I don't want to be a failure. I need GreYMisT to believe in me!
TL Mafia LV
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
I don't want to be a failure. I need GreYMisT to believe in me! | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
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. 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. 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. If I get elected as Leader and so obtain extra votes, on further days I'll just use them to apply additional pressure to who I want to lynch. I don't want you to sheep me just because I got elected to leader. If you agree with my ideas, great, if you don't then that's good for you, but hopefully you actually discuss why you don't, than turn into a brick wall. 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. The role of vice-leader is much more powerful than leader, and I believe it's the position we should actually be focusing on today. The leader picks the day 1 lynch, which will hopefully be influenced by town, and after that they only have 1 extra vote. The vice-leader on the other hand, has the ability to waste an entire day, cause an extra round of night actions to go through (which is bad for us in most cases), and also generates lots of confusion. If they use their power in an anti-town way, it means we potentially have to spend two extra days just to lynch the vice-leader and the person we were trying to lynch in the first place. This ties up our primary KP for a long time, and we get the additional WIFOM of if the pardoner pardoned his scum buddy or not, and whether the pardoner is actually scum or just a stupid townie. Basically, the pardon ability causes a ton of trouble that we won't want most of the time. As vice-leader, I promise not to use my power in 99% of cases. Basically, the only exception I can come up with off the top of my head would be a MYLO situation where I was going to be lynched as town, and pardoning myself means we don't auto-lose. Outside of a situation like that though, I really don't see a reason where I would ever want, or need, to use the pardon. So, I want to be elected, because I know my own alignment, and can trust myself not to frivolously use the pardon, or use it against the good of the town. I can't trust others to do that, since I can't know you're not scum, and beyond that, even with a town read, lots of people have the capacity to do something silly because they're convinced that it's a good play. However, this normally results in more bad than good, and in the mislynch of the player who did it, which isn't a desirable outcome. 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. Now, as for myself, I'm going to vote in a candidate based on who I think is most likely to be town, who I can trust to be the most transparent with what they're thinking, who has the best reads, and who won't go Rambo at the end of Day 1 and cause a huge mess for Day 2. Those four things are the criteria by which I will determine who I support as the other candidate for office. I'll keep you updated with what I think once most of the candidates come out and make their posts and we get past super early game posting. The pardon question has already been asked and answered: On May 27 2012 11:34 GreYMisT wrote: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Not telling you who can fire, But the KP can be roleblocked 4. there is full imidiate alignment reveal 5. Ben is a minor character in an episode Also, it's 3 a.m. here, so I'm going to bed now. However, Blazinghand, do you actually think it's the best day 1 play to just lynch someone you think is bad rather than someone you think is scum? Maybe if you had no scum reads by the end of Day 1, but you make it sound like you'll go through with it regardless... | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
I don't really like the idea of policy lynching a player nearly solely based on past performance, so I won't elect either Blazinghand or Sinensis. I asked Blazinghand if he would lynch Grush rather than someone he thought was scum, and I'm not entirely satisfied with his answer. He said that he's willing to lynch someone other than Grush, but it relies on a bunch of conditions beyond merely thinking Grush is town. From his answer, it reads that even if he has a town read on Grush, he'd lynch him if he doesn't like his play. That sounds like it gives him an extremely convenient cop-out if he gets elected leader, since he can just lynch Grush and come up with any excuse for why he thinks his play would be a detriment to town. I don't agree with that. I don't like VE for mayor right now, since he hasn't really been doing much in the thread since he declared his candidacy, and in general, he plays pretty compulsively, which I think is bad to have for either the mayor or pardoner. I don't trust him to play cooperatively with the rest of town rather than just do what he personally thinks is best, which might not always be the best play. Toad, I don't really get your platform. Basically, you say you'll lynch a scum on Day 1, and the rest of it's some nonsense about how you're impossible to read. But, how does that promise do anything to motivate us to vote you in? The thing about saying you'll lynch scum Day 1 is that we have to vote you in with the hope that you'll do as you promised after already being the mayor. It's not based on what you're going to be doing on Day 1, it's based on what you'll do after you're elected. In your post, you don't even make it clear if you'd give us any heads-up about who you want to lynch or if you'd just pick someone when you get into office. As well, you say that it's an alignment check. But what happens if you mislynch? It's entirely possible. You say that if you do it as scum, you'll say "well everyone is wrong from time to time", but what if you're town? Won't you end up saying the same thing? As it stands, I don't think I'll vote for you. Lastly, Kitaman, I don't think anyone's going to take your suggestion seriously. However, I'm interested, why did you choose Hyaach? What made you want to suggest him as the random mayor? So, right now, I think that voting for myself and EchelonTee is the best choice. If you agree, please give me your votes. I need you to vote for me if you would like to see me in office. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 28 2012 02:39 kitaman27 wrote: Do you disagree with my assessment or do you just really want to get elected? :p Lyncher is likely to run for mayor. Picking someone who isn't running reduces the odds of electing a lyncher. It doesn't really matter if we elect a lurker or less skilled player as long as they are town. Mayor isn't really a town leader in this setup without the bodyguards. Lies. Foolishness put much more effort in endorsing his candidate. Because he is a newer player and I want to hear more from him. Do you agree that it is more likely that a lyncher will be running for mayor? Lets lynch meeple. I think if there's a lyncher in play, then it makes sense for them to run for mayor if they feel semi-confident in coming out of the election alright. That's also why it's important that we elect someone based on their Day 1 play, and not any future promises, and that we elect someone we believe strongly to be town. I'm not that scared of there being a lyncher since I don't think he'd be able to get enough support to be elected, if we're smart about it. I think anyone who's being lined up to become mayor must provide a case on who they want to lynch before they're elected or else we pull out support for them. This will make it harder for scum and potentially a lyncher since they'll be forced to come up with some fake analysis on Day 1, which is hard to make sound sincere. If we don't like what the mayor is saying at that point, or their analysis is fake and contrived, then we can vote for someone else. On May 28 2012 02:52 jaj22 wrote: I don't think the risks of electing a lyncher outweigh the value of electing a good town player. A lyncher may not even have a town target, and the chance of a genuine mayor contender rolling lyncher is low. @Hyaach: What do you think about Kitaman voting for you? Or anything else, for that matter. @Wiggles: What do you think about strongandbig? He's your main competitor on current form. To the 60% of players who haven't posted at all yet, please do. No need to feel intimidated. I don't get how he's my main competitor since I'm running for both positions, but would just prefer the pardoner since I know I'm town with 100% certainty. Also, most people are just going to vote for a mayor, not a mayor/pardoner, so we're going to end up with two mayoral candidates who have the most votes, and the runner-up is pardoner. On a side-note, is Strongandbig even still running? But, to answer your question, I don't think he's a good candidate. He basically has no platform, and he hasn't done anything to show that he's town. A lot of his posting is just about that thing with BH that has no bearing on the game. As well, he's unclear with what he's saying about how he'll use the power. He says he probably won't use the power, but then a couple sentences later he says he'll use it if he has a strong town-read. That shows that he's willing to just use the power if he doesn't agree with what the majority of town (remember, this is majority lynch) are thinking. I don't want a pardoner who's going to use his power just because he doesn't agree completely with the lynch. He also says he'll try to bring it up early if he wants to use the power, but that doesn't make much sense, since early on, there won't be a majority on someone. Realistically, a clear lynch target will only really appear in the last half of the day. So, overall, I don't think he's a good candidate for pardoner at all. Like I said, I think I'm a good candidate, and out of other people, ET is the best candidate. The office should be made up of myself and ET. On May 28 2012 03:40 Toadesstern wrote: Screw this, don't feel like explaining why I am town, because I don't need to LOL I'm fucking modconfirmed townie. And this is not some Toadi-confirmed this is hands down modconfirmed. I am a Mason and there is no Anti-town role that can produce a mason result according to our OP. I can tell who I wish to mason once n1 has started and once I did that I can talk to the guy. I assume that means talking to him once d2 has started. I can mason ANYONE I WANT meaning I can confirm this and as mentioned there's no mafia or 3rd party role like that. Now you might ask yourself: "But toadi, what if you are mafia and faking this by outing 2 mafias (you and your "masonbuddy", not to mention that that would be completly retarded from a mafia point of view but whatever)? We can't be sure if you really are a mason at all!" I am an awesome mason. The most awesome masons of them all, meaining I can choose a new "target" every night, meaning I can reproduce that confirmation every night if you wish me to. If you believe I am mafia fakeclaiming, fine lynch me if I'm not telling the "truth" d2, I'll flip town and you lynch the guy who said "wait, toad said he masoned me but I did not get a mason-thingy!" afterwards and you get a mafia. If I am town I'm telling the truth and can prove it d2, which means I'm going to be shot n1 again, but I'm counting on that anyways so might as well take a mafia with me and I will. That's it. Vote me pls ❤ Why did you claim like this? My major gripe with what you've said so far, is that it doesn't seem like you're willing to put in the effort on Day 1 to show that you're town. As well, you can't be held accountable for anything you've said until after you get elected. Now you throw in this claim, which also can't be verified until after Day 1. Also, why even claim? Mason is a very strong role, especially in this set-up, because masons are confirmed town to the person they talk to. If you hit a townie with your mason, it would have been great for analysis, and if you hit a blue, then they could instantly role-claim to you and share their actions. That's pretty huge. Instead, you choose to waste the role by claiming on Day 1. Why? Why are you so desperate to get elected as mayor? It's not like a town player is useless after Day 1. At this point, it's starting to look like you're a lyncher or assassin who's going all-in on Day 1 to kill his target with the lynch. