|
On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote:
I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again.
So this post is rife with contradiction and scumtells. Let's break it down.
I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read.
You did not claim it was a huge case. I got angry because you had a misleading case and I've made that clear multiple times.
What does that second sentence even mean? That's the scummiest thing I've read so far! You posted a weak/half-assed read as your original case then you're saying you don't want it to get brushed off as a weak/half-assed read and therefore you posted it? WHAAAAT.
How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something?
When did I even suggest that I had 3 scum locked down? Where did that even come from? That's some suspicious shit right there.
|
Hello Townsfolk!
I would like to make a formal accusation of Hopeless1der. As you’ll find in the argument below, Hopeless1der is showing several common mafia traits, and his behavior is inconsistent with his meta as a Vanilla Townie in Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII (all underlined messages henceforth are relevant hyperlinks – click for reference).
Meta Analysis on Hopeless1derHopeless1der’s FilterHopeless opens the game discussing policy. While it is mostly fluff, he is very direct, never backs down, and states his opinion clearly. Notable quotes in the spoilertag below (bolding is my emphasis): + Show Spoiler + On June 25 2012 10:16 Hopeless1der wrote:
No more sheriff...well ain't that something special. What in the Sam Hill do we do now? Surely someone knows who else could be behind these treacherous murders.
I say we root these varmints out and string em right up in the middle of town, just like that VisceraEyes.
Now to do this we're gonna need a couple of...'Rules'.
I will say that I am a firm believer in the truth. Anyone caught in a lie deserves to die! Who's with me? On June 25 2012 12:53 Hopeless1der wrote:
To further clarify my response to Release:
I'm saying lynch people that we can collectively agree have been dishonest in something they have said or done.
Further discussions on what constitutes 'dishonesty' may follow at a later time, or right now if whoever is reading this should so happen to desire. On June 25 2012 12:13 Hopeless1der wrote:
Any statement preceeded by "I think..." is inherently true until a contradictory "I think.."or similar statement is made.
Nevertheless Release's logic should be addressed and I will concede that I committed the same error that he did prior to his EBWOP: equating truth to honesty, which are not the same.
Basically if someone decides to flip flop on a decision without some ironclad reasoning, I'm saying lynch the sucker On June 25 2012 13:13 Hopeless1der wrote:
And thus we've arrived at the point of my original policy: dishonesty is a move for scum. Townies shouldn't have a reason to lie, at least not a good one.
It's hard to imagine a game where someone instantly knows every scum and townie correctly - what would be the point of the game? We're going to have times where we're completely convinced of someones scumminess and manage to flip them as town. It happens, but I'd also rather Mislynch (when you're really really sure) than No-Lynch.
No-Lynching basically gives Mafia a free kill while denying us a chance to get rid of someone, at the very least someone that is not necessarily scum but definitely not helping the town. Only if such a person can not be found would I actively pursue a No-Lynch.
@Release: I pretty much agree with your stance on 'honesty'. Hence I moved on to Mis vs No Lynches Townie Hopeless1der makes his first move, firing an FOS against Esspen. While his FOS is flimsy at best (and targets a joke post made by Esspen), he is very direct. In addition, when confronted about this FOS by BioSC later in the day, Hopeless1der directly defends himself and directly confronts his attacker. Hopeless then votes BioSC. He is very direct about his accusation, accusing BioSC directly and undiplomatically. Hopeless is counteraccused by BioSC. Hopeless does not back down and continues to build a good case against BioSC.
In summary, townie Hopelessness is direct, unapologetic, and unafraid. His posts early game posts in this current game are the exact opposite in this current game.
Current Game Analysis on Hoepless1derHopeless opens the game with fluff. However, he attacks posts on general/advice and policy, unlike his townie game where he made them himself. (This is minor) Hopeless fires an FOS at YourHarry. Note that he doesn't give any direct reasoning for it, unlike his Townie persona. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 08:05 Hopeless1der wrote:
Yeah if it was just another FoS, who cares, but a straight up VOTE? Oh man thats harsh. btw, who's this hopeless guy? I'm Hopeless1der =P
And seriously, Lazer's long "DONT FAKECLAIM" was followed by "role claim by claiming your role if your blue". It just sounded weird in that context so I took a stab. YourHarry pointed out multiple ways I could have interpreted it that would have been fine.
I'm gonna stick with a FoS YourHarry for now. I really can't see his vote sticking to me like that so early when we're still waiting for half the people to start posting. In a followup post, Hopeless talks policy. It sounds completely different from his townie persona (quote in spoiler, my commentary is bolded). + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 10:19 Hopeless1der wrote:
This will be a good test to see how a bandwagon gets started then I suppose.
Jingle's done this before, just calling someone out based on their name being strange or the icon next to their name. The early posts are just random crap to get people talking. His post about lurkers is suspicious, but if we let people lurk, there's going to be some scum in the pile.
