrible, it provides nothing more than a bunch "I'm leaning town, but you can never be sure reads". I smell a scumwagon. On May 11 2012 05:38 BroodKingEXE wrote: Your big post brings up a list of null reads. Its misleading due to its size when its content is a bunch of reiteration of events. Scum will make posts like this to make themselves seem useful. If you actually read your reasoning for voting for anacletus it is: he was not eager, a post lacking logic, and a bandwagon. The first two could be townie mistakes and bandwagons aren't very effective when people have strong objections to the canidate. On the other hand, you have voted with the person you first thought was scum and had dropped your suspicions based on...nothing. On May 11 2012 09:09 BroodKingEXE wrote: Just needed explanation for your vote/post. This canidate seems really rushed though, people haven't looked at his latest posts for signs of scumminess. I agree that his past posts are suspicious, but we need to look at his current posts. Too much like a wagon for me to vote for him yet. Note that at this point, ShiaoPi has just thrown out the first real list of reads we had from anyone. BroodKing posts a couple times concerning the list, but doesn't really add anything. While he gets information out of ShiaoPi, he doesn't really provide any himself. At no point in those posts does he agree with a read or disagree with a read, rather, he simply acknowledges that reads were made and ShiaoPi voted. This is also the first point we begin to move AWAY from the Anacletus discussion (which has run its course at this point), and BroodKing continues to ask for information based on ShiaoPi's vote for Anacletus. Finally, compare his filter from this game with his filter from Newbie VIII, where he was town. + Show Spoiler + There are some posts in a similar style to his posts here, but a LOT of @x and @y, what do you guys think about z. Lots of longer discussions, paragraphs, lists. SOME of that is because he was the lynch target D1 and so had to be active and defend himself. But his townie posts from VIII feel more robust and they contribute, whereas his posts so far in XIII do not. ------------------------------- + Show Spoiler [analectus] + Anacletus's play still feels more bad than scummy. I would like to let him live for now, and see if he starts to really contribute. Right now he has 0 town cred, so if he's mafia he can't actively muck up town discussion. If we back off the pressure, MAYBE he mounts a decent defense and provides some good reads, because...he's got to do that to get any cred back. If not? We lynch him later, or we see if we can get any information N1 from blue roles that push us forward. Compared to Anacletus though, BroodKingEXE looks actively scummy. So far he hasn't contributed anything of note except the first vote of the game, which made little sense. He's supports getting responses before voting, but then votes without a response from FirmTofu. He wants scumhunting and reasoning, but has provided none. Again, I'm not opposed to an Anacletus lynch, but I would prefer to lynch the player that seems scummiest, which is BroodKing. ##Vote BroodKingEXE ##FOS: Anacletus Dahdum, I'm especially interested in hearing your thoughts on this, as you read BroodKing to be scummy as well. I didn't really notice him until I looked through all the filters last night and realized he was my best scumread. Do you agree with my reasoning? Did you have different reasoning? The reason I have not addressed it is because it doesn't make me look scummy. I voted for Firm Tofu, because he implied that we should wait for everyone to get a post up before discussing. At least this is how I read into it. By lynching lurkers early, I mean we shouldn't lynch for being lurkers early. I'm not for lynching lurkers early because at least one person is going to point out a scum, and that scum will have to defend himself or other Mafia. If we can find that guy we can draw out the rest of the scum. Also, lynching scum lurkers don't provide any information as to the other scum members. Too many times I have seen lurker bandwagons based only on their lurker. I have been drawing information according to you, and that is my plan to call out others and form opinions on them so we can lynch scum. | ||
| ||