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 28 2012 04:18 Toadesstern wrote: Mostly because I think I'm dead by the end of n1 or n2 anyways. About the accountability: Of course I can't. Noone can be held accountable before they get elected... If I were 3rd party or mafia I'd go for the long game as already pointed out: I don't think people are able to read me when I'm mafia so no need to do something like this, which means I want to be mayor because otherwise I'm dead before people listen to me Based on the player list, why do you think you'd end up dead on Night 1 or 2? There's other players on the list who would be higher on a shooting list for scum, and then add in your insistence that you're hard to read. If you were really that hard to read, then mafia would leave you alive to use as a scape-goat/mislynch on later days, not shoot you on Night 1. What you're saying seems contradictory. On May 28 2012 04:19 Toadesstern wrote: Your claim doesn't do anything to show or prove that you're a townie, though, or at least not until after you're elected, which I've already pointed out is a problem.because a townie wants a townie to be elected | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 28 2012 05:11 Toadesstern wrote: Why is it a problem. You are not acountable before you act either but for you I'm either a townie or a lyncher right now, correct? Let's be honest, worst case I lynch the guy I need to lynch if I am a lyncher and you have the most disruptive guy in the game out of the game because if I really am a lyncher I will be kicking, screaming and punching to get that guy lynched and you have a true-rnd policy lynch because I assume that the target of a lyncher can be both, mafia or town (or 3rd party). So the worst case scenario would be you get rid of a anti-Town guy (that's me if I am a lyncher) because I don't care about lynching mafia at all, you know that mafia is not Mayor because there's no mayor left (that guy is going to die soon anyways without a BG) and you've got a kind-of-policy lynch thingy. That doesn't sound so bad to me. And let's be honest again, I did not realize that a mason would be awesome for the lyncher as well as you pointed out but I'm going to make sure you guys know I'm town within the next 24 hours so give me some time and let me do my job, I will give updates on my reads and explain them. And I don't need some guy to poke me nonstop yelling "toad give update, toad give update NAO" when I said I'm busy today and only started to read the thread an hour ago. Worst case, you lynch the guy you want to lynch, are removed from the game, town probably losing a player based on the proportion of town to scum, and scum get a free round of night actions. So, town ends up losing 4 players and the mayor role for free. How's that not that bad for town? For the people who want to put you as the pardoner, that's just as bad. If a lyncher/assassin gets put into the role of pardoner, then expect scum to try to bribe them when one of them is about to get lynched. Something along the lines of "Pardon my lynch, and my team will shoot your target", or something like that. Again, we lose a whole cycle to the pardon, and then we're left with either a lyncher we either need to suffer through spamming in thread, or we lose a day of discussion lynching him. A pardoner lyncher can also at any point hold the lynch hostage unless we kill his target, again leading to a round of free kills. Also, you never answered my question about why you were scared of dying on Night 1 or 2. The player list suggests you're not the highest priority target for scum, and your own insistence of being hard to read suggests scum would leave you alive as you'd be a magnet for suspicion. Finally, I find it odd that you're trying to downplay the impact of a Lyncher/Assassin being elected rather than denying that you're one of those roles and trying to show otherwise. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 28 2012 05:44 Toadesstern wrote: I am trying to show otherwise but that needs time and I can't come up with an awesome lynch out of nowhere so from my point of view I either ignore you or talk about things I can already talk about in the meantime. Do you want me to ignore you instead? I can do that as well. About why I think I'm going to be shot early on: I got shot n1 last time and I claimed mason this time. I think that makes me a high priority. You said you claimed because you were scared of dying early on and wanted to get the mayor role. Now you're saying you're going to die early on because you claimed and that's why you're scared. You don't make sense, or you're changing your story around. + Show Spoiler + On May 28 2012 04:18 Toadesstern wrote: Mostly because I think I'm dead by the end of n1 or n2 anyways. About the accountability: Of course I can't. Noone can be held accountable before they get elected... If I were 3rd party or mafia I'd go for the long game as already pointed out: I don't think people are able to read me when I'm mafia so no need to do something like this, which means I want to be mayor because otherwise I'm dead before people listen to me This is where I ask why you claimed, and you say it's because you think you're dead anyways. So, now you're saying that you claimed because you think you're going to die, and you think you're going to die because you claimed. That's textbook circular reasoning. I'm pretty convinced that you're actually the lyncher now, because your story isn't adding up to me. It would be a bad move to vote you in. On May 28 2012 08:19 phagga wrote: Not through the complete thread yet, will catch up later. I'm against a policy lynch, as I think everyone should get the chance to improve. I don't like how Toadesstern claimed, and feel against voting him therefore. He is either throwing away his blue role or fakeclaiming to get the major. Both is bad. I like Mr. Wiggles reasoning, he looks like a good candidate. The other interesting option is ET, but I will have to read through his filter again to feel more sure. Mr. Wiggles and ET, do you already have some candidates for your lynch? Off the top of my head, I wanted to say Toad, but I don't think he's actually the best choice for the lynch today unless I can't come up with any other scum candidates. I think he's probably a lyncher, but that also means he's not a threat if we keep him away from the elected positions. He claimed mason, so he should be able to confirm that role tomorrow. So, so long as he isn't elected to the pardoner or mayor, I'm willing to keep him alive to see if he confirms his role on Day 2. If he can't confirm himself, a vig should shoot him. As for today, no one should be giving him any votes if they think there's a possibility of him being a third party. I've already explained why it's bad for town for a third party to be elected as pardoner. So far, I've been pretty focused on Toad, so I need to go back and read other people more closely to find a better lynch. As well, there's a ton of people who've barely posted, and I'm sure there's scum among them. Vigs at least should consider all the lurkers as potential targets for when they shoot, if they don't start to change their activity and attitudes. On May 28 2012 09:07 strongandbig wrote: So you want me to tell you why I'm town? Well, hopefully my play so far has shown that I'm town. I'm trying to be clear with what my thoughts are on the election. I'm explaining my views on both the mayor and pardoner, and backing it up with reasoning. I'm also pressuring a player I find suspicious. I'm taking a firm stance for a certain candidate, and against several others. Hopefully from my posting, it's clear who else I support to be elected along with myself, and why. I still stand by that choice. 1. I am not running for mayor. In case that wasn't obvious from my earlier post "don't vote for people who haven't made a case for mayor but only for pardoner". I haven't said anything like "vote for me" since I realized that the runner up for mayor gets the pardoner rather than it being a separate election. 2. Sinensis are you still running for mayor? Do you still want to policy lynch grush? I'm pretty sure BH still does but idk about you. 3. MrWiggles, you've said a lot about pardoner but this is an election for mayor. Also, how do we know if you're town? Obviously the "I'm town" paradigm posted by the subject of suspicion should always be treated with several grains of salt, but it can still be useful to townies making up their minds so I'd like it if you could post one. Overall, I'm hoping that my posts show that I am being transparent and open about my thoughts.I hope they show that I am actually putting effort into this game. Finally, I hope they show that I am taking a measured and reasonable approach to the game, in order to foster a good environment for scumhunting and discussion. As always, if you agree with what I'm saying and think I'd be a good candidate for leader/vice-leader, you should vote for me. I also support ET being elected into office along with myself. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Basically, I have two people in mind for who I think should be candidates for the lynch tomorrow. They are Sinensis and strongandbig. The starting point I took for my two reads is that I believe it's very likely that scum would have at least one person run for mayor/pardoner, if not more. So, I decided to focus most of my attention on the people who declared they wanted to be elected. From that pool, both Sinensis and strongandbig stick out to me, here's why: Sinensis: Sinensis opens up by saying that he's running under a platform of lynching Grush. As the game has progressed, he's continued to support this position, and that's pretty much all he's done. Even with people telling him that lynching Grush isn't the best choice, and that Grush's play isn't about to destroy the town, he's still touting that we should lynch him. I find this scummy, because his position provides zero accountability for his actions. Sinensis wouldn't consider himself accountable if he were to lynch grush and he flips town, because the reasons for the lynch aren't part of this game. They're based on events that happened outside the game. As well, tunneling grush like he is provides him with an outlet to make posts that look like they're contributing, but actually don't do anything useful and provide no new content. Sinensis can continue to tunnel grush without repercussions, and he doesn't even have to provide reasons for grush being scum, since his reasons for wanting to lynch him aren't based on his play in this game. This is evidenced by the complete lack of reasoning for why we should lynch grush besides just repeating the same thing over and over. Additionally, it doesn't look like sinensis is willing to let up, because when asked if he would lynch someone else, he says "find me a confirmed mafia and I will happily support their lynch instead of grush's". The thing is, we're rarely going to ever find a "confirmed" scum, so sinensis is just setting himself up to continue to tunnel grush. Even in the face of a reasonable scum candidate, sinensis is telling us that he'd still rather kill grush. This play makes it so that sinensis won't have to contribute at all to the game until grush dies. As well, it makes it so that sinenesis isn't responsible for the outcome of his tunnel. Overall, I find this play to be very scummy. strongandbig: I believe strongandbig is scummy because of how he made a decision to run for pardoner, and then just sort of fell out of the running and didn't even try to continue to gain support after being called out. He comes in and makes a post saying that he wants to be the pardoner. Quickly, BH calls him out on it, and after some back and forth, he drops his candidacy. It seems to me that scum would love to be able to nab the role of pardoner. This is what strongandbig set out to do, but when he was actually called out about running specifically for pardoner and was put under pressure, he was very quick to just drop his candidacy altogether. I think this is a sign of being scum, since it displays that he was very nervous in running. I feel as though a townie in that position wouldn't back off from running so quickly and after so little pressure. Also, his reason for not continuing to run is odd as well. He says it's because there aren't separate elections, but in my eyes, it seems more because he didn't like that he immediately came under scrutiny and was pressured. Even beyond his candidacy, strongandbig's posting has been very safe, and not very relevant to the game or contributory. He hasn't provided us with many original thoughts, and has been very reserved since he got called out by BH. Again, this looks like he's afraid of being in the spotlight or being put under pressure. As for kitaman, I can agree that he doesn't look like the towniest person among us, but I think that personally, I would rather lynch into either strongandbig or sinensis for Day 1. Let me know what you think. Do you agree with my reasoning? Disagree? Speak your mind, and hopefully we can decide on the best person to kill for Day 1. Right now, if elected mayor, I'm planning to kill one of those two. On a sidenote, if you've signed up for the game and haven't posted yet, or only have 1 post, please start actually playing. I'd rather not have the game end because of 9 mod-kills on Day 1. =/ It also makes you incredibly hard to read if you don't have any posts in the thread, since it's impossible to make a read out of nothing. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 28 2012 17:58 VisceraEyes wrote: Why would SnB, as newish scum, want to call apologize to me, a player who hasn't expressed any kind of problem with his posts or paid him any attention, at the same time as he's apologizing to BH, a player he's gotten into an argument with in the thread? Here's why I ask. As scum, for me, it seems much easier to simply pacify the source of the attention rather than call further attention to myself by apologizing to another player who hasn't even commented on the offending posts. It seems...too careless, you know? I don't think he's a good lynch really. It's true that his content is lacking, but from what I can see he seems genuinely interested in what's best for town. I think he apologized to you because he mentioned you at the same time as BH in this post: + Show Spoiler + On May 27 2012 13:46 strongandbig wrote: 1. Out of the mayoral candidates so far, I like ET. It's hard for me to encapsulate why, but it kind of has to do with the idea of taking things seriously. I feel like BH and VE are hard to read because they troll half the time and spam a lot. That doesn't mean ET is easy to read by any means, but I feel like his posts are more likely to be able to be subjected to ordinary analysis rather than gut reads. (In case it isn't obvious, I think it's important to be able to hold the mayor at least somewhat accountable, and that means you have to be able to analyze their posts in a serious way.) 2. That segues well into why you should vote for me for vice leader! I take things seriously and am easy to subject to analysis. I don't mean "hey I'm always transparent because I suck at scum"; people running for things always say that. What I mean is that when I post I'll do my best to include my reasons and background, and you all can do your best to tear them apart or find corroboration. So, why am I running for vice leader/pardoner? Well, last game I played was my first time being a blue role, and it was really fun; I want to try something new this game as well. Last thing: my platform for vice leader. The vice leader's only power is to nullify a lynch once per game. I'm not gonna say "I'll only use the pardon if town wants me to" because that would be retarded since town voted for the lynch. What I will say is that if I ever use the pardon, I'll announce that I'm considering pardoning the person loooong before the lynch happens and I'll discuss it fully. There's a 90% chance that I won't use the pardon at all during the game, because in general flips on suspicious players tend to be pretty helpful for town. The only case where I use the pardon would be one where I'm very sure of my town read on someone, and where there are at least a few other people who think I'm making sense. So, vote for me! BH reacted very strongly to what he said, so it makes sense to me that he'd want to preemptively apologize to you before you began to draw more attention to him again. You say that apologizing to you as well draws attention to himself before you even commented, but by apologizing all he has to do is make one post, and that's it. If instead he didn't apologize, there's the chance that you decide to comment, and then there will be both yourself and him involved, and he wouldn't be able to solve it so quickly. Apologizing then and drawing a little attention means that he avoids potentially drawing a lot of attention later on. That's how I see it. ET, right now it looks like either yourself or I am going to be the mayor. Who are you planning to lynch if you're elected? Like I said, lynch target/reads is one of the things I'm basing who I'm voting for on. You haven't mentioned what you're thinking though. It would be nice if we have some kind of idea of what you're thinking about the lynch before the deadline. Also, some people have commented on either thinking that sinensis or strongandbig aren't the best lynch for today. However, between the two, who do you think is the better lynch? If you don't think either of them are good lynches, who do you think is? This is your chance to get your thoughts out in the thread and let us know what you think. Also, try to give reasons too, not just a name. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 29 2012 03:37 strongandbig wrote: I think Mattchew or one of the other older players may be playing scummylurky. I recall ET did that explicitly and on purpose in SS mafia, maybe one of them (someone who recently lost a game as scum by being super active and leadery in the thread until I shot him) is doing that. + Show Spoiler [wiggles on me] + On May 28 2012 17:25 Mr. Wiggles wrote: strongandbig: I believe strongandbig is scummy because of how he made a decision to run for pardoner, and then just sort of fell out of the running and didn't even try to continue to gain support after being called out. He comes in and makes a post saying that he wants to be the pardoner. Quickly, BH calls him out on it, and after some back and forth, he drops his candidacy. It seems to me that scum would love to be able to nab the role of pardoner. This is what strongandbig set out to do, but when he was actually called out about running specifically for pardoner and was put under pressure, he was very quick to just drop his candidacy altogether. I think this is a sign of being scum, since it displays that he was very nervous in running. I feel as though a townie in that position wouldn't back off from running so quickly and after so little pressure. Also, his reason for not continuing to run is odd as well. He says it's because there aren't separate elections, but in my eyes, it seems more because he didn't like that he immediately came under scrutiny and was pressured. Even beyond his candidacy, strongandbig's posting has been very safe, and not very relevant to the game or contributory. He hasn't provided us with many original thoughts, and has been very reserved since he got called out by BH. Again, this looks like he's afraid of being in the spotlight or being put under pressure. 1. I stopped running for pardoner when I realized that it wasn't a separate election from the mayor's election. That's how it worked in the last game I played, and it wasn't specified in the OP. Once I figured out that it was the same election, I stopped running for reasons I've already explained -- I don't want to be mayor. 2. BH's "scrutiny" didn't make any sense at all! 2a: His first point was "why did you run for vice mayor instead of running for mayor, your reasons for running for vice mayor also apply to mayor." I had already answered that point (I don't trust my day1 reads enough to kill someone off). 2b: His second point was "hey first you said you wanted to do something different because blue roles are fun and then later you said that you want to keep pardoner power away from scum what gives those are different." I didn't mention keeping pardoner power away from scum because I thought it would be obvious; if a power is useful for scum and not for town then town should try to keep it away from scum. 3: IDK what you mean when you say I was "called out for running specifically for pardoner" - that's exactly what I was doing, it's not like I was trying to hide it or anything. I thought there were separate elections since it didn't say in the OP that the runner-up becomes the vice leader, I had to look through greymist's filter to figure that out. Basically, my point is that I wasn't trying to avoid scrutiny or the spotlight. There really just wasn't much worth responding to. Also after BH and ET blew up the thread over my poorly chosen comments about BH, I didn't want to drag the thread down any more. Think about this - if I was scum, by not posting I gave up a golden opportunity to get just as emotional as BH was and keep the thread fucked up for at least several more pages. What I mean by the called out comment is that BH called you out for running for pardoner, and instead of really defending your candidacy, you just dropped it. It looks suspicious to me, because it looks like you decided to stop running at the first sign of pressure, and just used the voting mechanics as an excuse. What do you think of sinensis? On May 29 2012 04:11 VisceraEyes wrote: Like, I get it...you don't want anyone besmirching your claim with false information or whatever the fuck...but imagine this scenario. Imagine you HADN'T broadcast that you're not roleblockable and scum have a roleblocker. What possible town motivation could you have for sharing the fact that you're not roleblockable with everyone? Hell, even people in PMs, why isn't that your most closely guarded secret? Wiggles, I'd like you to seriously SERIOUSLY consider lynching Toadesstern today...at the very least tell me what you think of the guy as completely and honestly as possible. I'm going to do the same right now. Right now, I'm convinced that Toad is a lyncher/assassin. I stated it in my earlier post where someone asked me who I would lynch. However, that also makes it so that he isn't a very good lynch candidate unless we're completely lacking anyone else to lynch. The thing about Toad's claim (especially now that he claims he can't be RBed), is that he'll either be able to prove it tomorrow, or we'll kill him. There's no reason to lynch him now, because he can show us if he's telling the truth tomorrow. Lynching him now only seems like it would be a good idea if we didn't have anyone else to lynch, but at this point it looks like we have several viable candidates. If he's not town (and I think he's third party), there's no way he can weasel his way out of proving that he's a mason. So, it makes the most sense to just let him live through the night. Lynching the lyncher (ha!) is pretty suboptimal compared to lynching mafia if we can. As well, if someone confirms that he masoned them, we either have two scum netted, or Toad is confirmed as a townie. So, in light of having scummy people to lynch into, I think the benefits of leaving Toad alive for one night outweigh any risks. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
After the last few posts by strongandbig, and Sinensis' complete lack of addressing anything relevant in the game, I think I'm leaning more towards lynching Sinensis than strongandbig right now, if I'm elected mayor. There's been a lot of discussion in the thread, as well as several posts made against Sinensis, but instead of addressing them, he continues his "lynch grush" posting. The two frontrunners for the election right now, are myself and ET, and neither of us has expressed much interest in lynching grush. Instead, we have both presented alternate targets for the lynch. However, Sinensis does not address any of these targets. If neither of the candidates for mayor are going to lynch grush, then why wouldn't he talk about any other targets, or even anything else that's been happening in the thread at all? Sinensis is exhibiting exactly the kind of behaviour that I find scummy, focusing solely on grush at the expense of everything else that's happening. It gives him an excuse to not contribute to the game, and to not have to post about anything else. If elected mayor, I'm planning on lynching Sinensis. Also, I need to vote, so: ##Vote: EchelonTee | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 29 2012 07:20 VisceraEyes wrote: Wiggles what do you think of Mattchew? I really dislike its length. I don't think his filter's very good. He looks like he's just posting enough to stay with the flow of the game, but that's it. If he doesn't step up his play on Day 2, it could be that he's lurking scum. I'm not sure if you're implying he should be lynched today or not, but I wouldn't feel comfortable lynching him yet. He's been pretty inactive, so that makes it much more of a coin-flip on Day 1 than lynching someone who actually has posted enough to get a decent read on. On May 29 2012 07:26 jaj22 wrote: @Wiggles: You're allowed to vote for yourself. Greymist confirmed earlier. I'd also like to register my disapproval of Mattchew's play, or lack of it. I don't think a lurker lynch is a bad choice here, partly because I have no idea what Sinensis is thinking. According to the day post there's 35 minutes left. I know I'm allowed to vote for myself, but I'd rather vote for ET as a sign of good faith, and to actually have something to tangibly hold me to my support of him in office. Also, while I believe ET is town, I wouldn't complain if I ended up as pardoner, because I can only be 100% sure about my own alignment. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 29 2012 08:53 Forumite wrote: Oh well Wiggles, if you got another lynch right now, who would you kill? Maybe kitaman, I'm not sure exactly. I thought sinensis was pretty scummy, so he was my choice. I wanted to lynch into the people who ran for mayor, since I thought it was likely that there would be a scum there. strongandbig would be my other choice from that pool, but he's looking better to me now than before, so I don't think I'd be ready to lynch him right now. We just have to make sure that we get scum on Day 2. Hopefully Greymist finds replacements too, so we don't have to deal with a bunch of modkills. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 30 2012 00:04 supersoft wrote: hey i really appreciate your effort, but why are you guys always trying so hard. Finding scum is a lot easier than you might think. Don't think around 3 corners. Try to catch the little things. Like that Zealos defends toad at a point when it was really useless to defend him. Neither was he in danger of getting lynched, nor is reducing the pressure that is currently put on a player helping the town. A reasonable explanation for his behaviour is that he's scum, he knows Toad is not. He wanted to get a little towncred. Or not even this, he just wanted to say something. Maybe Toad is even scum, too... See? There are plenty of reasonable explanations for his behaviour if he's scum and almost none if he's town. It's not a super strong case, but it is a case. Every other case so far except my toadcase (who is currently on ice until he's confirmed mason) was uncovered and not well thought out. Especially our lynch yesterday. That case was terrible. There was really nothing about it. I could write a lot about why this player was a bad lynch. From an overall gamepolicy point of view because we got no information - maybe some about wiggles - and an individual point of view, because he obviously was town. Here you say that the case was terrible and sinensis was obviously town. As well, you say that it was a bad lynch. However, when it was actually Day 1, you said no such things. It's only now, after sinensis has flipped that you're coming in here making posts about how he was very obviously town and that the lynch was terrible. The closest (and only!) post to that from before the flip is this: On May 29 2012 08:25 supersoft wrote: aww yeah i filtered this sinensis real quick. Completely useless fellow, hang him if you want. Reducing disturbing noise is better than nothing. I'd prefer reducing mafia kp, but you cannot have it all :-/ In which it is not a very good defense of a player who is "obviously" town. It's not going to do anything to change someone's mind. As well, this came after I said that if elected I would lynch sinensis, so there's no excuse like what you said in this post: + Show Spoiler + On May 29 2012 21:35 supersoft wrote: please dont protect wiggles. i'd rather vig him than protect him. he's been completely useless so far as toad pointed out correctly. you also should read my filter more often! all of you. dropped some truth already. + i want to apologize to wiggles first victim: i realized too late, that you were actually going to die. next time i'll yell much more at them. how retarded was that lynch... i think wiggles needs to die for not listening to the town at the end. i dont buy it that he wasnt around at deadline since he was the one who got elected. i think if zealos is scum, wiggles looks really bad and should die. i doubt that he'll be able to erase the doubts then. 70% chance he's scum if zealos is. Of not realizing I was actually going to kill him. I made that very clear in my post, where I stated, "If elected mayor, I'm planning on lynching Sinensis". I don't think it gets any clearer than that. So, you did nothing to try to convince anyone that sinensis was town, which wasn't obvious, considering I had the support of 11 people in lynching him, and you did nothing to convince me to change the lynch. However, after the lynch you're now up in arms about my lynch choice and how I've acted. So, you're either being silly, or you're trying to shovel suspicion on me because I mislynched and just became a lot easier of a target to do so on. Here's a question for you. If you believed so strongly in these things, why do you only mention them after the flip, and not before when it actually matters and can make a difference? I also disagree with what Toad said, but that comes down to what we thought about lynches, and who was a good lynch. Obviously, we disagreed. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 30 2012 03:05 Forumite wrote: Damn Wiggles, don´t you think you are overreacting? Pulling "11 people voted for me, so there!" to shut him up? Silly on purpose or scum, OMGUS much? Anyway, what I want to know is where you were at the deadline. How am I over-reacting? Supersoft is saying that he wants a vig to hit me, so obviously if he thinks that strongly about me, I'm going to reply. I'm not trying to shut him up either, but implying that I had no support for my lynch, or that general consensus was that sinensis was town, are factually wrong, unless people voted for me even though they disagreed with my lynch target. Also, supersoft's behaviour is pretty suspect to me right now. I posted why. For someone who didn't explicitly object to lynching sinensis, he sure has come on strongly after the flip to throw a lot of suspicion on me and claim that sinensis was a terrible lynch and obviously town. If supersoft actually posted before the lynch that he strongly believed sinensis to be town, or that he was a terrible lynch, maybe I could understand it. But in the hours leading up to the lynch, he did no such thing, even though he was around after I said who I was going to lynch and could see what was happening. It's pretty typical mafia behaviour to not do anything to object to a lynch, and then come in after the lynch claiming it was terrible and he knew the person was town all along to throw suspicion onto the people who supported it. So, I see him as scummy, or maybe he could just be a townie being very silly. I was around at the deadline, why do you think I wasn't? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 30 2012 03:43 Forumite wrote: I don´t want a vig to shoot you, but supersoft is also one of my stronger townreads in this game, so please give him some slack. The reason I wonder where you were is because SS and I tried to build a case on Zealos near the deadline, so that you´d lynch him instead of Sinensis. I asked you specifically who you were lynching, before I found out myself from your filter, and I didn´t hear an answer, so I assumed you were elsewhere. Why didn´t you consider our case? I didn't answer because you found the answer yourself. I did consider your case as well, but I didn't want to just switch my lynch target a half-hour from the lynch without any discussion with town. I felt that sinensis had a good chance of flipping scum, and I said that I was going to lynch him, so I stuck with what I told people I was going to do, instead of frantically rushing around the deadline to figure stuff out and causing a lot of chaos. On May 30 2012 05:28 Toadesstern wrote: well it kinda does. People tend to agree I'm either lyncher or town and lyncher has no shot. Just claim on the deadline. Lyncher has no KP, so if scum randomly switch to your target, it's a null-tell. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 30 2012 06:11 Forumite wrote: Hmmm, I wanted us to lynch Zealos but you are right, there wasn´t enough support at the time. Perhaps if I had gotten back an hour earlier. What do you think about Zealos now? I don't think he's looking that good right now. I went back and re-read your case, and tend to agree. Even his last post + Show Spoiler [Post] + On May 30 2012 05:48 Zealos wrote: I struggle to see why people think me defending Toad is scummy lol. I am a townie, because of this, I am posting under the assumption that everyone knows I'm town. Hence why, if I defend someone, its because I think they deserve to be defended. If I post accusations, it will be because I think they are scummy. I'm sorry I haven't posted a great deal yet, like I said, my exam is tomorrow, and so I'll be able to post more then. Zealos, why did you think Toad deserved to be defended? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Are the targets of medic protects notified if the medic blocks a shot? Waiting to see if MZ confirms what Toad's saying. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 30 2012 14:13 Mattchew wrote: and yours does? + Show Spoiler [WBG Filter Pre-night] + On May 30 2012 04:40 wherebugsgo wrote: Catching up right now. If anyone needs anything specific let me know, but it'll be a couple hours at the least before I can respond. On May 30 2012 06:26 wherebugsgo wrote: why I love supersoft my thoughts exactly whenever I read his posts LOL I come across first Toad post = oh god wtf On May 30 2012 06:34 wherebugsgo wrote: Is there a particular reason Gambitx32 wasn't warned or replaced for not voting? I ctrl-f'd his name in greymist's filter and didn't find anything there either. I have a scumread on him based on his only two posts in the thread. Both of his posts are massive walls of summarizing nothing. He also asks On May 30 2012 06:35 wherebugsgo wrote: oh wtf it cut off. He asks a bunch of people to state who they're going to vote and stuff but he doesn't vote himself. Why has no one questioned you about your claimed hit? He knew I was not hit by mafia, so he wanted to out the vig that shot me because thats what scum do when they don't know everything. They try to find it out Matt, I think you're grasping a bit here, and I disagree. Strongandbig wasn't asking for the vig to claim, he was just asking the thread if they thought you made sense as a vig shot. Frankly, you'd be a confusing mafia shot, since you hadn't done much in the thread, and people were suspicious of you. WBG on the other hand, may have been shot for bringing up a lurker who was scum (gambit), or he could have been shot on reputation alone to kill a vet when he'd be more unlikely to have protection or make an impact on the game. So, it makes sense to me for strongandbig to question your hit, since it didn't make much sense for scum to hit you. It made more sense for a vig to hit you. I don't think you can use that post as a point against him. Right now I'm trying to determine who I think is scummiest/want to lynch from kitaman/supersoft/zealos/gambit. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Instead, I think we should go with lynching Gambit today. The case on him has already been made, and it's pretty solid based on the information we have. As well, calling him scum actually looked pretty polarizing at first, and there were a couple people who soft-defended him: + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2012 09:53 VisceraEyes wrote: Whoa there buddy, we don't lynch lurkers here...we shoot scummy lurkers with holy bullets of townie fury....not hang them. How about we lynch someone who's posting so we can get information with our lynch? Ya? No? I like your target other than the fact that his lynch will net us no new information. On May 30 2012 10:02 strongandbig wrote: Gambit's two posts sound a lot like newer mafia posting noncommital lists of reads and then not following them up. However, I'd rather wait to vote until we've got a bit more information rather than during the first hour or two after the night post. I'm also still waiting to hear an answer to my questions for stofu, his posts look similar to me. On May 30 2012 10:07 austinmcc wrote: I'd prefer targets other than Gambit. When you called him out yesterday, you said he hadn't voted and had posted two unhelpful walls of text. The walls weren't helpful at all, but he DID vote. That plus a claimed hit is the extent of the case on Gambit. If we're lynching players for lurking and looking scummy when they don't, everyone seems pretty set that Zealos looks actively scummy. Why should we lynch Gambit based off your claimed hit and poor posting, when Zealos has had poor posting and seems less likely to modkill himself out of the game? Which could give us some decent information and leads if/when he flips scum. They all look odd to me, since none of them actively address whether they think gambit is scum or not. Instead, they're "We don't lynch lurkers", "I'd rather wait" (Why?), "You made a mistake about the voting. Lynch this other lurker instead!". Notice that none of them actually defend Gambit as town, they just try to find excuses not to lynch him. I find this interesting, since I could particularly see strongandbig or austinmc making a mistake like that as scum as they seem more inexperienced. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
##Vote: GambitX32 | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 31 2012 03:05 Toadesstern wrote: I'm not going to vote gambit unless he refuses to give me the name of his char and I'd say a lynch on that guy is like flipping a coin. Why? Just saying that you don't like the lynch doesn't help us determine if the lynch is actually bad. If you don't want to see him lynched, you'll have to explain why. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 31 2012 12:29 kitaman27 wrote: In your own words Wiggles, could you explain to me why Gambit is a better lynch than the alternatives? Also, why the drop-off in activity since your election? I've been more busy in the last couple days than I was when I ran. I only had an hour and a bit of free time today so far after the morning and ended up playing Dota, haha. :p I guess I'll answer your other post at the same time, since they're pretty much asking the same thing. + Show Spoiler + On May 31 2012 03:18 kitaman27 wrote: How did you come to decide it should be gambit from that list? I decided to go for Gambit, since the soft-defenses of him made me pretty suspicious, and the original analysis was good as well. His name as scum came pretty suddenly, because it's not like people were pressuring him too hard before-hand. Instead, it was more of a surprise and the case on him appeared very quickly. The case on him made sense. After it popped up, several people entered the thread and all defended against his lynch. However, they didn't do it in such a way that they called him town, or not scum, they did it in such a way that it looked a lot more like they were making excuses as to why we shouldn't lynch him. That's not the proper way to defend someone from a lynch, from a town perspective. So, I already agreed with what WBG had said about Gambit, and then a bunch of people soft-defended him scummily. Therefore, I decided he would be a good lynch, since he seemed likely to flip scum from the analysis made, and then he could provide us with further leads on three separate players. Especially strongandbig and austinmc seemed like they'd be healthy leads if gambit flips scum, since I could definitely see them reacting like that if they saw a scum-buddy suddenly accused with no warning. Their posts and VE's looked like knee-jerk reactions to WBG. On May 31 2012 07:29 VisceraEyes wrote: While I think Zealos looks pretty bad, I don't think the bolded plays into it at all. I think he's just saying that he thinks Toad will look town if he proves that he's a mason, if not, he's scum of some kind. That was the general opinion in the thread then too, so it looks like he's just echoing that. Actually, Wiggles I'd REALLY like your opinion...you're firmly in the Gambit-For-Lynch camp, yeah? What do you think about this post by Zealos? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On May 31 2012 14:44 kitaman27 wrote: You're always a pleasure to play with VE <3 So you're a vig who shot night one, but didn't call your shot? That's actually a good point. Why didn't you claim your shot before the day post, VE? Also why have you been flip-flopping on your read on Kita so much? I'd read you as town before, but I've taken pause after the weird switches on who you want to lynch, and who you think is town or scum. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
