|
Fulla it took over 24 hours from your first post to your second. Any comment beyond I'm new? Is this your normal posting habits or can we expect more from you?
I don't know what a rough statistic of what a one-liner poster might flip as, but it is not the same as an overactive day1 poster. The lack of content is what is detrimental, and that is reason enough for suspicion because that type of posting is beneficial to mafia. In general I don't believe an overly active poster could be hurting town unless he was actively pushing scummy agenda's and would probably get called out for it.
The other thing is that your reads are needed to help town no matter how newbie they are. Don't let that stop you.
|
Except for MYLO i agree that no-lynch is usually no good. Away from my computer right now but I should be able to find that statistic mislynch vs nolynch stuff tonight
|
Jeez perfection, thanks for the vote of confidence there bud. For reference:
And They All Lived Happily Ever Afterhttp://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=...and_they_all_lived_happily_ever_after
Numbers, Part 1http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Numbers,_Part_1
I was vaguely correct, which may as well mean I was wrong. The links have very limited bearing on this game and are probably not worth discussing at this point in time. Hapa asked about it and I said I'd find the info I was referring to (albeit poorly applicable info). If there is something in there that someone finds relevant to the discussions, then by all means...
After catching up, I notice that Fulla has disappeared yet again. Seriously what in the hell. Are you even trying to be active? I asked you a direct question and you run for the hills or something.
Vote: Fulla
Moving on, Un-FoS: tube since he has started to actually post things that seem reasonable, if not full reads/cases yet. Also his early posting style was too flippant for me to believe he's scum in a newbie game. If he slips later I'll revisit but for now I'm reading him as town.
Too tired to properly comment on Obvious.660 right now, but basically FoS: Obvious.660. I probably wont be posting until Noon-ish tomorrow (~5 hours before deadline).
|
EBWOP:
##Vote: Fulla
And also it seems I semi-failed at links. I'm awesome.
|
Going through Obvious's filter:
- Obvious.660 looks at YourHarry's early vote and manages to turn it into a big 'sacraficial lamb' strategy involving iamperfection and some unknown third scum (soon to be accused: tube)
- Responds to Jingle with an 'If I was Mafia...blah blah blah" Unacceptable as a defense due to WIFOM.
- Spends time trying to get tube to contribute. When tube finally steps up, he goes through a 'coached response, kill it' phase.
- Gets called out and somehow relates his vote back to his crazy sacrificial lamb strategy
- Says he got thrown off by the Capitalization, punctuation and paragraphs used by tube - after we spent so long ragging on tube for being useless and asking him to improve his posting. Obvious.660 was involved in asking tube to improve his posting.
Obvious.660's whole interaction regarding tube looks scummy. More to follow later, my vote remains on Fulla for the time being, but I'm heavily considering switching to Obvious.660
|
Regarding the "under the bus", that's throwaway to me.
I think the combination of attempting to pass off his 'sacrificial lamb' case as supportive reasoning for his bad case on tube and the bad case itself are suspicious.
Hapa, you made note that his list doesn't spread suspicion on everyone "which is what scum want". That would look retarded if he made a list of why EVERYONE IS SCUM! His summary contains very weak, albeit straightforward, insight into his current reads. Highlights include:
- gut feeling
- no scummy feelings yet
- lurking hard
These items are of very little use to town. I'd rather see a case on who he thinks is scum and why. We can't/won't divert attention unless he presents a case that shows someone else is scummier than he is. Making these summary posts is filler and a waste of our time. If he is town, he is doing a poor job of defending himself.
YourHarry has not really done much to warrant suspicion aside from lurking to a certain degree. While I agree that lurking looks bad on him, especially in light of his meta, I find Obvious' play to be more scummy at this point in time.
Obvious' actual actions show poor cases, backtracking, flawed reasoning and a non-committal summary post.
Now, I realize that Jingle is coming off harsh here, but I think he's justified. You're dismissal of the case on Obvious.660 in the quoted post below is precisely why Jingle hates dealing with you.