Throwing an early lynch at lurkers forces them to be more active, so there is more chance at scumslips instead of nothing to go on at all for those players. They all look scummy when they say and do nothing. The last couple games I've played/obs'd have been riddled with people being replaced and lurking and it completely screws with town's ability to make consistent reads. However, most of those games were majority lynch so the lurker problem had a much bigger impact.
Has an obsession with lurkers and discusses them ad nauseum - all filler. Completely different from his emphasis on policy and lynching lairs.
If we have scum reads we should definitely push them. I don't think a lynch lurker mentality is that beneficial to town given our voting system. Any lurking scum can jump on any suspicion very easily and not look any worse than the next lurker that just follows the pack. Good scum reads will force them out of the woodwork to cast suspicion on someone else.
More filler. "Good scum reads are useful." What else is new?
And I'm still not casting a vote as we're still waiting on 4 players to make a post and for Evulrabbitz and zen_man to do something relevant. The way rabbitz has disappeared concerns me as he ducked out just as we started getting to the not completely useless posts.
Note the emphasis on stalling. He also notes suspicious activities and doesn't FOS or accuse people. Very different from townie Hopeless. Things start to get extremely suspicious when Hopeless makes his first accusation. Hopeless points fingers at multiple people and uses straight-up untrue premises to draw his conclusion (For more information, read my responses here and here). This is completely unlike his direct accusation of BioSC in his townie game. + Show Spoiler +On July 06 2012 03:59 Hopeless1der wrote:So while catching up, it looks like Release isn't making any friends. YourHarry has also disappeared after resolving his shouting match with Jingle. He's said he'll re-read for scum vibes and hasn't been heard from since. (Fingerpoint #1)Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 02:37 JieXian wrote:
Let's focus on lurkers like Mackin ATM. I know I might qualify as one but I have nothing to add to the lazer/hapa vs hopeless/release/jingle babbling Mackin on the other hand disappeared about the same time as Rabbitz: just before what I consider the 'real discussion' started. A very suspicious time to start lurking because they could very easily have been watching and just let the town shred itself so I'll be watching them both going forward for avoiding discussions. Not that they're both necessarily scum, but its definitely looks scummy to me. Fingerpoint #2 and #3Rabbitz came back and had a read on Release that looks pretty good, but there are a couple other fingers pointed at Release concern me: Fingerpoint #4+ Show Spoiler +On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote:Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. Hapahauli is doing a big backslide from his previous case on Release, after seeing + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote:On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote:
Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons.
While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. and just jumps all over it, building a huge case: + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 15:40 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote:On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote:On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote:
Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons.
While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. Exactly what has Lazer done to be a "top-priority lynch?" According to your filter, you have two posts detailing cases against Lazer. The first is an analysis of his first post: Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:58 Release wrote:I think YourHarry is Grush's new alias. On July 05 2012 06:39 Lazermonkey wrote:
YOYO GUYS. I AM Vanilla Townie
On a more serious note, we want this ship rollin' as fast as possible. Discussing policy is not scumhunting but it does at least help us get the discussion going. First off, something we want to avoid as town is Vanillas claiming blue roles. In both my last game and Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII there were Vanillas who claimed blue roles(DTs). Both times town ended in an bad spot (although not as bad as it could've been due to luck). But this should still be avoided at all costs as it can cause massive damage to town. Why? Well let's say a vanilla townie claims DT, and then the real DT claims because the vanilla is lying. As it doesn't make sense for vanillas to claim blue roles, we must assume that one of theese players is scum and the other one is the real DT.Two following scenarios can occur here
1). The townie gets lynched. which means that the other person is probebly the real DT, this must however not be true.
2). The DT gets lynched, which means that the vanilla townie will 100% get lynched the next day.
While 2 is far worse than 1 they are still both very bad for town. There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie. If you don't agree with this please let me know. If noone disagrees I will assume that no townie is ever fake claiming a blue role. Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue.
I will also copy a part of my first post from my last game(where I was DT) since I am lazy.
Regarding lynches: I really really dislike nolynching for three reasons.
1. because the information that we are able to get out of it is very limited. Yes, we avoid a potential misslynch but on the other hand scum will score a more or less a free-kill during night. Essentially, we are back on D1 but this time we are in a 6-2 instead of a 7-2.
2. If we agree to nolynch then what is there to discuss? It's like asking for people to lurk even more.
3. With no vigilante in the game the only way we can win is to lynch scum. Kinda obvious but still.
We require 5+ votes in order to get a lynch done. With that in mind I hope that people are willing to vote for someone who isn't their top 1 scum. Obviously, if you REALLY don't think there is any chance that the person that is about to be lynched can be scum, then sure, don't vote him. But if it seems like your target hardly gets any votes and your second highest scumread is at 4 votes with 30 minutes untill deadline, then I think you should swap your vote onto him.
