EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XX
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
PMs PMs are not allowed in this game. Just looking for some clarification on the no PM rule. As I understand it, this forbids the use of teamliquid.net PMs, but does this prohibit other forms of contact out of the game-thread itself (i.e. 3rd party chat programs, IRC, etc)? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 04 2012 11:42 Radfield wrote: What happened is I ended up changing the setup and adding in an extra townie. So it should in fact be 13 players. However, if we want to run it as 12 that's probably fine too. How bout we start tomorrow night no matter what, either with 12 or 13 players. Sounds good | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I would like to cast an FOS on JingleHell, who's actions in day 1 have been nothing but contradictions so far. 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. ##Vote YourHarry JingleHell opens the game by decrying D1 voting as "nonsense in newbie games," then immediately fires one out himself. When Harry replies with the innocent, "why is lightning fast vote scummy," JingleHell posts: EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote. Not only does this not address Harry's question, but it has an incredibly defensive tone when he was not yet attacked. Sounds to me like someone who is very paranoid in the early game... 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. Oh, and bear in mind, I won't do this if a case gets made. I let people make their own counter-claim. I only stepped in because I see random D1 votes as so dangerous in our newbie games. JingleHell posts another crusade against bandwagoning and day 1 voting, despite his earlier vote against YourHarry. In addition, he's very adamant (almost panicked) about this "avoiding bandwagoning" business. From a townie perspective, what incentive does he have to discourage bandwagnoning only a few hours into the game? I would understand if this was a day or a half-a day before the lynch, but seeing who does and does not bandwagon provides us townies with time to provide good reads. It makes no sense to take such a staunch anti-bandwagoning platform so quickly into the game. Finally, Jingle Hell has been content to laugh off a legitimate post against his early-game behavior by lazermonkey. Lazer's post ---> http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=7#132 I can't decide what to laugh at first, but at least now people are explaining votes. If you want to see what showed me that early voting with no rationalization at all is bad, go see D1 XIX. Ridiculous mislynch, because of votes with zero substance. No defense, and completely ignores a topic worthy of response. 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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I mean look at this: Yeah, you pretty much nailed my point, Release. I actually already explained it, but they're ignoring it and burying it with more of this nonsense, so I'm not feeling particularly inclined to get into a shouting match with them. If the town has the slightest chance in hell this game, then people will see the sense in the responses I've already made. My light commitments and obvious easy comments are mostly because there's little to discuss without stooping to their level. If I don't play their game, and I don't want to get the bandwagon rolling violently over a towny, then the best thing to do is observe and respond, rather than letting myself get dragged into some OMGUS shouting match that only benefits scum. But this is exactly what you are doing by posting these types of things! No effort at defense, posting belittling remarks instead of making posts with any sort of content. You are the one creating the shouting match, and you can stop it by taking your accusers seriously. Prove your innocence instead of taking it for granted. So a me too post that contributes nothing while taking me out of context is supposed to make me nervous? Yawn. The day1 voting reference was talking about people bandwagoning onto any case built on nothing, as I actually discussed. Which you completely ignored. It's like you dug through 20% of my filter and ignored all the inconvenient parts. You sound like Lazer's pet parrot. Like I said, if people D1 lynch me based off bad jokes like you and lazer's posts, the town is doomed anyways. Ignored what? How have I taken you out of context? You denounced early voting and promptly voted for Harry. You refuse to provide any defense and are making every effort to be condescending to the players who accuse you. If you want to take that attitude into a newbie game, you're going to get bandwagoned. Simple as that. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote: 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: On July 05 2012 08:58 Release wrote: I think YourHarry is Grush's new alias. 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: Lazermonkey Yourharry, 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. On July 05 2012 11:08 Release wrote: 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?" | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
As I've taken some time to cool down a bit, I'm growing worried that this thread is going to turn into a giant post-bang between the four most active/reckless players on the thread so far (YourHarry, JingleHell, Release, LazerMonkey, and Me). Such a situation would be extremely harmful to the town and would let the Mafia sit in the shadows while we war over one another. Perhaps we can turn our attention to two suspicious posts by some lurkers in an effort to get them to speak up: TMG26 His first post is rife with a desire to look helpless, lots of fluff, and indecision (my commentary is bolded). + Show Spoiler [First Post] + On July 05 2012 08:38 TMG26 wrote: It's a 13 player game, and only 3 mobsters, so there is still a room for a litle mistake on day1 Megafluff, and downplaying the importance of day 1 reads With a random vote on day 1 the probability of hitting scum is low, but missing wont be that dangerous, the question that i want to make is: With this low ratio of scum, does the nolynch becomes more or less viable? I'm still a newbie in mafia games, thats one of the reasons of asking this questing trying to look helpless And sorry about my bad english, i'm not a native speaker more helplessness About what being happening here.. Lazer was not clear on what he said, Hopeless stated that, and yourHarry immidiatly voted Hopeless for that So, in my opinion if we want to catch the scum we have to confront them, so i Hopeless did the right thing...But so did yourHarry, what i find funny was JingleHell jumping in to declare FoS on yourHarry In my opinion Hopeless and yourHarry did almost same same thing Note the language - "in my opinion" as opposed to saying it outright. Overly diplomatic and indecisive My main suspects right now fall to yourHarry and JingleHell, because your acusations seammed more like a counter acusation after a "scum teammate" being acused But is all still too light, a lot of people still havent spoken Despite stating two suspects, immediately reverts to indecision When JingleHell replies to TMG26's passive accusation, TMG is apologetic, passive, and does not address the issue (commentary bolded again). + Show Spoiler [Response to JingleHell's Defense] + On July 05 2012 08:47 TMG26 wrote: Sorry, dont know what OMGUS is, i will search An apology... says he will search instead of just searching for the damn thing. Fluff. About the 23% odds, i didnt read that..... because of the time that it took me to type, i'll will make sure to check new replies before i post something that took a litle bit of time to type Does not address JingleHell and posts irrelevant information - "I'll make sure to read before I post..." More fluff/half-hearted accusations. + Show Spoiler [Response to Harry] + On July 05 2012 09:02 TMG26 wrote: Thanks for the welcome A: We cant know for sure what you are trying to do, a statment like "i'm not trying to mislynch" is worth notting... scum wont say they are trying to mislynch B: Well, there no eveindence that he wanted to start a bandwagon, there was only a acusation of lazer's contradiction, BUT you told us what you tought about it... thats your opinion, so its recorded now What?! What's even the point of that. What i believe he condemns you most is for the "early" vote... And then you came with the odds not being bad..................... Further indecision Makes another overly diplomatic/indecisive/fluff post that points suspicions to JingleHell and Harry + Show Spoiler [Another Diplomatic/Accusatory Post] + On July 05 2012 10:49 TMG26 wrote: Even if it is Plurality Lynch, there's still 40 hours left And its again funny to see that Hopeless jumped on your defence... After you had already voted harry after harry voted hopeless In my mind, you and harry are the prime suspects..but only a few hours have passed, and i dont want to jump into bad conclusions Mackin I have less of a case on Mackin, but his first post is very very suspicious. Inaccurate/Bandwagon post on LazerMonkey. + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 07:06 Mackin wrote: Hey guys, just putting it out there Lazer is already on my FoS list and we're only just beginning, long contradictory post with almost too much effort put in. Underlined part is simply not true. The post only has one contradiction, and it isn't very long. Criticizing someone for putting "almost too much effort" into posting is a huge red flag. This sounds like someone who saw someone's criticism of a lone contradiction and immediately jumped on the bandwagon without any analysis. Very anti-town mentality. His next few posts are comprised of one-liners and fluff: + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 07:17 Mackin wrote: HellJingle, that's an interesting name... On July 05 2012 07:28 Mackin wrote: On July 05 2012 07:22 Hopeless1der wrote: Mackin give the poor guy a chance, he's just a little excited I think. I just wanted to give him a heads up so he checks his posts more carefully, that way we can narrow down our scum lists earlier rather than later. Fair enough point, but I just want to stir up some conversation to get people talking. Ain't that what Mafia's all about?  [B]On July 05 2012 07:56 Mackin wrote: @Harry We have a clever one here methinks. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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
United States9305 Posts
On July 06 2012 01:02 TMG26 wrote: So basically you guys are acusing me based on my heplessness and the lack of new content in my post... Ok, its my very first game here, and i only played mafia twice on a totally different community and on a different language, so its a litle bit natural to me to be a litle bit "scared" You may say its scummy atitude, all that i can say to defend myself is that it was a newbie atitude... The underlined part is very important. While this is TMG's first game in English, this is not his first game. He should know the difference between good and bad townie behavior, which makes his wishy-washy attitude very suspicious. Also, the attacks on TMG aren't only for his indecision. BassinSpace brings up some anti-townie behavior in TMG's posts that needs explanation: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=9#172 On July 06 2012 01:02 TMG26 wrote: well i wasnt very clear it seems.. Lets see what happenned before that post: >Harry voted Hopeless >jingle isnta voted Harry for that vote >Harry voted Jingle >Hopeless returns and gives some suport to Jingle i believe that the part that confused you was saying that harry and jingle were the prime ones, not jingle and hopeless. Well, what i was trying to say was that harry and jingle were the ones with bigger chance to be scum due to OMGUS, of course that if jingle is revealed scum Hopeless chances of being scum increases I don't care for the argument logic, but it's D1 and anything goes. This part looks fine, but his accusation of Release is very suspicious. __________________________________ On July 06 2012 01:02 TMG26 wrote:It seem people want me to take a stance, fine! Only taking a stance because other people want you to? Anti-town mentality. Reading the new posts it to me that Release is trying to force a lynch on Lazer, and i see no motive for that Good good, pointing the finger... Release main acusation is that Lazer first post is really bad, sure, it wasnt good, he wrote so much, and almost no decent content... Immediately agrees with Release's argument about Lazer... what? But your main acusation is that Lazer's first post if it had really started a discussion on the subject as he intended to do we would loose tremendous amount of time discussing meangless stuff, and I ask you, how could we loose that much time discussing why VT shouldnt fake claim? Its a little obious what lazer said, so it wouldnt wast us as much time as you want us to believe Mostly summary of previous discussion. Also spends more time defending Lazer than actually attacking Release I dont see the point of the sex toys discussion not being rehashed, Lazer did not tried to rehash what he pointed out in the first post, and it seems like you are saying that the sex toys discussion was positive This is not a very damning quote by Release at all. Basically, i agree that Lazeer first post was bad, but it wasnt the work of the scum Devil that you want us to believe, it seems to me that you are trying really hard to see Lazer lynched at all costs when there werent another topic going on that you didnt pay atition Agrees with Release AGAIN. Then takes a stance on Release while providing nothing of substance to verify it (if your main point is that Release is starting a witch hunt, there are many better quotes/evidence to support his case FoS Release His entire case on Release a summary of previous analysis. In addition, his accusation is wishy-washy beyond the point that language-barriers can account for. The way he approaches LazerMonkey's first post within his argument is incredibly suspicious. @ TMG, I hope you can address these concerns of mine. In addition, I want to hear your thoughts on BassinSpace's post on your "anti-town" behavior (clicky!). FOS on TMG26 | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 06 2012 03:59 Hopeless1der wrote: ... Rabbitz came back and had a read on Release that looks pretty good, but there are a couple other fingers pointed at Release concern me: + 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: 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: 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: 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. 