On July 17 2012 23:43 Hapahauli wrote:
I believe YourHarry to be a better lynch case than Tube or Obvious.660 at this stage of the game.
While Tube has made some suspicious posts, he's waaaaay too upfront/naieve about his suspicious behavior, and comes across as a really really bad townie player. Suspicion alone is not enough to lynch someone - its more important to look for Mafia Motive.
Obvious.660 reads as pretty townie to me. He has many lengthy posts, provides clear reasoning for his actions, is playing recklessly. I don't understand the bandwagon at all, and this looks all too similar to the "LYNCH LAZERMONKEY" bandwagon on Day 1 in Newbie Mini Mafia XX. I don't want to spend pages and pages screaming in his defense this game, but I will do if we do this bandwagon shit again.
YOU ARE NOT ALWAYS RIGHT, YOU SAID SO YOURSELF.
Just because you think YourHarry is a scummy player and Obvious is not scummy, that does NOT give you the right to assume we're bandwagoning him. I have a suspicious read on Obvious, so does perfection, so does Jingle, so does tube. EVEN IF he flips town, you're attitude regarding other people's reads discredits anyone else's ability to post a read that does not match your own.
Jingle was town in XX, but because he didn't agree with you, (and you found scum) he was tunneled hard as your scummiest read, almost exclusively because of the fact that he disagreed with you. Had your initial read on me been wrong, I am of the opinion that you STILL would have gone after Jingle based on the way you have responded.
Since Jingle has berated you for "being Hapa" you've started to address the case more specifically, but still with the air of someone who knows he's right and won't take no for an answer. This is harmful to town because a) it leads to OMGUS as you may have noticed and b) has the risk of painting you with a huge scum target if your read flips town.
If you have a problem with a case and think Obvious is town, try to not say it like we're retards that can't comprehend the situation. I know what a bandwagon is. I might be on one, but my reasons for being here are very clear and I've yet to contribute my vote in any case. If you think we're too strung up on Obvious' case, it may be necessary to develop a defensive case on his behalf to convince us of his towniness. You shouldn't have to, but if its that important that we lynch YourHarry, sometimes you have to convince us that OUR target is town instead of YOUR target is scum
|
So for the most part, our lurkers continue to lurk. Obvious is currently set to be lynched due to plurality lynching.
So...I need to actually do work at work I think...I should be back around 2 hours before deadline to review the thread and vote accordingly if necessary.
As it stands, I'm fine with my vote on Fulla as I specifically tried to get him talking and he disappeared without addressing my question. It wasn't even policy or reads or anything, I wanted to know about his activity patterns and I've still got nothing on him.
If there are any problems/suspicious things in my filter regarding my reads, votes or anything else that isn't directly related to today's lynch please save it for night so we don't clutter the thread during the few hours we have remaining.
|
Vote Count and a confirmation that this is Plurality Lynch voting please.
|
So, am I going to get chewed out for not changing my vote? If I do, its a last minute bandwagon, and if I don't its because I Obviously (teehee) "knew" he was town.
Unless someone unvotes Obvious.660, there is no way to alter the vote at this point because he got to 6 votes first.
|
If he flips scum, I still look bad because I've said he looked scummy, but didn't put my vote on him. I made that post to demonstrate the fact that I think I'm screwed no matter what I do at this point.
|
I'm preemptively pointing out the fact that I'm going to look scummy regardless of what I do, before someone can turn it into a case and run with it. Perhaps I should have just stayed quiet, but I've already said I'd be around at the deadline and I can see this turning out poorly for me. I'm trying to make my situation as transparent as possible to prevent people from considering I'm scum because of my voting pattern.
|
Content notwithstanding, the following players are still on a 1 page filter:
(Post count started from Day 1 post)
Iamperfection: 3 posts
Fulla: 5 posts
Mufaa: 5 posts
drwiggl3s: 14 posts
Evulrabbitz: 7 posts
Players from above who voted for Obvious.660:
Iamperfection
Evulrabbitz
Fulla
I'll be gone for a bit. Going to look into iamperfection when I return, because he looks scummiest of the players listed there.
|
Just got into work and it's looking like its gonna be a shitty day. Sorry, won't get much posted until day post I think. Assuming I make it through, I will answer any questions addressed to me upon my return.
