|
Well this is obnoxious, I think Anaacletus is scummy but I think Fencer is more scummy, however I will be at work when the voting ends and this is my last minute in this thread for this day cycle, since I think a no lynch is really bad for us I am going to switch my vote to Anacletus, I hope that if he flips town you all will look at my Fencer case, he really does look more scummy to me.
I'm putting the hammer on Anacletus because we need a lynch and I won't be here to convince people that we should get Fencer, I would leave my vote on Fencer if I thought I could make the rest of you realize that he is scum but since you seem to want to go for the second reddest person I will do that as well to ensure a lynch.
I hope that if we are wrong and Anacletus is town you will all take a second look at my case on Fencer, if Anacletus is town Fencer is even more likely to be scum.
@Intact: If Anacletus flips scum and you feel the need to go after me I can't stop you, you should go after Fencer but if you don't do that you should go after him on day three after I flip green (all this assuming I live through the next two nights which I probably won't without medic protection).
##Unvote: Fencer710
##Vote: Anacletus
Is there any way to make sure I don't have to do this in the future since I won't be around for the voting deadline? i.e. would it be possible to PM one of you to say my preferences in terms of my vote. That a lynch is better than a no lynch and a lynch on Fenccer is better than a lynch on Anacletus and so on. I want my vote to count but I also have to make it about 12 hours before the deadline which really messes with me, thanks.
|
No, conditional voting is not allowed. We will only count the vote you post in thread.
|
On June 30 2012 13:38 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2012 12:45 Hopeless1der wrote:On June 30 2012 12:20 Fencer710 wrote:
OK, guys. I have to go to bed. My closing thoughts in case I don't make the deadline tomorrow:
Remember, 7 people have to decide to lynch the same guy in order for there to be a lynch. It's me, Anacletus, or nothing.
You can be meta all you want in your head, but it doesn't change what actually goes on in the thread.
Remember to read and reread all the posts! I'll take you over Anacletus today. You're posting is extremely unproductive to me. It doesnt seem all that scummy, but its a massive hindrance when you don't provide anything for discussion, just constantly droning about how your new and guides are super cool. ##Vote: Fencer710 You don't think Fencer is scum but you voted him? What the hell? If you are town this is horrible play, vote for someone who you think is scum not someone you think is annoying. Now, I think Fencer is scum so I voted him; what are you doing? Show nested quote +On June 30 2012 11:26 JingleHell wrote:
If you're really having trouble, and not just trying to be consistent to cover up the slips from earlier, I suggest you go read all of the linked guides, (no really, all of them). Then, forget all the advice you just read, because everyone has read it, and you'll just metagame yourself into a tizzy for no reason. Instead, focus on the generalizations, the state of mind, and the thought processes that were discussed.
However, I can easily see this, like I said, as you just trying to be consistent with your earlier behavior to try and get BotD. This is really good advice, we should all follow it. We don't need townies acting like scum just because they are dumb. Come on guys there are 9 of us, we need to start working together, our strength is in numbers. This Show nested quote +On June 30 2012 12:20 Fencer710 wrote:
OK, guys. I have to go to bed. My closing thoughts in case I don't make the deadline tomorrow:
Remember, 7 people have to decide to lynch the same guy in order for there to be a lynch. It's me, Anacletus, or nothing.
You can be meta all you want in your head, but it doesn't change what actually goes on in the thread.
Remember to read and reread all the posts! is why I can't imagine that you are town, I bring a case against you and your reaction is to give really generic advice and go to bed? You may as well just claim scum in the thread.
I think Anacletus and Fender have had the scummiest play so far. However, I do not think that there is enough evidence that the [i]are[]/i] scum. However, I feel obliged to lynch someone, and Fender's death would be less hurtful to the town since Anacletus (was) posting somewhat relevant things to the thread. <--This is not a good reason to lynch someone I know, but its the best I can come up with under the circumstances for placing my initial vote.