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.. The other thing that I found scummy about him was his reason for suspecting Jingle in this case: 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 @Hopless1der A lot your points are just flat-out wrong. You first quote a short paragraph I have on the subject of Release (regarding past game history/interaction with LazerMonkey) and state that this is a "backslide from my previous case on Release." What? I had no previous case on Release - I simply asked him to clarify his stance on Lazer, and there was nothing remotely accusatory in my post. The only two players I have FOS'd are JingleHell (retracted) and currently TMG26. I have no idea why you're calling my two paragraph analysis of Release's opinion on Lazer a "huge case." It's not even a case! You then mention that I retract from my "case" when other people suspect him. This is flat out wrong again. Before anyone suspected release, I immediately made a move to put suspicion on Mackin and TMG26. No one FOS'd Release in the time between my "case" against him and my actual case on TMG and Mackin. Hell, the only post about Release in that timespan was LazerMonkey defending himself from Release's attacks. In regards to my whole anti-bandwagoning thing against Jingle, I clarified my stance in this post (click). You're using a summary sentence to represent my complete view instead of taking the time to read my arguments. I don't see anything unreasonable about my stance, do you? Your accusation mis-represents my posts without any analysis, and you are spreading easily verifiable falsehood regarding me "switching stances" on Release. This is horrendous analysis and is deliberate misrepresentation of my posts. This is very anti-town play. FOS Hopeless1der | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 06 2012 05:45 Hopeless1der wrote: 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'. 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. You seem to have switched gears rather quickly despite taking some significant time building a case against me. You're avoiding a confrontation with me despite me leveling serious accusations against your case and motivations. You are not addressing the instances of the false evidence (click) you brought up against me. Instead of answering my accusations, you bring up the most non-confrontational part of my post: my anti-bandwaggoning stance. Finally, you post incredibly vague judgement on my "case" on Release. I'm very clear about my intent and simply use my post to ask him a question. You want to see what my FOS looks like? Take a look at these three posts (click). I have been very up front about when I am suspicious of someone. There is no "underlying suspicion." Your case has absolutely no basis, and I want some explanations about why you chose to attack me while taking me grossly out of context and using clearly false information. I'm not done with you. I want some explanations. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
@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 | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
My case on Hopeless1der: + Show Spoiler + Case vs. TMG26: + Show Spoiler + Case vs. Release: + Show Spoiler + [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=10#182]EvulRabbits FOS on Release [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=10#185]TMG's FOS on Release[/url] These three are the major ones (only substantial FOS's) for now - I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on one or all of them. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Case vs. Release + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I'm not accusing you only because you made a bad case (poor analysis isn't always a mafia trait). Rather, I'm accusing you because your case is misleading. The only point of your case is to rile up suspicion rather than providing sound, townie analysis. For example, look at the difference between your original post and the analysis you just posted. Your first post immediately jumps on me questioning Release as a strong case against him. This most recent post is a huge change in viewpoint from your original post. If this was your original position, why didn't you post it in your original analysis? I have no choice but to conclude that you didn't read my posts, didn't properly analyze, and tried to discredit me. You also clearly use clearly false evidence in your original case: On July 06 2012 03:59 Hopeless1der wrote: 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.. The underlined part goes beyond poor analysis - this is straight up untruthful. I asked Release a question, then very quickly shifted towards accusations against TMG26 and Mackin. No one changed their opinion on Release between those two posts. My two posts for the record (note the lack of suspicions of Release between the posts) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=9#161 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=9#168 Townies can bring up baseless cases to incite discussion (re: JingeHell and sex toys), however, using misleading information in a case is a decidedly mafia trait. In addition, a townie has no motivation to start an accusation against a player actively posting reads. The only function your post served was to discredit me, as opposed to providing any actual analysis. You have said nothing that will convince me to change my vote. Now to reply to your suspicions about my posts on Release: On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: 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. I dropped perusing Release because I've found a much better case to chase - you. On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: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: 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. Great. This deserves an FOS for what reason? How is this even suspicious? I'm being a good townie and dumping all the reads and information I see on the thread. This continues to make you look bad. First you post you have a case against me, then you back off in your previous post, then you post that I look suspicious? The hell? 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. Holy scum-tells batman! This one deserves a separate post! I'll get to work on this one right away. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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 Hopeless1der Hopeless1der’s Filter Hopeless 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 Note all the bolded “townie principles” he states. He breaks every single one in this current game 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 Hoepless1der Hopeless 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) 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 #3 Rabbitz 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: 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: 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: 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. 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 calls this a "huge case" which is clear exaggeration. Hell I don't even hint suspicion at Release.) 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: 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 Defense Hopeless'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: 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: 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) 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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Holy geezus that took me hours to write. Bedtime for me. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=13#249 | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. 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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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! | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. 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. 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. 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). 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. 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 | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 07 2012 03:14 YourHarry wrote: 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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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! | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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! | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 07 2012 05:48 JingleHell wrote: 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? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Its important to vote for a the scummiest player in a given round, and not a player who looks scummy. Hopeless1der has looked much more scummy than LazerMonkey. To prove this to you, I will analyze your case against Lazer below: Zen's Case against Lazer (click for reference) You open your case by mentioning Lazer's opening post and casting suspicion on it (quote and your commentary in spoiler below). + Show Spoiler + On July 07 2012 03:12 The_Zen_Man wrote: My analysis of Lazermonkey. This was his first post in the game. He start by making a big post and trying to look like someone who is helping town by giving them advice, such as this. I wont go into to much detail into this post, as it has already been talked about a lot. Lazer made a similar post as a town-aligned player in a previous game. In addition, summary by itself is not grounds to lynch someone. You then talk about Lazer's first accusation about Jingle: + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote: I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. After a few post, when jingle starts to get suspicous of him, Lazer writes a very long case. It may look like it is big, but it has almost no substance at all. He simply states that there is no threat of bandwagoning. Mafia tend to want to do this, posting long cases but with little of worth, so that it looks good. .He also proceds to vote on Jingle. Lazer proceds to tunnel Jingle for the rest of the game. Here, he effectively turned the attention from him and to Jingle. Lazer also post some aggressive post to anyone who is somewhat suspicous of him. You accuse him of posting a case without substance, despite it being the start of the game (no cases can have substance). Furthermore, he makes a legitimate attempt at analysis, is very confrontational, and overall shows a townie attitude to the game. You then accuse him of tunneling Jingle - this is simply not true. He has posted suspicions against multiple players so far. You then attack him for a summary post off of my analysis of TMG26 and Mackin: + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 21:09 Lazermonkey wrote: Some good analysis there Hapa. Although I can't really contribute anything on Mackin as his filter is just that long. I only find the first post of him to be intresting tho. I don't agree with my post be contradictory which I have already said a dozen of times. Yes, I did use bad wording but that's about it. Also look at the timing. Basically echoing what Hope had already said at that point. The other posts from him is indeed fluff, which is at best bad town play. As for TMG I wouldn't even call him a lurker, at least not in comparison to some other players *hint*. His posting has in fact been okay given that we have only played for <24 hours. But looking at his posts he has for sure being suuuper safe with his posting. He is really afraid of calling anyone scum. Going back and forth never taking a clear stance anywhere. The prime example: Aside from his tunneling jingle, he agrees of what other peoples scumtells are. In this post, he basically repeats what Hapa said, and makes it look like it is somewhat orignal. Mafia often tend to agree with other players, so that those players like them more and agrees with them in a discussion. Agreeing with people by itself isn't a scumtell, and is not enough to build a case alone. So far, your case is built on his opening post and him agreeing with me once. This is not enough to vote for someone. You then call one of his attacks on you "scummy." + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 05:08 Lazermonkey wrote: Zen_Man, I'd really appreciate if you put some thoughts about the other players. I think you are over reading Making. I would hardly call his first post an attempt to bandwagon. Then he post this. After i had only posted one post on Mackin, he makes it bigger than it is and says i am "overreading". Mafia often tend to blow stuff up, and make other people look bad (and therefore make themselve look better). He also says that talking about how mafia will play is impossibble, but that would in fact mean that analyzing is pointless. If we would follow his advice, no one should analyze. Very scummy. Lazer made a provocative one-liner and pointed out some very justified criticisms of your post. You make assumptions about how this game's mafia will act ("mafia tends to want to not have opinions alone..."), and lazer simply criticizes it. His bit about "talking about how mafia will play is just impossible" is completely legitimate. After all, its near impossible to talk about how mafia will play from a day 1 townie perspective - we simply don't have enough information! Furthermore, he doesn't suggest analysis is pointless - you just put words into his mouth. Lastly, you attack another of his posts agreeing with me (the Hopeless Case): + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 18:53 Lazermonkey wrote: I must say Hope looks very bad atm. However I don't agree with all points of suspicion against him. Like the part when he ''lies'' about there being a case on Release. I think this sould be very explainable from a town point of view. He saw your long post about release and you were also questioning Release's view on me. Overall, there were a quite criticising tone in it. Call it case or not, I don't really see this as a scum tell. What catches my attention is his indecisiveness, especially compared to the other game he played. In that game he focused on the persons he thought was most suspicious. This game... Just look at this post. Here, Lazer states his support for yet another person who seems scummy. As i said before, agreeing with everyone is a way for mafia to win favor among town. Lazer then goes on to a back and forth post with Jingle, with not posting much of worth. But something that was really scummy for me in that post was this. Again, you attack him for summary. You also conveniently ignore the other three original accusations he made around this time. This is not true. Your final attack is based on a "scummy" one-liner of Lazer's: + Show Spoiler + On July 07 2012 01:11 Lazermonkey wrote: This post had a really scummy sentence, "I will push people I think are scummy. If they flip green because they play bad, i can't be blamed for that". This is an excuse mafia use often when they are pushing a mislynch. Often, it is not because bad play but because mafia manipulated the game. Lazer then says that he leaves and continues posting from his phone. As of now, i am equally suspicous of Lazer as i am Hopeless, still unsure of who to vote for. Other players opinions are welcome. But for now ##FoS Lazermonkey Lazer's quote: "I will push people I think are scummy. If they flip green because they play bad, i can't be blamed for that." That's not scummy. That's a perfectly legitimate townie attitude. He wants to push people that are scum. He's not making excuses for mislynches at all. In conclusion, your case on LazerMonkey is based off his first-post, one or two instances of summary posting, and a not-so-suspicious one-liner. Your evidence champions summary while ignoring Lazer's posting tone and authoritative accusations of several other players, including yourself. Compare this to Hopeless1der's behavior, who built a case on lies, has been wildly different from his townie meta, who has shown well-established scumtell's throughout his defensive posts. There's no way LazerMonkey is a better lynch than Hopeless. The case against Hopeless again for reference: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=12#230 | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Your "bet" suggestion adds to the laundry list of anti-town mentality quotes you've made over the past few hours. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 07 2012 09:08 Hopeless1der wrote: ##Vote: Lazermonkey Given that the two main votes are either myself or lazer, anything else right now would be stupid no matter if I'm scum or town. I would like to point out that Hopeless is content to die without having a single standing case against anyone in this game. He has not posted any reads, and is not even trying to out any mafia. Get off the lazer bandwagon. C'mon folks. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
