|
On July 17 2012 06:02 drwiggl3s wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 05:58 JingleHell wrote:On July 17 2012 05:55 Hapahauli wrote:On July 17 2012 05:51 JingleHell wrote:On July 17 2012 05:49 Hapahauli wrote:On July 17 2012 05:45 JingleHell wrote:On July 17 2012 05:44 tube wrote:
and yeah in every accusation against other people so far you can tell that people are just trying to make something out of nothing which is why i dont agree with anyone yet
also there should be pressure on the people who haven't even posted yet to say something:
drwiggl3s
fulla
mufaa
evulrabbitz
thats 4 people any of which could be mafia just sitting there watching you guys gang up on the "active lurker" And if you flip town, I'll consider them as plausible targets. If you flip scum, I'll consider them confirmed townie. Deal? Let's not pre-determine our lynches less than 24 hours into day 1 Jingle. While tube is at the top of my list right now (even moreso after chainsaw defending himself with a list of lurkers), we don't know if he'll be the scummiest player by the D1 lynch deadline. I was actually fishing for a reaction more substantial than his current posting, thanks for interfering. And you're one to talk, remember XX N1 where you were like 72 hours away from deadline planning to lynch me until DT confirmed me on D2? Of course I remember - it was a huge mistake, and I don't want to see it repeated. With tube, I'm thinking the same way I was about Lazer. If they flip green, at least we don't have them hurting the town with their attitude. Is this.. a scum slip? You should always go for mafia. Lynching someone for being bad-town is a mistake. This is a noobie game after all.
Do you have a list of mafia for us to choose from? Are you on that list, Captain Obvious (No relation)? I thought I was supposed to get myself killed Day 1 every time, hence my abysmal history in playing this game. [/sarcasm]
Lynching a bad townie in absence of scum to choose from is the best play town can make (unless its MYLO) imo.
Are we allowed to Vote: No Lynch?
There's some theoretical crap about even numbers of town-vs-scum being better for a potential mislynch or something to that effect. I might have it backwards in some way, but anyways, mislynching still gives information and the entire process leading up to getting tube (mis)lynched will give us information as well. If along the way someone makes a scumslip well guess what, I'll probably be voting for the scummy player. We need to do something to force reads from people who refuse to contribute. Almost getting them lynched should work as reasonable motivation I'd hope.
|
I’d like to make two points.
One – I agree that tube has graced us with terrible posts. It seems like he may not entirely understand the game. His post history outside the game is mostly similar one-liners with little effort so that seems to be his overall posting style. His behavior is decidedly anti-town as it stands.
Two – Nice of you to grace us with a single post, iamperfection. I feel like this may have been somewhat buried so I’d like to bring it back to people’s attention. I want to call to attention poor logic and assumptions.On July 17 2012 00:42 iamperfection wrote:It means i got me eye on you google is kind of usefull.
Although calgar's premise is wrong. I think a mafia member is more likely to put much more thought into their posts then a non mafia member. From my 1 game of experience in which i played more of a lurker role as a mafia member the other 2 members put a ton of thought and effort into their posts. Even as going as far as having the coach review their posts before posting them to see what they thought. Your logic:
Hmm, so my premise about his anti-town behavior is wrong, based on your limited observations of being mafia last game? What?! First, that’s a terrible sample size. Second, it’s fallacious to assume that anything in your previous games has any relevance on how people will act in this one. Poor logic and mafia-like. What relevance does your specific last game have at all to our situation here?
You are by far looking the more sucpicious right now. The accusation on tube is telling to me. After the heat on you it seems you like you know want to set up a policy of lynching lurker or people that do one liners. Instead of drving the attention on one person it appears to me you are trying to get us looking at a whole group in order to confuse the town
FOS Calgar
Also, i think there is a possibility yourharry post was an attempt to get attention away from calgar
smaller FOS on YourHarry It looks like you just scanned my post quickly and attacked it as “trying to shift suspicion”. Did you even read it or consider what I meant? It seems like many others agree with me about his anti-town behavior. It seems you’re defending anti-town behavior of tube here.
Why are you suggesting that I have some grand strategy of people to lynch? It looks to me like I made one very specific post about a single player. Yet I have plans of setting up a lynching policy to "confuse the town". Putting words into my mouth - very suspicious.