As you've already changed your vote to ensure a lynch, it probably doesn't matter anymore, but I was going to do the same thing (Switch vote from Fender to Anacletus) closer to the deadline (unless Fender got jumped). My reason for not immediately voting Anacletus was that they're both looking scummy and if I hammered, it could very well have halted all discussion for the rest of the day until we lynched him.
|
On June 30 2012 23:03 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2012 13:38 Promethelax wrote:On June 30 2012 12:45 Hopeless1der wrote:On June 30 2012 12:20 Fencer710 wrote:
OK, guys. I have to go to bed. My closing thoughts in case I don't make the deadline tomorrow:
Remember, 7 people have to decide to lynch the same guy in order for there to be a lynch. It's me, Anacletus, or nothing.
You can be meta all you want in your head, but it doesn't change what actually goes on in the thread.
Remember to read and reread all the posts! I'll take you over Anacletus today. You're posting is extremely unproductive to me. It doesnt seem all that scummy, but its a massive hindrance when you don't provide anything for discussion, just constantly droning about how your new and guides are super cool. ##Vote: Fencer710 You don't think Fencer is scum but you voted him? What the hell? If you are town this is horrible play, vote for someone who you think is scum not someone you think is annoying. Now, I think Fencer is scum so I voted him; what are you doing? On June 30 2012 11:26 JingleHell wrote:
If you're really having trouble, and not just trying to be consistent to cover up the slips from earlier, I suggest you go read all of the linked guides, (no really, all of them). Then, forget all the advice you just read, because everyone has read it, and you'll just metagame yourself into a tizzy for no reason. Instead, focus on the generalizations, the state of mind, and the thought processes that were discussed.
However, I can easily see this, like I said, as you just trying to be consistent with your earlier behavior to try and get BotD. This is really good advice, we should all follow it. We don't need townies acting like scum just because they are dumb. Come on guys there are 9 of us, we need to start working together, our strength is in numbers. This On June 30 2012 12:20 Fencer710 wrote:
OK, guys. I have to go to bed. My closing thoughts in case I don't make the deadline tomorrow:
Remember, 7 people have to decide to lynch the same guy in order for there to be a lynch. It's me, Anacletus, or nothing.
You can be meta all you want in your head, but it doesn't change what actually goes on in the thread.
Remember to read and reread all the posts! is why I can't imagine that you are town, I bring a case against you and your reaction is to give really generic advice and go to bed? You may as well just claim scum in the thread. I think Anacletus and Fender have had the scummiest play so far. However, I do not think that there is enough evidence that the [i]are[]/i] scum. However, I feel obliged to lynch someone, and Fender's death would be less hurtful to the town since Anacletus (was) posting somewhat relevant things to the thread. <--This is not a good reason to lynch someone I know, but its the best I can come up with under the circumstances for placing my initial vote. As you've already changed your vote to ensure a lynch, it probably doesn't matter anymore, but I was going to do the same thing (Switch vote from Fender to Anacletus) closer to the deadline (unless Fender got jumped). My reason for not immediately voting Anacletus was that they're both looking scummy and if I hammered, it could very well have halted all discussion for the rest of the day until we lynched him.
This sounds vaguely suspicious to me. Noncommital, but a lot of words to say it, and no real interest in who dies. We might be looking the wrong way on both of them.
Why would you want to bandwagon on what you think is a mislynch? Remember, a mislynch actively hurts the town. Sure, information is good, but if we lose a townie vote to get it, we're hurting.
|
Would you rather No-Lynch in a situation like this Jingle? I would not, but I can see the merits to both decisions.
|
On June 30 2012 23:19 Hopeless1der wrote:
Would you rather No-Lynch in a situation like this Jingle? I would not, but I can see the merits to both decisions.
I'd rather lynch scum. I'm just reminding people that while a no-lynch can be bad, because scum is +1 kill against us, with a mislynch, they're +2 kills. As much as I like information, the fact remains that information is the scum's game, ours is perception. Nothing we know or think matters unless others see it.
