EPT(I will not be modkilled.)
Emergency Mini Mafia!
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
(I will not be modkilled.) | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 05 2012 07:33 furerkip wrote: Wait, are you serious? You just claimed Miller and said that DT shouldn't check on you because you are Miller... Judging from your ending, you said you've played this game before. To me, that strikes me as a really odd way to just spout out "I'm miller, and you'll get a guilty on me if you check me, so don't check me, OH and by the way, I'd like to make sure you guys realize that my opinion is more important than anyone else's because I'm officially a clear because I just claimed so. And also, I'm not claiming BLUE, just as reminder, I'm a Miller so investigating me will always turn up as a negative result for you." If you were really a Miller and had game experience, why wouldn't you just make yourself seem more of a townie? If anything, with gameplay experience, you should be able to have seen games were Millers play correctly and don't scream "I'm a Miller." I would have called this a dumbtell, since I sincerely doubt Mafia would just do this. But fact is, your whole post is made to seem like you are a Miller, and a simple "I claim Miller" would have sufficed. But you went above and beyond that: you wanted to have town not even try to examine you unless, as you said, "I expect you to keep a very close eye on me and lynch the FUCK out of me if it looks like I'm pushing Mafia objectives…", which can be translated to "not at all" because Mafia will never try to make it obvious that they are Mafia. ##Vote VisceraEyes My concern with the first part is that it doesn't fit at all with my interpretation of VE's post. He's not saying that his opinion is more important than everyone else's, and he sure as hell isn't saying that he's clear. Regarding the second part, your translation of VE's statement that "I expect you to keep a very close eye on me and lynch the FUCK out of me if it looks like I'm pushing Mafia objectives..." is just faulty. He IS urging people to examine it, even if you think his criteria for lynching is bad. Secondly, if we're not to lynch people who push mafia objectives, who'd you suggest we lynch? According to your subsequent posts, you think that we should lynch people based on scum slips or retarded play. I think that lynching people based on scum slips is weak, and that it is way better to analyze the player's performance as a whole to determine his alignment. (Scum slips might factor, but they are rarely the main argument for someone being scum, unless it's a horrendous slip.) Lynching people who are playing retardedly can be good or bad, depending on if they seem to be scum or not, but lynching someone for just bad play is not wise. I am also a little bit curious as to why you twisted his words. Can you explain? | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
I have played in Mr. Wiggles Mini Mafia I (VT), BC's Arkham Asylum (VT) and in TL Mafia XLII (Mafia goon). After reading this post by Navillus I've grown quite suspicious of him. Let me go through it: I don't really see the ghost case, it seems to start with artanis pointing out that VE probably doesn't expect to die in the first 72 hours of a given game so ghost's wrong in deciding VE is likely miller because of this. (and just based on how people treated vets in MTG I honestly wouldn't be surprised if VE does expect that, on TL people act like killing enemy vets is more important than the rest of the team combined...) While I don't agree with ghost I also don't see this as particularly scummy. After that a big thing is that he said he would point out some scummy posts of furer and he didn't. This is worse and makes me suspicious but is still something where as town or scum he probably wouldn't say this without actually planning to follow up and he would mean to follow up as both so this isn't a particularly strong indicator of alignment. All you're saying is that he could be scum, but he could also be town. Notice the back-and-forth: "This makes me suspicious, but I don't think it is it a strong indicator of alignment". It's a very cautiously expressed opinion. Now looking at the votes on him I get suspicious, VE's vote which is now moved was very fast and didn't go on much, he basically read a couple of posts where artanis points this stuff out and says his meta is different and jumps on. This is suspicious but even more FOS: Mr.Zentor he has a couple posts about VE that don't indicate much then his first post where he says something solid is him jumping on ghost for 1. admitting that he is bad at reading VE which makes no sense and 2. for not following up on furer which I've mentioned. It just looks like Zentor isn't trying to talk about reads or cases, he just wanted to jump in and vote someone people were already suspicious of. The above part of the post is mostly fine, but what's strange is how fast he moves on to place his vote on Hyaach: Finally, Hyaach