Lurkers!: There are two types of lurkers. The ones who doesn't post anything and the sneaky ones, who posts ALOT but nothing of value. The first category could either be bad town play or scum play. But the second category is almost exclusivly scum play. If you are a townie, speak your mind, don't make a super duper long post when you could've said it on just a few lines. Keep it simple. With that being said, post!
Ignoring the copy-pasted policy stuff for now, Why on earth did you even post that scenario stuff about a VT fake-claiming a DT or blue? There was absolutely no indication that anyone had even planned on that (especially considering you had the first post). If anything, you have just shown people something they can do (to the detriment of the town). And why go through the casework? It's just fluff and you know it. This is very much a post looking like a contribution, while being a non-contribution, or even an anti-contribution. Im pretty sure, again, that no one was even remotely close to voting in a way to force a nolynch. I love the bolded line; you could have kept this post simple and concise. But you decided to make it "super-duper long." ##vote: LazermonkeyYourharry, you should do more than OMGUS. You are definitely rivaling, for scumminess, against lazer. Fos: yourharry
Fos: lazermonkey It's worth saying that Lazer's first post was made 12 minutes after the game started. I'm not sure when the mafia separate forum-thingy goes online (at the start of the game or when the role PM's are sent out?,) but his message seems innocent and hardly "an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies" - as you call it in a later post. Him warning about townie fake-claiming is a legitimate concern, as it led to the downfall of the town in one of his previous games. While this may seem common-knowledge to the both of us, it is clearly not obvious to some players, and thus is worth mentioning. While I agree his post is "fluffy," it does not seem like an attempt to "brainwash" townsfolk, and his actions can be seen as having a pro-town mentality. This is hardly FOS material. Your second case against Lazer is a response to his case about JingleHell. Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 11:08 Release wrote:On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote:I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote:
So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz 1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia... The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not. On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote:
Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point.
Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things.
Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away. If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice. And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf? On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote:
EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote.
Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious.
Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet. But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well. On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case'' On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that? What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you. ##Vote JingleHell are you outing Jingle as your scumbuddy? or maybe trying to drag him down with you? YOU ARE SO CONFUSING. OMGUS. Why are you promoting your first post as a discussion starter? It isn't. It is an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies and get us talking about useless things. I commend him for shutting your down your post with this authority. If you are actually using the discussion of sex toys as a reason to call him scum, you really are just grasping at straws for lack of any real substance. In terms of day1, i don't think setting a tone on lynching lurkers is necessarily a bad thing. should we decide on lynching a lurker, the lurkers will feel a need to speak up in order to avoid getting the lynch. In other words, saying "let's lynch lurkers" promotes discussion. And "to make a point" states exactly that. "speak up or die." Jingle should probably reply to the next part, but as far as i can see, it goes - OMGUS OMGUS OMGUS ##vote -##vote x 10 - no discussion, the guy who got OMGUS'd has nothing to attack/defend. Checkmate. Turns out, he was VT o.O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ That being said, Jingle has only made very light commitments and commented on very obvious/easy things. Lazer, you still look worse. What ever his stance may be, he clearly took the time to read through JingleHell's post. He's also taking a firm stance against a player, and making a clear attempt at analysis (even if it is only day 1). You spend half your post talking about his first post, then address one of his points... then the rest I don't even understand. You have very strong feelings about Lazer, care to solidify your case for him to be a "top priority lynch?" He pushed him for a bit, and then finally let up once everyone else had suspicions on Release. His change of stance is well timed to distance himself from his provoking, but he still leaves himself an open avenue to target Release later on based on his meta from a game where Lazer played the same but got a different response from Release than this game.. (This order of events is easily proven false. See the first half of this post)The other thing that I found scummy about him was his reason for suspecting Jingle in this case: Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 11:37 Hapahauli wrote:
--SNIP--
In conclusion, FOS on JingleHell. His actions regarding D1 voting are contradictory, and he's taken a very suspicious stance on anti-bandwagnoning so early into day 1.
I don't get how being anti-bandwagon can be seen as suspicious. Bandwagoning is terrible and I completely agree with Jingle's stance on it, seeing as I was the victim of a D1 mislynch in XVIII. Scum don't have to push for a majority vote this game, they can let us rile ourselves up and can vote with little risk of getting themselves caught in the mislynch votecount. FoS: Hapahauli
However, my case against Hopeless1der goes from simple suspicion to VOTE LYNCH HIM when you analyze his responses to my counter-accusations. When counteraccused by BioSC as a Townie in his previous game, he forcefully sticks to his argument, is never apologetic, and never changes his mind (re-read the first segment/meta analysis if you forgot). In this game, he is a completely different person while defending himself.