So, while I'm not 100% against taking a risk day 1, we shouldn't just tunnel into lynching for info, and should go back through filters, see what we can really see, take a step back, and try to get a shot at lynching a scum. I'm planning to do that myself as soon as I finish getting my kid fed and doing some cleaning up.
|
Based on what I've seen, I am not convinced that either Anacletus or Fencer is scum. (I was calling him Fender for a while there, sorry) I don't have a full scum read on anyone. Thanks for evading the Yes or No question I asked though. I'm not trying to trap you here, its just that you seem of the opinion that we shouldn't be lynching anyone right now due to lack of sufficient scumtells
My point with the two players under suspicion is that I value the information from either lynch higher than the analysis of the lynched player or the lynched player's vote (Because they're targeting each other and not posting much analysis). I know town is down a player (potentially two) but the game is practically designed to mislynch day 1. I agree that our goal should be finding scum, not just getting information, but there is too little to go on so far other than ensuring someone gets lynched today due to bandwagoning.
|
On July 01 2012 00:08 Hopeless1der wrote:
Based on what I've seen, I am not convinced that either Anacletus or Fencer is scum. (I was calling him Fender for a while there, sorry) I don't have a full scum read on anyone. Thanks for evading the Yes or No question I asked though. I'm not trying to trap you here, its just that you seem of the opinion that we shouldn't be lynching anyone right now due to lack of sufficient scumtells
My point with the two players under suspicion is that I value the information from either lynch higher than the analysis of the lynched player or the lynched player's vote (Because they're targeting each other and not posting much analysis). I know town is down a player (potentially two) but the game is practically designed to mislynch day 1. I agree that our goal should be finding scum, not just getting information, but there is too little to go on so far other than ensuring someone gets lynched today due to bandwagoning.
If you'll look back, since the very start, I've been against "yes or no" type play. I'm not evading anything, I'm saying we need to actually consider the angles. This isn't something we can just say one or the other is always better, so I'm not going to be forced to answer a question that doesn't line up with the way I believe we should play, and I'm not going to be called scum for being consistent that way.
Why are you trying to force a decision based on too little information? That seems entirely more relevant at this point, because in the end, you'll see what decision I come to when I place a vote.
|
United States5162 Posts
Umlaut, I don't understand how you could consider me inactive with non-contributing posts. I was one of the first people to question Anecletus for being so non-serious and have 10 posts, which is only a couple less than you; and while they're not essays on meta analysis, I think they do provide some insight into how people are acting.
Either way, I've been just as active and contributive as most. If you want inactive/non-contributing look at Monk and BobTheLob. They have 5 and 3 posts, respectively. Actually, the fact that BobTheLob has posted almost nothing, and has posted none of his own thoughts, but hoped on the bandwagon of Anacletus is kind of surprising to have not risen red flags.
As far as why I stated I'm leaning towards Fencer, it's because nearly his entire post history has been useless. He's done a whole lot of talking about nothing while Anecletus at least contributed a little bit. They top my list as people who could be mafia, but if Bob doesn't speak up I might put him up there, too.
|
On July 01 2012 00:17 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 00:08 Hopeless1der wrote:
Based on what I've seen, I am not convinced that either Anacletus or Fencer is scum. (I was calling him Fender for a while there, sorry) I don't have a full scum read on anyone. Thanks for evading the Yes or No question I asked though. I'm not trying to trap you here, its just that you seem of the opinion that we shouldn't be lynching anyone right now due to lack of sufficient scumtells
My point with the two players under suspicion is that I value the information from either lynch higher than the analysis of the lynched player or the lynched player's vote (Because they're targeting each other and not posting much analysis). I know town is down a player (potentially two) but the game is practically designed to mislynch day 1. I agree that our goal should be finding scum, not just getting information, but there is too little to go on so far other than ensuring someone gets lynched today due to bandwagoning.
If you'll look back, since the very start, I've been against "yes or no" type play. I'm not evading anything, I'm saying we need to actually consider the angles. This isn't something we can just say one or the other is always better, so I'm not going to be forced to answer a question that doesn't line up with the way I believe we should play, and I'm not going to be called scum for being consistent that way. Why are you trying to force a decision based on too little information? That seems entirely more relevant at this point, because in the end, you'll see what decision I come to when I place a vote.
