EPTNot a huge fan of the way day 1 was handled. And I'm aware its my fault too.
iGrok's Good Clean Old-fashioned Mafia - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
Not a huge fan of the way day 1 was handled. And I'm aware its my fault too. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 12 2012 08:28 gonzaw wrote: Oh so I see BB made a "case" right after I left >_> + Show Spoiler + On June 12 2012 05:33 BrownBear wrote: You see, I'm not dampering discussion. I'm pointing out that Palmar is. I'm not sure why you don't understand this. Let me throw up a few examples. Post contributes nothing. Great, MZ "failed" by agreeing with Greymist? How about you explain some more exactly why and how he failed? How about you provide a logical, well constructed argument about why Greymist and MZ are "wrong" rather than just say "welp, they don't agree with me, they fail, LYNCH LYNCH LYNCH". So instead of complaining about it, why don't you change it bro? "Thick" is not an accusation many would say about Radfield, particularly players who have actually played with him. There's a reason scum target him early on rather than let him play entire games. I think he's just as confused as I am - he wants to know your reasoning for supporting RNGs. I do too. Let's hear them? This is the response of someone who's actually worried that they look like they aren't playing. If Palmar were playing and were secure in this fact, why wouldn't he just link to a bunch of his earlier posts where he was playing and contributing? That would be a much more airtight defense than a simple "screw you". Also, Palmar's too smart to mistake the volume of posts he's posted for actual, meaningful contribution. He's posted like 25 times: I count maybe 2 or 3 of those that are actually useful to town. This is a classic scum tactic (I used it in Mafia XXX, if you're curious) where volume makes a player look active, while clever words or subtle rehashes of earlier topics disguise the fact that none of the posts have much meaningful substance to them. Direct attack on me and Ace aside, isn't the point of mafia to build cases on people? A weak case is still a case, saying it isn't is stifling town discussion. If you think a case is weak, rather than dismiss it out of hand, you should maybe point out the weaknesses in it or the holes in logic. This builds town cohesion and stronger cases. Direct attack against another town player (gonzaw) trying to shut down a valid point: Palmar ISN'T PLAYING THIS GAME. He's trying to appear that he is, and he's trying to tie up town conversations he doesn't like by directly flaming the people making them, but he is not contributing anything meaningful of his own. Now, some people may say "oh, that's how Palmar plays lol" but that shouldn't be acceptable. Like I said earlier - his behavior is a cancer to the town. We need to either cut it out or ignore it. How do you know I'm town? BrownBear, you say Palmar's behaviour is "cancerous to town". Yeah it may be. However, do you think he's scum or not? I don't think I remember you explicitly saying you thought Palmar was scum/SK. I never did. I'm starting to think he's just BM-style town - annoying, misleading, and should be ignored. However, a couple intentionally misleading things he's done still give me pause. But I'm much less convinced he's definitely red now that I'm less angry at him. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
| ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 12 2012 09:10 gonzaw wrote: Another question: Does any of you have an idea who the SK might be? And is there any subtle difference in scum behaviour and SK behaviour? (without taking interactions with scumbuddies into account) As to your first question, no clue yet. To your second question, SK and mafia tend to behave rather differently. SK thrives on running under the radar and not attracting any attention whatsoever - competent SKs will achieve this by lurking or posting "just enough". Really great SKs, though, will work hard to be a trusted member of town (this is easier to do for them because they don't have to worry about teammates). This protects them from the only possible method of killing them - the lynch. In this setup, the SK is gonna be harder to catch, because we won't have DT checks, trackers, or a trail of bodies to follow back to him (in other setups, you can catch SK if he hits several people casting doubts on him, even if you think he's just scum he'll still die to lynch). We'll have to rely on straight analysis + the one night when 2 people come back dead instead of 1, if that happens. I don't think mafia players would risk outing him directly because that would mean half their strength would be lynched right afterwards, and the SK himself certainly isn't gonna ever claim (once SK is out in the open, his win condition becomes basically impossible). and to your earlier thing: That isn't a scumslip. That's me being dumb and saying "he's town" when I probably should have said "a player who I think is town". | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 12 2012 09:39 gonzaw wrote: So....who do you think is scum? Still figuring that one out. I will post when I have a clearer picture. There isn't really a time crunch at the moment, so I hope you don't mind if I take my time during the night cycle and read carefully. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 12 2012 05:40 BrownBear wrote: And it would take you maybe thirty fucking seconds to put it up in a quote, say "HERE IT IS BROWNBEAR, NOW SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP", and be done with it. You have not done this still. Either you're too stubborn to help other people play the game, or you are still vainly trying to hide the fact that no explanation exists. Just to throw something out there, he did not respond with a quote of his reasoning, but rather decided to say "this game sucks cause everyone is trolling" and has posted nothing but one or two liners since. I find that kind of disappointing, and a little bit suspicious. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 12 2012 11:37 gonzaw wrote: You don't go lurking on me Fine, you have all the time in the world (until night ends) to thoroughly reread the thread and filters to figure out what's going on, but you can still chime in on discussions and post your "temporal" thoughts to show you are active and care about the game. I still wonder why you didn't even try to find scum yesterday. So you read the thread, found out Palmar was a "nuisance and cancer to town" and decided to tunnel him for the rest of the day, all the while you ignored everything else being discussed...which you know...was about actually trying to catch scum I thought Palmar was scum until very near the end of the day. I'll admit that was emotionally charged because I hate it when people directly attack me in game and call me "fucking useless" but I was focusing on someone who at the time, I thought was scum. Also, I still think his plans this game have been bad, his attitude has been bad, and he overall has been a distraction to town. So I don't mind removing his credibility within town, because maybe it will make people stop listening to him and maybe we'll get some intelligent, non-flamey discussion done tomorrow. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
 ok, ok, i know that isn't true. Anyway... On June 12 2012 19:17 Radfield wrote: I assume what your insinuating is that me and Palmar are scumbuddies, or that I wanted to save him for some sort of underhanded reasoning. I can assure you that if I was scum and Palmar town, I would push any lynch on him I possibly could. Palmar, like no other player on this site, correctly ID's me by Night 1 pretty much every game we have ever played. Certainly he busted me in LOTR and Arkham 2, and was on my case in Closed Casket. No way I would save him, especially when I had already given myself plenty of reason to not vote Meapak. Something about this passage seems off to me. Radfield addresses ace's insinuation that he's scumteam with Palmar by talking about a hypothetical situation in which he isn't scumteam with Palmar... am I missing something, or does that smell kinda fishy to me? | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
| ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 13 2012 11:42 gonzaw wrote: Okay, what do you think of Wiggles and BrownBear? (I don't think you ever mentioned your thoughts on BB yet) Your case on me is without merit and awful. I posted this earlier, wondering what people think about it: On June 13 2012 02:42 BrownBear wrote: Did I miss something, or did Ace and Radfield just both claim SK? ok, ok, i know that isn't true. Anyway... Something about this passage seems off to me. Radfield addresses ace's insinuation that he's scumteam with Palmar by talking about a hypothetical situation in which he isn't scumteam with Palmar... am I missing something, or does that smell kinda fishy to me? I think Radfield is ducking something here... | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
| ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 13 2012 14:51 gonzaw wrote: Okay, off to reread the thread! (I think it will be the 1st time I'll ever reread a thread since it's beginning and not just read filters, I'm so excited!) Up to page 11, and I already have new info and revelations :O :O :O This is fun. Good idea. Since it's a small thread, pretty easy to do, I'd encourage more people to do this as well! I'm off to do the same thing. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 13 2012 12:53 Radfield wrote: Mafia just did us a favor  I like that mafia teams keep killing off good scum players. Off to bed, I'll post in the morning. BB, you're reading too much into that post. I was just explaining to ace that if I was scummily saving Palmar, the only option was for me and palmar to be scumbuddies, something he refused to just come out and say. Also, real quick, we have the same number of posts now, so ha And I see what you mean now. Still though, something about it weirded me out. If Ace were still alive, we could ask him to clarify, but he isn't, so... | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