Analysis of Hopeless's Scummy DefenseHopeless's "drops his case" against me. He also does not answer any of my attacks against him and tries to avoid conflict (my commentary is bolded in spoiler). + Show Spoiler +On July 06 2012 05:45 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 15:56 Hapahauli wrote:On July 05 2012 15:44 BassInSpace wrote:
Apologies for the late entrance, but my time zone makes it a bit hard to post concurrently with the rest of you. First of all, I don’t think harry’s lightning fast vote is as terrible as you make it out to be jingle; town has shown that it can obviously think for itself without jumping on mindless bandwagons. However, I would like to ask you hapahauli, what exactly is wrong with an anti-bandwagon stance? We want to actually encourage people to post their reads and think before voting, not going with the flow of the thread, which is what mafia likes doing. I can’t think of any situation where bandwagoning helps town, much like fake claiming doesn’t help. Lazermonkey’s long first post is similar to jingle’s anti-bandwagon stance, no? I’ll have a look at the other points against him later, as it seems a few others are FOSing him, but I need to head out now and just wanted to clarify with hapahauli.
Also, Mackin seems to have completely dropped off with no significant contributions whatsoever, and we KNOW he was around during most of the discussion during this first 24 hours. Not too sure about the other lurkers yet obviously, but I know JieXian and I will have similar post timing (see NMM XVIII) because we’re only 2 hours apart. Hi Bass and welcome to the game! My argument (re: anti-bandwagonning) is that it is more appropriate to take such a stance closer to the lynch deadline. I feel that taking such a strong policy early in the cycle stance can limit the amount of posts that players make. Players can post with less inhibition without such a stance in place, which makes for additional opportunities to make reads for townies (i.e, I may be discouraged from posting analysis on Mackin because I maybe seen as "bandwagonning" off of you). I'm all for this stance closer to lynch time, but it serves as nothing but an inhibition on posting this early in the game. Bandwagoning allows for the exact opposite of what you say. Its to place a vote without looking at the reasoning or thought behind it. If you were to post analysis on Mackin, thats analysis not bandwagoning to me. Perhaps we're disagreeing on the meaning and taken in the context of your post, sounds like a fair statement. I disagree with your definition of 'bandwagon'. (Focuses on bandwagoning as a side-track instead of addressing my arguments. Townie Hopeless would be much more concerned that I called him out for lying)Between the posts that I quoted regarding Release, two players had FOS'd him. You didn't explicitly say you had a FOS on Release but it did feel like it to me. Calling it 'huge' was overstepping things, and you maintain it wasn't a case at all, so I'll drop it, but I'm still seeing some underlying suspicion about Release. (Incredibly wishy-washy, and drops his case against me! This is completely opposite from Townie Hopeless!) Hopeless defends against my ##Vote. In this post, he is diversionary, emotional, tries to draw pity, changes his stance multiple times... just read my commentary. Read the spoiler! This is all the proof you will need! This last post is shockingly different from Townie Hopeless. + Show Spoiler +On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 06:19 Hapahauli wrote:
EBWOP:
@Hopeless1der: And just so you don't mistake my post as "underlying suspicion," I would like to make it perfectly clear what I think about your last two posts. You brought attention to a player who had not yet been attacked using false and out of context evidence. You immediately flip-flopped and avoided confrontation when presented with this. You are not pro-town, your goal has been to discredit my analysis so far and incite paranoia amongst the town.
You are mafia.
## Vote: Hopeless1der When you responded to my suspicions you completely flew off the handle about there being no case and how I was completely making shit up. All your "false evidence" claims are based on there being no case. There hasn't been anything else from you to comment on, and trying to push my read would have come off as either blind tunnelling or an OMGUS, neither of which really help town and make me look scummier than choosing to let it go. (Read that last sentence again. He says that not addressing my arguments makes him look less scummy. This is the polar opposite of Townie Hopeless)My issue is with what happened after you asked Release to clarify his position. He completely ignores your post, and you pretty much completely give him a pass on your next post about him. The one thing here is that you make a statement about how his meta doesn't match with a previous game and it might be scummy behavior: (Changes positions, reverts to calling me scummy after dropping my case)Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote:Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. The whole last paragraph...I don't know if you're saying it makes Lazer and/or Release look townie or scummy, but its very nonchalant and easy to overlook. You seem to be pro-Release in your overall posting but I saw something suspicious and brought it up. (Incredibly indecisive. This would be enough for Townie Hopeless to directly cast suspicion on me. He instead is unclear and diplomatic. Note that this reasonable stance was not included in his accusation against me.)I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. ( Red sentence makes absolutely no sense. Confronts me sarcastically, saying I have all 3 scum locked down - a townie would never attack another townie like this. Finally, he appeals to pity with his last sentence.
In summation, take a look at the "townie principles" that I noted in my meta-analysis of Hopeless.
I will say that I am a firm believer in the truth. Anyone caught in a lie deserves to die! Who's with me? I'm saying lynch people that we can collectively agree have been dishonest in something they have said or done. And thus we've arrived at the point of my original policy: dishonesty is a move for scum. Townies shouldn't have a reason to lie, at least not a good one. Basically if someone decides to flip flop on a decision without some ironclad reasoning, I'm saying lynch the sucker
He has been dishonest in his arguments and has relentlessly flip-flopped. Townie Hopeless would lynch this game's Hopeless on principle alone.