One thing though that's bothering me: Fulla, are you going to answer my question?
On July 17 2012 09:00 Hopeless1der wrote:
Fulla it took over 24 hours from your first post to your second. Any comment beyond I'm new? Is this your normal posting habits or can we expect more from you?
|
At home, time to read up now. Going through Jingle's case at present. Thoughts on the matter when I finish.
|
On July 19 2012 09:54 JingleHell wrote:
I think that's about all for now. Any further thoughts?
Okay I've read through Jingle's case on Calgar. I've spoilered the individual aspects separately. Here are my further thoughts:
+ Show Spoiler +Early on, during his 'wait and see' dilemma, he proposed that his post managed to generate discussion and behaved like it was intentional. Jingle was the one who called him out as it being a scummy looking thing to say, and he comes back to defend himself a lot harder than I would have considered justified. Here are the three posts in succession: On July 16 2012 11:28 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 11:21 JingleHell wrote:On July 16 2012 11:17 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Calgar: Well-posted, but I disagree with you on the newb-lurker strategy being "overplayed." Fact is, this is a newbie game, and I wouldn't be surprised to see some of that stuff (or other "overplayed" tells) here. I fully expect to see at least one player go too obviously "hard-counter" to the scum-tells in the various guides. If we don't get at least one high-profile scum, I'll be shocked. You guys may end up being be right but I'm not expecting anything to come easily. I suppose we'll have to wait and see. Very quiet first night so far, though, so not much to be done really. On July 16 2012 11:35 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 11:28 calgar wrote:On July 16 2012 11:21 JingleHell wrote:On July 16 2012 11:17 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Calgar: Well-posted, but I disagree with you on the newb-lurker strategy being "overplayed." Fact is, this is a newbie game, and I wouldn't be surprised to see some of that stuff (or other "overplayed" tells) here. I fully expect to see at least one player go too obviously "hard-counter" to the scum-tells in the various guides. If we don't get at least one high-profile scum, I'll be shocked. You guys may end up being be right but I'm not expecting anything to come easily. I suppose we'll have to wait and see. Very quiet first night so far, though, so not much to be done really. See, that's suspect in and of itself. "Wait and see" is trouble. Make something happen or lose. And just your bit about not expecting things to come easily, just sounds like you're hoping to plant seeds of doubt early, so that you can point to it later when you go WIFOM crazy on us. On July 16 2012 11:45 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 11:35 JingleHell wrote:On July 16 2012 11:28 calgar wrote:On July 16 2012 11:21 JingleHell wrote:On July 16 2012 11:17 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Calgar: Well-posted, but I disagree with you on the newb-lurker strategy being "overplayed." Fact is, this is a newbie game, and I wouldn't be surprised to see some of that stuff (or other "overplayed" tells) here. I fully expect to see at least one player go too obviously "hard-counter" to the scum-tells in the various guides. If we don't get at least one high-profile scum, I'll be shocked. You guys may end up being be right but I'm not expecting anything to come easily. I suppose we'll have to wait and see. Very quiet first night so far, though, so not much to be done really. See, that's suspect in and of itself. "Wait and see" is trouble. Make something happen or lose. I think you're reading into my words way too much. I mean them as plainly as possible - I'm not aiming to have any subtle ulterior-motive second speech going on. I agree, make something happen or lose. Difficult when people are not posting, though, agreed? Thus talking to try and instigate said discussion, agree? Should I rather become silent - no, disagree. I'm trying to be as productive as possible - and at least giving other people a little bit to go on and analyze to make decisions for themselves. Show nested quote +And just your bit about not expecting things to come easily, just sounds like you're hoping to plant seeds of doubt early, so that you can point to it later when you go WIFOM crazy on us. What on earth are you talking about here? Why are you predicting that I will point to seeds of doubt later that I haven't even laid? What I said in my last post: 1: you guys may be correct that mafia will reveal with obvious tells. 2: i'm going to give them more credit than that though 3: very little dialogue occurring currently. What you say: you're going to turn on us with your seeds of doubt. Not very logical, imo. The bolded seems like the direct response to Jingle's post. Which strikes me as illogical, as he just said he would "wait and see". People aren't posting, the thread is quiet, so I will wait for them to post. To the underlined: He was being semi-productive before this post, but again, the "There isn't really much to do" makes it sound like hes not going to continue to be as productive as possible" in the near future.
