Newbie Mini Mafia XIX
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
When is this mysterious "deadline", and why is it the deadline? | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 27 2012 22:52 s0Lstice wrote: now now gentlemen there is plenty of marv for everyone. pass him around like a peace pipe. So we all take turns smoking his wood? He better be one awesome coach if he expects that. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 28 2012 22:29 Promethelax wrote: And an offer I can't refuse? Does it involve a human sized hamster ball and a life of captivity? That's just the one you don't want to refuse. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 00:48 Fencer710 wrote: ##Vote TheToast, the BreadLord You realize TheToast is the BreadLord, right? Of course I know TheToast is the BreadLord. We really need to discuss policy, though. I'm thinking Bread Puns>Scum>Liar>Lurker. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 02:39 andrewlt wrote: 10 pages of off-topic for every 1 page scumhunting? That's why we'll have a policy lynch on OT posts. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
So, my friends, we shall dig through the evidence, seek them out, find them, and BAN them. If we can not get rid of these terrible posters, we'll be in a jam! Don't let them butter you up, see them for who they truly are. Feed them to the almighty hamsters, BANS FOR THE BANGOD! I suggest we discuss policy. Specifically, we should avoid being too careless with policy. Trying to mindlessly do things a specific way will play right into the trolls hands. As soon as we have a written plan, with them lurking amidst our numbers, they can begin to fight back, by seeking to exploit that plan. Hence, I suggest that we treat each day's banning as it's own entity. Look for those causing the most trouble, and seek out the truly trash posters. No patterns, no regrets. If you have a case to make against someone, make it, without fear of some "policy" making your case easier to manipulate by the scum amongst us. Some will seek the shadows, others the light. Not all shit posting is created equally! There may be a failsafe, or there may be a TI. We can not know, so we can not falter in our quest to offer blood and obeisance to the bangods! ALL HAIL THE HAMSTERS! | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Hello, my dear fellows. It seems vile posting has started rampaging, and we must seek out those in need of report, and get them banned! These scum hide amongst us, posting, vilifying our own, seeking to cause mayhem on our beloved board! So, my friends, we shall dig through the evidence, seek them out, find them, and BAN them. If we can not get rid of these terrible posters, we'll be in a jam! Don't let them butter you up, see them for who they truly are. Feed them to the almighty hamsters, BANS FOR THE BANGOD! I suggest we discuss policy. Specifically, we should avoid being too careless with policy. Trying to mindlessly do things a specific way will play right into the trolls hands. As soon as we have a written plan, with them lurking amidst our numbers, they can begin to fight back, by seeking to exploit that plan. Hence, I suggest that we treat each day's banning as it's own entity. Look for those causing the most trouble, and seek out the truly trash posters. No patterns, no regrets. If you have a case to make against someone, make it, without fear of some "policy" making your case easier to manipulate by the scum amongst us. Some will seek the shadows, others the light. Not all shit posting is created equally! There may be a failsafe, or there may be a TI. We can not know, so we can not falter in our quest to offer blood and obeisance to the bangods! ALL HAIL THE HAMSTERS! | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If that's the case, Anacletus, explain your actions! You've been inconsistent, claiming a role that isn't in the game, without knowing what it is or if one is in the game! Why would you false roleclaim? Why does your name look like Analfetus? The FoS shall rest upon YOU for now, until people decide to actually post! | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:05 Anacletus wrote: Bah, you always know how to hit me where it hurts! I regrettably admit to taking a rusted bike chain and strangling the sheriff. But if there's one thing that I didn't do, I didn't shoot the god damn deputy. See, that's the sort of thing that makes me wonder more seriously. You could easily be trying to pre-establish an alibi for any scum behavior. You let me take the lead, but when I started pushing for participation, you jumped in with a weak suggestion, and now this. It's obviously rather weak as far as tells go, but it's more than I have on any of the people who aren't posting. And Myles, what could I possibly be distracting from at this point? I'm the only one wanting to find these scum and get rid of them. Anacletus suggested we just start hunting, so I started hunting. If you want to contribute, maybe you should chime in on policy, or announce yourself, or do basically anything besides a low content post that won't help the situation. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:17 Myles wrote: Not really defending you, just wondering why he's taking such a lead when we have nothing to go on. Starting a witch hunt is only going to get innocent people killed me thinks. Also, when did you suggest we start hunting? If nobody takes a lead when we have nothing to go on, we'll never have anything to go on. The entire purpose of this is to witch hunt in such a way that we eventually flush the scum. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Although, Anacletus, I am going to keep that loose eye on you, and one on Myles. I'm not entirely sure why, but something about your posting is setting off... well, not really alarms, more like having a cell phone on vibrate, but leaving it in your other pair of pants, so that mild buzzing sound. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Which is exactly what a scum would be hoping for. A visible post that doesn't progress things. That originally joking FoS Anacletus is starting to look serious, rather than just a vital conversation starter. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I totally see how you could grab a "scum" feel from what I've said so far, but right now I just want people out of their shells, posting, discussing policy, or basically doing anything. Doing something semi-useless is far more productive than doing nothing whatsoever. And, let's face it. If we try to lynch everyone who's made a non-productive post so far, we'd definitely get a grab bag of town, even if we didn't get any scum at all, based on the numbers. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 12:00 Anacletus wrote: I'm not actively refusing to participate. I just don't want to throw around accusations because I think that that will be aggressive and more like scum play. I think I'll wait for a few more people to post before I post any reads. This isn't a court of law, it's more like Jerry Springer. You talk to people, you lead into questions that get the discussion going the right way, and you start looking for things to poke at. Waiting for someone else to make a case and then bandwagoning looks pretty scummy too, so you're not doing yourself any favors. I'd be poking in other directions more, except there's damn few directions to poke right now. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 12:13 Anacletus wrote: Yeah I know, I've played mafia before. It's just that refusing to participate is pretty serious and is mentioned in the rules. He wasn't suggesting that type of refusal, he's talking about not working with us, despite these reads, and pages of notes you claim to have. If you're not helping us look for scum, you're hindering the hunt. If you're not with us, you're against us. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 12:17 Anacletus wrote: From what I generally see in mafia, the town is the most active in posting when the game starts, while the mafia generally don't post and lurk a while. I've been posting a lot and I really think it's too early to start calling out scum. + Show Spoiler + I said I had 8 pages of notes, that was obviously a joke, I don't know shit, bro! We can't make "town does x, scum does y" generalizations, though, especially on D1. Both sides can know the meta game, so we have to start everyone on a blank slate. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If you go back to my very first posts, I'm not saying we should scrap all policy, I'm just saying let's be prepared to take cases individually, rather than hoping some blind set of policy works to crush all of our scum. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
AmericanUmlaut is also making me a touch nervous, because he's leaning in the direction of getting early bandwagon votes on someone, and trying to make it sound like a justifiable policy, and leaving room to get a scapegoat if Anacletus is mislynched. FoS AmericanUmlaut | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 30 2012 06:39 Hopeless1der wrote: Argh...Thanks for derailing us hard ghost. It's time to get back to scumhunting now? and for future reference, the quoted post is usually seen as a complete waste of time and reason for suspicion. Wow, that's completely meta, a waste of content post about waste of content posting. I agree, though. Not ready to shift a vote yet, but I've got an FoS on Fencer710. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 18:22 Fencer710 wrote: Sorry T_T. I was literally asleep during the day. For better or for worse, my views are the same as Umlaut's. I can't really add anything. :\ Well, there's also this shady bit that never got completely cleared up. Add that to spammy posts, and yeah, you're at least worth watching. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 30 2012 09:30 Fencer710 wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 30 2012 09:24 Fencer710 wrote: Yeah I'm an idiot for sure. ![]() Elaborating on this a bit: I had forgotten that posting 1-liners/spam is considered 'scum'. I need to reread the rules T_T. I said this since in your first game you fuck up and learn a lot more than your second and third, at least in my experience with playing games for the first time, unless you do so on purpose. Now, what I should have done, in spoilers if you don't want to read it: + Show Spoiler + I should have said I will stay and post through the night to prove my claim that I was asleep through the first portion. I should have paid more attention to the general guide to mafia. A lot more. I should have re-read everything 5 times, and been very very careful what I posted. I should have posted far far less. I'm an idiot for forgetting why Anacletus was called out as scum. T_T Also It's pretty easy to point out a newbie's mistakes as scum behaviour, I consistently start stopping 'scummy' behaviour, aka spamming and indecisiveness as you/I catch it. We already know you're a newbie. Just like the rest of us. ##Vote Fencer710 It's not a crutch, it should be a similar sort of hindrance (we're all willing to spend time on a website dedicated to competitive video games, don't tell me about not reading the guide.) | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. Uhm, it really doesn't work that way. Because they know that we know that they know that we know... you can get as meta as you want, what it really comes down to is educated guesses, and convincing other people those judgement calls are reasonable. Both sides know the same things, and both sides can try to meta-game. You can't second guess the people who know more than you and get the same updates to info as you. All you can do is look for what they do with the information. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 30 2012 23:03 Hopeless1der wrote: 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. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 00:53 Hopeless1der wrote: 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. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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: 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 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 | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 02:21 Hopeless1der wrote: 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. WTF YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS WHY AM I DEFENDING MYSELF TO YOU?? Your math requires that we have no new reads to work with based off the mislynch and D2 discussion, and are forced to randomly lynch on D2. If we avoid a crapshoot on the D2 vote, we have better odds of winning a vote with scum being a smaller percentage of the population. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Perhaps we should contemplate who looks shady now, in light of the new information. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 06:27 AmericanUmlaut wrote: I think we should save discussion for morning. Posting our thoughts during the night just gives the PBUs more information to consider when picking their night hit. They already have us over a barrel. Besides, if it goes anything like the day did, they're probably too busy laughing in /r/ablmafia about the incompetent Nazi modding happening. I mean, let's face it, most of the discussion sounded like a Failsafe blog. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
He placed his vote on Fencer (who has been under vague suspicion quite a bit, including by the dearly departed), but only after the vote on Anacletus was nearly secured, and ended the day as the ONLY vote on Fencer. That ties in to the case we were already making about his scummy play. What do you think? | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 08:03 Promethelax wrote: I'll go back and look at it, it isn't fair to you to call it our case though. I noticed and mentioned the stupid play, you made a real case. I would urge you to go back and re-read my case on Fencer, I think it is even stronger now that Anacletus has flipped green. I'll post my thoughts about the wonder when I have re-read your case and his filter. I still think Fencer is scummy, too, which is why I mentioned the Hopeless vote on him, as it makes one of them look less scummy if the other flips, but was done in a way that it didn't overcommit the vote, either. However, if I have to take two people who are similarly scummy, I'm going to end up dropping a vote on the one who seems more dangerous, which currently feels like Hopeless. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Oooh, look who deigns to "contribute". Who's worried about it? For one, it's N1, they can't have rolechecked yet if they have a checker. For two, regardless of when we talk, there's two options without them having a check yet. They can either shoot someone to shut them up, or shoot someone so we think they wanted them shut up. We won't know which it was either way, so why sweat it? The scum have a very huge lead on information at this point. We win based on getting perceptions and communicating, along with superior numbers. We can meta-game ourselves to the point of manic paranoia, or we can do what needs to be done and nail these scum to the wall. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 08:16 Myles wrote: Well then I guess I'll post my thoughts. First I think we should look at bandwagoners. I’m sure I’m under suspicion, or more so than before since I got the eye from some posters, for being part of the lynching, but I hope I explained my position enough that I get some BotD. A number of other people barely explained themselves at all before voting. Blind-rawr hopped on the bandwagon without much discussion and voted pretty early, but his subsequent posts explained his position. Intact did pretty much the same, just with a fewer number of posts. Fencer is tied at the top for most suspicions now imo. His overall behavior, combined with his hopping on the bandwagon really early, hopping off when he got some attention, then hopping back on seems really scummy. BobTheLob is right there with him. Lurker who used the same arguments as Fencer, hopped on the bandwagon with no reasoning, and the few posts he has made contributed nothing. The others who voted for Anacletus seem like they had a reasonable position. And while I can’t say we know for sure that those who didn’t vote for him are town, I think it’s really likely because the FoS went so quickly on Anacletus . He didn’t do much to convince us of his innocence, so if they were PBUs it’d be some serious metagaming to start backing off and potentially drawing attention when there was so much support. When the vote was secured on a townie, or close to it, why WOULD scum be voting on Anacletus? Maybe some did, but certainly not all of them. In fact, given your general level of suspicious behavior, the fact that you tried to get people to stop posting at night while Hopeless was under the radar, and your conspicuous lack of discussion on my read of Hopeless, I'm really starting to think you're scummy. And since you pointed at Fencer as top on suspicion, I'm dropping him to a notch below Hopeless on my Scum-o-meter. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Since I answered those questions already. I'm currently looking at Hopeless, Myles, and Fencer. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 08:27 Myles wrote: I think the scum would keep on Anecletus to not draw attention to themselves and keep the heat on him. I would agree that is possible one didn't vote for him, I just don't just have a heavy scum read on any of you. I talked about your read of Hopeless when AmericanUmlaut asked me about it, and AmericanUmlaut suggested we not post at night and I thought his reasoning was valid. You mean when you said next to nothing, dragged it over a couple of paragraphs, and defended Hopeless? That's convincing me you're not scum. On July 01 2012 04:05 Myles wrote:+ Show Spoiler + On July 01 2012 03:58 AmericanUmlaut wrote: What is your opinion on JH's read on hopeless1der? Why do you feel that Anacletus is a scummier read? I was suspicious of JH at first because of the seemingly chaotic way he accusing people deciding policy, but I agree now that it was just to get people talking so we could go somewhere rather than seriously accusing people. Hopeless seems like he's trying to make the best decision with the information we have. I agree that lynching just for information is bad if we have nothing else to go on, but given that we have a couple suspects, we should definitely be lynching one of them since relying on scum to slip up and make it obvious seems very unlikely at this point. That wasn't "discussion". | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 08:44 Myles wrote: Well, you're reasoning of hopeless being suspicious because his voting someone else after Anacletus was all but secured is something I don't agree with. I don't think that's much to go one because Fencer revealed himself to be pretty scummy with his spammy offtopic posts and haphazard voting. I mean, you basically did the same thing by putting an early FoS on Anacletus then changing to focus once other people jumped in. I don't think something like that is very damning. If you're only going to answer the smallest part of the reasoning, in defense of another person, you're not going to help your own case. This post is clutter at best, and incredibly scummy at worst. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 09:42 BobTheLob wrote: Yes I am. You to are the most active right now and as I said, we're ALL following what you guys are doing. I didn't say you were scum I said that it'd odd that you two right out of the gate are helping each other and building on what the other said. Actually, we've sparred back and forth a bit, too, we voted different directions on D1. We see similar things and build off of eachother's cases because out of everyone here, we're the only ones that aren't taking individual posts and comparing them to a newbie guide. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 10:12 Promethelax wrote: Are you using a guide? I've been working based off of what I have read in other mafia threads, I did a bit of research before playing since I was scared as hell. I don't really get what you mean about how we'd be a double lynch. I have trouble seeing why after I flipped green or you flipped green anyone would lynch the other one. I you flip red I guess I will look bad though, I guess I'll hope to hell that I'm right about you and that you are one of us. I was saying that if we were scum, tying ourselves together for no reason would be suicidal. I read the guides, and then threw out everything I read except for the mentality type stuff, because frankly, it's all opinions on the best way to metagame other than that, which is just a headache waiting to happen. I know I'm town, and I'm reasonably confident you are. What do you think of Myles in light of his jumping to defend Hopeless after we started looking at a case against him? | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 10:18 Promethelax wrote: oh, okay that makes a lot more sense. I don't like him but I'm still looking into him, maybe its awful town play? I'm not sure I'm still building the case. I also think I'll just re-link my Fencer case since he is still scummy. Why do you think Bob chose to come out of the woodwork now? He posted that huge thing with no reads in it and a lot of words. I'd love your opinion. Right now I'm feeling "towny scared out of shell". It's kind of like Anacletus' early posts, it's useless, but it feels almost too useless to be intentional. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 01 2012 13:46 Hopeless1der wrote: You've lost me Promethelax. My statement pertained to No Lynch and Mislynch (intentional or otherwise). Are you saying No Lynch is preferable? Because I'm saying Mislynch is preferable. Oh wait, when you cast your vote: + Show Spoiler + On June 30 2012 22:19 Promethelax wrote: 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. Your actions agree with my conclusion, whether you agree with the deduction itself or not. My 'non-committal' posts (at least towards Anacletus) were in fact a good read by me to identify someone being bandwagoned for a weak case. I can't decide if you and JH tunneling me so far is actually scummy or not, but don't for one goddamn second think I don't know what I'm doing. If you start basing your defense off an attack, it looks like an OMGUS. You should start by defending points against yourself first, then, if you feel there's a case, turn it around second. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 10 2012 17:28 AmericanUmlaut wrote: From the obs QT: Killing JingleHell was a horrible mistake. Eh, dying may have focused my tunnel vision just a bit. It's impossible to say at this point, without being clouded by hindsight, what I would have done had I still been in. | ||
| ||