I'm going to be switching my vote to VE. I thought he was town after his day 1 play, but the constant flip-flopping to try to look good and the nonsensical role-claim and breadcrumb have changed my mind. Basically, it looked like he kept changing his read due to pressure in the thread, and it ended up with him contradicting himself multiple times as he tried to wiggle out of the pressure. Then add on the claim that's very convenient and easy to fake as scum (along with a "breadcrumb" that shows nothing), and you have the reasons for my switch of opinion. I guess I was wrong about VE being town, as his play today has shown. =/ ##Unvote: Gambit ##Vote: VisceraEyes | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 01 2012 11:50 Probulous wrote: He was actually one of the first. Between super and Forumite, the day 1 Zealos wagon started. I don't like his play since then but I have to give him credit for that. Ok having had a stroll through the voting list against VE here are the lurkers who had really bad reasoning for voting for VE. The others look relatively townie to me so I won't include them in my list. Ange777 His reason was seriously non-commital (Klicky) but it is other posting that makes me suspicious. All soft-defending Zealos. Next up Manason He is the opposite in that his filter looks OK (weird stuff about Kita) but then BOOM random vote for VE He also never reappears to evaluate the VE case on Kita. If people want to know why I have left someone specific off, just ask. I agree that Ange looks like he's soft-defending zealos there. I disagree somewhat with what you say about manason there though. He just says that he's looking forward to seeing what VE writes about Kita, he doesn't promise to comment on it later, so that's not something he can really be held to. I say somewhat though, because I find his choice of wording odd, as well as the decision to not include anything he could be held to. Why say "If it's good enough you might have a chance to not get lynched."? I would think he would say something more along the lines of "If it's good enough I'll take my vote off you", or "If it's good enough I'll reconsider my read". Instead, he says he's looking forward to what he writes, and then doesn't say anything he can be held to after it. What he says implies that he'll share no personal opinion on it or take personal action over it, but instead just follow along with what the majority think. Basically, blatant sheeping and shirking having to actually do anything in response. What do you think? Also, in case it isn't clear, if there's another vigi out there, you should be shooting Gambit. If we have to lynch him tomorrow, we'll end up with a day of minimal discussion and everyone just piling votes on him as he's very likely to be scum. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 02 2012 04:02 Blazinghand wrote: Yeah wiggle-dawg has been kinda lurking since his D1 helpfulness. I haven't been lurking, I just haven't been around and have been busy the last couple days. I can't post when I'm not home, or doing something else. On June 02 2012 02:57 Mr. Wiggles wrote: BH, did you really believe you could get 14 other people to vote-switch with you within 5 minutes? On June 02 2012 03:01 Blazinghand wrote: I voted for scum. Somehow, during D2 I got distracted from my tried-and-true tactic of tunnelling scum and thought "oh these people have legitimate arguments" but I will not listen to dumb ideas any more. Nothing will stop me from lynching G32 tomorrow. I have nothing more to say on the topic of the VE mislynch. You didn't answer my question. You nearly ended up causing a no-lynch, so I'm wondering what was going through your head at the time. There's no way you'd actually get enough people to switch within 5 minutes to be able to kill Gambit, but you still posted this, egging people on to switch with you: On June 01 2012 07:55 Blazinghand wrote: ##UNVOTE ##VOTE GAMBITX32 LYNCH HIM LYNCH HIM NOW BEFORE HE GETS AWAY HURRY So I'm wondering what exactly were you trying to do? Just make a statement? What? Obviously he wasn't going to die, so what else were you trying to accomplish? The only thing it could have ended with is a no-lynch, was that what you were shooting for? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 02 2012 04:38 Blazinghand wrote: You know as well as I do the problem with this kind of explanation. Obviously, it's possible you have been busy. Maybe you were. But if you are a lurking scum there's nothing preventing you from making the explanation, right? And wasn't a plank of your candidacy for mayor the fact that you'd be active? I think it's a fair statement that you're lurking more than would be expected. On principle I will not stand for G32's kind of play. He is scum and he will die like scum. And honestly, if I ended up causing a no-lynch, then we'd still have our vigilante who handn't shot his gun yet. Yeah ok maybe it wasn't optimal play given what I knew at the time, but I did the right thing. I should have never unvoted G32, and I never will again so long as he's alive. No, I don't think I said anything about activity in my mayoral campaign. I can't help if I'm not here, and I'm not going to hedge or sacrifice things I need to do outside of the game to appease how much people want me to post. That's all I'm going to say about that, since it's unconfirmable and doesn't have much bearing on the game. I can say I'm not lurking though, since I'm not just sitting around posting whenever my name comes up or it suits my goals to post, and that's verifiable from the thread. That's the difference between inactivity and lurking. Also, thanks for the answer. And, to answer Hyaach, I wanted to see if Blazinghand made up some excuse about how VE flipped town so it would have been good if we no-lynched, or that no-lynching would have saved VE, or something along those lines. Yes, it's true, but that explanation would be pandering to us based on the result of the flip. At the time, it wasn't clear that VE was town, so appealing to our guilt that VE flipped town as a way to exonerate himself for his actions means that he's probably scum. He did that somewhat, but he added that "maybe it wasn't optimal play given what I knew at the time", meaning he agrees that it was probably a bad move at the time, so he passed the test. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 02 2012 11:23 Hyaach wrote: Toad whose your new mason? Why did you ask that? It's a good thing Toad didn't answer yet, because he probably shouldn't, not unless there's an actual need to. Also, as much as I would like to potentially flip Kita today, I am more sure of Gambit being scum at the moment. So, I would rather take the opportunity to lower mafia KP, than lynch someone who I see as having less surety of flipping scum. For the people voting for kitaman right now, why are you voting for him as compared to Gambit? What makes you think kita's surer to flip red than him? I'm actually surprised that a lot of people have piled votes on kita, while Gambit has been generally ignored. I'll only consider changing my vote to Kita if there's no support for a Gambit lynch and that's the alternative, but there should be support, because Gambit's scum. ##Vote: Gambit I'm going to spoiler my response to Kitaman for length. + Show Spoiler [My response to Kitaman's case] + I don't think Kitaman's case is very well thought out. Besides the fact that it's wrong, because I'm town, it also does a good job of misrepresenting events as they happened. On June 02 2012 11:52 kitaman27 wrote: It's time we take a look at our mayor Mr. Wiggles. While Wiggles was voted into the leader position, he has displayed little interest in leading the town the first two cycles. While individuals such as myself and Meapak have put in effort to push our prefered lynch candidates, Wiggles has sat in the background jumping on others cases. His posts have been lengthy and well-written, but they are also incredibly safe. In his initial campaign post, Wiggles announces that he is running for office, but prefers to be elected vice-leader. He explains how the pardoner is the more important of the two roles and that he wants it for himself because he knows his own alignment. With the voting seperated by only a couple of individuals, he easily could have ensured that he obtained the pardoner role with a simple request in the thread to rearrange a few votes. However, his only legitimate opponent, EchelonTee, has expressed suspicion of Zealos and a strong anti-Zealos movement has started to gain strength hours before the deadline. Rather than trusting the lynch in EchelonTee's hands and securing the pardoner position, which his campaign was based upon, he drops his initial plan and ensures himself that he is elected mayor. While he does vote for EchelonTee himself, he only does so with less than an hour remaining into the day, where his victory is nearly certain. Kitaman tries to create a narrative here where seeing that a zealos lynch is gaining huge support and that ET is one of those supporters, I ensured that I became mayor by not posturing for the role of pardoner. As well, he paints me as having my campaign simply based upon obtaining the role of pardoner, thus making me becoming mayor seem even worse. However, in reality, this is not the case. Firstly, my campaign was never based solely upon becoming the pardoner. + Show Spoiler [My initial campaign post] + 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. 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. 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. 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. If I get elected as Leader and so obtain extra votes, on further days I'll just use them to apply additional pressure to who I want to lynch. I don't want you to sheep me just because I got elected to leader. If you agree with my ideas, great, if you don't then that's good for you, but hopefully you actually discuss why you don't, than turn into a brick wall. 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. The role of vice-leader is much more powerful than leader, and I believe it's the position we should actually be focusing on today. The leader picks the day 1 lynch, which will hopefully be influenced by town, and after that they only have 1 extra vote. The vice-leader on the other hand, has the ability to waste an entire day, cause an extra round of night actions to go through (which is bad for us in most cases), and also generates lots of confusion. If they use their power in an anti-town way, it means we potentially have to spend two extra days just to lynch the vice-leader and the person we were trying to lynch in the first place. This ties up our primary KP for a long time, and we get the additional WIFOM of if the pardoner pardoned his scum buddy or not, and whether the pardoner is actually scum or just a stupid townie. Basically, the pardon ability causes a ton of trouble that we won't want most of the time. As vice-leader, I promise not to use my power in 99% of cases. Basically, the only exception I can come up with off the top of my head would be a MYLO situation where I was going to be lynched as town, and pardoning myself means we don't auto-lose. Outside of a situation like that though, I really don't see a reason where I would ever want, or need, to use the pardon. So, I want to be elected, because I know my own alignment, and can trust myself not to frivolously use the pardon, or use it against the good of the town. I can't trust others to do that, since I can't know you're not scum, and beyond that, even with a town read, lots of people have the capacity to do something silly because they're convinced that it's a good play. However, this normally results in more bad than good, and in the mislynch of the player who did it, which isn't a desirable outcome. 