Hopeless1der is a completely different character from his townie-persona in a mafia-oriented way. He is an easy D1 lynch.
|
As this is the first major accusation of the game, I want everyone to give an opinion on my argument. My post is not an excuse to top talking and blindly vote. Keep talking, keep giving opinions, and keep pressuring those scum.
Holy geezus that took me hours to write. Bedtime for me.
|
Quick EBWOP:
After my first quotation block:
In summary, townie Hopelessness is direct, unapologetic, and unafraid. His posts early game posts in this current game are the exact opposite in this current game.
This should read:
In summary, townie Hopelessness is direct, unapologetic, and unafraid. His posts early game posts in this current game are the exact opposite.
|
@ Hopeless - My case isn't just that you're different - its that you're different in a mafia-oriented way. In addition, I bring up some of your scummy posts that go far beyond meta analysis. I wish I could comment on your defense, but you don't even attack my formal case! You spend time deflecting the issue and quoting my other posts!
(As far as the whole "huge case" thing in one of my previous posts - that's my mistake. That's also why I make no mention of it in my formal analysis, which Hopeless does not address once in this post)
So what that Townie Hopeless died day 1? Townies aren't afraid of death and put themselves in the spotlight precisely because they are willing to get shot.
On July 07 2012 00:18 Hopeless1der wrote:
Well Hapahauli has me backed into a corner and won't let me up from under his thumb. Fine, spend all your effort reading my meta and explaining how Townie Hopeless is so different than me. You know what else is different about Townie Hopeless from XVIII?
HES DEAD. LYNCHED DAY 1. Convenient of Hapa to completely leave that out of that case he built. Being direct and argumentative got me into an OMGUS and ultimately got me killed. I'm not too keen on reliving the experience, but Hapa seems to have me pegged as scum with huge emphasis on the fact that I'm playing differently than that time I got lynched first in the game.
Lol seriously? This just gets worse and worse.
I've been locked into this bullshit from Hapa and he just wont let it go. If I still look like scum (and I'm sure I do to him), fine, but I need to spend some time actually contributing to town instead of defending myself all game. I have yet to get a chance to breathe since my FoS.
You just contributed tons here. Tons.
|
|
|
On July 06 2012 23:58 Release wrote:caught up; I think Meta is a horrible form of analysis. + Show Spoiler +Defending me based on my previous games is quite shit. But, ingoring the meta, the case on hope1 is still fairly good.Since i should be back 15 minutes before the deadline, i'll leave my vote on Lazer for now.One word: deceitful and Jingle is pulling a half-grush, which i think is never good for town.
DAFUQ? Do you honestly believe that Lazer is a better case than Hopeless?
On July 07 2012 01:31 Lazermonkey wrote:
Okay, I will go soon and may or may not be at home at the deadline. I will have my phone tho so I am able to check the thread and swap my vote if that is necessary. I will keep my vote on Jingle as of now, although that may change during the rest of the day. I will also change my vote to most scummy person in case there is a close voting. Here is my wish list for people I want dead:
1. Jingle.
2. JieXian
3. Hope/TMG
DAFUQ? Jingle and JieXian are better cases than Hopeless? Stop pointing fingers, focus on one read, and build a substantial case.
|
JieXian, I'm just going to focus on the last part of your post because it contains most of your argument.
On July 07 2012 02:31 JieXian wrote:- You pounced on everyone who dared laying a finger (of suspicion ^^) your mates.
- You came to their defence (with "fire" if I may quote you) as soon as anyone brought them up.
- You contradicted yourself by never addressing their posts which fit your criteria for scumminess. The criteria of which is of
course, anything at all.
- A funnier one, was that somehow I was 2nd on your list after you've been chasing down TMD and hopeless for so long. I was
relatively safe, hopeless was about to be lynched and TMD... well he can't possibly a threat to your trio right now.
I was thinking damn playing as townie is really hard. After 10 pages, I'm thinking, it can't possibly get any easier than this.
##Vote Lazermonkey
Most of your case assumes that Mackin and YourHarry are fellow scum, and that Lazer is scum because of his pattern of defense. Its worth saying that I could change those two names other players and use your logic to incriminate every other active poster in this game. Hell, you could build a case against me if you change your suspected scum list around right.
Also, I was the first to draw attention to Mackin and I wasn't attacked by Lazer. Your second point is just wrong. But do you know who attacked me after I brought attention to TMG and Mackin? Hopeless did. Lynch Hopeless1der
Lazer's at the top of my townie list atm. He's been incredibly uninhibited, posting all his reads, generating discussion, and calling out less-active players. This is as pro-town as you can get!
|
@ EvulRabbits - Here's my take on your argument. tl;dr, JingleHell is not very suspicious
On July 07 2012 02:48 Evulrabbitz wrote:
Is it not funny that a person who was so keen on defending every move against him has suddenly become so very arrogant and brushing of all accusations against him as stupid?