Your post strikes me as if you were mafia and were planning how to enter the game late. You decided to jump onto someone’s reasoning bandwagon to try and avoid attention. Why do I say this? You make no effort in original thought. To me it looks like you scanned the thread, looked at who had been attacked, and said “Oh yeah I agree, FOS on the same two guys as jingle”.
|
well if everyones in agreement that somehow im being a bad townie i guess ill just wait and see if anyone else says anything before votes are done
because in my eyes all ive done is maintain a disinclination to accuse people due to a lack of information
|
On July 17 2012 06:09 JingleHell wrote:
No, it's not a scum slip. It's what I said earlier, if we don't have anybody who really screams "scum" at us, we can just lynch the person who might just be actively bad town. The "noob game" excuse doesn't fly with me, we're all newbs, thus being in the game.
This game is plurality lynch. Most votes at the end of the day dies. So yes, someone who's actively not contributing can be a severe detriment. Ask Hapa about the town win in XX. Where the guy I would have lynched for being such a PITA was trying to coerce people into not voting for the guy we ended up lynching. Who flipped red and won us the game.
Actively bad town are scum's best friend. And if they make it to MYLO or LYLO, they can cause a town loss, because they look scummy.
In XVIII I won as scum because of an actively bad town player who I was able to lead a mislynch on and walk away from it because he was so scummy sounding. Scum had all 3 alive at endgame.
There's never an exuse to lynch someone because you think they're "bad town" - they can always be ignored by the other folks.
In regards to the XX game, you mean Lazer defending Bass from being lynched on D3? That certainly doesn't justify lynching Lazer D1 instead of the more suspicious player (who ended up flipping red).
In regards to the XVIII game, I haven't read it over so I can't comment.
All that being said, I've FOS'd tube not because I think he's a bad townie, but because he's the most suspicious player in the game so far.
|
I have to disagree with you here. We saw firsthand how hapa crushed hopeless last game with a thorough meta-analysis. This means it is at least worth something. Having said that, I think it will be less useful this game since those who saw what happened will be more careful to avoid similar mistakes. And some players (like me) have no history to analyze.
Second, it’s fallacious to assume that anything in your previous games has any relevance on how people will act in this one.
Calgar; Explain yourself.
If it isn't obvious; In the first statement you say that meta is worth something, in the second you previous games have no effect on this one.
|
i think the difference is you're comparing separate games of the same person, whereas iamperfection was trying to make connections between completely different player pools
jesus im defending someone's accusation against me
|
by the by that also applies to jinglehell's reasoning as to why i should be lynched
|
On July 17 2012 06:30 Evulrabbitz wrote:Show nested quote +I have to disagree with you here. We saw firsthand how hapa crushed hopeless last game with a thorough meta-analysis. This means it is at least worth something. Having said that, I think it will be less useful this game since those who saw what happened will be more careful to avoid similar mistakes. And some players (like me) have no history to analyze.
Show nested quote +Second, it’s fallacious to assume that anything in your previous games has any relevance on how people will act in this one. Calgar; Explain yourself. If it isn't obvious; In the first statement you say that meta is worth something, in the second you previous games have no effect on this one. Meta analysis is analyzing the post history to compare patterns of previous games to the present. Potentially useful.
I misspoke when I said "anything" when attacking iamperfection. He's not referring to meta here, though. I mean, more specifically, that I considered his particular example to be poor and irrelevant. Because he's talking about a strategy that different people used in a different game to try and justify why tube is acting suspicious/anti-town currently.
The difference is that meta compares the same person across two games whereas he is comparing a strategy used by mafia (and two players not in this game) to this one. A comparison he makes to defend tube as not being mafia-like, because mafia would put more effort into their posts.
Clear?
|
|
|
EBWOP: Oh shucks, calgar beat me to it.
|
Ok, time to get to work.
@Tube - You need to start contributing if you want to live. I wouldn't vote for you currently, but only because it's still early. You're the most obvious lynch right now. Instead of telling everyone why you should live, show everyone why you should live. Contribute something other than one liners (Who do you suspect? What seems suspicious to you?). It doesn't have to be an airtight case, but we need to force scum to make slips, not dropping one liners that lets everyone bandwagon you halfway through d1.
@Jingle-
Early in the day you say:
On July 16 2012 12:15 JingleHell wrote:
I'm really curious though, when there's no votes (I hate the risk of early bandwagons), and if you think this accusation is such a pointless distraction and so on, why are you squirming around so much under this very light pressure?
A reasonable opinion, except for the fact that you have two out of the three total votes so far. Both of your votes/cases so far have been the most obvious choices, which if the day ended right now I would be upset if we didnt lynch one of them. When you're claiming that you hate the risk of early bandwagons however and you're the most likely cause of a bandwagon forming I have to question it. I'm not sure if you're scum, but this feels like you're trying to skirt around discussions by picking the most obvious tells without actually trying to find scum.