FOS JingleHell | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I'll be posting mine in a couple of hours. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
He is still a strong townie read for me, and the only thing I saw that can resemble a case against him was The_Zen_Man's Case. I've made it clear that I thought it was poorly constructed ([url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=18#351]click here[/url). | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
By the way, for those of you who voted on LazerMonkey - could anyone provide a good case as to why you think he is mafia? We can gain a lot of information if we can establish suspicion or innocence on his case. He is still a strong townie read for me, and the only thing I saw that can resemble a case against him was The_Zen_Man's Case. I've made it clear that I thought it was poorly constructed (click here). | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Do you still have suspicions of LazerMonkey? Also, do you have any other strong reads? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 07 2012 12:38 Release wrote: @hapahauli His first post, which is incredibly deceitful His repeated bringing up of the fact that the sex toys discussion was worse than his first post, and that the sex toys was legitimately bad and scummy behavior. I'd understand calling his first post suspicious, but deceitful is quite the stretch. The post is summary/introduction/fluff, but no part of his post creates deceit. Your argument seems circular - you assume he is mafia, and therefore his post is deceitful. As for the sex toy thing, day one banter means next to nothing unless you can identify a mafia motive behind it. For example, no one suspected Hopeless1der until it was past the initial posting stage. Also, LazerMonkey mentions sex toys twice in all his posts. He only uses it once in a serious context - an early D1 (and therefore meaningless) accusation against JingleHell. On July 07 2012 12:40 Release wrote: 'a 1 hour beginning of D1 tangent which proved that some poeple were online and could be called out for scumminess later in the game if their only post is sexy = scummy' to my mind is just grasping at straws, and a little bit of deceit as well. Grasping at straws =/= scummy, especially with Day 1 behavior. My original case against JingleHell was the very definition of "grasping at straws," yet clearly I'm not on your suspicion list. (Note: my case against JingleHell NOW is much much stronger, more incoming tonight). | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 07 2012 12:50 JieXian wrote: Oh ya and if anyone wants to check Lazer, don't because there's a high chance he's godfather if he's mafia Its interesting to bring up that the Detective is not a very useful role now. Even if a player shows up red, there's still a 50% chance he's townie (miller). As for checking lazer, don't. We have a lot of posts on lazer, and it would be much more useful for the tracker and detective to use their night actions on people with a lower post count. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I believe JingleHell has shown a pattern of anti-town mentality throughout Day 1. This will be made clear in his case of LazerMonkey, his defense of Hopelessder1, and his anti-town viewpoints/stances. My commentary will be found italicized in select quotes below. In addition, all hyperlinks will be underlined. Jingle's "Case" against LazerMonkey Jingle's misread isn't bad in itself, but his reasoning/rationale is extremely suspect. Jingle has a suspicious change of heart about Lazer, initially coming to the defense of LazerMonkey: On July 05 2012 23:08 JingleHell wrote: I do wish we could stop looking at Lazer's first post as "contradictory". Actually, for that matter, I wish we would leave alone all the initial burst of posting, the entire purpose is to get people talking, which was accomplished. Frankly, I don't think Lazer's first post felt scummy, because while it was only very basic, it was an effort to do the same thing I accomplished by bringing up sex toys. I've just discovered that something meaningless works better. (calls attention away from Lazer's first post. Very friendly.) Instead of cluttering things up, I'll just say that Bass and Lazer's analysis on TMG sounds good, and I'll be interested in seeing what he has to say. (complement's Lazer's analysis on a non-controversial subject) After he is suspected by Lazer, Jingle immediately turns around and fires a vote against Lazer. Note in particular the way he defends himself and his rationale: On July 06 2012 22:33 JingleHell wrote: I'm not playing nice, I'm telling them to make cases on you not be grounded on something that's clearly down to how you read it. (Defends Jingle to open the post!!!) I'm not bothering to post here as much because frankly, I'd rather watch people post when it looks like a half schitzo paranoid delusional 3 headed monster shouting at itself. Don't like it, maybe people should stop making 30 second cases and then chasing the next person that posts around. (Makes a critique of the "posting quality" of the thread despite making it a point to create discussion earlier. Ad hominem attacks.) If you're so suspicious of me, do us all a favor, vote for me, and watch me flip green. It'll be tons of information that nobody will use. (Doesn't defend himself, simply takes himself for granted as green) On July 06 2012 23:39 JingleHell wrote: You have yet to ask me anything worth my time or effort in answering, but feel free to get me mislynched. (Still doesn't defend himself) I never claimed not to have been part of the shouting earlier, but it's gotten much much worse, since now everyone talking a lot is accusing almost everyone else who isn't. (Not consistent with his pre-game stance. Accusations are NEVER a bad thing early in the game) Me personally, I'll be enjoying seeing what comes at the end of the day, as it will provide us with plenty of information. For the time being, though, ##Vote Lazermonkey It's got to be somewhere, and your self-love and expectation that everyone else will dance to your tune strikes me as scummy. (Blames people for throwing around accusations, then turns around and votes Lazermonkey for unclear rationale. Just read this thing. Jingle continues to pressure LazerMonkey and take a hard stance on him, yet never provides analysis and resorts to vague/unclear rationale - a common mafia trait. A considerable amount of it is flaming, and I suggest you take a look at Jingle's Filter (p3 and 4). Note that Jingle focuses his attacks on generalizations and never attempts to analyze the content of LazerMonkey's posts. I'm going to pick out two of the worst quotes below: 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. (This is mafia-rationale. Vote to lynch scum, not vote to lynch someone because he wont be missed. On July 07 2012 05:09 JingleHell wrote: Uhm, You haven't "proven" anything, you've just provided anecdotal and circumstancial evidence. The same thing I'm using to say I'm not feeling scum out of him at the moment. I am, however, getting an "actively useless or active scum" vibe out of lazer. I get that in the best case, you want to be the hero by swaying everyone over, but it's not working. Deal with it. Add to your case, or consider other people as well. 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... ("feeling" and "vibe" is not enough for a case. Its mafia-rationale. This is made worse by the fact that he has never attempted an analysis of LazerMonkey's posts.) Jingle's Defense of Hopeless1der Jingle is very adamant that Hopeless is innocent, but never provides an analysis. He bases his defense on "feelings" and "vibes" instead of logic - a huge mafia trait. In the first quote, he makes a defense based on Hopeless's meta that's straight-up false, proven by my earlier meta analysis of Townie Hopeless. On July 05 2012 08:29 JingleHell wrote: And I made a very strong read against him and another player in XIX, the reads being linked, and was promptly shot N1, after which, when I wasn't pushing at them, they ignored the attacks completely, pointed to WIFOM, and started trying to direct the town. Mislynch #2 ensued. 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. In particular he doesn't seem scared of prolific posting in the early game. (This is false. Townie Hopeless and Mafia Hopeless post lots of fluff. This comment was made on page 6 of the thread, and Hopeless hadn't even posted his case on me yet.) And I prefer substantial pressure. If there's nothing to refute, there's no argument to give off an odor. And the odds of hitting a townie with random votes are way higher than the odds of hitting scum. On July 07 2012 04:54 JingleHell wrote: If you missed what I already said about Hopeless, or aren't interested in my current guesses based off of meta, that's up to you. But until/unless my meta guesses are proven wrong by a flip in his other game, I'm unconvinced. I can't help it if you aren't reading enough to have seen what I said, and I can't make you buy in to it, but to suggest that I haven't answered that is outright fallacious. (continues to rely on false meta-read. This is also after my huge meta analysis on Hopeless was posted) Of course, I'd expect nothing more from someone who spent a fair amount of energy buying into Lazer's nonexistent case against me. I'm not entirely convinced you two aren't working together, perhaps in a scum QT? On July 07 2012 05:09 JingleHell wrote: Uhm, You haven't "proven" anything, you've just provided anecdotal and circumstancial evidence. The same thing I'm using to say I'm not feeling scum out of him at the moment. (Not feeling scum. lol.) I am, however, getting an "actively useless or active scum" vibe out of lazer. I get that in the best case, you want to be the hero by swaying everyone over, but it's not working. Deal with it. Add to your case, or consider other people as well. 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... JingleHell's Anti-Town Mentality I've saved the best for last. JingleHell takes clear anti-town stances and tries to represent them as pro-town. First, Jingle rationalizes lynching Lazer on the basis that "he won't be missed." This is a mafia-excuse for a mislynch. 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. Next, Jingle declares typical mafia-reads as bad, and encourages people to look for opposite-tells to determine mafia - in a newbie game. This is insane, even at high levels of play! This is spewing with mafia-mentality, looking to stir suspicion at non-suspicious players. On July 07 2012 00:37 JingleHell wrote: I already did. It's inconclusive, but it's already on the record. The big issue is that it's based in meta from a game where he hasn't flipped yet. And, of course, most of the people here are so busy being too smart for their own good that they can't realize that I'm actually not being scummy. I also expect a D1 lynch to almost always be a mislynch, because the odds of latching onto the right person with minimal information are kind of bad. And, of course, if anyone feels the need to put together a case against me that isn't smoke and mirrors, I'll happily respond, but frankly, under the current circumstances, I'd rather provide information via getting mislynched than beat my head against the brick wall of the people going berserk on attacking everyone. Actually, if we want to find out who's being scummy, since this is a newbie game, is look for the people who are trying too hard to be the polar opposite of scummy based on the various guides. So look for prolific posters who find a way to turn every single word into a scumslip, are obsessed with analysis, and want to take the lead. You should find at least two scum that way. Jingle claims that analyzing my case will lead to "clutter" in the thread. Townies have no motivation to discourage or not provide analysis. Instead, he clutters the entirety of page 17 with smaller posts. 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. Finally, he uses a "bet" as justification for a lynch rather than trying to look for suspicious players. More mafia-mentality. On July 07 2012 06:50 JingleHell wrote: How about a little bet, Hapahauli. If Lazer flips Red, we lynch you tomorrow for your (getting ridiculous) defense of him. If he flips town, lynch me. Lastly, there are many mafia-oriented contradictions in Jingle's gameplay. I'll be hyperlinking the posts (they will appear underlined) 1) Jingle is unnaturally fearful of bandwagoning, yet actively contributes to the bandwagon against LazerMonkey for horrible rationale (as evidenced by the previous content in this post). 2) Jingle bases his entire day-one play discussing EvulRabbit's name as a sex toy and flinging Votes and accusations, then blames people for the exact same thing in this post. In conclusion, JingleHell's play is suspicious in a Mafia-Oriented way. He has shown a clear anti-town mentality through his casework, defense of Hopeless, and mafia-favoring stances/advice. The Day 1 lynch was very close. JingleHell fits the description of a Mafia member who tried to shift focus off Hopeless1der and start a bandwagon against LazerMonkey. He defends Hopeless and accuses LazerMonkey on questionable logic, and makes every attempt to discredit the person (me) pushing for Hopeless's lynch. JingleHell is Mafia | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
