EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Page 11
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
BioSC
United States636 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
Who says I cannot maintain multiple policies. Not enough has been said for me to conclude that anyone has been dishonest. I do not agree with No-Lynch, especially in the early game. Are you not a lurker BioSC? In what way...what have you done that suggests otherwise? (p.s. I know I have to vote in the Vote Thread thread for it to count) | ||
|
BioSC
United States636 Posts
On June 26 2012 12:55 Hopeless1der wrote: ##VOTE BioSC Who says I cannot maintain multiple policies. Not enough has been said for me to conclude that anyone has been dishonest. I do not agree with No-Lynch, especially in the early game. Are you not a lurker BioSC? In what way...what have you done that suggests otherwise? (p.s. I know I have to vote in the Vote Thread thread for it to count) Sorry, I'm not going to make a case on myself for you. If you believe me to be scum, make the case. Look through my filter. I've discussed policy (Hint: I want people to post too) You are voting for me? Why? Am I a lurker? I'm not even sure you know why you are voting for me. We've done and posted about pretty much the same things. So, I bounce the question back to you. What makes me a lurker, a candidate for YOUR policy, over someone who's filter I can quote in 4 lines? + Show Spoiler + On June 17 2012 03:09 AegonC wrote: /in This is my first mafia game, I believe I am signing up correctly. On June 25 2012 10:22 AegonC wrote: Perhaps the best way to approach this situation is circumspectly, that is to say don't rush into any stupid decisions. I agree with Hopeless1der, truth should be our banner and justice our sigil! | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 26 2012 13:03 BioSC wrote: Sorry, I'm not going to make a case on myself for you. If you believe me to be scum, make the case. Look through my filter. I've discussed policy (Hint: I want people to post too) You are voting for me? Why? Am I a lurker? I'm not even sure you know why you are voting for me. We've done and posted about pretty much the same things. So, I bounce the question back to you. What makes me a lurker, a candidate for YOUR policy, over someone who's filter I can quote in 4 lines? + Show Spoiler + On June 17 2012 03:09 AegonC wrote: /in This is my first mafia game, I believe I am signing up correctly. On June 25 2012 10:22 AegonC wrote: Perhaps the best way to approach this situation is circumspectly, that is to say don't rush into any stupid decisions. I agree with Hopeless1der, truth should be our banner and justice our sigil! Your opening post contains some cliche townie wisdom. Second post defers back to me to elaborate instead of contributing anything further Third explains the rules of the game itself Fourth comments on my suspicions against you, followed again by requesting that I provide all sides of the conversation. I fail to see how you "discussed policy" in those posts. Sweet - you've met both my policies. STRING HIM UP BOYS. Im giving Aegon the BOTD. He hasn't done anything overly suspicious. You have. I have little interest in prolonging this with you BioSC. Should anyone else wish to chime in, I'm all ears. | ||
|
BioSC
United States636 Posts
Odd, because I was about to say similar to you. You have yet to explain to me why I've met your random, mysterious qualities for lurking, over someone with bare minimum posting standards. Here's me not discussing policy - + Show Spoiler + On June 25 2012 11:01 BioSC wrote: I like Esspen. A man after my own heart! I've played in one other newbie mafia game, and lurking town + scum made it hard to make reads. So post, and post often, lest I find you and do horrible things to your bodies. And hi everyone else! Hmm... so lets see, now who's meeting policy? Don't try to make a half assed case on me and ignore portions of my filter, especially this early, there is no reason for it. We wanted policy talk done early. I made my statement about lurkers, and that was it. Now, lets go through YOUR posts. Your opening post contains some cliche townie wisdom/ Your "policy" (don't lie) wrapped up in some cute dialect. 2-4th posts are you floundering about when Release calls you out on your policy. Trying to make yourself seem better when you are called out (I.E. excuse making.) Then this post: + Show Spoiler + On June 26 2012 04:46 Hopeless1der wrote: FOS:Esspen Blues are townies as well, yes? In what game would your suggestion be beneficial to the town? Certainly not a newbie game. This is an insane statement to make, regardless of "I wanted to see the reactions." Also, Release hasn't really questioned you except for the whole "OMGUS" as the opening post: Oh noes...Granted Release is attacking just about anyone right now, but that's to get things going. Your statement was ridiculous and right now, I'm suspect you of trying to shift the attention back onto him since he's been so vocal that it makes him an easier target. Release has gone to bed, so his pressure is off you, and now you begin shifting attention away from yourself. Start with the easiest case, Esspen with his really bad "joke" statement. Easy target to shift focus to. Finally, we arrive to your 3rd policy of the day, Lurkers. No one is really biting on Esspen for whatever reason, so you need to find something that sticks. Lurkers gets some comments, as some people have already expressed interest in that policy. So your choices are arbitrarily narrowed down to 2 people. If you honestly expect people to follow your lynch lurker policy, Aegon would have probably been a better choice. Hell, I may have gone along with you. But for whatever reason you have yet to explain adequately, you focus me. I think you may have made a few too many scumslips. You can stick to policy lynching lurkers. I'll policy lynch scum. | ||