More to come, but I need to check over filters more closely before I do.
|
On July 17 2012 06:41 Hapahauli wrote:
EBWOP: Oh shucks, calgar beat me to it.
didnt i beat both of you to it
well looks like mufaa is also convinced that my active lurking is a scumtell
despite the fact that i already said i dont suspect anyone
and again i dont see a reason to bandwagon me for not being careful with accusations
|
|
|
On July 17 2012 06:37 tube wrote:
by the by that also applies to jinglehell's reasoning as to why i should be lynched
My reasoning to consider you a target is simple.
1: If we hit MYLO or LYLO with someone posting like you are alive, it greatly increases our odds of a mislynch.
2: If we don't get any scum to lynch (which you seem to think we can't possibly get any information on D1, which is a self-fulfilling prophecy, if nobody gets people talking we're guaranteed to never have information) we can only go by "scummiest". Right now, whether you like it or not, your behavior strikes me as scummy. And, it seems, everybody else agrees that your play is somewhere in the realm of bad town or scum. Which makes you one of the current scummiest. Hence, a target.
|
On July 17 2012 06:45 tube wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 06:41 Hapahauli wrote:
EBWOP: Oh shucks, calgar beat me to it. didnt i beat both of you to it well looks like mufaa is also convinced that my active lurking is a scumtell despite the fact that i already said i dont suspect anyone and again i dont see a reason to bandwagon me for not being careful with accusations Our advice seems to be falling on deaf ears, here. Why don't you read my summary of iamperfection again, I think it was very suspicious and poorly written post on his part (and his only one, to boot).
You say you don't suspect anyone but it doesn't seem like you're even trying, either. You aren't helping town out at all so town is naturally going to be suspicious.
|
On July 17 2012 06:42 Mufaa wrote:Ok, time to get to work. @Tube - You need to start contributing if you want to live. I wouldn't vote for you currently, but only because it's still early. You're the most obvious lynch right now. Instead of telling everyone why you should live, show everyone why you should live. Contribute something other than one liners (Who do you suspect? What seems suspicious to you?). It doesn't have to be an airtight case, but we need to force scum to make slips, not dropping one liners that lets everyone bandwagon you halfway through d1. @Jingle- Early in the day you say: Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 12:15 JingleHell wrote:
I'm really curious though, when there's no votes (I hate the risk of early bandwagons), and if you think this accusation is such a pointless distraction and so on, why are you squirming around so much under this very light pressure? A reasonable opinion, except for the fact that you have two out of the three total votes so far. Both of your votes/cases so far have been the most obvious choices, which if the day ended right now I would be upset if we didnt lynch one of them. When you're claiming that you hate the risk of early bandwagons however and you're the most likely cause of a bandwagon forming I have to question it. I'm not sure if you're scum, but this feels like you're trying to skirt around discussions by picking the most obvious tells without actually trying to find scum. More to come, but I need to check over filters more closely before I do.
The "early bandwagons" I was referring to, for the sake of context, is votes where you don't have an explanation. It's hard to defend against no reason, hence making for a danger of bandwagons. I try to have some sort of reason for a vote, which leaves room for them to counter, which means that people might have more reason to jump OFF of an early bandwagon if the need arises.
|
On July 17 2012 06:45 tube wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 06:41 Hapahauli wrote:
EBWOP: Oh shucks, calgar beat me to it. didnt i beat both of you to it well looks like mufaa is also convinced that my active lurking is a scumtell despite the fact that i already said i dont suspect anyone and again i dont see a reason to bandwagon me for not being careful with accusations
If you aren't suspicious of anyone, you aren't playing. As far as you know (unless you're scum) 3/11 other players are definitely scum so if you aren't trying to help find them you're hurting the town, which is a pretty big scum tell.
|
i've said it over and over all ive done is tell people that i dont accuse anyone as of yet
still dont see how that convinces anyone that im playing against town
and i already said people need to generally post more (i myself was trying to do this but didn't want to lie to do so i just said what i thought about people's accusations)
|
|
|
On July 17 2012 06:50 tube wrote:
i've said it over and over all ive done is tell people that i dont accuse anyone as of yet
still dont see how that convinces anyone that im playing against town
and i already said people need to generally post more (i myself was trying to do this but didn't want to lie to do so i just said what i thought about people's accusations)
You don't get information without discussion. You aren't fomenting discussion, you're hampering it by posting low content posts, saying, basically, that everyone's arguments suck, but you can't be assed to tell us what's wrong with them.
If you don't understand how that doesn't help, you're definitely a hindrance.
And if you do understand and don't actually try to fix it, that's even worse.
What you need to do is make your behavior useful. Short, non-committal posts are very much a scummy thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