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. Now, as for myself, I'm going to vote in a candidate based on who I think is most likely to be town, who I can trust to be the most transparent with what they're thinking, who has the best reads, and who won't go Rambo at the end of Day 1 and cause a huge mess for Day 2. Those four things are the criteria by which I will determine who I support as the other candidate for office. I'll keep you updated with what I think once most of the candidates come out and make their posts and we get past super early game posting. The pardon question has already been asked and answered: Also, it's 3 a.m. here, so I'm going to bed now. However, Blazinghand, do you actually think it's the best day 1 play to just lynch someone you think is bad rather than someone you think is scum? Maybe if you had no scum reads by the end of Day 1, but you make it sound like you'll go through with it regardless... My campaign was based upon running for both positions, but with a preference to pardoner. As I said in the thread, by the end of Day 1, I had a good enough town-read on ET that I was fine with him obtaining the role of pardoner instead of myself, and decided to let the votes fall as people actually wanted, instead of trying to manipulate them near the dead-line to become pardoner. As well, myself and ET had different lynch targets in mind, so it would be disingenuous to ask my voters to switch onto ET when they were voting me in part for who I was going to lynch. Now, what "strong anti-zealos movement" are you talking about? There wasn't a strong movement against him, so much as 3 or 4 people commenting on him near the deadline. Additionally, the actual case on zealos by forumite didn't even come until 30 minutes after the deadline, whereas I had sent in my choice for lynch 5 or so minutes before the deadline. Additionally, it wasn't clear at all that ET would be lynching zealos. These are the posts made by ET before the deadline about who he'd like to lynch. In both of them, he makes it clear that strongandbig would be his target, and he doesn't take too hard of a stance on wanting to lynch zealos: + Show Spoiler + On May 29 2012 06:00 EchelonTee wrote: While I think Zealos/Mattchew are scummy for a few reasons, I'd rather hold off on them for a few reasons. You guys better step up your play if you're town. RE: Strongandbig This case is late (which will be sure to set of Wiggles' alarm bells :p) and ninja'd for the most part, but here are my reasons for wanting to lynch SnB. His campaign post has been already pointed out as strange. Why state "I am running for mayor b/c blue role is fun"? It appears that he doesn't care to run for mayor to help town; even when townies run for mayor off of bad reasoning, they at least appear focused in some aspect. SnB's campaign feels like a small conglomarate of generic reasons ("I will make cases. I will use pardoner role if I think it's ok but I will discuss it") that could easily be faked by a newbie scum. While generally I would think newbie scum (he has had around 4 games now though? he's breaking out) would be reluctant to go for a role, note that his original election campaign was only for the pardoner. The pardoner role has much less accountability (no lynch, no extra vote), while still having some sway. I could see his vet scum buddies not wanting to go for election b/c no bodyguards, and instead let SnB go for it. The majority of his filter is filled with posts like this, posts that don't really talk about much. While it is true that I have a long filter chock full of setup speculation, talking about general shit, etc., since I have a higher post count, I have the time to both post about that stuff, and post reads/opinions. In SnB's case, with his limited posting he has only posted one case, but worse so, he has posted very little opinions about anybody. He states that he thinks me and Wiggles look townie. Thanks bro, but that's about it. He states that he thinks supersoft is scummy, builds case. While his case isn't bad, it consists of "this turn by supersoft is not logical, therefore he is scum". Read this last paragraph from his case.+ Show Spoiler + This reads to me either like SS and Toad are scum buddies trying to distance themselves and got too far, or (more likely) like a scum SS saw an opportunity to gain town cred by making an actual good case on a player who was not being towny but wasn't on his scum team, then backing off when he realized that the presence of third parties like a lyncher hurts town and probably helps scum. It doesn't take much to see that the logic there is pretty convoluted. "looks like a scum SS saw he could make town cred, but backed off when he realized toad could be lyncher"? ... And even now, when given an opportunity to take a stance on someone (Sinensis), he is still waffly. No me gusta. Filter analysis seems to corroborate his scumminess. His filter from Wheel of Fortune. He talks about setup speculation in an extensive manner along with a plan (that code thing). Has opinions on several people D1. His filter from Space Station. Doesn't take stances on almost anyone, doesn't build much cases. Disclaimer: one of his first games. Lastly, the case doesn't feel too "easy". This is more of an abstract thing, but when a lynch seems to be proceeding too easily (tons of people agreeing easily except for one or more so mavericks), then it feels like a mislynch. Think Janaan from TL Mafia LI; who actually opposed that lynch? SnB has had some people indicate that they see SnB as "null" or "not scummy enough" to lynch atm. However, since the progenitors of the case are people that I currently trust, I have reason to believe that the resistance is healthy, and the case is strong. I will kill SnB if elected. Alternatively, if Wiggles is elected I hope he will pick SnB over Sinensis. On May 29 2012 07:30 EchelonTee wrote: I posted a case, Forumite. Tell me what you think of it. The reason why I don't particularly want to lynch Mattchew atm is because he is probably just busy. He has played active scum games before, so him just lurking =/= scum. Uncharacteristic though, for sure. I would be ok with a Zealos lynch, but it doesn't have much grounding atm. If I was elected, Zealos would probably be my 2nd choice. I don't agree with a Sinensis lynch because I don't think he is scum, but it stands that he is not very contributive and his death wouldn't be as bad as whiffing a lynch on say, Toad, but I don't agree with the lynch. So, how could I have made a decision to not try to obtain the pardoner role in response to ET possibly lynching zealos, when ET had never took a hard stance of wanting to lynch zealos Day 1? In fact, the first time ET mentions that he would be lynching zealos if elected is 3 minutes after voting had ended. On May 29 2012 08:03 EchelonTee wrote: I agree with you supersoft, I made a post on the same points you said before I read yours.I hear corroboration without prior knowledge is a good sign or something. I think I'll lynch Zealos over SnB, if elected, since SnB's response was not too bad. During the entire day one cycle, Zealos never considers or even references Wiggles as mayor. As one of the two main candidates, why wouldn't he take a moment to comment on his candidacy? Between Wiggles two day one lynch candidates, we have two townies. While being wrong isn't necessarily scummy, his case against Sinensis took advantage of a poor day one plan, and made it appear as if he was pushing a scummy agenda. Furthermore, he fails to address any of the concerns against his case for why Sinensis would be a poor day one lynch. I didn't make sinensis appear as though he was pushing a scummy agenda, he was pushing a scummy agenda. I lynched him for it, and I'm not going to apologize for it. As well, a lot of the weak opposition to the sinensis lynch was just people saying they were null on him, or thought strongandbig was the better lynch, with little or no reasoning, so there wasn't anything to address. Going back and re-reading, I might not have addressed concerns about why sinensis would run for mayor himself instead of just supporting BH, but at the time, I thought that would just open up a can of WIFOM and conjecture that would be impossible to prove one way or the other. As for zealos' behaviour, I can't explain the posting of a dead scum player, so I'm not going to waste time trying. Day two is where Wiggle's play really starts to drop off. Rather than actively perticipating in discussion, he jumps on 2-post Gambit, without providing any reasoning, except there was a solid case. Only after questioned, does he actually provide a case for his vote. In addition, he makes the following statement about VE: While he explains that his opinion on VE has changed after his flip-flopping on the lynch and his late vote switch, he never addresses why the town-tells he found on day one no longer apply. In addition, he only supports the VE lynch after it has gained a large amount of support. While his mayoral double vote is necessary to ensure the mislynch, he makes sure to remind the town that he had a town read on VE initially: I don't see where you're getting that I didn't provide any reasoning for wanting to lynch Gambit. I found the initial case on him solid, and instead of rehashing what had already been posted by other players several times before, I simply stated my support of it as it stood. As well, I gave additional reasoning for why I thought he would make a good lynch. In fact, what you're saying is inconsistent. To show this, these are the two posts I made regarding gambit: + Show Spoiler + On May 31 2012 03:01 Mr. Wiggles wrote: I'm going to say right off the bat that I disagree with the VE case. He's one of my town-reads. I don't see why him opposing Toad being elected into office makes him scum. As well, I don't really see why what he's posting makes him scum. Instead, I think we should go with lynching Gambit today. The case on him has already been made, and it's pretty solid based on the information we have. As well, calling him scum actually looked pretty polarizing at first, and there were a couple people who soft-defended him: + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2012 09:53 VisceraEyes wrote: Whoa there buddy, we don't lynch lurkers here...we shoot scummy lurkers with holy bullets of townie fury....not hang them. How about we lynch someone who's posting so we can get information with our lynch? Ya? No? I like your target other than the fact that his lynch will net us no new information. On May 30 2012 10:02 strongandbig wrote: Gambit's two posts sound a lot like newer mafia posting noncommital lists of reads and then not following them up. However, I'd rather wait to vote until we've got a bit more information rather than during the first hour or two after the night post. I'm also still waiting to hear an answer to my questions for stofu, his posts look similar to me. On May 30 2012 10:07 austinmcc wrote: I'd prefer targets other than Gambit. When you called him out yesterday, you said he hadn't voted and had posted two unhelpful walls of text. The walls weren't helpful at all, but he DID vote. That plus a claimed hit is the extent of the case on Gambit. If we're lynching players for lurking and looking scummy when they don't, everyone seems pretty set that Zealos looks actively scummy. Why should we lynch Gambit based off your claimed hit and poor posting, when Zealos has had poor posting and seems less likely to modkill himself out of the game? Which could give us some decent information and leads if/when he flips scum. They all look odd to me, since none of them actively address whether they think gambit is scum or not. Instead, they're "We don't lynch lurkers", "I'd rather wait" (Why?), "You made a mistake about the voting. Lynch this other lurker instead!". Notice that none of them actually defend Gambit as town, they just try to find excuses not to lynch him. I find this interesting, since I could particularly see strongandbig or austinmc making a mistake like that as scum as they seem more inexperienced. On May 31 2012 14:31 Mr. Wiggles wrote: I've been more busy in the last couple days than I was when I ran. I only had an hour and a bit of free time today so far after the morning and ended up playing Dota, haha. :p I guess I'll answer your other post at the same time, since they're pretty much asking the same thing. + Show Spoiler + On May 31 2012 03:18 kitaman27 wrote: How did you come to decide it should be gambit from that list? I decided to go for Gambit, since the soft-defenses of him made me pretty suspicious, and the original analysis was good as well. His name as scum came pretty suddenly, because it's not like people were pressuring him too hard before-hand. Instead, it was more of a surprise and the case on him appeared very quickly. The case on him made sense. After it popped up, several people entered the thread and all defended against his lynch. However, they didn't do it in such a way that they called him town, or not scum, they did it in such a way that it looked a lot more like they were making excuses as to why we shouldn't lynch him. That's not the proper way to defend someone from a lynch, from a town perspective. So, I already agreed with what WBG had said about Gambit, and then a bunch of people soft-defended him scummily. Therefore, I