|
BioSC
United States636 Posts
FOS Aegon Step up the activity. If you don't want to be next. I'm going to bed. See everyone in the morning. | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On June 26 2012 07:15 Keirathi wrote: This is the most confusing sentence in this thread, so maybe *YOU'RE* the mafia.  In all seriousness though, i feel like you are putting yourself in the limelight a bit too much on day1 for oyut o be mafia, unless you're just an idiot, which I assume isn't the case. As far as the whole "lynching the blues" comment by Esspen, really boggling. I can't even see how this would create good discussion; 1) you're serious, in which case WORST MAFIA EVER or 2) you're making a joke, people call you out, you say you're joking, people still suspect your motives but move on. I dont feel like anything that has come out of that statement has been useful towards finding whoever the mafia is, so that just makes it more suspicious/boggling. Now: lynch the lurkers. I've played around tis strategy many many times, and while it doesn't always work, it does have some key benefits: 1) a lot of mafia (especially inexperienced ones) are going to try to keep a low profile for a long as they can and 2) people who arent giving input, well, aren't giving input or opinions for others to base anything on, therefor aren't helping town to win. The chance of mafia nightkilling lurkers is exceptionally low, as well, because 1) thats one more person to cast suspicion on, and 2) the lurker isnt going to casting any suspicion on them. So thats my 2cents. Lynch All Lurkers is probably our best plan of action. While lynching lurkers to make mafia come out is a good idea wouldn't it be a better idea to target scummy behaviour since we have so many examples? And leave the lurkers policy for when there's no better choice? i.e. scum>lurkers>liars Actually assuming both Esspen and Release are smart won't totally rule them out because they are causing commotion and confusion while being safe from lynching (just like how I've gave Esspen the benefit of the doubt earlier) by: - Claiming to attempt to draw out mafia. - Assuming people would assume that they are not complete idiots. - Having the same play style (according to Vivax ) (( holy shit if Release turns out to be mafia that'll mean something but there's nothing concrete on vivax for now imo )) I had to skim past Hopeless and Release's argument on policy because I just couldn't read it and they could be staging it for all I know (again, assuming they are smart). **wild assumption no. 2** Esspen panics and targets Release for a reasoning that doesn't make sense for his response, which makes him look weak. Hopeless targets BioSC now but *coincidnetally* BioSC targeted Hopeless earlier.... (So they don't interest me .. yet.) I feel really bad targeing lurkers without having any info on them because holy shit I'm spoilt for scummy choices. Assuming all are smart, Esspen's wasn't really effective in protecting himself or creating commotion, though he posts less and he and Release seem to be on the opposite side. (just maybe) They may be lynching lurkers now since that would mean that they will be safe. **wild guess when it comes to hopeless** Voting for Release since I wanted to vote for him earlier for creating so much bullshit. tldr: He's completely safe if we assume he's stupid. What if we assume he's smart ? | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
| ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
So to clarify: voting for release for causing commotion for no reason. Even if he's townie we can be much more focused with people like Vivax and Keraithi and dna. | ||
|
Release
United States4397 Posts
No time for a thorough explanation. He seems to have been changing his stance to suit the current opinion of the town. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
Okay then...which lurker are we lynching? Im seeing Aegon, NrGmonk and BioSC as our prime candidates. You have a FOS on esspen, who you already said you find suspicious for trying to bring attention back to release, but then you ask which of our "prime candidates" out of those 3 we should lynch? If policy lynching really is the last resort, should you not be pressuring esspen more, or waiting closer to the voting deadline when there has been more activity before you start wanting to lynch lurkers (by my count there are still 22 hours until the deadline)? That is the whole point of a last resort. I really don't like how much attention you were putting on voting for lurkers before BiosC responded to you. I'm not sure if you'll get to see this and respond any time soon because of time zones, but I will hold off putting my vote on you until I go to bed just in case you manage to post before then. As for esspen, I really don't know. That really is just way too obvious a move for mafia to make as others have said, but I am getting a stronger read from hopeless1der. | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On June 26 2012 15:06 BassInSpace wrote: Hopeless1der, you say that policy lynching should be our last resort, but then you