Not only does his discussion with YourHarry in the beginning of the game end very abruptly but he also stops posting for quite a while. He and YourHarry stirred up a discussion by YourHarry attacking Hopeless without any substantial basis and claiming for it to be pressue. This leads to Jingle attacking YourHarry for attacking (note: not for attacking Hopeless, just for attacking someone). While this is happening Release makes a case against Lazer. When Release's kicks off and Bassinspace, Hopeless and Hapa joins in the discussion both YourHarry and JingleHell suddenly makes amends and quietly fades out of the argumentation. They both un-vote each other and Jingle sticks around slightly longer to defend himself since Lazer voted for him.
This is pure speculation. I understand this argument if we were in day 2/3 and YourHarry was a proven mafia, but this is just a story without any evidence.
Show nested quote +Actually, for that matter, I wish we would leave alone all the initial burst of posting, the entire purpose is to get people talking This is a quote from Jingle after he has made amends with YourHarry and the other accusations has begun. Now, JingleHell, why should we forget about the early posts? Are you trying to hide something? Strategies are deployed from the beginning. Show nested quote +If the town has the slightest chance in hell this game, then people will see the sense in the responses I've already made. Oh JingleHell please come save us with your mighty biceps. It's pathetic you are trying to convince people you are needed instead of actually contributing and showing us why your presence is so great.
Provocation, no evidence.
Show nested quote +I'm much more careful when I'm playing scum. I need to work on consistency, really. Ah, yes. Please do share your mafia tactics with us so we can clearly see these are not the tactics your are currently performing. Currently you are playing in a very arrogant manner and instead of defending yourself claiming that people, as previously mentioned, are stupid and playing poorly. So what you have contributed so far is a discussion which ended abruptly and an arrogant attitude. None of which is very pro-town. I honestly believe this is some kind of strategy. However, as you did take the initiative to end the conversation (YourHarry did) I will further strengthen my case.
Arrogance is not necessarily a mafia quality. To me, he sounds very confident of his innocence. Mafia are usually diversionary and deflecting in their defense. JingleHell pretty much throws up the middle-finger at his accusers. This is realllllly townie.
In addition, you mention he took the initiative in the conversation. This is more pro town stuff.
The subject which JingleHell and YourHarry was discussing was more or less about fast voting and probability of random lynching a mafia on day 1. During this conversation YourHarry "introduces" TMG by summarizing his motives for voting for Hopeless and Jingle's motives from voting on him (YourHarry). Show nested quote +I am not sure if you missed it, but I explained my reasoning for placing my vote on Hopeless1der. I will summarize here:
1. Hint of motivation to start a band wagon against a player who may have contradicted himself. (slightly scummy)
2. To see his and others' response (not related to scuminess)
Jingle is telling me that I should not have done that. In fact he is saying that I am scum because:
A. He thinks I am trying to mislynch. (False)
B. I am not participating in case based on substantial evidence (True, but not my fault probably) Now, just saying something is false does not make it so. Saying something is not related to "scuminess" does not make it so either. Frankly, this post makes no sense. Is he trying to "win" TMG over to his side? Well obviously he is since he is saying Jingle is wrong and Hopeless is (slightly) scummy. Show nested quote +I am currently skimming the new posts and I find TMG suspicious. While his English may not be perfect, he has completed games elsewhere. I don't think it is normal for him to feel intimidated to play this game in this game as town.
So either he's lying, which means he's probably mafia.
Or he's telling the truth, which means he's probably mafia as well.
Great and all, but how the hell is this a mafia motive - especially with my strong case against Hopeless out in the open?!?!
Oh so now, when he has solved everything with Jingle, he moves on to throw the person he tried to win over under the bus. After this he jumps on a bandwagon against Hopeless.
So what do we have here? Jingle and YourHarry starts a discussion and YourHarry tries to drag other players by propaganda. Jingle and YourHarry then , on YourHarry's initiative, ends their discussion rather abruptly. YourHarry moves on to outright say the very same person he tried to drag into the now ended discussion is a mafia. JingleHell proceeds to say we should forget about early posts and focus on the later ones, that he is needed for the towns victory and basically that everyone who says something about him is stupid and illogical.
This is all a play and both YourHarry's and JingleHell's motives are to stir up discussion, make people paranoid (they were the first to start saying everything is WIFOM) and then discreetly leave while everyone else is throwing torches and stabbing each other with pitchforks. Both YourHarry and JingleHell are mafia.
HoS JingleHell
HoS YourHarry
##vote JingleHell
So your entire argument is a story based on YourHarry and JingleHell being mafia because of their conversation in the beginning of Day 1?