You have been against yes/no play, I agree. You didn't really want to policy lynch to begin with. For the record I do not think your play is scummy. However, in order to vote for anyone you must come to the conclusion that it would be (or at least seems to be) beneficial for town. My problem with your answer is it assumes we will always be able to find scum, which right now I cannot. Too many bandwagons and lurkers. Therefore, my choices are to (semi-)knowingly go into either a mislynch or no-lynch situation.
I qualified my question with "in a situation like this", by which I meant relatively poor cases, only two real options for voting, and a good chance to mislynch. My stance is it is better to mislynch for information than to no-lynch for an extra vote tomorrow. The votes that do get made are based off of better analysis due to having more information available. There is also the chance that we are lucky enough to pull scum.
|
On July 01 2012 00:53 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 00:17 JingleHell wrote:On July 01 2012 00:08 Hopeless1der wrote:
Based on what I've seen, I am not convinced that either Anacletus or Fencer is scum. (I was calling him Fender for a while there, sorry) I don't have a full scum read on anyone. Thanks for evading the Yes or No question I asked though. I'm not trying to trap you here, its just that you seem of the opinion that we shouldn't be lynching anyone right now due to lack of sufficient scumtells
My point with the two players under suspicion is that I value the information from either lynch higher than the analysis of the lynched player or the lynched player's vote (Because they're targeting each other and not posting much analysis). I know town is down a player (potentially two) but the game is practically designed to mislynch day 1. I agree that our goal should be finding scum, not just getting information, but there is too little to go on so far other than ensuring someone gets lynched today due to bandwagoning.
If you'll look back, since the very start, I've been against "yes or no" type play. I'm not evading anything, I'm saying we need to actually consider the angles. This isn't something we can just say one or the other is always better, so I'm not going to be forced to answer a question that doesn't line up with the way I believe we should play, and I'm not going to be called scum for being consistent that way. Why are you trying to force a decision based on too little information? That seems entirely more relevant at this point, because in the end, you'll see what decision I come to when I place a vote. You have been against yes/no play, I agree. You didn't really want to policy lynch to begin with. For the record I do not think your play is scummy. However, in order to vote for anyone you must come to the conclusion that it would be (or at least seems to be) beneficial for town. My problem with your answer is it assumes we will always be able to find scum, which right now I cannot. Too many bandwagons and lurkers. Therefore, my choices are to (semi-)knowingly go into either a mislynch or no-lynch situation. I qualified my question with "in a situation like this", by which I meant relatively poor cases, only two real options for voting, and a good chance to mislynch. My stance is it is better to mislynch for information than to no-lynch for an extra vote tomorrow. The votes that do get made are based off of better analysis due to having more information available. There is also the chance that we are lucky enough to pull scum.
I think we're better off continuing discussion to try and force a scumslip, and if we reach the point of no return on a vote, I'll make the decision then on what vote to make based on all the information available at the time. I should (almost always) be here by the deadline. However, today I might not be, so like I said, I'll be going through the available information and working with it.
|
Ok, so, as promised, some analysis. Maybe you shouldn't have pushed me so hard for it, Hopeless.
On June 29 2012 07:17 Hopeless1der wrote:
Let's suppose many people neglect to post...if we can't get a decent case going, are we cool to lynch lurkers?
Everyone on board?
Early on, suggesting Policy on Lurkers, at a point when it would have been a terrible option.
Category of useless posts, spoilered to stay concise.