@ YourHarry - Lynching anyone but mafia is pretty fucking terrible. Your analysis on the recent vote as it pertains to LazerMonkey's innocence is very well thought out. On voting habits, TMG and evulrabbitz check out very well, since they had the chance to swing the vote over to Lazer as opposed to hopeless. I highly disagree on your stance on Bass_in_Space for now, as he had the opportunity to join the strong bandwagon on Lazer a few hours before the deadline and didn't take it. In addition, we cannot make a judgement on the guilt/innocence of Khorrus, since he literally made two posts. The first was fluff, and the second was him asking for a replacement. The second post is key here. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=20#397 If we start this whole LazerMonkey bandwaggoning shit again without proper evidence, I'm going to drive to the library and bang my head against every desk I see. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Regarding JingleHell defending his behavior - Jingle spent the entirety of his earlier post talking about his self-defense. My case (CLICK HERE). does not concern this at all, and instead, attacks him based on his defense of Hopeless, the logic of his case, and his anti-town mentality, all of which are suspicious in a mafia-oriented way. @ Jingle, I don't think my case is "weak" by any stretch of the imagination, and don't give me shit about how it "isn't worth your time." If the medic doesn't screw up/get roleblocked and I die, I'm voting for you the second that D2 starts unless I get a satisfactory defense. On the subject of Meta-Analysis on Jingle - Jingle is clearly pretty self-aware of his meta, so I'm hesitant to use his posting tone/style in a formal case. In addition, in his last game as mafia, he was a substitute, and thus was under very different circumstances/pressure than this game. I believe my current case outlines his mafia-motive pretty well, but if people need convincing, I'll provide an analysis of townie Jingle and talk about how different his posting motives were in that game. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
@THE_ZEN_MAN On July 07 2012 19:15 The_Zen_Man wrote: Cant say im too suprised, as my choice was between hope and lazer, and they were about equally scummy too me(lazer obvously more). But for now, lets just wait out the night. We're not content to just "wait out the night" - we need to organize the town, pressure suspicious players, and make reads so we don't take our opinions to the grave. ...and for the 30th time, why is Lazer scummy to you?!?!?!?!?!? I wrote a pretty long post HERE discussing why your suspicions are baseless, yet you're still throwing this around? I want some legitimate answers. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
1) You vote to lynch lazer without providing ANY evidence or analysis. You're welcome to dig through your filter and quote yourself in your defense, but I can't find anything remotely substantial. 2) You defend Hopeless1der without providing ANY evidence or analysis. You are not a stupid person, and we know that from your post games. "Misread" won't cut it - give a good reason for your defense. You spend a lot of time talking about a mysterious "meta" that we still haven't heard anything about. The time you do talk about his meta, its straight-up wrong ("prolific posting" by hopeless... lol). 3) Your cases of anti-town mentality and advice. I'll let the below quote do the talking for me: On July 07 2012 00:37 JingleHell wrote: -SNIP- Actually, if we want to find out who's being scummy, since this is a newbie game, is look for the people who are trying too hard to be the polar opposite of scummy based on the various guides. So look for prolific posters who find a way to turn every single word into a scumslip, are obsessed with analysis, and want to take the lead. You should find at least two scum that way. Holy scum-advice batman! TBH, I'd be perfectly fine with you ignoring everything else I've said if you can explain your way out of this one. Of course, you can also sit back and continue to flame as opposed to defending yourself. You continue to build your rapport of anti-town mentality as opposed to providing anything productive to the town. You continue to flame and throw around "dicks" rather than post anything of substance. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 02:49 JieXian wrote: In that quote he's obviously attacking lazer and another person (most probably you) what's so special about it >_> Oh wow I completely misread his tone. GG sir, thanks for pointing that out. God that's my bad. However, I still believe that statement to be scummy for other reasons. He says that in scarcasm, then promptly goes and starts throwing suspicions about two prolific posters - lazer and me. In addition, the rest of my case still stands. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 02:52 JingleHell wrote: After I calm myself? I'm perfectly calm, as evidenced by the fact that I'm not following your lead across the line from playing the game to being an asshole. I just don't feel the need to turn a game, which should be fun and relaxing, into some abnoxious dick waving contest, and frankly, it wouldn't be good for the town, either. Ookay then don't defend yourself. Case closed. ##Lynch JingleHell Btw, mafia is fun, but it certainly ain't relaxing =D | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Thanks for your defense. I just have two questions for now: 1)1 Explain your justification for lynching LazerMonkey. I didn't notice any evidence or analysis behind your stance, which is suspicious for someone who lead an anti-bandwaggoning charge early in the game. 2) Explain your lack of suspicion for Hopeless1der and the lack of reasoning behind it. You've mentioned that it was a "misread," but I'd like to hear some reasoning. The only reasoning I've seen you use was a false meta read based on Hopeless's "prolific posting" early in the game. Thanks for your time. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 03:07 JieXian wrote: ok he did attack you a bit but it's different from the attack towards Lazer. It was mostly an attempt to convince you. Naturally we'd look like shit that hopeless flipped scum but I think you understood his moves wrongly. The problem is that it wasn't an attempt to convince me - it reads as an attempt to spam the thread and provoke me. I'd understand if he tried to break down exactly why he thought Lazer was a better lynch, but he didn't. He relied on vague meta-reads, and when I confronted him about it, he accused me of being Lazer's scumbuddy. I can break down my view on page 17 if you'd like - I think the mafia motive is pretty clear after a readthrough. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 03:18 JingleHell wrote: Again, my misread on Hopeless was due to meta analysis from a currently non-concluded game. Hence why I said multiple times I wasn't going to try and force that opinion. What reason do you have not to post your meta on Hopeless - even from a non-concluded game? In addition, how could you have a strong-enough meta read on Hopeless (in an unfinished game) to dismiss my entire case suggesting otherwise? Lastly, the meta-read you were relying on (re: Hopeless's early game "prolific posting") was proven incorrect. Can you post your meta read on Hopeless? Lazer was attacking me based on the sex toy thing, and was trying to argue that an early bandwagon was no danger, in a plurality lynch game. If an early bandwagon based on literally nothing kicks off, and lurkers vote and vanish, you can literally have someone die 40 hours later if nothing conclusive comes up and grabs a lot of votes. Since that seemed reasonably scummy to me, since I had my horrendous misread on Hopeless, Lazer seemed scummiest at the time. Then, following on that, you came in defending lazer by attacking hopeless (regardless of being correct about hopeless), you were making a more functional defense for Lazer than Lazer himself was. That made it seem to me that you were trying to force a lynch on hopeless to save Lazer. I don't understand your view on Lazer's bandwaggoning stance. He made it pretty clear in several posts that he supported such a stance closer to lynch deadline - it was only an early-game objection. Secondly, why did you make no attempt to analyze why Lazer was a better case than Hopeless? Your quote saying "analyzing your case would clutter the thread and be pro-mafia" makes you look really bad - especially in light of the entirety of page 17 being a swinging-dick fest between the two of us. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
The problem with that page 2 filter post (re: meta on Hopeless) is that it is unclear and false. My commentary is bolded below: On July 05 2012 08:29 JingleHell wrote: And I made a very strong read against him and another player in XIX, the reads being linked, and was promptly shot N1, after which, when I wasn't pushing at them, they ignored the attacks completely, pointed to WIFOM, and started trying to direct the town. Mislynch #2 ensued. (Can you explain this? Can you post the contents you based your D1 read on?) 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. In particular he doesn't seem scared of prolific posting in the early game. (again, this is wrong, and I put a lot of effort into proving this in my meta analysis, which you claimed to have read) And I prefer substantial pressure. If there's nothing to refute, there's no argument to give off an odor. And the odds of hitting a townie with random votes are way higher than the odds of hitting scum. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 04:02 JingleHell wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=347856&user=159089¤tpage=3 Pages 3 and 4 of my filter, it's a LOT of content. I ended up the N1 NK. And your second bolded part, I was referring to this game, he seemed more willing to post a lot than he did in the early stages of XIX D1. Which is true. I saw the filter, but it would be impossible for me to put myself in your shoes and analyze it from your perspective. Can you post your meta reads? Doesn't have to be much, just want a bullet point list on why. Posting "a lot" is waaay different from "prolific posting." In addition, you posted your read when he had only made 6 posts (after the PM deadline. Furthermore, four of his first 6 posts were one-liners. This doesn't make sense. I also have a number of objections with your previous post. You summarize your suspicions against lazer (which still are weak IMO), but you don't address my questions regarding your methodology. In particular, how could you have a strong-enough meta read on Hopeless (in an unfinished game) to dismiss my entire case suggesting otherwise? Furthermore, I find our page 17 discussion extremely suspicious. In particular, the below quote makes you look very bad: 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... -SNIP- This looks like an excuse for not posting analysis to me. What is your justification for not attempting to prove that Lazer's case was better than Hopeless's? You didn't even attempt an analysis, or even a counteranalysis after I dissected TheZenMan's case against Lazer. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
While the posting tone between me and Jingle has considerably changed in the past few hours, that's nowhere near grounds to determine his innocence. So far, my case against him still stands, and he has yet to answer a lot of the incriminating details against him. I ask you to withhold judgement until I can extract the proper answers. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
@ YourHarry - If you are "convinced" by jingle, please post why. Its important to read deeply into his defense to determine innocence or guilt. Remember, several players were "convinced" by Hopeless1der's post to my accusations. Upon careful analysis however (my post HERE), Hopeless's defense post contained a lot of mafia motive and logic. While the posting tone between me and Jingle has considerably changed in the past few hours, that's nowhere near grounds to determine his innocence. So far, my case against him still stands, and he has yet to answer a lot of the incriminating details against him. I ask you to withhold judgement until we can extract the proper answers. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I don't intend on moving to another line of questioning. As it stands, your defense has been very similar to Hopeless1der's so far - you're deflecting conversation, avoiding difficult questions, and your main defense has comprised of summary of easy/irrelevant questions. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