You want an actual case against a suspicious player? Read my case against [red]Hopeless1der[/red (link below). That's what a suspicious player looks like.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=12#230
|
On July 07 2012 03:14 YourHarry wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 03:08 JieXian wrote:On July 07 2012 03:00 Hapahauli wrote:JieXian, I'm just going to focus on the last part of your post because it contains most of your argument. On July 07 2012 02:31 JieXian wrote:- You pounced on everyone who dared laying a finger (of suspicion ^^) your mates.
- You came to their defence (with "fire" if I may quote you) as soon as anyone brought them up.
- You contradicted yourself by never addressing their posts which fit your criteria for scumminess. The criteria of which is of
course, anything at all.
- A funnier one, was that somehow I was 2nd on your list after you've been chasing down TMD and hopeless for so long. I was
relatively safe, hopeless was about to be lynched and TMD... well he can't possibly a threat to your trio right now.
I was thinking damn playing as townie is really hard. After 10 pages, I'm thinking, it can't possibly get any easier than this.
##Vote Lazermonkey Most of your case assumes that Mackin and YourHarry are fellow scum, and that Lazer is scum because of his pattern of defense. Its worth saying that I could change those two names other players and use your logic to incriminate every other active poster in this game. Hell, you could build a case against me if you change your suspected scum list around right. Also, I was the first to draw attention to Mackin and I wasn't attacked by Lazer. Your second point is just wrong. But do you know who attacked me after I brought attention to TMG and Mackin? Hopeless did. Lynch Hopeless1derLazer's at the top of my townie list atm. He's been incredibly uninhibited, posting all his reads, generating discussion, and calling out less-active players. This is as pro-town as you can get! Hopeless only attacked YOU. Lazer attacked everyone. Try to look at the first case too. Bloody weird of Lazer to stop being "uninhibited" against Harry for that "bandwagon" post given a search for bandwagon on his filter returns 21 results (including people he was quoting) I think one of the misconception is that scums would attack everyone. Where as towns may change their mind and post their changing reads in uninhibited manner, scums are always awry that people will suspect them of acting scummy. In my experience at least, scums tend to pick a target or two and tunnel. Unless definitive consensus builds on their initial target, they stay with the target. In reality, it is super difficult to try to find scums from written texts that can have been modified and edited for perfection before being posted. There is no wavering tone of voice or wandering and intimidated eye contact to base your scum reads on. At least, for me, I change my reads all the time. For example, I was relatively sure Hopeless1 was scum but now I think he's probably town. I am bringing up this point to say that Lazer's attacking everyone does not mean he's scum. Also, despite Hopeless's long defense post made me think he's town, his attacking one person in this game does not necessarily make him obvious townie.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=15#285
Check out my analysis of Hopeless1der's defense post. Long doesn't mean "townie." By contrast his post is diversionary and has several more scumtells.
|
I hope this is the last I'll say on this topic, but with the recent wave of posting, I'm not optimistic.
Why the hell is the town going after controversial players? We should be going after suspicious players!
LazerMonkey is a TOWNIE! Its so blitheringly obvious! Lazer has been under relentless pressure since day 1 and hasn't said anything remotely incriminating. He has been calling out lurkers, making cases, has been active, and freely speaks his mind! Fingerpointing =/= suspicious behavior. Agreeing with people =/= suspicious behavior. What's important is that we find someone acting suspicious in a mafia-oriented way. We're looking for deflection, deception, dishonesty... Lazer's shown NONE of those traits!
There are SO MANY BETTER TARGETS for pressure than Lazer right now!
There are multiple lurking players with low post counts that we should be scrutinizing! We already have an obvious D1 lynch target in Hopeless1der - we don't have to create a case against a controversial, clearly town-alligned player!
|
You, Zen, Release, and JieXian have all launched votes/FOS/cases against Lazer. I want you to all stop running around in circles, start pressure non-obvious townies, and get the obvious mafia (Hopeless1der) lynched.
|
How is my case not convincing? If someone wants to take the time to read it and tell me why I'm wrong, I'm willing to listen. However, NO ONE has. Instead, people have started an insane bandwagon against LazerMonkey.
|
On July 07 2012 04:41 JingleHell wrote:
Saying you're wrong and saying we're unconvinced are two entirely different things. Why the excessive defense of Lazer, exactly?
You call it a bandwagon, even though it seems to be multiple people who have decided that he's at best unintentionally divisive, and at worst scum.
Either way, if he gets lynched, he won't be missed, as he's not going to help the town win in either case.
We're going to lynch him because he's not going to help the town win anyway? WAT.
I've made it perfectly clear why I'm "excessively defending" lazer in my previous posts. You all are bandwagonning/chasing ghosts about a player who's posting habits suggest pro-town, as opposed to making productive analysis.
Why are you unconvinced about my case? No one has posted anything to suggest it isn't convincing. Hell some players have posted that it was convincing, then promptly voted for other people!
|
On July 07 2012 04:44 JingleHell wrote:
Oh, and might I add, that if all of the "cases" you've made, and seemed really convinced of for a short chunk of time were correct, the town would have lost as soon as role PMs went out, as we would have been outnumbered by scum D1.
