Newbie Mini Mafia XVII - Page 19

On June 15 2012 02:58 trackd00r wrote:
Ok back to the game.

At this stage of the day, the 3 most suspicious players that I have in my list are Suki and Crossfire99 andO.Golden_ne. I'd like to push a lynch to any of them. I'll post analysis in a moment.

On June 14 2012 13:21 suki wrote:
@Miltonkram



Apologies for not addressing you directly. Quite simply you (and several other people after you) answered your question. The motivation is to get the ball rolling some way, any way. I feel I failed a bit in that regard as my attack was so full of holes that there hardly was any discussion developed from it, but it was made with good intentions.


Regarding Mouldyjeb, I agree that he is confusing, however his filter is also quite short. His words definitely are not pro-town, but in my opinion they aren't inherently scummy either, it could just as easily be poor town play.



Now I've gone through a few people's filters, and only one person really sticks out at me: alan133

roflwaffle initiated pressure on him, and then loosened up after Crossfire and I argued in alan's defense. I did not find the case convincing before, but now alan's posted his defense, and now the case is a lot more stronger to me.

As a quick rehash of rofl's initial case, he argued that alan made posts with little controversy, that he wasn't interested or willing to apply pressure on anyone, that he does some bandwagoning.

All true, but possible for both town and scum play. However, with his defense posts, I feel that things are starting to add up. Looking even closer at the filter I feel I've caught some things that I missed before.


+ Show Spoiler +


His initial statement is very verbose and is pro-actively defensive. He's countering arguments to his words before they even come up. He's even countering counter arguments to his words.

"...hoping for a bandwagon leading to a mislynch. [counter] Note I am merely listing the possibilities, I do not FoS anyone yet, [counter-counter] which can also mean I do not trust anyone yet".

He also likes to use FMPOV and IMO a lot, further stressing how his words are subjective.

It's very telling when someone is that self-conscious and defensive, because only mafia really have that motivation.

I don't see this quote by him as being overly defensive in any way. He was already put under bad pressure by rofl, so he wants to make sure people understand him. He's saying suki attacked trapdoor based on a misunderstanding, but could be mafia and done it intentionally. He also states he doesn't have any really good reads yet, so he is suspicious of everyone. This is early on day 1 and he thinks it is smart to play it safe and be cool, especially in his case because he doesn't want to draw undue attention to himself because he is a vigilante. Also, I think use of FMPOV and IMO are completely fine for anyone who is town because as town you only know you are town. Anyone else can be mafia. I actually think suki attacking this betrays her mafia alignment because only mafia have objective knowledge of who is town and who isn't. Every case a townie puts forth is subjective argumentation based on people's own words.


When called out by waffle for not having suspicions, he gets extremely agitated.



He spends a lot of words explaining his reasoning behind saying he doesn't have an FoS. He starts to really use red to emphasize his words, which he had used previously to point out inconsistencies and scummy lines, but not to add emphasis to his words.

Notice that he is spending a lot of effort defending himself and justifying his past words. I feel a townie would be less threatened by such accusations, and instead start trying to apply pressure and otherwise prove their towniness.

So defending yourself is scummy? NOPE! In no way is defending yourself scummy. If you never defended yourself when you are town and this causes you to be lynched, you actually HURT the town. Her advice is actually good mafia advice. Ignore the case against you and hope it dies while pressuring others.
.

Following what he feels is an adequate self-defense, he goes on the offensive.



This is extremely extremely scummy to me. What he's saying here is essentially this: "If not giving throwing out suspicions is anti-town, then I will prove my towniness by throwing out suspicions.", followed by attacking the person who attacked him.

This isn't scummy. He is being attacked for being neutral and playing it safe, so to try to satisfy his critics he decides to throw out some suspicions. Eventually he will have to throw out his own suspicions, so he might as well do it when some people are attacking him for not having any to show that he is trying to play as a team.

He finishes the post by saying



There is a mental disconnect here.

