The Spirited Defense Of One Mr. Wiggles, Mayor of Liquidia
On June 11 2012 08:48 Toadesstern wrote:
Here's why Wiggles is mafia and Kenpachi (proably) is not:
Mafia gets to choose who gets what role:
Do you think mafia would give the GF role to some random noob? No they'd give it to Wiggles / Kenpachi. Now keep that in mind. They know Wiggles is going to get GF. Perfect scenario for him to run for mayor as mafia. He should have been shot loooong ago if he's really town but whatever, maybe mafia just didn't shoot him because people thought he might be town. Anyways if I were mafia I'd 100% make my vet in the team run for mayor as GF. If he's not shot people will DT him and see he's green and therefore okay. Perfect scenario for mafia.
This doesn't do anything to point out that I'm scum. I'm town, so that's why I show up green to checks, if you believe I'm a GF, I can't argue against it except on behavioural and logical grounds. The thing is, what you think of me colors the check. If I turn up green, I'm a GF, if I turn up red, you'd just say I was scum (even though it means I'm framed).
Also the thing about the check is that it relies on the supposition that scum have a GF in the first place. There's absolutely no assurance of that. From what Grey has said, it seems like scum got a list of roles and got to distribute them themselves. So, the entirety of my check being wrong is based on the chance scum have a GF. Personally, I find it a lot more likely that scum got a role-cop, to counter the large amount of blues in the game, and it also helps explain how scum managed to snipe both BH and supersoft on Night 2. I find it pretty unlikely that that happened purely by chance, so it suggests to me that scum have a role cop.
Also, mafia haven't shot me because I've been under suspicion since Night 1, been relatively inactive, and because I'm a prime mislynch target as we move towards the end of the game. If I'm scum, town automatically loses in a late-game scenario where me and any hypothetical team-mates can just outvote the town and cause a no-lynch. Scum know this, and town know it, so everyone's going to be really skittish as we go to the end. The thing is though, in a lot of cases, we lose if we mislynch. So, scum aren't going to shoot me now, unless I somehow manage to convince everyone in the game I'm town beyond a shadow of a doubt. The problem is that probably won't happen, or scum will just keep trying to call me scum (See: Hyaach, Papapanda, Kenpachi), to try to get you to mislynch me so that they'll win. They're hoping town get so scared they'll just lynch me on the chance I could be scum, and then we lose.
Wiggles does nothing:Check Wiggles filter and point me to something that gave you the feeling Wiggles is actually helping town. I can't find a single moment like that with the exception of the Maju vote but we'll take about that later. Yeah Kenpachi is the same but Kenpachi is always useless, no matter of alignment. Wiggles usually ends up being helpful as town and he's just not this game. What happened d1:We basicly had 2 options for a d1 lynch imo: Zealos and Kita. Zealos would have been the cowards way that would have ended up being right and Kita would have been the balls-of-steel way that would have ended up with town loosing a vet and a medic but noone knew about the medic at that point in time. What did Wiggles do? He basicly policy lynched a noob. Noone had a read on Sinenesis that was anything more that "that guy's a noob". Nothing, and that lynch was horribad. The most useless lynch I've ever seen. True-random-chance to hit mafia combined with 0 information town can get. I would consider lynching Kita d1 ( with the information that he's a medic!) a better lynch than this guy. Lynching Sinensis was the best move you can make from a mafia point of view. You leave town shattered in pieces asking each other "gawd, what a noob, what happened?" without giving them ANY information and at the same time it's literally the SAFEST lynch ever if you are scared. Why am I talking about a safe lynch? Picture Wiggles lynching Kita. What would have happened? People would run wild and accuse Wiggles for mislynching a vet on d1. So there's a nother reason why Sinensis was the perfect mafia lynch.Now you could be here standing: Well Toad that's all nifty and nice but that could just be really bad luck. I'd tell you something along the lines of Yeah, that's really convenient, isn't it and argue along with my next couple of posts why that's not an option. But if you're reading this I'm probably dead so I have to get everything in here 
This is a flat out lie. The only push for Zealos was made by about 4 people close to the deadline, and any support for Kitaman was scattered at best. You keep overstating the sentiment of people wanting to kill them, because you were the person pushing Kita, and you were pretty buddied with the people pushing zealos (Forumite and supersoft). Go back and read the thread though, that wasn't the general feeling. I clearly stated I would lynch Sinensis, and people supported it both in thread, and with their votes for me. If no one supported a sinensis lynch and they all wanted a zealos lynch they would have voted for forumite. You're confusing what the best lynch for the day was with who you wanted to lynch.