is just ringing all the wrong bells in my head, he has a few posts all talking about VE, they're confusing and most of them are him explaining this post - which says nothing, it says that he doesn't want to lynch VE immediately which no one was suggesting then he says that the claim could be fake... or not! and that we should analyze VE, something he himself told us to do. This post isn't in itself that bad but it says nothing strong and he manages to post a fair amount after this without clarifying much or taking any kind of stance, so until a point where he does ##Vote: Hyaach You base your vote on one post that "isn't bad in itself", him not taking a stance (he is basically saying the same thing about VE that you are saying about ghost; that the action [VE's claim/ghost's promise to find scummy posts] is not very indicative of alignment), and lack of clarification. (Lack of clarification on what? He did try to clarify the post you quoted when questioned by zelblade. Whether or not you find his explanation satisfactory or not is another story.) This just seems like a cheap attempt to throw your vote away. All you provide is flimsy, abstract reasoning. If he is "ringing all the wrong bells", surely you would be able to better pinpoint exactly what it is about his posting that is so alarming? Lastly, I'm curious about why you prefer to put your vote on Hyaach until he takes a stance, rather than voting for MrZentor, who you said looked suspicious. Care to enlighten me? | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 06 2012 07:49 VisceraEyes wrote: Yeah I'd like that - after all you just said you think he's possible scum and he's aiming for the same guy you are for lynch. It would really be helpful for everyone if you looked into MrZentor fully and answered my question as completely as possible. After reading through his filter, my verdict is still "possible scum". The first time I read BH's case I missed the difference in MrZ's and ghost's statements. I agree with MrZ in that they are not essentially the same. He (MrZ) openly states that he has a hard time reading BH, while ghost says something and provides some reasoning on why it could be true, just to discredit himself in the next sentence. Like MrZ said, his post looks more like an attempt to contribute without actually saying anything. It is a bit concerning that MrZ votes for ghost without providing much thought, but I find Navillus more suspicious than MrZ at this point in time. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 06 2012 01:30 Pandain wrote: There is too much talk on VE and Furer. To start out, claiming miller was indeed a good move if town. It gives information to us and suggests that as blues we not check him, allowing us to use our powers on other people. + Show Spoiler [Rest of the post] + VE is almost certainly town. There's a small chance he's a badass serial killer, but for him to have claimed(vulnerable to counterclaims) requires an element of risk which I do not think the SK would use. There is almost certainily not 2 millers in this setup, as having two "false" townies, as well as all the other Alignment-Confusing roles would just decimate the cop's role. Since the risk of being counterclaimed would be so damning, I do not think that VE would have claimed miller if he was mafia/SK. Especially so soon as the day started. Furer is just playing poorly, but his play does not reek of scum. He voted rashly against VE, the very first(and only) vote so far. I do not think mafia would risk bringing so much attention to themselves. He's not only single handedly try to lynch VE, but he's done it with a reckless aura that excludes mafia. I think Mr. Zentor is very suspicious, and should be looked at instead. He's offered very weak arguments, suggesting he does not want to force his opinion onto the town. He's offered vague statements that do not really put himself out there("a bit rash", "would probably", "I think, but we should") which do not prove him being mafia but merely cause me to be watchful. I am also somewhat suspicious of Navillus, but it is more of a general feeling than specific evidence. It looks like he's trying to steer the town in the right direction in his first post, but later he comes in and derails the thread onto a 2-page argumentation about masons that doesn't really give us anything. His claim seems stupid (if not anti-town, considering how much he managed to shit up the thread). At any rate, Pandain seems to be more interested in arguing game mechanics and game setup than finding scum. I'm happy with a lynch on either Pandain or Navillus, and currently I think that I'd rather have Pandain hanging from the gallows. ##Vote Pandain | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 06 2012 21:59 ghost_403 wrote: I'll catch up on the thread in a bit, but I still have no idea why people think Navillus is scum. If no one can point me to a case, I'll have to work it out myself, and I don't want to do that because I'm really lazy. I think Artanis meant this post when he talked about my case on Navillus. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