1. He feels throwing out suspicions is bad for town
2. He tries to prove his towniness by throwing out a suspicion at his attacker
3. He reinforces his belief that staying neutral is not bad town play

If he really was town and he really believed that his way of playing was optimal, why would he have the need to go completely against his beliefs to prove his towniness?

His stance is classic blue behavior. Stay in the background, read other people's cases and weigh their validity to inform his own decision on what night action to take. It is also not bad vanilla townie play (in some instances) in the sense that too many cases and suspects just confuse everyone. We only need to find one scum each day. Also, he went against his beliefs because people were pressuring him to give his suspicion, so to defend himself he gave his suspicions.

In his next post, the same trend continues.

He spends time justifying his red text:



but the interesting thing is.. if it was so easy for him to build a case against waffles, why didn't he? Of course, because he didn't have any. He was simply defending via attacking.

He was just making a point that you can make a bad case based on anything

And then there's the whole weird analysis that he does where he analyses my case and waffle's case, comes to the conclusion that:

1. waffles could be either scum or town (???)
2. somehow finds me slightly scummy even though he previously thought that my case was based on a misunderstanding (and went to extra lengths to state that he did not FOS anyone yet),
3. Some sort of mafia conspiracy theory out of left field what??
4. Which he backs off saying 'I think I might have read too much into it."

So, he finally makes analyses on people, but only the two most active and controversial ones, and doesn't come to any solid conclusions. He makes a really weird statement regarding mafia alterior motives that doesn't make any sense coming from a town's perspective, but comes naturally to a mafia who is trying to spin scum motivations on townies.

Being active and controversial generally means that there will be evidence to make a case against you. It is still early in the day and he never really wanted to be in the spotlight to begin with so he is unsure about his reads. Heck I was unsure about my reads that early on. Yeah he mentions some possible mafia motives and it turns out he was right about half of his conspiracy theory already and might have been right all along 0.o

Oh yeah he backs off of it because he readily acknowledges it is a conspiracy theory. If he was 100% sure that both you and rofl were mafia based on what was posted already, I would have thought he was mafia because we had no solid information at the time.

Summary

1. He's pro-actively defensive
2. Justifies his own actions instead of trying to make pro-town actions
3. Defensive Aggression
4. Inconsistency regarding a neutral/suspicion-throwing playstyle
5. Attacks the two most controversial posters with a questionable theory for townies to think of that he just kind of throws out there.
6. Still no solid reads, analysis or suspicions despite (kind of??) conceding that not throwing out suspicions is anti-town.

Suki is mafia


##vote alan133

On June 17 2012 11:51 s0Lstice wrote:
trackd00r. I want to know why you said you were suspicious of suki and then never posted a case on her.



I'm pretty sure she has asked you this already also. I don't see a response in your filter.

So defending yourself is scummy? NOPE! In no way is defending yourself scummy. If you never defended yourself when you are town and this causes you to be lynched, you actually HURT the town. Her advice is actually good mafia advice. Ignore the case against you and hope it dies while pressuring others.

This isn't scummy. He is being attacked for being neutral and playing it safe, so to try to satisfy his critics he decides to throw out some suspicions. Eventually he will have to throw out his own suspicions, so he might as well do it when some people are attacking him for not having any to show that he is trying to play as a team.

His stance is classic blue behavior. Stay in the background, read other people's cases and weigh their validity to inform his own decision on what night action to take. It is also not bad vanilla townie play (in some instances) in the sense that too many cases and suspects just confuse everyone. We only need to find one scum each day. Also, he went against his beliefs because people were pressuring him to give his suspicion, so to defend himself he gave his suspicions.

Being active and controversial generally means that there will be evidence to make a case against you. It is still early in the day and he never really wanted to be in the spotlight to begin with so he is unsure about his reads.

On June 17 2012 12:42 s0Lstice wrote:
Actually while I'm reading, how about you tell me how you took the time to bold her name and still didn't realize your 'oops.'

My suspicions toward you are a result of finding the most likely explanation. Either a,b, and c above are true because you are mafia, or they are true because you have had some bad luck and bad reads. I think the more likely explanation is the former.