Also, I was already running for mayor. I had purposefully attracted attention to myself by running and then winning. As scum, why wouldn't I take the chance to kill off someone who could turn out to be a very strong town player before they had the chance to do anything? I would just have to weasel my way out of the lynch the next day. As town, I didn't want to just blow up a town vet because one person felt like it, or kill zealos with little discussion and no consensus when I'd already made my decision and stated it. Those would have both been rash and bad decisions.
Check the vote patterns and Wiggles actions:Especially the one were Manason got lynched. You remember me that night? I tried to get people off Mana and vote Maju instead because everyone who was considered to be mafia in my spreadsheet was voting Manason. Wiggles did nothing until something like 3 hours prior to the deadline. There's two important points here: 1) He started doing so REALLY LATE. We had something like 9 votes on mana and we needed 8. Don't know if it's really those numbers but it wa barely a majority. Now take that into account and consider Wiggles pushing Maju at that point of time. He could have EASILY helped pushing Maju early but he choose not to. Why? Because we had the slightest majority ever and he knew it would make him look good while knowing townies are probably to scared to get off Manason due to the fear of a No-Lynch with so little time left and couple of europeans probably already asleep. 2) Marv and ET both said they wanted to lynch Mana instead of Maju. That means Wiggles knew that we're already 2 townies short and even if townies would not be scared of the soon to be deadline it would not work out anyways because both Marv and ET both said they don't want to get off Mana at all. Example: Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 02:36 EchelonTee wrote:
what in the balls is happening? toad you want to switch lynch off manason? and well, Marv was the dude who did the case so obviously he's convinced that Manason is the better lynch as well. So really, Wiggles voting Maju instead of Mana is not alignment indicating AT ALL. If he take the "knowledge" into account that he can just tell his mafia buddies to lurk until deadline and not get back in here AND both ET and Marv not willing to vote Maju that's not a tell at all. From that point of view it is the easiest way to get towncred because he knew all along a switch is not going to happen. Now if you take the really bad timing of his posts as well that now looks like a nultell combined with a mafia agenda because clearly it was AGAIN the best move possible for a mafia. Remember what I said about the lynch earlier? Yeah another point that seems to be really bad luck for wiggles, or just plain and simple mafia agenda
Again, this is not factually correct. I didn't wait until the deadline to try to do something about the lynch, that's just when I got a chance to post that day. Yes, it was close to the deadline, and that made it less likely to work. However, if you look at the voting thread and the main thread at that time, there were definitely enough people around to change the vote.
+ Show Spoiler [Votes] +On June 07 2012 05:12 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:
##Vote: MajuGarzett On June 07 2012 07:30 kitaman27 wrote:
##Vote Manason On June 07 2012 07:20 austinmcc wrote:
##Unvote
##Vote: Manason On June 07 2012 07:10 Probulous wrote:
##Vote Manason
From phone
These were four people who all voted after I did. You also said you wanted to kill Maju, manason had his vote on him, and I voted him as well. There were also other people around who were posting, but didn't make votes as well. It took 8 to lynch that day, only counting our three votes and the people who voted in the voting thread, we would have had exactly 8 votes. So no, the maju lynch wasn't impossible to make happen, people just idiotically lynched manason by mistaking bad play for scummy play. The case on him was thin and basically came down to he was posting so badly he had to be scum. However, there's no way scum, especially in their first game, would say any of the things he was. The lynch was stupid, because it was just piling on to an easy target whereas maju was actually a player who had a scummy agenda and posting behaviour. Do you really think that no one in the entire game could possibly think manason was town unless they were scum and had extra knowledge? He was a bad lynch because he was an easy lynch, and his posting oozed that he was inexperienced and had no clue what he was doing.