First you dismiss your stance on hopeless as a misread. Note the lack of reasoning. Again, my misread on Hopeless was due to meta analysis from a currently non-concluded game. Hence why I said multiple times I wasn't going to try and force that opinion. I then press you for your read, and you link to one of your early game posts: On July 08 2012 03:37 JingleHell wrote: That's on page 2 of my filter here. The discussion came from the first Day/Night cycle in XIX, and was incredibly long, but that's the short version of it. Next I point out that your posts are misleading and false (HERE). You reply with a vague and false clarification, linking me to your entire pregame filter. On July 08 2012 04:02 JingleHell wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=347856&user=159089¤tpage=3 Pages 3 and 4 of my filter, it's a LOT of content. I ended up the N1 NK. And your second bolded part, I was referring to this game, he seemed more willing to post a lot than he did in the early stages of XIX D1. Which is true. After I post that the red part is false and that you change your tone on Hopeless considerably from your previous stance (posting alot =/= posting prolific), I ask you for a summary of your meta (which you simply linked to a filter and STILL haven't explained beyond "prolific posting"). You then flip out: On July 08 2012 05:28 JingleHell wrote: I'm actually sick of repeating myself already, why would I spend six hours dissecting 48 hours worth of posting? If you remain intent on screaming that I'm scum after I've explained myself as much as I have, I'm probably not going to convince you, because now you're looking at everything with a severe confirmation bias. Move on to another case, or cast your vote on me, I don't care which, but frankly, I see no value in continuing this line of discussion. You're refusing to answer difficult questions and constantly avoid providing a concise summary of your case defending hopeless. This is because you had no case and are dodging the issue. This is Mafia Behavior. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Since we're approaching the deadline and I've posted a lot of evidence against Jingle already, I'd like to point some differences between this game and his townie-meta in Newbie Mini Mafia XIX. (I'll be ignoring his Mafia Meta in XVIII, since he was a replacement player and therefore was under much different circumstances/pressure. I haven't done a thorough read-through of XVIII tbh) Earlier, I made the case that Jingle's cases and defenses were based on "feelings" and vauge suspicion (you can find that HERE). In the brief analysis below, I'm going to show that his current-meta is from townie-JingleHell in XIX in a mafia-oriented way. Townie Jingle is capable of analyzing and breaking down text (CASE HERE). Note that he breaks down posts looking for mafia logic and suspicion - he is very clear about his reads and does not rely on meta at all. In addition, the reads he suggests in this post in the current game are the polar opposite of his analysis meta as a townie. Pushing so aggressively for the lynch of Lazer was very different from that of Townie Jingle. A quick look at Townie JIngle's 3rd page filter will show you that Jingle is not afraid to explore other cases, throw his vote around, and change his vote to a better case. This is the polar opposite of Jingle in this game, who pushed relentlessly for the lynch of Lazer despite a good case on Hopeless. As mentioned in my previous analysis, he doesn't even consider an analysis of Hopeless, and pushes for Lazer. Once again, JingleHell's actions fit the description of a Mafia member who tried to push the lynch of Lazer over his scumbuddy. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
We would be able to gain a lot of information from their reads. We would clear two people from suspicion and we would clear anyone they tracked as green from suspicion. We could eliminate 4 people from suspicion today (5 if we include the medic), and an additional 1-2 more people tomorrow. Furthermore, we will guarenteed not mislynch a blue. This game would basically be won, as we'll have 6-7 people cleared from suspicion by the start of day 3. I propose the DT and Tracker roleclaim now and post the results of their night investigations. The Medic (I thought it was TMG T_T) can roleclaim after DT and Tracker confirm their reads. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 10:58 YourHarry wrote: This is what I propose: Phase 1. From now to July 8, 20:00. 1. Vanilla townies + Medic: do post, but do not claim. Detective + Tracker: claim if you received the positive result. Otherwise, do not claim. Phase 2. Until Day 2 deadline. 1. Vanilla townies + Medic: do post, but do not claim Detective: claim and report. 2. Tracker: claim if you targeted a different player than whom detective targeted. . Vanilla townies + Medic: claim vanilla townies Our own deadline system: Decide who we are going to lynch by 10 hours before actual deadline, July 9, 23:00 The person about to get lynched should claim. Phase 1/Phase 2 seems kinda pointless. If we're going to set up a role-claim, we may as well do it right at the start of the day. I suggest DT and Tracker roleclaim now and post their night1 results. We want to make sure we dont mislynch a blue and kill him before he gets his reads across. Medic DOES NOT roleclaim unless we say otherwise - he can flip a coin between saving the DT/Tracker and give the mafia a 50/50 shot of a blue lynch should mafia try to go after a declared blue. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 11:43 Evulrabbitz wrote: I am the Detective. Since the heated discussion during the night I decided to do my check on JingleHell. He turned innocent (reads non-mafia). My mind just blew up. Holy shit Jingle. I owe you a drink or something. Like shit. My bad. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
The_Zen_Man was the 2nd highest on my list, and Lazer made a pretty good case on him earlier. I could probably build cases on Release and Mackin as well. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
But there's no point in a counter-claim list. Lets just wait to see if there's a counterclaim. I also pretty strongly suspected Evul of a blue role, so I see no reason to distrust him until proven otherwise. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 12:28 Evulrabbitz wrote: In my opinion there is no point for the tracker to claim at this point. Maybe closer to the night if he can prevent a mislynch but for the moment there is no point to it unless he have evidence against a mafia(which I highly doubt). I still like the idea of tracker role-claiming, especially if we can take suspicion off of one of two players. For example, if tracker declares and it leads to the clear of even one of Lazer/Zen/Release/JieXian, we're in really really good shape. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 07 2012 15:19 Release wrote: Well i read the Jingle case and i can't disagree with it. But it makes me uncomfortable to feel that he is scum, because then YourHarry would be the other scum (those two had a little OMGUS battle and then suddenly reconciled, great way to clutter the thread), leaving no place for Lazer to be scum, which i still think is true. And mackin... Indecisive on Jingle case, points fingers at a bunch of players for zero justification, etc. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Also, we should look at Lazer's case of The_Zen_Man and decide who's the more suspicious. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=25#492 Bass's case against Mackin still stand as well. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
##Unvote: JingleHell | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
As such, this is the list of people who haven't been proven innocent via roleclaim/bluecheck Hapahaulli Release Mackin The_Zen_Man BassinSpace LazerMonkey One Medic, four townsfolk/miller, and one Mafia RoleBlocker. I want to be able to take two cases to the lynch deadline (just incase our primary read ends up roleclaiming medic). Everyone on this list needs to be questioned (including me). We need to make sure we take the most convincing case to the gallows. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 08 2012 14:51 Release wrote: if there are no roleclaims, then take this with a grain of salt: + Show Spoiler + On July 08 2012 14:26 JieXian wrote: I really hate the idea of roleclaiming but it seems like the right move since a mafia got modkilled (boo newbie games) Feels good to have read Jingle correctly. Would have felt like an idiot defending him if he was scum. Tracked EvulRabbit, knew he was DT. Confirmed. (Your seemed worried for no reason N1 >_>) You just chose the easiest claim possible, the only one a scum can know for sure. a VT / medic track could easily result in your failure to correctly identify townies On July 08 2012 14:32 JieXian wrote: nah I won't have roleclaimed if there was 2 left. It's 8-1 you can't possibly be worried about losing. a bit nonchalant don't you think? we get three mislynches, but we don't have enough confirmed townies to arbitrarily vote until we hit (should inevitably) hit scum. Release... this is just awful. No mafia in their right mind would ever claim blue int his situation (if they did, they're auto-dead next day). What's the point of even drawing suspicion at JieXian? There is none, and you've been doing nothing but pointing fingers the entire night cycle. FOS: Release | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
A quick case on Release - I find his current gameplay very different from his typical town-aligned gameplay, which is well established from three newbie mafia games: Newbie Mafia XIV Newbie Mafia XVI Newbie Mafia XVIII I'll give a brief overview of his playstyle in each game. I also highly recommend skimming through his past games to get a feel for his posting - it doesn't take much reading to realize how different he is as a townie. (all underlined words are hyperlinks for referencing). Newbie Mafia XIV On page 1 of his filter, you'll notice long posts that take clear stances on players early in the game. He never appears wishy-washy or unsure of himself. THIS POST sums up this game's town-alligned Release very well - forceful, looking to pick confrontations, and actively builds cases (even if this particular case was against the town doctor xD). Newbie Mafia XVI Release doesn't build any large cases in the early parts of this game, but is very forceful about his opinions. He locks on to one player (Grush) early on in the game and grills him relentlessly. However, he's very willing to change his vote multiple times at a whim. He's extremely reckless and not afraid to forcefully point fingers/generate discussion. Look at THIS POST for another example of forceful townie Release. Newbie Mafia XVIII Release gets killed by Mafia N1 here, so there's not much to go on. Do note that his tone is forceful throughout his filter, he never summaryposts, and never tries to out several people in a single post. His post count/activity here is much lower due to a busy schedule, something he mentions after death. Release Townie Meta Summary - Release always accuses 1 player at a time. He locks on to someone and grills them forcefully, actively seeking confrontation. He'll switch votes at whim if he sees other suspicious behavior. - Release rarely, if ever, attacks cases on players he's not pursuing. Release really locks on to his cases and tries to build it. - Release is always at the center of the controversy. - Release is not afraid to defend himself against accusations. Release Day 1 Lynch Release in this current game has been very different. Just take a look at some of these quotes: One thing that I really fucked up in my case against JingleHell was not looking for Mafia motive. I had evidence of scummy play, but did not have a story and mafia-motive behind actions and behaviors. I will be clearly identifying motives in this analysis First, Release calls JingleHell's post suspicious after defending him against Lazer in his previous post. In addition, he doesn't take any forceful opinions. Note he doesn't accuse Jingle ("This is kind of interesting"), and takes a very unclear stance on TMG26. Townie Release would have been throwing around votes based on past meta. Release is trying to spread suspicion against multiple players while pushing a bad case against LazerMonkey. The push in itself isn't bad, but spreading suspicions is pro-mafia. On July 06 2012 00:00 Release wrote: This is kind of interesting You defend Lazer and try to downplay the importance of first posts (despite Lazer calling his own post bad). Absolutely not. If his post caught traction, we would waste lots of time. Your post did catch traction, but we hardly wasted any significant amount of time. Something meaningless works better than what he did because we know it's not serious. You know it, i know it, he knows it, but he chose to choose something "significant." TMG looks rather shit, but if his english actually sucks, then we have a serious problem. Lurkers speak up now. I will lynch you if Lazer is not a serious contender. Next, Release acknowledges my case on hopeless as "fairly good," then continues his vote for LazerMonkey for unclear reasons. This is consistent with a Release who wants to put himself in good standing with the author of a case against fellow mafia, but instead tries to push a townie lynch. Release is keeping his options open and remaining unclear - a mafia trait. 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. 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. Release's post just before the D1 lynch. Pre-lynch panic, combined with outing THREE players in one post for unclear reasons. This is wildly inconsistent with Townie Jingle, and it is in mafia's best interest to spread baseless suspicion. On July 07 2012 10:00 Release wrote: Fuck fuck fuck fuck. From what i see, the scum has to be Lazer and Jingle (maybe Harry) When its clear that Hopeless is going to hang, Release covers his bases before the D1 mod post. Note that he acknowledges a legitimate suspicion against Hopeless, yet does not change his vote. He also outs 3 players in this post again. On July 07 2012 10:13 Release wrote: you two seem awfully pretentious and deceitful, but i didn't see that Hopeless hasn't posted shit since the acusation (probably scared of slipping.) Release: Night 1 You're going to see Release make a huge gear-switch after Hopeless1der gets lynched. He tries to further justify his suspicions against LazerMonkey for vague reasons (and ignores me the MULTIPLE TIMES I call him out for it). Instead, he tries to establish a friendly rapport with the town, while pointing fingers and generally not doing anything. Release first addresses why he voted for Lazer. Look at the complete lack of reasoning. In my counter argument, I proved all of these false. On July 07 2012 12:38 Release wrote: @hapahauli His first post, which is incredibly deceitful His repeated bringing up of the fact that the sex toys discussion was worse than his first post, and that the sex toys was legitimately bad and scummy behavior. Despite still having HEAVY suspicions of Lazer, Release agrees with my case on Jingle then promptly outs YourHarry and Mackin for scummy behavior. His reasons are vague, unclear, and this is not the forceful Release in his townie meta. Release is trying to stirr up suspicions and create unrest. On July 07 2012 15:19 Release wrote: Well i read the Jingle case and i can't disagree with it. But it makes me uncomfortable to feel that he is scum, because then YourHarry would be the other scum (those two had a little OMGUS battle and then suddenly reconciled, great way to clutter the thread), leaving no place for Lazer to be scum, which i still think is true. And mackin... Release outs two MORE players in his next post. On July 08 2012 01:35 Release wrote: caught up and evul has wasted a hell of a lot of time talking about circumstance/hypothetical scenarios about D1, despite the fact that we have passed day 1. He also tried the if this, then that bullshit. I don't really see what town motivation would cause this, but as a scum, it's trying to survive without an analytical basis. "meh, that post doesn't feel like a sufficient basis for an accusation" = defense because there was an accusation (I) and your saying there should be no accusation tells me to stop attacking him for that reason. Release has a sudden change of heart against Lazer and jumps on the Jingle bandwagon (before Evul claimed DT and verified Jingle as townie). Release finds a better angle and jumps on the mislynch in an attempt to avoid suspicion On July 08 2012 10:00 Release wrote: I've caught up in this thread and have to say that i no longer believe Lazer to be scum. so far, Hapa has been very good on fighting against scummy plays, making his analyses and i would hope that others follow suit. Especially jingle. Summaryposting in an attempt to gain rapport with the town. On July 08 2012 10:04 Release wrote: very unlikely that the two remaining scum is among those who voted for me. the remaining 2 scum is among:Release, JingleHell, JieXian, The_Zen_Man, Khorrus(replacement) and Mackin These are 100% contradictory and mentally retarded. Correct me if i'm missing something but you just said "no they're not" and "yes they are" in close succession Sudden voteswitch to lazer for a single line after N1. This is an effort to create further confusion, knowing that JingleHell is on pace to be lynched. On July 08 2012 10:08 Release wrote: lazer i just cleared, you and you post this. Explain yourself. This is total bullshit and you know it and as far as i'm concerned, ##vote: lazer Release spends the rest of the night (and the opening of D2) posting summary and one-liners. In conclusion, Release's behavior this game is very different from his Town-alligned meta in a mafia-oriented way. Furthermore, clear and logical mafia motivations can be derived from all of his actions. I highly suspect Release to be Mafia. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Patience sir. ##Vote Release | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