+ Show Spoiler +On June 29 2012 07:56 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2012 07:32 JingleHell wrote:
And just in case people decide to show up, and start trying to take my lack of posts as suspicious, I'll be leaving in a bit for TKD. Show nested quote +On June 29 2012 07:42 JingleHell wrote:
Well, Myles, if you have a suggestion for flushing the scum with people not talking until we have something to go on, feel free to elaborate on that plan. Otherwise, I'm going to stick with the established method of getting people talking enough that we either get something to work with, or at least get enough people active to be physically capable of lynching anybody. Aha! That's what we're looking for you lieing...Or maybe 10 minutes counts as a bit...Whatevs, Not a big deal. I do probably need to read better though. Everyone else needs to hurry up and get in here, im freaking out man. On June 29 2012 11:35 Hopeless1der wrote:
i have one post-it note and a small whiteboard. =p
Mind you, those fly in the face of:
On June 29 2012 11:57 Hopeless1der wrote:Anacletus you're actively refusing to participate. Not even neglecting to do so (which I was also doing by joking around), but literally saying Show nested quote +On June 29 2012 11:41 Anacletus wrote:
I am not sharing my thoughts as of yet, I don't think that that is in my best interest to do so. Dumb jokes aside, that is garbage and scummy behavior for anyone in this game. You would be better off lurking and pretending you weren't here, and even that could be considered suspicious. Our goal this early should be making whatever little reads we can and start building cases. Unfortunately we cannot do that with joke posts. Are you planning on giving us any reads? Right now, you have at best 1 post so far that I don't consider a complete write-off. Everyone has to start somewhere...
You try to dismiss your as "dumb jokes" and attack Analfetus for it at the same time.
Then, you try to drag me into a policy discussion when I've already made myself 100% clear about policy, all the while encouraging what you admit is a probably mislynch "for information", despite not really believing either is scummy.
On July 01 2012 00:53 Hopeless1der wrote:
I qualified my question with "in a situation like this", by which I meant relatively poor cases, only two real options for voting, and a good chance to mislynch. My stance is it is better to mislynch for information than to no-lynch for an extra vote tomorrow. The votes that do get made are based off of better analysis due to having more information available. There is also the chance that we are lucky enough to pull scum.
##Unvote
##Vote Hopeless1der
|
United States8476 Posts
Monk is just not here. A couple of posts explaining how newbie you are, and a pretty limp-wristed FoS on Anacletus. If Anacletus's "nothing but short posts which don't adequately defend himself" is sufficient for him to be the only player you've even discussed as possible scum, what are we to conclude from your total lack of contribution?
The difference is I never felt the urgency to defend myself, because I was never accused. I also went out last night and only got home this morning. You can check the veracity of this statement from The Newbie XVIII game.
Anyways, time to contribute. One argument I have in Anacletus's defense is that even though he's close to being lynched, no one has really mounted a strong defense for him or has been really adamant to accuse someone else. If he were really mafia, I would suspect at least 2 other people to help him out a bit more.
Fencer's play just seems nooby to me more than scummy. I would personally give him the BotD, at least for day 1. I'll look into this more after this post though. But to be honest, at this point, it seems more likely that scum is in one of the lurkers rather than in one of these two. Btw, the bigggest lurkers include BobTheLob and me and below that there's Intact, BLinD-RawR, and Myles.
I want to bring special attention to Intact. Although he posts a decent amount, it seems to be filled with one-liners that don't really contribute much to anything and state the obvious. Check his filter, but for the lazy, here's some highlights:
On June 29 2012 20:22 Intact wrote:
I think I saw this type of play in a previous mafia game. Not sure which one though. There were 2 mafia who argued agressivly towards eachother early on. This reminds me of that occasion.
Trying to edge on Anacletus's hanging with a random story that doesn't really help anyone.
On June 30 2012 10:48 Intact wrote:
In addition, should we lynch analectus and he turns put to be mafia, it would make it fairly easy to point out the other mafia. And if he turns out to be townie it would be very easy to confirm some townies.
Stating the obvious, and trying to gun for the lynch.
At the same time, however, it seems extremely weird that Anacletus would vote for Intact without any providing any reasons. Suspicion goes back to Anacletus...I would really like to hear some explanation on this from him. Anyways, these are just my thoughts and I just want to lay them out so I could get feedback. Not really solidly accusing anyone though until I can get some feedback.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49496 Posts
I didn't do this yesterday, I'm calling it a night now so people know when I'm on and when I'm not, so seeing as I will miss the Night post I got somethings to say.