I pointed that all out, but people were either to stubborn or deaf to listen. However, to say that the lynch couldn't have happened is a lie. There were more than enough people to get him lynched, but no one wanted to change their vote or vote with me.
Also, it wasn't a mafia agenda because I didn't try to take cred for it. I didn't make a post yelling at the whole town and calling them bad, or that I was the greatest because I was the only one who defended the townie, I did nothing after he was lynched but help kill Maju the next day. If I were scum, why wouldn't I try to capitalize that I just was the only person to defend the mislynch? In fact, I haven't disowned any of the things I've done in this game, and I haven't tried to take extra credit for any of the things I've done either. That's because I don't care about cred. People can judge me based on what I do, not on how much I can hype myself up for what I did right, or avoid responsibility for what I did wrong.
Keeping Wiggles accountableThis is just a bonus for the lulz. Remember his mayoral campaing? I said that shit is on the surface the most good looking stuff I've ever seen while not saying A THING, just like ET's campaing but ET's not Wiggles. Wiggles should know better than that. And yeah that's why both gave me a bad feeling d1. Some highlights: Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 18:22 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
So, I'm going to start off by saying that I'm running for Leader/Vice-Leader. I'd prefer if I can hit the vice-leader spot out of the two, and I'll explain why further on. Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 18:22 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I'm not going to go too deep into my past performance since I've always felt it's a waste of time and doesn't really say anything This is what I'm talking about when saying stuff that looks good but is literally nothing. This phrase looks incredible nice and is an attempt to get peoples trust. It's basicly: "see I'm not even going to try and influence you guys by posting my recent results!" which is incredible manipulative. If he's town he doesn't need to post like that. He could have just left it out, because again, the fact that he's not telling us his recent results has no purpose other than telling us that. Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 18:22 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
It doesn't matter what you've done in past games, it matters what you're doing in this game. But, for those who really want it, I'm a decent enough scum-hunter, I'm town, and I hope I'll be able to demonstrate those to you and get elected. We should take him accountable on this one. Not for the sake of taking someone accountable because that can ruin games in lylo / mylo but he has NOT proven a thing in this game. He did nothing. Furthemore he just told us he won't talk about recent games but goes on telling us how good he is. That's not a bad sign. I did the same telling you guys I'm awesome in rainbow colors. But I didn't tell you guys I'm not going to earlier looking as manipulative as you can get. Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 18:22 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I don't have a kill target right now, but if I'm in line to be elected leader, I will let the town know what I'm thinking with some advance notice, so as not to surprise anyone with my choice for the lynch. I'm going to play out Day 1 as normal, and as soon as I develop a decent scum read, I'll let the town know, and we can discuss it. In the end, I'm hoping we can base the game around actual discussion of scum targets instead of the trend I've seen lately of someone making a case, no one commenting on it, and then people just calling others scum with no reasoning to back it up. If you want to lynch someone, I expect you to actually come up with reasons why it's best to do so, and not just blatant sheeping. As well, if you disagree with a lynch, actually speak up. I don't even care if you're wrong, because the point of discussion is to discard the bad or wrong ideas and move forward with the good ones. Again, this is total nothingness. Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 18:22 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