I've got this gut feeling that at least part of the Mafia is lurking. They might have one active veteran player in VE/BH but I think that at least one (likely two) of them are skating by without posting much. My proposed lynch target for Day 2 is zelblade. My first issue with him are these questions: + Show Spoiler + On June 05 2012 12:08 zelblade wrote: Why would it take "huge balls" to claim if he is town? Why would you let him live for only "a day"? Why would you put his analysis specifically to be dismembered and examined just because his is immune to checks? Does this mean you think this claim is suspicious? On June 05 2012 15:54 zelblade wrote: How does claiming miller paint a targert on his head if hes town when its an anti-town role. And you didnt answer this: Why did you state that you are going to let him leave for only "a day?" On June 05 2012 16:46 zelblade wrote: Eh wait what did you mean by "paint a targert on his head" It generally means a targert for scum to shoot (thats what I thought you said) but did you mean a targert to be lynched instead? They make him appear pro town, when in reality he doesn't really have to anything at all. They make it seem like he's contributing to the town even though he's not. I wouldn't have as much of an issue with them if it weren't for his lack of contributions to the town. (VE also poses a lot of questions, but he also brings new information to the table, makes his own cases, etc.) After this he returns after about 24 hours just to jump on the Pandain lynch with this post: On June 06 2012 22:21 zelblade wrote: Apologies for the splotchy activity have been a little busy of late. Either way I would be perfectly fine with a Pandain lynch. The blueslip feels exteremely fake to me. Slipping like that is akin to making a major scumslip... and one is more likely than not going to be more careful about leaking their role no? As pointed out, the random vig claim as well as the random mason discussion managed to severly derail the thread which reeks of scum. A couple more points is that he tries to dump suspision on me through a vauge statement. [1] + Show Spoiler + I'm also very suspicious of Zellblade, as he's hardly posted at all. In fact, hilariously enough, he's just asked interogative questions. Which I find hilarious and will do one day. So why are interogative questions suspicious? I found hyaach's post to be a little.... wierd so I questioned it. Why do you even bring me up if you dont intend to lynch me today? (Assuming this since he wants to lynch BH + he isnt even bothering to make a serious case) Town doesnt bring up every little suspision they have and put it out in the open, and this side comment looks alot like mafia attempting to derail the discussion onto me. Note that this is when pressure starts going onto him. [2] ##vote: pandain
Keep in mind that this is the only lenghty (it's lenghty compared to his other posts) post that zelblade has written, it contains only bullshit, and he does not take a firm stance on anything. He is just "fine with the Pandain lynch". His two most recent post about furerkip's scum slip (which furerkip has yet to explain, by the way) brings no new information either. Basically what I'm saying is that if zelblade doesn't do some quality posting during Day 2, we should lynch the fuck out of him. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 07 2012 11:42 Navillus wrote: Shraft I agree about lurking but I think the first order of business should be to get as many people as we can to stop lurking, I'm worried about making a case like this on ZB at this second because I think it's case on the lurker who's contributed the most because he has contributions to look at while there are others (furer and hyaach among others) who have yet to make any strong statements, they have almost nothing that can be analyzed and that's something we should make clear they have to stop even before we try to get someone lynched. Yes, I agree that we do need to get them to post. Out of the lurkers (zelblade, furerkips, Hyaach, and maybe Snarfs) I think that zelblade is the one looking most suspicious. That's exactly why I wrote my analysis on him. I don't think your reasons for worrying are valid. zelblade has not made a strong statement about anything yet either, and his posts are lacking just about as much as Hyaach's. I don't know what you really mean with "... and that's something we should make clear they have to stop even before we try to get someone lynched". If you think my way of putting lurkers in the spotlight is bad, how'd you suggest we get them to post? By asking nicely? We need to threaten them, or they are going to keep lurking (and get away with it), that's just how it works. Regarding Hyaach, I find him the second most suspicious of the lurkers, simply because of his complete lack of contributions along with just jumping on the easiest lynch without much thought. I believe that furerkips has posted most out of the three lurkers (I'm not saying that he's contributed enough, or that he's probably town). It's disturbing that he has not posted anything for two days. He seems to be indifferent to the outcome of the lynch as well, coming in and just placing his retarded vote on VE in the beginning of the day and then disappearing, not coming back for two (?) days. Snarfs has not posted that much either, I don't really know if I'd call him a lurker. Either way, when he has posted, he seems to post relevant stuff, and he does not simply come in and vote on the easiest target without providing any reasoning. I'm getting a town vibe from him. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 07 2012 17:48 zelblade wrote: I dont see how me saying that the blueslip seemed fake is bullshit, when it seemed so forced. I cannot wrap my head around someone "slipping" like that, and thus thought it was fake, and thus thought he was fakeclaiming scum since doing that as town makes no sense. It makes little sense as scum as well. Either way, the jump from bad claim -> scum is not straightforward, and you do not offer any explaination about it, except that it "reeks of scum". It's bullshit because it's taking an action that is not very telling of his alignment and saying that it reeks of scum, without you explaining why. On June 07 2012 17:48 zelblade wrote: Basically I agreed with the pandain case and thought that he was most likely to flip scum on a couple of points, and I mention them in passing. So just because I dont bring up any new points means im scum? Really? As town I usually sheep cases that I find are good/likely to hit scum, might I ask, how is this suspicious to you? It's not suspicious by itself, but when you're not contributing anything at all, along with only sheeping your votes, it starts to worry me. On June 07 2012 17:48 zelblade wrote: Also, "im fine with a pandain lynch" = I want to lynch pandain, I think hes scum and he needs to hang. Are you really going to nitpick over a small thing like phrasing? Me voting him means me making a stance on the issue. What does "firm" stance even mean? I guess its fine to accuse me if I try to shrink away from responsibility after the lynch, but am I doing that? I agree that it's a minor thing, but I don't think that "I'm fine with the Pandain lynch" equals "I want to lynch Pandain". | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 07 2012 18:36 zelblade wrote: I think its fairly obvious why fakeclaiming vig as a vt d1 isnt exactly the smartest thing. As stated I was busy with stuff. Will have more time so dont worry about it. It does equal it -_- Even if you dont think it does the fact that I voted him along with the post should say something no? Townies do stupid stuff as well. There's a difference between doing something dumb and doing something scummy. You might be right about my concern with your wording/not taking a firm stance issue, but that's still just a minor part pf my concern with you. We should stop arguing this. It is not going to render us anything useful. There is a better way for you to convince us that you are town. Go look for scum. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
Today I'd like to lynch either zelblade, Hyaach or furerkip. Between the three of them I'm not really sure who is the most suspect. I'm going to come back in a little while with my thoughts after reading through all their filters. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
Only thing that stuck out to me when I read his filter was this: On June 05 2012 11:15 Hyaach wrote: I would let VE live for a day unless something really scummy comes out from his play. it takes huge balls on claim this early, be it fake/real and its not a fool proof plan imo mafia or town. Besides, from his claim, i would put all his analysis on a magnifying glass to be dismembered and examined piece by piece. which seems like an easy thing to say to appear pro town without having to do much. (He is not promising analysis, just saying that he will examine VE's posts, which means that he doesn't have to make any follow-up on this statement.) Either way, he has promised analysis and I'm waiting eagerly. furerkip seems like a bad Epicmafia townie to me. He plays exactly like the townies over there, speaking about "having mislynches", calling VT's "blues", saying that scumslips = scummy play, and speaking about "three way lynches" (a situation much more common in Epicmafia games than in forum mafia). He could maybe be Mafia, but I think that his aggressive posting is quite out of place for a first time (forum) Mafia player. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 08 2012 19:33 zelblade wrote: Also assuming furekip doesnt come back should we lynch him anyway or try to get him modkilled and risk him ningavoting? A ninja vote should not be very dangerous. The only scenario where it can make a difference is if we have five votes on someone, and he comes in and drops the deciding vote. | ||
| ||