+ Show Spoiler +The next thing is that he has already made the following couple posts that I find strange: On July 16 2012 09:06 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 08:59 Evulrabbitz wrote:Since it's newbie games I feel people haven't really gotten a feel for their preferable playstyle and thus I deem meta analysis worthless. 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. On July 16 2012 10:07 calgar wrote:
You make a very interesting inference there, hapa. You infer that my lack of mafia history on TL equates to newbieness. I have in fact played many games of Mafia before and am not a newb. I don’t plan to use newbieness as any kind of excuse for my actions. I agree when taken out of context (--snip--) it could be interpreted how you did, as a subtle suggestion of ‘newbieness’. But I meant to use it as a supporting fact as to why I think meta will be less effective this game.
Here are my thoughts: this is a newbie game, after all, so bringing attention to newbieness is only useful insofar as creating an excuse/cover for anti-town play. “forgive me for acting stupid and spreading confusion, I’m a newb LOLOL”. If there is no suspicious behavior to cover up then it doesn’t have value as a cover.
Moreover, I think that the ‘newb cover’ strategy has been way overplayed. Kind of like the lurk-and-hope-no-one-notices-you strategy. I would imagine any mafia trying to use such an obvious excuse like that would only be drawing unwanted attention. In other words, a very poor game move so early that intelligent players would not make. In that second post, Calgar admits to having played before, but in the previous post made it look like he was just another newbie. What kind of games were these? IRC, IRL, another forum? It doesn't really matter, but his comments are suspicious when I actually read through his filter here.
+ Show Spoiler +The next thing is when he said he'd push super hard to get iamperfection lynched instead of Obvious.660. Here is him trying: On July 18 2012 06:06 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 06:03 JingleHell wrote:On July 18 2012 05:57 calgar wrote:On July 18 2012 05:51 drwiggl3s wrote:On July 18 2012 05:41 tube wrote:
And why are you dismissing the accusations against Obvious as petty bandwagons, he hasn't even defended himself yet. The fact that he hasn't posted to defend himself, the fact that no one is strongly defending him, tells me that he's probably not mafia. I'm defending him, have you read my posts?! I would be trying harder if it didn't seem it was already a foregone conclusion. Let's see who's voting him? iamperfection - I think he's mafia. evul - won't post content; ignored my request to do so. tube, yourharry - people who have come under fire for post quality. jingle. Overall, I don't think it's the most reliable group that's casting the vote here. It seems like an easy vote to make with no risk. And how many of those people considered you suspicious at one point in time? Casting aspersions based on that oh-so in-depth analysis of our posting to try and swing the vote off of obvious, on the grounds that "he's scum because nobody is strongly defending him" except, of course, for you and hapa... hmmm. That wasn't my "grounds", that was drwiggles. I've outlined several reasons I think he has displayed pro-town play. On July 18 2012 06:32 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 06:12 JingleHell wrote:Well, frankly, your entire town read involves him agreeing with you, based on the rather smallish case against perfection, and the case against harry. Literally anyone could see harry as suspicious now, and perfection hasn't posted enough to be regarded as scummier than anyone yet.