CLICK HERE (reference) Note: Release also accuses me of being Mafia here, on the grounds that I've been too pro-town and therefore deceitful. If anyone wishes to hear my thoughts, I'll gladly comment, though I find the reasoning insane and not worth addressing. Analyzing the "Breadcrumb" from Townie Release Perspective (Night 1 and onwards)
These three events/opinions by Release are wildly inconsistent with one another, and I can't find a townie motive anywhere. Release breadcrumbing me as godfather basically says that me and JingleHell are the last two mafia (despite all his statements above). So how could townie Release justify this? Here's a Hypothetical based on a townie-release motivated breadcrumb: If JingleHell would get lynched D2 and flips red (remember, hypothetical), if we assume Release's suspicions hold, his case against me would be built around me lynching two of my fellow mafia members (who wouldn't have suspicion on them otherwise) in a very aggressive manner. This would be a really strange breadcrumb. If JingleHell gets lynched D2 and flips green/blue, Release would use the breadcrumb against me to discredit me and push me as the godfather for pushing a mislynch. Again however, given Release's support of my case, this doesn't make sense, as he supports the mislynch himself. I can't find any townie justification for his breadcrumb move, and I'd appreciate the thoughts of others on this issue. Mafia scenarios are pretty easy to identify though - Release would know that JingleHell would be a mislynch, and thus would use the breadcrumb after he flips green to discredit another townie and create extra suspicion. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Breadcrumb (click!)) Release (who claims he's Town alligned) supported my case against JingleHell because the godfather(me) was pushing for the lynch. Wat. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 09 2012 05:51 Lazermonkey wrote: While I agree with that Release looks bad, Hope's meta case on him is just shit. It's massivly dependant on the fact that Release have the abilty to be active the same amount of time in all of his games. While it may be true that he is lying about being bussy, this is just WIFOM and can't possibly be used as an argument against him. I don't claim to understand Release but I played XVI where we both were town. His play soso. The good part of it was his activity level but his reads were kinda off. He were tunneling alot and didn't really look at motives nor did he swap his target too often. He got alot of critique on that so it just makes sense that he would be trying to change his play this game. I'm going to assume you meant my case against Release, and I appreciate the comments. The majority of my case isn't based around Release's activity - its based on his posting style. Several of his posts on day one are massively out of character with his townie persona. Release in his other three games is never unsure of himself, never wishy-washy, and will never passively fingerpoint people. I'm sure he didn't receive any advice to start doing this, yet look at some of these posts: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=13#248 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=19#368 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=21#409 Townie Release NEVER posts ANYTHING in his townie meta similar to the 3 posts above He is fickle about his opinions, sounds passive, and fingerpoints multiple people within individual posts. Not only is it out of character with Release's town meta - its out-of character in a mafia-oriented way. My case on Hopeless was built on the exact same meta argument - Hopeless was being different from his town meta (being passive/diplomatic/fingerpointing) with mafia motives. I'll give some more detailed comments on your case about Zen tonight, but from what I've seen so far, Zen has been far too quiet for me to make a solid judgement. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Anywho, some comments on your case of Zen - since his filter's so short, I'm just going to break it down in a "timeline." 1) Zen opens the game with a case on Mackin - (You mention this is not a major reason for your scumread, so take this with a grain of salt). I don't find this post scummy at all. While he does take a stance against a passive player/eazy target, calling out lurkers is a townie trait, as it helps spark discussion. The content of the post itself is a pretty legitimate attempt at analysis as well. In addition, ignoring the first few pages of shitposting is not necessarily a bad thing - it can be interpreted as lazy town play, or a townie who doesn't see any value in 2)Zen's suspicious D1 voting - This makes him look pretty bad. He goes from voting Hopeless ("Hopeless IS Mafia"), to posting a pretty bad case against you and keeping his options open ("i am equally suspicous of Lazer as i am Hopeless"). His vote-switch three hours later for unclear reasons is suspicious as well - given that it put LazerMonkey into the voting lead. I think you've said all that needs to be said here, however, I can't justify voting for him on a voting pattern alone. Now some of my own reads on Zen that could strengthen/weaken your case: Zen's overall "lurkiness" - Zen has 1 page of filter so far, and only has a couple of pretty useless posts after the D1 lynch. In particular, his posts emphasize stalling and taking non-controversial opinions (click for reference). I don't think this is enough to make a judgement, but Zen is not helping his cause and is showing some mafia-motive. Zen's "analysis" - Zen has two attempts at analysis so far, one being a decent early-game suspicion of Mackin, and a pretty bad bandwagon case on Lazermonkey. While the timing of the case is interesting, it actually is an attempt at analysis despite it being pretty bad content-wise. While Zen has shown very suspicious behavior, we only have lurkiness/voting patterns to go on. I feel that both Release and Zen have been very suspicious, but there is simply not enough information on Zen for me to make a judgement. I might go through his game-history later to get a feel of meta. As it stands, we have a lot of information (meta and otherwise) on Release and he's the better D2 lynch IMO. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
As far as checking me and revealing Guilty, that would be a pretty fucked up situation huh? Either way, I think there are much better targets for checks - eliminating Mackin or YourHarry from suspicion N2 would be pretty awesome for the town. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Zen, if you are Medic, ROLECLAIM NOW. If you are a vanilla townie, do not false-claim under any circumstances. I wish there was more to talk about, but it looks like we have two solid cases. As it stands, I'm pretty happy to see Release or Zen get lynched. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Switch your votes NOW | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Le Plan [List][*]Medic (Zen) randomly selects DT or Tracker to protect (flip a coin or something). [*]DT and Tracker agree on two different people to get information on. Mafia has a kill and a Roleblock tonight. If Mafia wants to prevent our information roles from clearing a townie, Mafia has to Roleblock and Kill the DT and Tracker. By randomizing Medic's protection, Mafia has a 50% chance of losing the game instantly if he/she guesses wrong, as we'll get information on two players. Mafia can opt to roleblock medic and kill one of our information roles, but we'll be guaranteed information on one target. Thirdly, Mafia can opt to not roleblock (to render tracker useless) and try to kill tracker or DT. In this case, we have a 50/50 shot of a free lynch (and a large advantage) or one blue dies. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Le Plan
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I disagree though = if they are transparent about who they investigate, it gives us more information about the Mafia's roleblock/night actions. While it could turn into a WIFOM thing, its information nonetheless, and could be useful if on D3 D4 if Release flips green and we need to search for mafia. Having them reveal their investigations simply gives the town more information - never a bad thing. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Also, a question about the Roleblocker - do regular townies receive PMs/notifications if they are roleblocked? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 10 2012 08:45 YourHarry wrote: Yes, regular townies do receive PM notification for roleblocked. THis is why I have been asking for whoever got roleblocked. No one responded, so it's probably TMG who got roleblocked AND NK'ed. Or scum just forgot to roleblock? lol Yah that's strange. Mafia seems pretty inactive this game (with Hopeless gone D1 and Khorrus modkilled), so I wouldn't be surprised if Mafia just forgot or something. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
BAAAANDWAAAAGONNNNNN!!!! | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
##Vote Release[/b] | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
##Unvote ##Vote Release | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Well let's get down to business. We need to confirm blue actions for the night and start building new cases. Next on everybody's list seems to be Mackin. However, in light of D2 having been horrendously unproductive from a discussion standpoint, we need to start doing opening up our analysis to other players. This is not an excuse to fingerpoint, rather, we should look for Mafia-motives everywhere we can. If you find something suspicious/compelling about a player, post it (even if its on me). Let's make N2 better than the first. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Mackin - Votes for YourHarry randomly, does not post again until late in N1 LazerMonkey - Votes for JingleHell, posts lynch "wish-list" supspecting Jingle/JieXian/Hope/TMG, then changes vote to Hopeless when the vote total gets close at the end. Slightly suspicious, but his posting tone/analysis has been very pro townie so far, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. BassinSpace - Voted for Hopeless early, pushed for his lynch, no vote changes. Hapahauli (me! =D) - Voted for Hopeless early, pushed for Hopeless's lynch, no vote changes. The one voting pattern that sticks out to me is YourHarry's: YourHarry - [List][*]Votes for Hopeless, "Hopeless is flailing, kill it with fire" (right before I post my formal case) [*]Half a day later, unvotes Hopeless and votes for TMG. This is after Hopeless posted his defense, and two votes were placed on Lazermonkey (lazermonkey is leading 2-1). Furthermore, this is not too long after JieXian reads Hopeless's defense, is "convinced," and switches votes from Hopeless to Lazer [*]1 minute after TMG vote, posts that "JieXian and Hopeless are prob town" with no reasoning. [*]A few minutes later, posts: "Guys, go after TMG. I will take responsibility, if mislynch. :D " [*]With 4 hours to lynch deadline, asks Lazer to declare if he's blue (Lazer is leading 4-3 in vote total) [*]Posts that he will re-evaluate my case against Hopeless after I get into a huge argument with Jingle over the D1 lynch. Also states that he is "OK" with the Lazer lynch on the basis that Lazer claimed townie. Also posted that he'd try to find a better target if possible. [*]Votes Hopeless a couple of minutes later (ties the vote 4-4 with Lazer set to get lynched). So I ask YourHarry to explain his actions before the D1 lynch deadline. His vote pattern follows the strengthening/weakening of the lynch-Hopeless movement on Day 1. In addition, his vote on TMG has almost no reasoning behind it. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
YourHarry -
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 07 2012 14:57 YourHarry wrote: I am OK with JingleHell lynch day2. After my initial quick vote on Hopeless beginning of day1, JingleHell quickly tried to reverse the bandwagon against me. He also belongs to the possible scum list, outlined in my previous post. LINK | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