post this? You have a FOS on esspen, who you already said you find suspicious for trying to bring attention back to release, but then you ask which of our "prime candidates" out of those 3 we should lynch? If policy lynching really is the last resort, should you not be pressuring esspen more, or waiting closer to the voting deadline when there has been more activity before you start wanting to lynch lurkers (by my count there are still 22 hours until the deadline)? That is the whole point of a last resort. I really don't like how much attention you were putting on voting for lurkers before BiosC responded to you. I'm not sure if you'll get to see this and respond any time soon because of time zones, but I will hold off putting my vote on you until I go to bed just in case you manage to post before then. As for esspen, I really don't know. That really is just way too obvious a move for mafia to make as others have said, but I am getting a stronger read from hopeless1der. Wow you're right, I totally missed it. I was not really interested in hopeless so I didn't read too much into his posts. Reconsidering my vote on Release but I still don't like how Release looks like for now. | ||
|
Release
United States4397 Posts
On June 25 2012 22:27 JieXian wrote: shit I just noticed that this wasn't what i thought it was. This actually means that we have 2 days to vote right? Release's game plan seems to be: 1) Create escape route. (just in case he got mafia) So night. I will be less active in the following days (until night 3) for aforementioned reasons. 2) Create chaos 3) Claim it leads to more productive posting 4) Hide with aforementioned excuse Vivax and I found that confusing = We must be mafia lolololol If you're still stuck one this, i don't know what to say... "They may be lynching lurkers" I never said. I said go for scum. I even said lynchscum>lynchliars>lynchnottruth. I said that lurkers will always take a position lower than scum on priority list. Words in my mouth. Yeah, i caused commotion. We weren't exactly making a lot of progress. I think commotion>banter because at least we get some honest opinions in there. Maybe even a scumslip if someone gets too emotional... Night | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 26 2012 15:06 BassInSpace wrote: Hopeless1der, you say that policy lynching should be our last resort, but then you post this? You have a FOS on esspen, who you already said you find suspicious for trying to bring attention back to release, but then you ask which of our "prime candidates" out of those 3 we should lynch? If policy lynching really is the last resort, should you not be pressuring esspen more, or waiting closer to the voting deadline when there has been more activity before you start wanting to lynch lurkers (by my count there are still 22 hours until the deadline)? That is the whole point of a last resort. I really don't like how much attention you were putting on voting for lurkers before BiosC responded to you. I'm not sure if you'll get to see this and respond any time soon because of time zones, but I will hold off putting my vote on you until I go to bed just in case you manage to post before then. As for esspen, I really don't know. That really is just way too obvious a move for mafia to make as others have said, but I am getting a stronger read from hopeless1der. My FOS on Esspen was based on him making me confused. Townies shouldn't be trying to cause confusion imo, so that concerned me. Not enough to vote him, but enough to make note for future reference. Many have come to the conclusion that it would have been insane for mafia to make that move, but I still need to consider WIFOM as we progress. You're right on the deadline, there is time available to pressure for scum tells. However, there isn't really enough info to push that very far, so I essentially singled out BioSC and took a go at him under the premise of saying hes a lurker. (NrGmonk has literally not posted and is subject to modkill, as dNa pointed out. Aegon had 1 post and fits the bill for a lurker to a tee, but I felt I could squeeze BioSC for more info since he seemed inclined to respond.) BioSC responded with a strongly toned OMGUS analysis of my posts so far. Please read through both of our cases and see who you agree with more. I didn't randomly target BioSC; hes the strongest read I have so far, hence he has my vote, and my scrutiny. On June 26 2012 14:56 Release wrote: ##Vote Hopeless1der No time for a thorough explanation. He seems to have been changing his stance to suit the current opinion of the town. @Release: You know I was the one who steered the Lynch all liars AND lurkers policies...So is the town changing its stance to suit me? Maybe you feel I'm just dancing in circles hoping no one catches on...but there is plenty of discussion between me and other players already. I'm not hiding, and I'm not suddenly jumping back and forth. My posts follow a consistent train of thought. Here's hoping you change your mind about me, or at least flesh out something that I might have a chance to rebut. And on that note: Good Night, sweet Liquidville. This is Hopeless... | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On June 26 2012 15:39 Release wrote: If you're still stuck one this, i don't know what to say... "They may be lynching lurkers" I never said. I said go for scum. I even said lynchscum>lynchliars>lynchnottruth. I said that lurkers will always take a position lower than scum on priority list. Words in my mouth. Yeah, i caused commotion. We weren't exactly making a lot of progress. I think commotion>banter because at least we get some honest opinions in there. Maybe even a scumslip if someone gets too emotional... Night No, As I mentioned several times before... I'm not voting for you based on that. About your second paragraph I have no idea what you're talking about. I think we're on the same page with lynching policies. I was actually disagreeing with Keraithi (and now hopeless) since he said lynch lurkers and I even quoted him. 3rd point fits my arguement of a smart mafia. I think it doesn't look good for you whether you're smart or stupid hahaha now that I think about it. Good night to you. I just woke up a few hours ago hoho | ||