Perfection's low volume and semi-suspicious content don't strike me as being quite worth a vote without seeing context based on how a lynch target flips. He could either be scummy or just too inactive, at this point, as I already stated. You've mis-characterized my read as simpler than it is. It's not only because we agree. I think, based on his limited post history, iamperfection is a better lynch (where is he, anyways...?). I'd rather vote for someone with few posts that displays decidedly mafia-esque behavior than someone with many more who has had positive town impact in posts and some shifty reads/decisions. All negative in one case whereas there is some positive in the second, leading to a higher percentage of successful lynch. That's my theory. -He operates with the principle "Form an opinion, roll with it, see what information it can get you. Don't sit on the sideline and let everyone else do the work." A pro-discussion principle which he follows. -He convinces tube to become a useful player by questioning him. This is decidedly pro-town. -He tunnels and makes a bad read, as he says and backs off. The theory is attractive in some sense; if a personality change did occur then it would be possible that it were coached. He just overestimated the personality shift that occurred. Bad read, which he then backs off of. Why would mafia go out on the line like this with a bold call, and then retract? This is WIFOM I know... -He puts up content voluntarily for people to discuss, which is more than others have been doing in the way of discussion promoting. I guess I'm having a hard time defending him. What's there is there, it's just how you interpret it. It would be nice if he showed up. Great effort bud! I don't care how pointless it looks, finish the job. The absolutely terrible job attempting to push iamperfection lends credence to the idea that it was a bus job.
+ Show Spoiler +Jingle has gone over the proposed vigi shot on perfection already. Personally, I think it would have a been a stupid idea to begin with, but calgar does a poor job of selling the idea to us anyways. When Jingle asks him to defend his read (with his life) he backfires that Jingle suggesting he sacrifice himself on the chance he's wrong is a scummy suggestion.
I'm inclined to read this as a weak bus attempt by getting the vigi to do his dirty work for him.
"...Only mafia would try to set me up to look bad after the vigilante hit." ~calgar
Later he denies calling Jingle scum. Well he correct I guess, he didn't type it in words, but its pretty heavily implied in that quote. Later on, after Hapa has expressed a similar concern that shooting iamperfection is a bad move this early, he jumps right on board with no issue.
He goes on to blare at Jingle again using circular WIFOM logic that makes so many hypotheticals that is pretty much unreadable. I could pretty much pick apart everything in his post and point out precisely why scum might do what he says he did, but again WIFOM bullshit that goes around in a circle. The point is, he looks scummy. He's using every word he can to casually imply that Jingle's actions are more scummy than his own are, BUT ALSO SAYS that Jingle is a strong town read for him. This logic basically says its okay for town to behave like scum, because they'll still be a town read to him anyways.
+ Show Spoiler +
This last bit is pure speculation, but I would have been trying to pit Jingle and Hapa against each other after the shitshow they demonstrated earlier. Since Hapa is essentially on Jingle's side here, calgar's eagerness to side with Hapa feels like a buy-in onto Hapa's town cred. In any event, based on Jingle's case and my own reads, I'm currently reading calgar as scum
Jeez that took a while. I still have to go through iamperfection, which I never got around to. That should be up before I go to bed.
|
Once through on iamperfection's filter, here is my case so far:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 17 2012 00:42 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 23:25 tube wrote:On July 16 2012 20:49 calgar wrote:On July 16 2012 10:26 tube wrote:
in a game this small where everyone said "i will be active" i dont think lurking is a good idea for anyone, esp mafia I found this post to be rather odd. It doesn't seem like you're putting any time or thought into your posts - just what randomly comes to mind. You said lurking isn't a good idea but that's what you've managed to do so far. I feel the same way about your intro post. IGMEOY idk what igmeoy means but i just didnt do any analysis 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. 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 1st Paragraph: NO WAY CALGAR, FROM MY ONE GAME OF EXPERIENCE I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT SCUM DO ALL THE TIME! 2nd Paragraph: The accusation on tube is based on the fact that tube denounced lurking and proceeded to lurk. iamperfection blows it up to look like its a big policy against lurkers when it is in fact a FoS on what calgar noted as scummy behavior. Illogical conclusions and a failure to read the thread OR an attempt to cast weak and early game suspicion when it is unlikely to stick to the players. Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 12:49 Hopeless1der wrote:
I don't care if you have a scummy meta, SCUMMY PLAY DOES NOT HELP TOWN! If I find your play scummy, I'm going to read you as scum and push for your lynch.