In regards to the quote above, YourHarry did quickvote Hopeless, but ignores the fact that he jumped off the bandwagon after some players jumped on Lazer. Read the whole story of events in my YourHarry voting timeline. FOS: YourHarry | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I also have some questions regarding the end of your defense. On July 10 2012 14:41 YourHarry wrote: --SNIP-- Here are some reasons you should think I am probably a town: - I prevented from medic from claiming, initially. Right now, actually, I don't think medic claiming makes much of a difference, but the fact that I thought about the different strategies to maximize town victory should provide reasons for you to believe my townness. - I also strongly pushed for two claim phase, so that the power roles would not claim unless they provided additional information would be provided. - I insisted many times for whoever got roleblocked to claim. If I was a scum, knowing that I either did not roleblock anyone or roleblocked TMG, I would have fake-claimed roleblocked. Considering I was the one who posited the possibility of scum skipping roleblock to claim roleblock, it would have been a rather safe way to be cleared - especially when the current state of the game so unfavorable to scum. Scum Harry would have claimed roleblocked. The first two points don't give me a strong town read because they're fairly non-controversial/non-original issues. Multiple people in the town were posting similar ideas, and its not like Mafia would give bad advice on blues in the first place. As for the Roleblock thing, I've been thinking about that a lot for the last hour or so, and there are only two situations that I can come up with. 1) You (assuming you're mafia) didn't Roleblock because you had no good targets. Instead, you saved it as a ploy to gain trust as a townie and brought it to light as early as possible. 2) Mackin's (assuming he's mafia) 24 hour IRL issues was rushed to send in a lynch PM and forgot about his roleblock action. While this is all speculation, most of the points above are fairly non-controversial and would have been brought up at some point by another townie. Lastly, this post is just really really strange: On July 08 2012 18:50 YourHarry wrote: Anyways town victory is almost a certainty. Even if we randomized all of our actions, as long as we lynch from unconfirmed list, we should cruise to victory. According to my calculations, something like 3% chance of losing. Additional strategy. Both detective and tracker should publicize who they will target. They should pick two different players. The medic can randomly protect tracker or detective, but if either detective or tracker makes it known that he will target the medic, do not protect that person (for example, detective plans to target A and tracker plans to target B, and if A turns out to be the medic, medic should protect the tracker who's targeting someone other than medic). Guidelines on day 3: Tracker and detective should immediately report. The perfect scenario is if any power role receives "innocent" or "no visit". As long as we have one additional confirmed townie, we are guaranteed a 100% victory. If detective is alive and he received "guilty" on player X, we should lynch X regardless. If detective is dead and tracker targeted the player Y who "visited Z", we should kill Y as long as Z got lynched at night. Again, Y cannot be the medic here because nurse should have protected the detective if tracker publicized his plan to target the medic (And yes, tracker is more powerful than detective at this time). I really want to play through this game, but I feel the responsibility to volunteer to lynch myself. I am a vanilla townie and I do not want to risk having to force the medic to claim. Good job Hapah, if you are town If not, you lose Good game everyone and good luck!! ##Vote YourHarry I can't follow the logic of you voting for yourself to not force the medic to claim. On top of that, how is lynching yourself (from a VT perspective) pro-town? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Well he could be the miller, so someone try to build a case on him. He was one of my strongest townie reads, so this comes as rather surprising. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 11 2012 10:59 YourHarry wrote: First, I do not believe that no matter how much we tried, we would be able to find the scum 50% of the time. Second, if we let BassInSpace live, it would cause so much distraction later in the day. In fact, this would be exactly what the scum wants. Imagine scum and bassinspace to make it to LYLO! This is especially the case since medic and detective are completely useless now. We HAVE to stick with this report. If he's miller, then so be it. This does not mean we should stop discussing who is scummy. In fact, this game just got a lot more interesting but I want to fast forward time to lynch Bass to see what happens. Listen, I'm all far lynching BassInSpace if he's the scummiest read we have, but it's mind-numbingly stupid to lynch him on hope and prayer. This information just gives us another out when we lynch - we win the game if a guy flips Miller OR Mafia. Lynching someone on a 50% chance is terrible. If we lynch the miller tomorrow or in the subsequent days, we can lynch Bass at a 100% chance. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Let's assume we have three lynches remaining in total. Bass has a 50% of being mafia, and the 4 unconfirmed players have an equal chance of being mafia. Situation 1, we lynch Bass D3. 50% chance of Bass flipping Mafia (50% chance of victory) 50% chance of bass flipping miller
75% of victory total Situation 2, we lynch bass D5 after two days of lynching other scummy players: 2/5 chance of lynching miller or mafia D3 (40% chance of victory) 3/5 chance of lynching townie
85% chance of victory Now its entirely possible that I've fucked up the math somewhere (its been ages since I've taken a statistics/probability course), but the point I'm trying to make is that lynching on the "guilty" DT check now is not the most effective use of our information in a strictly mathematical viewpoint. Again, this is assuming that everyone has an equal chance of being scum and whatnot, but the point should be demonstrated. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Though its worth saying that this 50% of mafia stuff is inherently fallacious | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
So they're the same. However, situation 2 will give us more information and generate more discussion (rather than simply lynching bass and being done with it). Therefore I vote situation 2 | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
@BassInSpace - While we wait for someone to post a case/defense against you: who do you believe is(are) the best lynch target(s) for Day 3? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Activity: You must post in this thread once per day/night cycle and vote every day while you are alive. If you fail to do so, you will be modkilled. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 00:16 Evulrabbitz wrote: BassInSpace. As it is now I simply cannot trust anything you say or any case you make. It is too dangerous. The fact that you even think your votes is of more value to the town than a confirmed townies view is ridiculous. The town has such and advantage the vote doesn't really matter; What matters now is confirming people's roles so their words gain credibility. If you try to convince me to lynch someone other than you now (which is to some degree understandable) all I will see is potential misleading. If you make your cases against who you think is suspicious and, if lynched, flip green, they all know that the information you have provided is 100% town-aligned. I don't choose who to investigate by chance. I chose you because all trough this game you have been trying to make a case against Mackin but when the voting is due you jump onto the most voted person (granted you did have to chose between Lazer and Hopeless, but the concept still stands). I found that somewhat scummy and decided to investigate. Stop it. Just stop. It will do you no harm to listen to his defense. In addition, he has a lot of pro-townie points from his actions on Day 1. He was the only other player in the game besides me to vote Hopeless1der, stick with his vote, and support his lynch. That's pretty pro-fucking-townie. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 05:33 YourHarry wrote: I tried to answer your questions. Let me know what questions were unanswered or not satisfied with. I strongly recommend lynching Bass today. For reasons previously stated. I am willing to repeat these reasons and discuss them further upon requests. I'll get to your defense later in more detail tonight - the N2 night actions have been a huge distraction from any productive analysis. But the gist of it is: - You don't really clear yourself on a lot of the more suspicious actions. You basically acknowledge that your D1 lynch voting is suspicious. In addition - "Overall, Hapha, I think, for you to have a reasonable ground to accuse me" - direct quote. - The reasons you listed for your townie behavior are pretty inconsequential. As brought up by me and Bass, talking about blue actions does not make you a pro townie. In addition, you still have not built a case on a player or provided any analysis on one. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Based on Bass's actions (especially the D1 lynch) and my own reads, I'd say Bass has well over a 50% chance of being the miller. Do you really think there aren't more suspicious players than Bass? Who is your strongest scumread? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
should be "First of all, calling it a 50% chance for Bass to be Mafia is inherently fallicious" | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 06:26 Evulrabbitz wrote: He clearly states what happened, how can that be downplaying it? What if the miller flips too late? Keep in mind Jingle said the same about Hopeless. Hapa was very convinced Jingle was Mafia. We all said the same about Release (As YourHarry pointed out). He never said it was useless, he said that because there is a miller the validity of investigation has been compromised; As in it might not be entirely true. All you said in that post was plain bullshit. Anyway. I don't side with Harry, nor do I side with Bass. I believe that keeping BassInSpace alive is not crucial for town victory. What you do need is town-aligned information and viewpoints. Now, if BassInSpace makes his cases; "Who would he lynch first? Next? etc", you still have his viewpoints. If we then lynch him we either get a Mafia and win the game or get a valid source of information there is no need to distrust. Lynching on hope and prayer is incredibly stuipd. If he turns up mafia, yay we win. If he turns up miller, we are screwed. Please just read through his filter - I see NOTHING about his play that's remotely scummy. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 06:33 Evulrabbitz wrote: I already did. Have you stopped reading? I clearly stated it. What I also clearly stated was why I think your post targeting YourHarry was bullshit, which you seem to have completely ignored. It's not entirely bullshit. YourHarry basically discourages us from doing analysis and cites Release and (note: this is while YourHarry is under suspicion) and to vote for Bass immediately. This is despite me and YourHarry coming to a concensus that there's no mathematical basis for lynching Bass now as opposed to later. I was on the fence about YourHarry until I saw his last post. There are so many contradictions and anti-town mentality in it that I'll cast my vote unless another compelling case is brought forward. My earlier suspicions against YourHarry still stand, including but not limited to:
##Vote YourHarry | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 07:23 Evulrabbitz wrote: Well at least we are on the same page then. I fail to see how you can find that post beneficial but regardless, I just wanted to know if you thought I called you post bullshit or you thought I called Lazer's bullshit Ok good - I'll clear up my thoughts on his post. Lazer brings up some pretty good/suspicious points about YourHarry's post: 1) There's no reason a townie should ever discourage analysis EVER. Even if his justiciation was to push the Bass lynch, this is still incredibly suspicious. 2) Lazer attacks YourHarry's logic about Bass - as previously stated, lynching Bass solely on his guilty check, especially in light of his pro-town behavior - is just stuipd. There's even more in that post that Lazer didn't even mention, but him calling attention to a suspicious post is far from "bullshit." | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 07:27 YourHarry wrote: --SNIP-- Before I continue to respond to everyone's reply, I want to ask you one thing. You guys are saying that 50% does not matter. The probability does not matter. Lazer is arguing that this is "not math". What if there were 3 scums left and 1 miller left? And detective's "guilty" report implied 75% chance of Bass flipping scum. Would you still ignore what implications of detective's finding? What if it was 90%? Somehow, I am afraid that I will continue to hear lazer argue that "90% doesn't matter. we should still find someone who is scummy". A player can be scummy for many reasons. Scuminess encrypted in his responses is what you guys are going after. But a player can also be scummy because he received a "guilty" report from the detective. If someone has behaving the exact opposite of scummy, I'm not going to vote him/her, simple. Throwing out unrealistic percentages does nothing to justify Bass's Lynch. You want to lynch Bass? Come up with a case against him. Find something suspicious, build a case, and we'll listen to you. If you can't, there's no way in hell I'll lynch him. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 07:59 Evulrabbitz wrote: I will try to build a case against BassInSpace when I finished this episode of American Dad. Take said upcoming case as you will. I will try my hardest not to mislead in any way, but it is hard to account for all aspects so please do dissect it. Not that expect anything else, but still. Thank-you. That's all I wanted - I look forward to reading it! =) | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 08:20 YourHarry wrote: Lazer and hapha. Why would I want to kill Bass now, if I am scum. I ask you this again. There is no reason. Scum would want to push a mislynch, especially of a player with a very pro-town history. Scum's best hope is to create an end-game scenario with a bunch of suspicious people. On July 12 2012 08:06 YourHarry wrote: In the absence of miller, detective's "guilty" report would be taken as fact. Because this is 100%. Regardless how townie this player may have acted. Because there is miller, it is now 50% true. If we can find scums better than 50% of the time, then we should ignore this. However, if our ability to find scum is significantly lower than 50%, the detective report should override our decisions on who we think are scum. Whether we can find scum more than 50% of the time could be up for an argument. The rest, really, is not. Again, "50%" is not the proper way to look at this. Based on Bass's play so far, I put the chance of him being mafia at far below 50%. If Evul checked Mackin or you and either of you turned up red, I'd put the probability of either of you being mafia at above 50% and push for your lynches. I'm curious - if Evul checked me last night and I turned up red, would you vote for me? Would you believe that I had a 50% chance of being mafia despite D1 lynch actions? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 08:37 YourHarry wrote: If Evul checked you last night and you turned up red, then yes I would vote for you still. Even if I didn't think you were particularly scummy until that point, I will have to put my faith in the probability - because I don't trust my read as much as a fact telling me you are about 50% scum. And it is true. The probability is not exactly 50%. The number should be adjusted based on our "reads" but again our reads should be able to change that number too much, unless there is like overwhelming evidence. If reads can change the number, why don't we try to make that number a bit more accurate then? Why don't you dig through Bass's filter and see if we can make this a bit more accurate? This is the last I'll say on the subject of the whole 50% thing - you're putting blind faith in probability. This is a game of analysis, not coinflips. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Just a quick point before I start writing a formal reply: He finishes his post saying that Hapa's point and Hapa's meta case (remember this) make his vote swing in the favor of Hopeless rather than TMG or Zen, the two he previously made cases against. The exact quote from Bass's post is: "However, the points raised by hapahauli combined with the meta analysis of hopeless is going to mean that I put my vote on him for now, rather than zen man or TGM." You take him out of context here - he's pretty consistent with his view. [Quote]The next post on line Is not really that suspicious other than he says he doesn't really like meta, yet his decision to vote for Hopeless was partially based on meta. The rest of this post can be seen as suspicious, but that will ultimately lead to too much WIFOM so I won't go there(E.g he encourages Jinglehell to make a good basis for defense to Hopeless which he then can support).[/Quote] You take him out of context again. He's simply questioning Jingle's meta analysis of Hopeless, and is not commenting on my own. Overall, his view on my case on Hopeless is quite consistent - he's not too fond of meta analysis but feels that it adds to the case and his major suspicions (the 3 points he mentions). My first overall thoughts on your case is that you try to create a story to justify him being mafia rather than looking for actions that make him mafia - most of the actions you call suspicious can also be interpreted as very pro town. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 11:32 Evulrabbitz wrote: For the first "take him out of context" I don't actually see how I do that. In the direct quote he says that your arguments and the meta case (I mentioned your meta case, not just the meta case. However that doesn't make a difference) made his vote switch into favour of hopeless rather than TMG of Zen. That is exactly what I said. Please elaborate. "the points raised by hapahauli combined with the meta analysis of hopeless" I mean that this above statement is constitent with his viewpoints. His overall view is:he dosn't like meta analysis alone, and treats meta arguments it as something that strengthens the other poitns of my argument. The above quote fits with that viewpoint perfectly, as do all his other quotes. For the second one. I said in the post that the only think suspicious is that he questions the use of meta. The other part I said was too much WIFOM to build a case on. I point out the fact he clearly says he dislikes the use of meta analysis. You seem to think that this was a comment only regarding Jingle's meta analysis. In that case I don't see how he can dislike Jingle's meta analysis but support yours. Here's the full post (the post itself is addressed to JingleHell): "But as it stands now, it comes down to your meta analysis of hopeless vs his scummy posting in this actual thread. I value finding scummy posting as a scum hunting tool far more than I value meta. You don't think the points brought up by Hapahauli paint Hopeless in a bad light? And just as an aside, I'm not saying I think you're scum. I just want to understand why you think your meta analysis (which you admit yourself is an issue because he hasn't flipped in the other game) is more valuable than actual posts in this thread." In Jingle's post (which he replies to), Jingle mentions an unclear meta argument based on a game of Hopeless that hasn't finished yet. He's very clear about his intentions, "your meta analysis of hopeless vs his scummy posting[/b]" - he finds Jingle's unclear meta argument (based on a game that hasn't finished) as bad. Nowhere does it address my meta argument or talk about his views on meta arguments as a whole. As I continue to read through your arugment and Bass's filter, I think he's very consistent on his view on my case, and I haven't found anything to suggest otherwise. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
1) BassinSpace contradicts himself in agreeing with my case - I disagree and I think you take him out of context in your argument. He appears very consistent throughout, initially stating 3 points of my argument that he likes and saying he's not a huge fan of meta but accepts it as another component of my case to strengthen it. 2) BassinSpace "juggles" suspicion - I like this point a bit more, but I think its overblown. He's pretty consistent on the Hopeless lynch in the beginning as well as his suspicions on Mackin. He does have a habit of mentioning multiple people in a single post, but given that he lives in a different timezone than the other active posters, he has very few opportunities to talk with people directly and has to address all his questions/concerns in single posts. 3) BassinSpace is suspicious of Mackin, but still hasn't started a case against him - this is a valid point, and I think this justifies an explanation from Bass. This isn't necessarily a 100% scum read though, and he applies pressure on Mackin quite consistently. It doesn't seem very scummy to try and extract information out of a lurker/low-postcount player. Overall, I think this case brings up some slight suspicions, but that's about it. A lot of this can be interpreted as townie play, and he's far from the most suspicious person in the game right now. If it weren't for your red check, we probably wouldn't even be analyzing his case. Your main points against him are his lack of decisiveness against players and raising suspicions, however these issues Mackin's filter are far worse. Furthermore, he still has one very pro-town thing going from him: his D1 voting pattern, voting for Hopeless and pushing his case. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 14:29 YourHarry wrote: --SNIP-- I will force myself to come up with a case against Bass, and hopefully I can convince even myself that Bass is "definitely" scum. I hope this is sarcastic. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 14:32 YourHarry wrote: Scum Harry would LOVE a mislynch, OF COURSE. But scum Harry would MUCH MUCH MORE PREFER A LYNCH of an UNCONFIRMED TOWNIE. WAY WAY MORE THAN LYNCH OF BASS, A POSSIBLE SCUM/MILLER. Harry. There's one scum left. If you are scum, you know he's innocent, therefore you push for a mislynch. Its pretty basic. I really can't follow you here... | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 14:43 YourHarry wrote: Yes, say I am scum. I know he is innocent. But it's much better to have a guy who is "known" to run red later in the day rather than having him get mislynched an flip town. Do you think scum Harry would want Bass on Day 5 with me or not? I still don't get it. Scum want non-scum dead. Bass is an easy bandwagon target for scum, since it allows them an opportunity to lynch someone who's acted pro town with little or no analysis. The sooner they get rid of him the better. I will agree with your vote on Mackin though. He hasn't been speaking at all (lurking), he really only posts when he's called out/asked to (keeping the town on a need-to-know basis), and his posts have been all summary/finger-points. ##Unvote YourHarry ##Vote Mackin | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 15:18 YourHarry wrote: Sick feeling. Sum Haph would want me, Bass, and Haph in LYLO. I assume you meant scum Hapa? Well scum hapa wouldn't have crucified hopeless D1 =P | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Mackin's D1 Voting Pattern/Defense of Hopeless1der: Mackin immediately comes to the aid of Hopeless when he starts coming under fire. His first substantial post is right after Hopeless addresses my FOS. On July 06 2012 06:06 Mackin wrote: That makes alot of sense to me Hopeless and I totally agree. Bandwagoning is giving no real thought to the situation whereas when there is a clear reason for siding with someone such as terrible posts, I'm all for agreeing with them and I don't see it as "Bandwagoning" Hapa what you said makes no sense to me. If I have made crappy posts, why wouldn't you side with Hopeless? It's hardly bandwagoning if you think you have anything to question me on. I have no inhibition to post and anyone who does have inhibition when people are stacking against them clearly has something to hide. Mackin defends Hopeless very passively when I first ask him for thoughts on his case. He tries to justify his actions in an unsure/unconfident tone rather than taking a strong opinion either way. @Hapa: Your case on Hopeless1der: I don't know what to think here. It's like Hopeless is really trying to build a case against you, he builds up quite alot in the first post and when you make your stance clear in your response, his response is to back down immediately. Maybe he just wanted to question you and test the water a bit? I don't think he's trying to genuinely full on attack and point the FoS here. I don't know why he starts going on about Release, if I was thinking more suspiciously of him, he maybe just wanted the conversation to change quickly and forget about building a case on you. Mackin then casts a vote for YourHarry and is done with D1. Mackin's Fingerpointing/Spreading Suspicion Mackin is fond of making lists of all the players and giving his thoughts of all of them. In all of these lists, he always casts slight suspicion on every single player, and will never outright declare someone extremely suspicious. The two posts linked below make him look very bad - he tries to be non-confrontational while casting suspicion on every single player. The only time he'll ever declare someone pro-town is if they're confirmed (as a result of the Blue roleclaims). http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=25#496 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=32#622 Furthermore, he misrepresents his posting. The above lists are not forceful or decisive, yet he says this earlier in the game: On July 06 2012 06:06 Mackin wrote: Hapa what you said makes no sense to me. If I have made crappy posts, why wouldn't you side with Hopeless? It's hardly bandwagoning if you think you have anything to question me on. I have no inhibition to post and anyone who does have inhibition when people are stacking against them clearly has something to hide. Mackin is anything but uninhibited when he posts. He's incredibly non-confrontational and tries to point suspicion at many players with his "lists." Mackin's "Lurkiness" Mackin doesn't post often - he didn't post the entire N1 cycle! Furthermore, Mackin will rarely post unless directly addressed/prompted to. This is consistent with Mafia keeping the town on a need-to-know basis. I found the timing of this next post funny: On July 08 2012 07:23 Mackin wrote: Sorry I haven't posted I have had an unbelievable 24 hours IRL. Not getting into it but basically sorry I missed critical point of D1. I'm just reading through now and thoughts will be posted very soon! While I don't mean to belittle his IRL issues, he posted this 4 minutes after I called him out for not posting. At the time of this post, he's posted once in D3, excusing himself for not posting in N2. Based on his interactions with Hopeless, his fingerpointing/indecisive posting, and his unwillingness to post, Mackin is my top Mafia suspect. ##Vote Mackin | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 12 2012 22:25 The_Zen_Man wrote: Correct me if i am wrong, but is there not one miller and one scum that show red for dt check. Therefore, there has to be a 50% chance for him being scum. Analysis is good, but it does not increace or decreace the percentage in any way. This means that there is a 50% chance for him being scum, not "way below" that, as the monkey above me stated. It is not a 50/50 chance! *Foaming at the mouth* Calling it 50/50 is a vast oversimplification of things, especially if he's acting pro town. He's either 100% mafia, or 100% miller. Based on his pro-town actions, what do you think is more likely? | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
This is the last newbie game I'm ever playing. I hope for my sanity that you guys are right. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 13 2012 05:11 JingleHell wrote: If Bass isn't scum, I'd suggest you start looking closely at people who have tried to dominate the thread and control where people voted, tried to stop discussion they didn't like, tried to force reaction over thought, and made personal attacks against anyone who suggested thinking outside the box. In the mean time, let's hold hands, skip around in a circle, and lynch Bass when all analysis screams otherwise. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 13 2012 02:16 Hapahauli wrote: Its wroth mentioning that for every accusation/point of suspicion you have against BassinSpace, Mackin does it 100x worse. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
GG folks. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 13 2012 10:08 Release wrote: Hapa, i'm sorry bro.   /brohug | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
JingleHell, Vanilla townie, celebrated by shooting children at Christmas! BHAHAHA oh man, lost it when I read that (no offense Jingle =P) | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 13 2012 10:13 marvellosity wrote: I'd have lynched on the redcheck every time EvulRabbitz investigated him because he found him scummy and he was proven correct. Welp. Shit. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
When he bussed hopeless, he left himself open to change his mind - he said he wanted to see Hopeless's defense before he locked in his vote. Him never voting or FOSing Mackin was a really strong point that you didn't mention until I brought it up later. He hounds Mackin without ever committing to his case. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
(You don't sound condescending at all, no worries! ^^ ) | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
This game's 27 | ||
| ||