However, like I said at the beginning of my post, I'd prefer to actually be elected to the position of vice-leader, since I believe that position can be abused much more by scum being elected to it, and has the potential to generate a ton of confusion. I also don't even trust most townies to it, since lots of people will misuse the role and cause as much confusion as if scum had it. Being manipulative again. Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 18:22 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I'm planning to play the same regardless of which position you put me in, or if you elect me at all. However, I believe I can use the Leader position effectively, but would prefer to be able to safekeep the position of Vice-leader, to keep it away from not only scum, but also compulsive townies. I'd like it if you vote for me, but you should also consider a second person you would like to be elected along with me, since for whichever role, we still need to have either a vice-leader or leader to go along with it. Come on, everyone knows that themselves... So this whole thing is based on nothingness, which is not a surprise because it's d1 and his first post. But he's trying to make it look really really good when there's no need to be that manipulative at all. Also he wants to go for pardoner instead of mayor. Also all those phrases that look good but really aren't are involved: "Doing what town wants to do rather than doing a rambo" (not what he said but something along those lines) and stuff like that. It's the same ET said and people considered to be pro-town when he said he'll lynch who town considers to be the best lynch. That's the cowards way out and already planting the excuse "Sry guys I did what you wanted to" instead of just lynching who he THOUGHT to be most likely mafia. But it sounds really good because people like hearing the guy with power is doing what we want him to do instead of doing what he wants to do because it sounds good although it really isn't. Wow, you really don't understand the point of campaigns, do you? I'm not being manipulative, I'm trying to convince people to vote for me. That's how elections work, and that's what campaigns are for. The entire purpose of that post was to establish myself as a candidate, and hopefully draw support to my candidacy. If you think that's manipulative in a malicious way, then we have pretty different conceptions of what malice is.
Also again, you're not even reading what's being written, and are just making things up. You even quoted yourself where I said how I'd lynch people.
I don't have a kill target right now, but if I'm in line to be elected leader, I will let the town know what I'm thinking with some advance notice, so as not to surprise anyone with my choice for the lynch. I'm going to play out Day 1 as normal, and as soon as I develop a decent scum read, I'll let the town know, and we can discuss it. In the end, I'm hoping we can base the game around actual discussion of scum targets instead of the trend I've seen lately of someone making a case, no one commenting on it, and then people just calling others scum with no reasoning to back it up. If you want to lynch someone, I expect you to actually come up with reasons why it's best to do so, and not just blatant sheeping. As well, if you disagree with a lynch, actually speak up. I don't even care if you're wrong, because the point of discussion is to discard the bad or wrong ideas and move forward with the good ones.
Where in this does it say I'll lynch exactly how the town wants to lynch? All I said is that I'll give advance notice of who I want to kill, and that I'd like to discuss targets. How do you get that I'll just sheep the town's reads from that?
Also, you're contradicting yourself! You say here that I'm just going to sheep who the town wants to lynch, when I said no such thing, and then when you're talking about the Sinensis lynch, you said that I went against the town and lynched someone that according to you no one had a scum read on instead of zealos or kita who, again according to you, everyone thought was scum and wanted to kill. So, which one is it? Am I a sheep who just did what the town wanted on Day 1, or am I a scum rebel who killed someone useless and went against what everyone wanted to do?
Again, I haven't tried to shrug off responsibility. I still stand by lynching Sinensis. I'm not going to say it was a bad choice, because it wasn't. If you disagree, fine, but that's why you didn't vote for me. I never said that I lynched him because that's what people wanted me to do. In fact, I've said near the opposite. I lynched him because people agree with my choice and voted for me. I led the charge, and I was the one who in the end was responsible for pulling the trigger. I still think I made the right choice though, and it was my voters who supported me, not myself who sheeped them.
So, Toad's case is wrong. It's also not that great because it flat out refuses to look at what happened in the thread, and it's self-contradictory. I put a lot of effort into this defense, because a mislynch now will almost assure our loss, and I don't want that to happen. Hopefully I'll be able to get you to see that I'm not scum before you actually kill me.
|
EPT