|
Vivax
21959 Posts
I think the focus has to switch to the less active posters (NrGmonk, AegonC, roflwaffle55y, Esspen). Consider the amount of content, not just the amount of posts. I'll give you my opinions regarding the lurkers, I hope it's gonna help you in making a decision on which one to lynch. If someone of the would-be-modkilled lurkers just posts and votes shortly before the lynch without a damn good reason to do so, we should obviously lynch him. I think it's good to have a consensus on this alternative, I would appreciate if townies expressed their approval if they agree with this. NrGMonk: Gonna vote for him if he posts right before deadline to escape the modkill. AegonC: Doesn't offer any reads with his generic minipost. His priority is next to NrG's. Esspen: Kinda weird posts. He posts first when it's about discussing the lynch all liars policy. What strikes me here is that he questions the policy, but concludes the post with his line about lynching blues and confusing scum. That might have been a slip.His next post says it was intentional, and he immediately uses that explanation to put his FoS on Release. He never took a hard stance during this, he never tried to post a case on Release when he had reason to. And then he completely forgets Release in his last post, to 'completely agree' with Keirathi and hopeless1der about the lurker lynch policy. Saying that he would be a too obvious mafia isn't a valid defense for me either, mafia can be obvious if the players make mistakes, and I still don't buy above blue role lynch mistake as intentional. It might have been, but that'd be very risky play by a townie. roflwaffle55: He comments on policy (lynch > NL), doesn't like Release style of posting, promises more contribution after sleeping. Him commenting negatively on Release very early looks townie to me. I wouldn't vote for him instead of the other three as of now. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
5. In the event of a tie the person with the most votes first is lynched. 6. Voting is mandatory. You may NOT abstain. 7. Whomever has the most votes at the end of the day will be lynched! Because of this, I am very hesitant to decide between BioSC and hopeless1der right now with the current info in the thread, since this will be my last post for the night and I may not be around in time for the deadline. Both players' cases against each other are not enough to convince me, and I would love to be able to analyse both players' posting more. Hopefully I have the time in the morning to read more, but I doubt I will have time to post thorough reasoning for my vote (will be on my phone as well). For now however, I am going to vote for roflwaffles55. On June 25 2012 14:37 roflwaffles55 wrote: Good to see that we already have some conversation going + Show Spoiler + even if it is just Release flailing his FoS everywhere. :D Figure I'll address a couple of the policy points with my opinions while I'm here. I haven't really seen a good reason to NL early game, so I'd prefer a mislynch to a NL day 1/2. As for Release's strategy, at the moment, it is likely just scaring scum from posting. I'm exhausted, going to sleep now, I'll contribute something more meaningful in the morning. He didn't post anything useful in his first post, and hasn't made good on his promise to post "something more meaningful in the morning" If I don't see anyone who sticks out more to me in the morning (or I don't get the time to check), then I am leaving my vote on him/her. ##Vote rofflewaffles55 | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
On June 26 2012 05:33 NrGmonk wrote: I can /in if I'm allowed to play 2 newbie games at the same time and as long as this doesn't start for another week. I have a shitload of TL-related stuff to do this week. Just something I thought I'd bring up for others to keep in mind. We seem to disagree on roflwaffles55. His commenting negatively of release isn't "very early" as you put it was easy for him to do. Release's early vote/fos style is brash and sure to attract attention/criticism. Plenty of people thought it was the wrong move due to the lack of information, and roflwaffles55 was third to comment on it negatively, after Hopeless1der and dNa. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
We seem to disagree on roflwaffles55. His commenting negatively on release was easy for him to do; release's early vote/fos style is brash and sure to attract attention/criticism. It's not a bold move or particularly townie to disagree with it; plenty of people thought it was the wrong move due to the lack of information. Also, roflwaffles55 was third to comment on it negatively, after Hopeless1der and dNa. Sorry, the first version read like crap. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
| ||