I just hope that we don't end up in a no lynch situation and I really do want fresh reads from monk who has been largely inactive and people need to push on Bob to talk too.
Bob has been as helpless as Fencer (who I think is more of an uncomfortable player than straight up scum but either way hes been hurting town play by not contributing) and worse is that we can't even get a read on him because he doesn't post.
so until I have some sort of epiphany and rush to my PC, I'm going to stand by the Anacletus lynch.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49496 Posts
EBWOP: Happy birthday ghost and thank you monk for your reads.
|
Can we get a vote count again pls
|
Day 1 Vote Count:
Anacletus (7): AmericanUmlaut, BLinD-RawR, BobTheLob, Fencer710, Intact, iamperfection, Promethelax
Intact (1): Anacletus
Fencer710 (1): Hopeless1der
Hopeless1der (1): JingleHell
Not Voted: NRGmonk, Myles
With 12 players alive, it takes 7 to lynch. Currently, Anacletus is set to be lynched Day 1.
|
Myles: You're right to a certain extent. I was looking at your and Monk's contributions specifically because you were the only two not to have cast a vote. However, just because two players have the same post count doesn't mean they're making the same contribution. The vast majority of your posts so far have been filler that haven't added in any meaningful way to the conversation. For the record, I don't have a scummy read on you, I just feel like you could be contributing more with your posting.
JH: Less nuttiness, and more posts like that, please! I for one am persuaded. I still have a scummy read on Anacletus, but actively arguing in favor of a mislynch over no lynch at all is far scummier play than he's demonstrated so far.
##Unvote Anacletus
##Vote Hopeless1der
My read on Anacletus isn't changed at this point, though; I still think he's got a good chance of flipping scum. I'm a bit concerned that there might be too many players who will be inactive between now and the lynch, in which case I'll be switching my vote back to Anacletus to prevent a no-lynch.
|
On July 01 2012 02:09 AmericanUmlaut wrote:
Myles: You're right to a certain extent. I was looking at your and Monk's contributions specifically because you were the only two not to have cast a vote. However, just because two players have the same post count doesn't mean they're making the same contribution. The vast majority of your posts so far have been filler that haven't added in any meaningful way to the conversation. For the record, I don't have a scummy read on you, I just feel like you could be contributing more with your posting.
JH: Less nuttiness, and more posts like that, please! I for one am persuaded. I still have a scummy read on Anacletus, but actively arguing in favor of a mislynch over no lynch at all is far scummier play than he's demonstrated so far.
##Unvote Anacletus
##Vote Hopeless1der
My read on Anacletus isn't changed at this point, though; I still think he's got a good chance of flipping scum. I'm a bit concerned that there might be too many players who will be inactive between now and the lynch, in which case I'll be switching my vote back to Anacletus to prevent a no-lynch.
You just agreed with my reasoning against Hopeless1der because of the underlined text, and then said the bolded.
Bandwagoning on my read, with a huge, glaring inconsistency, with the threat of further bandwagoning. You're still on my scum radar.
|
The biggest scumtell I've had so far is the whole mislynch vs no lynch. To that I submit the following:
WORST CASE SCENARIO
No Lynch Day1
+ Show Spoiler +
Day1: 9 Town, 3 Scum (33.333% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch)
No Lynch, Mafia hit on town
Day2: 8 Town, 3 Scum (37.5% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch
(Mis)Lynch Day1
+ Show Spoiler +Day1: 9 Town, 3 Scum (33.333% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch)
Lynch Town, Mafia hit on town
Day2: 7 Town, 3 Scum (42.8% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch)
Conclusion: Mislynch Bad. No Lynch Worse.
On July 01 2012 02:09 AmericanUmlaut wrote:
SNIP
My read on Anacletus isn't changed at this point, though; I still think he's got a good chance of flipping scum. I'm a bit concerned that there might be too many players who will be inactive between now and the lynch, in which case I'll be switching my vote back to Anacletus to prevent a no-lynch.
WTF YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS WHY AM I DEFENDING MYSELF TO YOU??
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