You've been casting your net as widely as possible, directing suspicion at almost everyone for a short period of time. It's only as we've gotten closer to the deadline that you suddenly became intensely convinced Hopeless was pure scum, and focused on him.
Also, you accuse everyone else of bandwagoning, but you want people you haven't convinced to jump on the bandwagon of your case. I don't buy it. You're Lazer's scumbuddy, most likely.
Of course I'm "tunnel visioning" Hopeless1der! He's suspicious as shit, and I just posted a huge comprehensive analysis on why he is so (CLICK HEREfor reference)! The other "cases" (as you call them) pale in comparison to the one I have against Hopeless, and I'll be pushing for his lynch until he swings from the gallows.
Oh, and "Lazer's scumbuddy" is going to proactively and controversially defend him against attack from four players. That's a great mafia play.
|
JingleHell, this is your post discussing Hopeless's meta. You make two points:
Hopeless's play is different enough from D1 there, where I won't be convinced he's town unless he flips, that I'm convinced he's town here.
Hopeless's play is very different from his townie play. My case proves it.
In particular he doesn't seem scared of prolific posting in the early game.
I've proven this wrong in my accusation. Read it.
|
On July 07 2012 05:09 JingleHell wrote:Uhm, You haven't "proven" anything, you've just provided anecdotal and circumstancial evidence.
All mafia accusations are based on anecdotal and circumstantial evidence. Do you want me to hack his account and take a SS of his role PM or something?
On July 07 2012 05:09 JingleHell wrote:The same thing I'm using to say I'm not feeling scum out of him at the moment.
So you're going to pursue a case over "feeling" rather than logic and proof?
On July 07 2012 05:09 JingleHell wrote:Add to your case, or consider other people as well.
You've been babbling on and on about how my case is unconvincing and haven't analyzed it at all. Your criticisms (such as the bit about it being based on circumstantial evidence - LOL) are laughable generalizations. Post something useful.
On July 07 2012 05:09 JingleHell wrote:You didn't seem to have a problem considering almost everyone else earlier in the game... back when there was more chaos and less votes on Lazer...
Well no shit - I didn't defend lazer when no one was bandwagonning on him. Duh?
|
How do they contradict? You can build a logical case on circumstantial evidence.
Also, just because I haven't gone through and provided a play-by-play of my personal opinions, cluttering up the thread, doesn't mean I haven't looked at the case.
Clearly you haven't, as this is yet another post of yours that suggests doubt on my case without providing any analysis whatsoever.
|
On July 07 2012 05:38 JingleHell wrote:
Well, I could either clutter up the thread by breaking down every individual point of yours that I don't find particularly compelling, which I'm sure scum would love, since chaos and distraction are their tactics, or I could trust that people will read through and decide for themselves, because if they aren't doing that, whether they agree with me or not, we're doomed to lose to the scum.
I should think that votes can stand for themselves when the lynch is decided. Unless you have some real, solid information you're not sharing (It's D1, so only scum do), then you're just guessing, like everyone else, based on WIFOM. Don't be offended that other people disagree with you.
Posting analysis is pro-scum behavior. Uh-huh.
If you believe Hopeless to be innocent, break down my case and convince me he's innocent.
|
On July 07 2012 05:48 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 05:43 Hapahauli wrote:On July 07 2012 05:38 JingleHell wrote:
Well, I could either clutter up the thread by breaking down every individual point of yours that I don't find particularly compelling, which I'm sure scum would love, since chaos and distraction are their tactics, or I could trust that people will read through and decide for themselves, because if they aren't doing that, whether they agree with me or not, we're doomed to lose to the scum.
I should think that votes can stand for themselves when the lynch is decided. Unless you have some real, solid information you're not sharing (It's D1, so only scum do), then you're just guessing, like everyone else, based on WIFOM. Don't be offended that other people disagree with you. Posting analysis is pro-scum behavior. Uh-huh. If you believe Hopeless to be innocent, break down my case and convince me he's innocent. I already told you why, and why, unlike you, I don't require other people to justify my existence. And providing endless clutter that's not going to change anyone's mind, be particularly relevant, or prove a damn thing... yeah, that's pro scum. And since you're trying to convince me to do it, it's backing up my belief that you may well be Lazer's scumbuddy. If hopeless gets lynched and I'm proven right with a green flip, I'm going to do my best to see to it that you and Lazer are next. I'm through with this conversation.
You analyzing my case would be clutter? Let me give you two situations:
1) You make one post: "Hapa, you're wrong, hopeless is innocent, here is why [breakdown]"
2) You make multiple pots: "Hapa, you're wrong" "Your case sucks" "Your case isn't convincing" "LOL you contradicted yourself LOLOL"
Which leads to more clutter? Situation 2 just transpired, and I'd argue that that leads to much more clutter. What say you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