Also I'm glad you reread my posts and came to a better conclusion | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 13 2012 16:02 gonzaw wrote: BrownBear, before doing anything....do you have the "clearer picture" yet? You promised to "take your time during the night cycle and read carefully"...I assumed you had done that in the night cycle, right? What did you conclude by then? I did not have time, unfortunately. With 72 hours to go at the time, I thought I would be okay not sacrificing sleep to get through the thread. I'm feeling like Radfield or Hesmyrr would be a good target. gonzaw already built a case against Hesmyrr that has some salient points (example: only appearing when his name comes up means he was reading the thread closely, but not contributing information unless he has to, which is a scum trait). I'm not 100% convinced yet because of hesmyrr's complete absence, but dude's got some 'splainin to do when he gets back. As to Radfield, I've mentioned a couple things about him that make me iffy, but one other thing I noticed. Take a look at a sampling of Radfield posts around lynch time and in the night after: On June 12 2012 06:46 Radfield wrote: Rest assured, If you're still the scummiest player after I finish filtering, I will push you Happy You're right though, he really only been 'in your face' with Palmar, but that doesn't make it look like a show. Can you lay out for me in a clear and concise format why you think MZ is the best lynch today? On June 12 2012 06:58 Radfield wrote: Chaoser, I don't really see the Greymist case right now. I certainly don't see much wrong with his response to the Vanilla Town thing. What specifically do you see as the reasons for voting Grey? On June 12 2012 07:42 Radfield wrote: I don't get it. You were here before that conversation even started, yet were making no attempt to push VE. Also, are you insinuating that me and VE are scum buddies together? On June 12 2012 18:43 Radfield wrote: Wiggles, that's all well and good, but those posts are startlingly neutral. Who would you have voted for yesterday. Who do you think is playing scummy. On June 12 2012 19:25 Radfield wrote: Why did you want to lynch Palmar Ace? All of these posts raise questions, which are a good thing. However, the number of Rad's posts that raise questions is far greater than the number of posts that provide answers. This isn't scummy in and of itself, but it could be a way to hide a lack of contribution - you can say you're contributing by "provoking town discussion" by asking questions, but in actuality, you aren't contributing anything, which could be seen as a scummy action... Gah, I dunno. It's a ton of little things about Radfield's play this game that make me suspicious. But none of them are actually big enough for me to outright point at and say "this is good evidence for you being scum". I need to stop tunneling and look around some more. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 13 2012 17:19 gonzaw wrote: I can still post the "halfway-there" case I have of you if you want Actually, I'm curious. What have you seen from me that appears scummy? | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
My vote on Palmar was intended as somewhat of a placeholder (but realistically, I think he should know better than to think RNG is actually a good idea, so that was suspicious to me), then I kept it on him because he pissed me off. For the record, though, I did originally express my intent to vote for Palmar over 24 hours before the deadline (back at page 14), then rushed to put it in the voting thread when I realized we were doing votes there, not in thread. Regarding the whole "you're taking too long to come to a conclusion" thing, we still have something like 36 hours before the deadline. I think we have time. However, question: considering that barely half the game has posted this cycle, why are you continuing to point out my tardiness? | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
| ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 12 2012 09:39 gonzaw wrote: So....who do you think is scum? Still figuring that one out. I will post when I have a clearer picture. There isn't really a time crunch at the moment, so I hope you don't mind if I take my time during the night cycle and read carefully. Never promised I'd post after the night cycle. Said I would take my time, read carefully, and post when I had a clearer picture. I've posted things as I read and think of them. You are twisting my words there, and I really don't appreciate it. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On June 13 2012 17:46 BrownBear wrote: yo, i never said outright I would. I assume you're going off of this quote: Never promised I'd post after the night cycle. Said I would take my time, read carefully, and post when I had a clearer picture. I've posted things as I read and think of them. You are twisting my words there, and I really don't appreciate it. | ||
| ||