decided he would be a good lynch, since he seemed likely to flip scum from the analysis made, and then he could provide us with further leads on three separate players. Especially strongandbig and austinmc seemed like they'd be healthy leads if gambit flips scum, since I could definitely see them reacting like that if they saw a scum-buddy suddenly accused with no warning. Their posts and VE's looked like knee-jerk reactions to WBG. While I think Zealos looks pretty bad, I don't think the bolded plays into it at all. I think he's just saying that he thinks Toad will look town if he proves that he's a mason, if not, he's scum of some kind. That was the general opinion in the thread then too, so it looks like he's just echoing that. As you can see, the second post isn't providing reasoning that wasn't already present in the first post. Instead, the second post is an elaboration of what I had originally said. All I did was go into more detail about my reasoning, not make a case that I didn't already mention. So, which is it? Did I provide a case for my vote, or did I not provide any reasoning? Both posts contain the same reasoning, only the second is in greater detail, so if the first post has no reasoning, neither does the second, and if the second makes a case, then so does the first, so which one is it? Now, as for VE, I never said that what made me think he was town no longer applied. However, if we only judged players by how they were acting before they did something to give you reason to think they were scum, we wouldn't get anywhere. My read didn't change on the basis of changing my opinion about VE's Day 1 play, it changed on the basis of what he was doing on Day 2. Notice that I don't bring up anything from Day 1 for why I though VE was scummy. I thought he was scummy based on how he reacted to pressure in the thread, contradicted his votes, and flip-flopped like a fish out of water. Also, that post was just me sort of hitting myself over the head for thinking that VE was town, whereas at that point, I was convinced he was scum. Wiggles completely drops his prefered lynch, gambit, without any push. Instead, he jumps on his second lynch bandwagon based on a case he didn't contribute to. Throughout the game, Wiggles has shown little signs of actual scum hunting. He has shared his opinion on occassion, but lacks the assertive attitude towards pushing a pro-town agenda that I would expect, which makes me believe he is scum. There are a large number of people who seem to agree that Wiggles is mafia, but never has he been considered for an actual candidate. ##Vote: Mr. Wiggles By the time I had switched to VE, it was pretty clear that there wasn't as enough support for a Gambit lynch. So, rather than push for a gambit lynch I had supported before my read on VE changed, I decided to help ensure VE's lynch instead. I felt that he was scum, and was happy to lynch him. I don't see how that makes me scummy in turn. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 03 2012 06:42 jaj22 wrote: Yo Wiggles: Were you required to put your lynch choice in before the deadline? Did you have an opportunity to change it after the deadline? I put it in five minutes early in consideration of the hosts. They didn't tell me if I could change it or not after the deadline, but I assumed once I made my choice and the deadline had passed, it would be final. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
I'm reading austinmcc to follow up on his soft-defense of Gambit. I'll let you know what I think of him after the deadline if I'm still alive. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 05 2012 08:19 EchelonTee wrote: Hrmm. Well we should go one lynch at a time anyways; no need to see big grand mafia connections, especially when you never know if a crafty scum player has been hiding long time. I know I keep on repeating that, but just saying; the intent of scum is to escape notice, so it's possible that one of our entrenched "townies" could just be an especially good scum player. AKA, don't ignore me+others just because it seems like we're town or whatever. Wiggles, opinion on today's lynch? Kita, I was going to say Kita, but after his claim, I need to re-assess. Breadcrumbs don't do anything for me, so I'm going to base what I think on the basis of his posting, and how likely I think it is that there's a non-claiming medic if MZ doesn't turn out to be a vet. On June 05 2012 12:24 kitaman27 wrote: Something else that I forget to mention is that I know 100% that Meapak wasn't saved by a veteran passive ability. Reads to come in about an hour or two. How do you know that? Also, if you are town, what do you think of ET and Kenpachi? Why did you just claim today instead of trying to argue against what people have said against you, or alternatively just push for the lynch of someone you think is scum? One of the things that's making me more reticent about your claim is that you didn't push for anyone else first, and you underplay the value of the medic, which seems weird considering you become more likely to make a save as the game goes on and those saves become more devastating to the mafia. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 05 2012 13:49 kitaman27 wrote: How else would I know this? Because I saved him. Just to be clear, are you supporting the "medic should counter-claim if they exist" plan or the "lynch kita plan"? We need to clear me so no player has an excuse to keep their vote on me today and cause a no-lynch or mislynch. As I said before, I felt I would be unable to argue against this today. The entire cycle yesterday was wasted by me having to defend myself and no one was willing to listen to my response. Keeping my identity safe is important, however, not as important as an entire day's discussion and the threat of a mislynch and night hits. If I'm the clear easy lynch target, then we have two days in a row where players are no required to share their opinion, which is awful for late game. I could have waited until later in the cycle to claim, but with the inactivity displayed by the players yesterday, I had no faith that we would be able to accomplish anything in a 10 hour period. I'll comment on ET and Kenpachi later, but I'd really like to hear from you first. The entire game I feel you have been gauging where the town seems to be going and then showing up later in the cycle to share your opinions. Is there a reason why you aren't the one who is leading the lynch? I think that if there's a medic who saved MZ or MZ is a vet, they should claim. The thing is, I've played with some people who don't really like to play out situations optimally, with stuff like not claiming their vig shots, or if they took a hit or RB, or whatever. So, even if I tell them to claim (which I am now), there's still the possibility that they think their role is more valuable than just outing you, especially if they think we'll lynch you anyways, so I need to weigh against the possibility of that as well. And no, there's no particular reason I'm not leading the lynch, I'm just not. I'm doing prep for a test I'm taking next week in the afternoon and early evening, and I eat dinner around the deadline as well, so that could be creating the sense that I'm hanging out for a while before posting if that's what you mean. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 06 2012 04:38 austinmcc wrote: I won't give a bullshit response, although I had one typed out as well. It ensures that you and MZ aren't scumbuddies. The reason I asked whether scum could hold a KP is to determine whether MZ is 100% confirmed or not. MZ is confirmed because he took a shot N1 and nobody else claimed. If scum can hold shots, he's not 100% confirmed. Without a third member to confirm you're a mason, you can fakeclaim, he can claim to have been shot and been masoned, and you can both skate through the rest of the game as confirmed townies by holding back a single KP on one night. Pretty good bargain. I want to be absolutely sure as we push into late game that you guys are actually both confirmed. Now is the perfect time to do so, because if you're worried about someone in the circle getting shot: (1) Mafia hasn't fired on you despite knowing you were a mason since D1, (2) Mafia hasn't fired on MZ since knowing he was masoned D2, (3) we have a claimed medic and cop which make juicier targets than a third member of the circle. Therefore, the downside in the third member outing himself is extremely low. Do you think Kita is scum as well? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 06 2012 04:56 austinmcc wrote: Last night, I was leaning scum on Kita.+ Show Spoiler + On June 05 2012 08:42 austinmcc wrote: wbg's protection N1 was definitely from jailing, don't remember N2 specifically. So if blues stayed on the same targets each night, with supersoft dead he was vulnerable. Gonna start the game day with the breakfast of champions, a vote for kita. On June 05 2012 10:02 austinmcc wrote: Went to go looking for something but quote, but you're right. I hadn't spoken up on that. However, I started off yesterday the same way. You had my vote until G32 came back and posted.+ Show Spoiler + On June 03 2012 23:49 austinmcc wrote: Going to put my vote on kita at the moment. Happy to switch it later if needed. Despite nobody coming forward and thinking Gambit is town, nobody (except Kita) has really come forward and said that about kita either. It's not a big preference on my part, but I don't want to swing everything to Gambit too early. All/most of our very low volume posters have popped in and voted Gambit, which makes me want to sit on the other side at this point. I did disagree with VE's case on you. Perhaps it's me being new, but I'm not a big fan of meta-based cases. Going to assume it's more difficult to play different from one's meta than I imagine, but for now I'd prefer a case made off of in-game actions. Part 1 of VE's case was pure meta, Part 2 was based on certain aspects of your interaction with Toad's candidacy and the possibility of him being lyncher. So I wasn't going to vote for you off of VE's case, because (1) I had scummier reads and (2) didn't find VE's case in particular compelling. However, VE isn't the only player to have spoken up, to some extent, I suppose I'm sheeping on this one. Prob posted a case that felt more compelling than VE's, particularly in the way he expanded upon the Toad/lyncher interaction and followed it further into the game. Furthermore, it just doesn't look great in general when townies keep dying with you as one of their main scum reads. While you can say that's just mafia setting you up for a mislynch, you've been a serious lynch candidate for days now and so it's not like they've been aiming shots to make you look scummy, you looked scummy to a lot of the thread before the shots went out. As far as voting for you over my top suspects from earlier - i put out a list of 7 filters that I read. Not everyone in the game, and it wasn't supposed to be all my thoughts, just some filters I'd freshly read. Haven't been contributing as much as I'd like, so I put those out there. You weren't included because you were being actively discussed for the last few days, and I was digging through some other filters. I do still believe manason and papapanda look scummy, but part of manason's looking scummy is the way he brought you and zealos up as scummy with no cases. So yeah, this vote does look more out of left field than I thought it would. I voted for you yesterday but didn't push that. I disagreed with VE's case, but not because I found you particularly towny, only because the case on you didn't convince me more than the case on him. With the claim, it's a little more murky. This is a major turning point in the game though, whether Kita is actually the medic or no, and I want to make sure I've got as much information as possible to decide where I come down on that. No, I'm asking because there's almost no consistent way to think that MZ is scum and Kita's a medic. If MZ is scum, Kita is too. Grey said that medics are notified when they make a save, so if Kita is a medic, then he got a notification saying he saved MZ from a shot. So, MZ can't be scum and Kita a medic unless: a) Mafia actually shot their own member and gambled he'd be protected, which is retarded b) A vig shot MZ (why?) and didn't claim (why?) and we have a missing shot. This is very unlikely. So, you can't say that Toad and MZ are scum, unless you believe Kita is as well. In that case, you're claiming you just caught the entire scum team. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Maju is the better lynch out of him and Manason. First, I'll explain why I don't agree with the case on Manason, and then I'll explain why I think Maju is scum (Hint: It's not just about content or whatever he's saying). I don't agree with the case on Manason, because the read I personally get going through his filter is that he's just a newbie town. This is his first game of mafia ever. I don't think he's a smurf unless the guy smurfing is putting a ton of effort into roleplaying a new town and not playing the game beyond that, and I find that very unlikely. So, it's his first game. In that light, the things he says make sense from a town perspective. A lot of what he says, is just blatantly scummy, and things that no experienced town would even think of, much less say, but this is why I think it makes him more likely to be town. If he was part of a scum team, I don't think they'd let him promise to make a case (twice!), and not let him follow up on it and use the excuse that he was playing skyrim. As well, I don't think they'd let him vote for VE and then post that he thought VE was town the entire time. It's just blatantly wrong to do. So, I think that's the entire reason he was able to post those things. He hasn't had the benefit of any coaching, from town or scum, so he's just doing things on his own. As such, he's posting things that are wrong from a game-play perspective, and things that people learn to not do after a few games. It's somewhat hard to explain, because this is just my intuition on the matter, and it's telling me that he's new, inexperienced, town. I'm not voting him today. As for Maju, the thing that really typifies his play is that he always takes the path of least resistance. Examples of this are that his contributions on Day 1 are arguing against whether Toad's claim was good for his role (which doesn't contribute anything), then on Day 2 arguing against VE's breadcrumb. Both of these are easy to do, since the mason claim was bad, and the breadcrumb was bad. However, this is a huge majority of everything he's done this game. Arguing whether Toad's claim was good play or not was useless, because it doesn't matter now that's he's claimed. Then, when arguing against VE, he doesn't state reasons for why he thinks VE is scummy besides sheeping MZ's case. Everything to do with VE is just arguing against the breadcrumb. Both of these are easy to do, because they provide points of contention where you can argue without actually providing any thoughts on alignment to the thread. It's easy to take a stand, because both of them were bad moves, and that makes it really easy to tear into them. Additionally, on Day 3, he ends up voting for Gambit, but nowhere in his filter does he mention original reasons for wanting to do so. He says at one point he likes the case, and that's it. So again, he's just taking the path of least resistance forward. Even now, when pressured to give some reads, he ends up posting about Hassy and papapanda, who were generally thought to be scummy, so he could blend in. Again, he's taking the path of least resistance. Even in his analysis, notice how unsure he seems to be than when he was arguing against VE or Toad. It's because now he's talking about thread behaviour, not just arguing with bad plays, so it's harder for him to fake analysis. This is further shown, when he's called out on the Hassy check. If he really thought Hassy was scum, he would just argue that he was framed, was the GF, or that Prob was insane and Toad was framed Night 1 or something. All of those are valid reasons that could explain why the check came back town, but he doesn't try to argue any of them. Instead, he backs off completely and says in his own words to disregard anything he said about Hassy. This shows that he just wanted someone to make an easy case against, and that he didn't believe any of it. So, without further ado: ##Vote: Maju | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 07 2012 06:16 marvellosity wrote: Your defence of Manason seems to be that he's too scummy to be scum. It's just not a defence. I've mentioned twice already this game that scum Zealos got caught in Magic admitting he voted for a townie, and he had Katina on his team to 'coach' him. The fact that he was willing to discuss the mayoral elections but NEVER on scum analysis is pretty damning. He's not even responded when kita gave him an explicit chance to earlier (Zealos and gambit were pushed to contribute earlier this game and did not, and we know how they flipped). So when Manason doesn't contribute he's townie because the scumteam would have told him to, but when Zealos/Gambit didn't the scumteam were doing what? No, it's not that he's "too scummy to be scum", it's that he's posting so badly, no scum team in their right mind wouldn't have either coached him, or completely bussed the crap out of him before now. Your initial suspicion of him came on Night 2, and we ended up lynching Gambit on Day 3. I doubt that scum would give someone who hasn't played before and thus is a risk to get lynched super early or get modkilled a power-role, so why didn't they end up bussing him instead of letting Gambit get lynched? He's basically indefensible except for the argument that he's just really that new/bad at town. In the presence of stronger players, a lot of new people don't make their own cases, and they just end up sheeping hard. That's what he's doing, but he's explicitly stated it. It's not about not contributing, it's about how he's posting things that are explicitly wrong or scummy, like saying he thought VE was town all the time and still voted him, or that he's not going to bother writing cases and just sheep. I don't think he would be that brazen as scum in his first game, and I don't think his team wouldn't tell him to just stop posting stuff like that, or alternatively bus the crap out of him because of how easy a target it makes him. On June 07 2012 06:31 kitaman27 wrote: Why does it take you 45 hours to post a case and then expect a consensus 3 hours before the deadline? -_- Doing a quick reread and then will be voting. I wasn't around and hadn't read through them thoroughly yet? Also, MZ and Toad both looked around and expressed their desire to potentially vote Maju, and now we've had 3 or 4 others pop in here already. That's enough to lynch him, and if it's not going to happen they can switch back if they really think Manason's scum. So, it's not like people aren't here and we can't lynch Maju. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
##Vote: Maju If anyone wants me to answer anything for tomorrow, just ask. On June 08 2012 10:56 Kenpachi wrote: no actually, nulltell i dont get it It's Day 5, and the best you can say is that you're null? What do you not get? On June 08 2012 10:42 Kenpachi wrote: ##vote: majuGarzett On June 08 2012 10:43 Kenpachi wrote: so id like an explanation on Maju who is this guy and why is he mafia wat? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
I'm town, because my role PM says so. MZ and Toad are town. Scum can't be masons, and scum didn't shoot their own member on Night 1 or something equally stupid. I also believe Prob's claim, because I don't think he's ballsy enough to claim DT like that as scum. If he's still alive in two days, I might come back and look again. So for now, he's town. I currently have town reads on all three of Austin, Marv, and ET. So, that leaves 4 players, Maju, hyaach, papapanda, and Kenpachi. There's four scum left. GG. On June 09 2012 05:45 Kenpachi wrote: fuck tell me this is town wiggles with a straight face because i sure as hell cant ( i dont remember it anyways. he's scum too often lolol) He makes a posting excuse. cant say anything about that but he takes no responsibility. Seriously, as town, id feel pressured to comply to mayor status and actually help town. like wtf? you guys think this guy is town? What the hell? How about, instead of avoiding the question, you answer? You even bolded it for yourself. There's no reason you shouldn't be able to have a read on someone one way or the other unless you haven't bothered to read anything (no way we can tell, so that's a lame excuse) or you're purposefully not wanting to give reads (scum). Then add on that you voted for Maju, and a minute later are in the thread asking who he is and why he's scum. That made me go "wtf?" in my head, and that's why I quoted it. What made you decide to do that? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 09 2012 07:28 Toadesstern wrote: well you've got to admit that Wiggles pm that tells him he's town is quite a convincing argument. You've got to be mafia Kenpachi It's not an argument, I'm just not including myself in a list of suspects when I know I'm town. -_______- On June 09 2012 07:34 austinmcc wrote: Wiggles' argument is convincing, but then I noticed this post: Clearly both town? Scum could have easily been given the VT role PM. It's likely considering it's not in the OP and there needs to be a way to keep people from bread-crumbing their role PMs to confirm themselves to others with the same role. Also, Kenpachi, my question isn't a piece of shit, so why don't you answer it? What do you not understand about the case on Maju? After 5 cycles, the best you can really say about him is that you're null? That implies you don't think he's town or scum one way or the other, unless you're just abusing the word null. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 09 2012 08:28 Kenpachi wrote: i wont answer it cause it is a piece of shit Tell me this, what is scummy about maju? I can see where you're coming but i cant say hes mafia or town. On June 07 2012 04:16 Mr. Wiggles wrote: As for Maju, the thing that really typifies his play is that he always takes the path of least resistance. Examples of this are that his contributions on Day 1 are arguing against whether Toad's claim was good for his role (which doesn't contribute anything), then on Day 2 arguing against VE's breadcrumb. Both of these are easy to do, since the mason claim was bad, and the breadcrumb was bad. However, this is a huge majority of everything he's done this game. Arguing whether Toad's claim was good play or not was useless, because it doesn't matter now that's he's claimed. Then, when arguing against VE, he doesn't state reasons for why he thinks VE is scummy besides sheeping MZ's case. Everything to do with VE is just arguing against the breadcrumb. Both of these are easy to do, because they provide points of contention where you can argue without actually providing any thoughts on alignment to the thread. It's easy to take a stand, because both of them were bad moves, and that makes it really easy to tear into them. Additionally, on Day 3, he ends up voting for Gambit, but nowhere in his filter does he mention original reasons for wanting to do so. He says at one point he likes the case, and that's it. So again, he's just taking the path of least resistance forward. Even now, when pressured to give some reads, he ends up posting about Hassy and papapanda, who were generally thought to be scummy, so he could blend in. Again, he's taking the path of least resistance. Even in his analysis, notice how unsure he seems to be than when he was arguing against VE or Toad. It's because now he's talking about thread behaviour, not just arguing with bad plays, so it's harder for him to fake analysis. This is further shown, when he's called out on the Hassy check. If he really thought Hassy was scum, he would just argue that he was framed, was the GF, or that Prob was insane and Toad was framed Night 1 or something. All of those are valid reasons that could explain why the check came back town, but he doesn't try to argue any of them. Instead, he backs off completely and says in his own words to disregard anything he said about Hassy. This shows that he just wanted someone to make an easy case against, and that he didn't believe any of it. Basically, he's given barely any thoughts about who is scum while arguing against things that are very easy to argue against, but provide little in the way of useful information or analysis (See: Toad's claim, VE's breadcrumb). When asked for reads, he gives reads that follow the general feeling of the thread without much explanation or support, and when called out on his analysis, quickly retracts it. A green check on Hassy doesn't make behavioural analysis on him invalid, so Maju completely retracting his read on Hassy shows that he was just looking for an easy target to post a read on, and wasn't convinced of it. He was afraid of stepping on any toes. All this together makes him scum. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
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: 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 accountable 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. This 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: 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. 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. Again, this is total nothingness. Being manipulative again. 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. 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. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 12 2012 12:34 Kenpachi wrote: i would lynch wiggles before him. That's because he's your team-mate and I'm not. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 12 2012 19:39 marvellosity wrote: Summary of Wiggles' recent post(s) for the thread: - A bazillion lines in self defence - barely one line on who is actually scum. That about cover it guys? Except the scum can be found purely through the process of elimination. I don't need to make big long cases when they aren't necessary to know who is scum. Unless I'm wrong about you being town, of course. The only thing cases serve now is to convince people to lynch scum instead of town (myself). So, part of that is showing how I'm town. Thus my defense. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
| ||