Our goal is to win............ I dont care if someone walks in with a t shirt with im scum plasterd on the front of it we lynch SCUM. I haven't really taken the chance to address this post, which has been brought up multiple (twice at least) times. My post was written in the context of discussing meta analysis, not policy voting. A scummy meta does not mean its okay to post in a scummy fashion to me, and someone who argues that it's okay because its what they've always done should be trying to improve their play by eliminating scummy behavior from it as best as they can.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 17 2012 13:30 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 12:38 Hopeless1der wrote:
Except for MYLO i agree that no-lynch is usually no good. Away from my computer right now but I should be able to find that statistic mislynch vs nolynch stuff tonight If its as good as your explanation from Newbie Mini Mafia XIX please dont bring it up. All you will manage to do is confuse yourself and everybody else. No lynch will allow the mafia to spread their vote and hide and would probally make it harder for blues to make better plays. Leave the math out no lynch = bad leave it at that. Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 07:57 Obvious.660 wrote:On July 17 2012 07:45 JingleHell wrote:Hold up, Obvious. Going from On July 17 2012 07:32 Obvious.660 wrote:On July 17 2012 07:30 tube wrote:On July 17 2012 07:12 calgar wrote:On July 17 2012 07:05 tube wrote:yeah i dont see the need to put the effort into quoting each argument and pointing exactly where somebody is trying to make an accusation out of thin air when if people just looked at them they would realize there is statistically an 8/11 chance that whoever they're accusing is town because their argument was empty to begin with, in that people just pick out innocuous tidbits of a post and try to make it seem like something a mafia would say (sometimes even extrapolating to create an even less believable post, you being the repeat offender of this one) On July 17 2012 06:48 calgar wrote:On July 17 2012 06:45 tube wrote: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). ? i was wrong in my response to evulrabbitz or what is this about? No, you were right. I was just suggesting that since you had no suspicions you could see what you thought about mine. As a way to try and become a more active participant. Also, your posts are slightly difficult to understand because of awkward formatting. Could you try using sentences and punctuation? Yeah I agree his argument had bad logic but again I think he's just making accusations out of nothing, like this segment for example: 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
I don't necessarily read such an argument as a scumtell because it could also just as easily be his candid attempt at scumhunting. Fact of the matter is, there's virtually no way to tell for something like this. Also, if you think putting words into people's mouths is suspicious, take a look at JingleHell's early posts against me that sparked the entire bandwagon. He does it multiple times by saying that I basically said so and so and therefore was clearly playing against town. Woah! It's like a completely different person sat down at your computer and started typing. WELCOME TO THE GAME, TUBE! to I notice you didn't ask my why I changed my vote, you just jumped me for doing some band-wagoning On July 17 2012 07:39 Obvious.660 wrote:
##Vote tube
Reason: out of character posting. Coached response. is a bit bizarre. Frankly, that sounds more like scum suddenly seeing a chance for a bandwagon on someone they didn't lead the case against. ##Unvote
##Vote Obvious.660 Remember this? On July 17 2012 02:21 Obvious.660 wrote:Greetings. Had a good sleep and I feel a bit refreshed and quite a bit like swimming in coffee. Breakfast-type things are happening but the hunt must continue. FOS YourHarryI guess it was an easy way to make myself a convenient target by posting something low content early in the first day before I would be able to contribute anything for another 12 hours or so. Regardless, choosing the last name you see for your vote when others have already provided much more to go on seems scummy to me when I wouldn't even be around to defend myself. YourHarry's self analysis might be indicative that mafia is going with some kind of sacrificial lamb ploy to get our trust. If that's the case, I'll have to follow it up with smaller, more wrinkly and arthritic FOS on iamperfectionas their entire strategy may have been hinted right in front of us. YourHarry gets to be the sacrificial lamb and anyone on his case early is riding the gravy train for day 1 as they will be safe from lynch tonight. On July 17 2012 00:42 iamperfection wrote:
Also, i think there is a possibility yourharry post was an attempt to get attention away from calgar Of course there's a third scumbucket somewhere around here that hasn't been factored in my theory, for which I will be searching on top of building my current case against these two. Nothing has changed. He's definitely a third mafia candidate (shitty posting history plus change in character to what looks like copy-pasted text from someone else) and it wraps up my theory quite nicely. The jig is up on the sacrificial lamb-ing and their strategy has been adjusted. His last couple of posts were completely out of character. Capitalization? Complete sentences? Total 180 and I don't think that a new-found passion for the game is going to change whether or not you type like shit. If I'm right on this vote, it will mean my read was good (unless I change my stance on the other two I've listed, which is not out of the question by any means) and I can have more faith in my other suspicions. If not, well, it takes a town to vote. ~6 Hours since the last post from YourHarry Still only one post from iamperfection. The perfect one would never sacrifice a mafia member. Also this is a mini mafia it would be very risky to throw a mafia member out. Also i dont believe i said anything about a sacrifical lamb strategy i said yourharry was trying to get heat of calgar by throwing a vote out there to take off heat from calgar. I dont know where you came up with this grand conspiracy of a sacrfical lamb from my post. And two can play at this game calgar i still got my eye on you. The perfect one would never sacrifice a mafia member. Because he's so trustworthy after an approximate 2 posts (its hard to keep track some times) Oh btw, he never said anything about bussing his teammate so WHY would you ever suspect him of something like that. How dare you make a read using your own observational skills? To be fair, it was a far-fetched theory, but iamperfection behaves like he is above suspicion regardless of what he does or says. Nevertheless, he still "has his eye" on calgar. After calgar had posted this post: + Show Spoiler +On July 17 2012 06:24 calgar wrote: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. Show nested quote +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? Show nested quote +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”. iamperfection never really responded. AND CALGAR NEVER BROUGHT IT UP AGAIN, DESPITE HIS PROMISES TO GET IAMPERFECTION LYNCHED
+ Show Spoiler +On July 17 2012 22:36 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote:
There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch. Isnt posting meaningless lists about every one in the game a way that mafia try to do to buy town cred. By being non commital you are trying to keep you options open so nothing can be used against you later. In fact the first guide that is posted in this thread states that what you just did is something scum do to try and hide. Why would a townie try and do something like that. I would say you are reading a diffrent section of the guide. ## Vote Obvious.660 Pulls one read based on Obvious (Who flipped town) blatantly contradicting a newbie guide. HE MUST BE SCUM! (I will note that I made a similar read, but the point still stands, voters for Obvious' mislynch are inherently suspicious based on the flip, WIFOM or not) Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 20:39 calgar wrote:On July 17 2012 13:30 iamperfection wrote:
And two can play at this game calgar i still got my eye on you. You've managed to vaguely reply to my post, yet you've addressed none of the content. You've lurked and been generally unproductive. You come in and point two fingers immediately but fail to later support your case. You get your case from another person and add no thought to it. You use poor logic and disregard my direct questions to you. ##Vote iamperfection I remove my FOS calgar I dont think a scum player would just outright vote for me after i acussed them. And if anyone elses wants to come after the perfect one i say bring it. WAT? iamperfection still knows precisely what scum do all the time, thus he no longer needs to be suspicious of calgar. There is the bare minimum in terms of the amount of effort going into that deduction. iamperfection
+ Show Spoiler +On July 18 2012 10:32 iamperfection wrote:
Some food for thought while we enter the terrors that are the night. Why would i knowingly put myself under so much heat. When i Voted for obvious their was one exactly one vote for him. If i was mafia i could posted lip service comments to try and hid but i diddnt i put a claim out there and i think its going to lead to some information. The bandwagon on obvious happened after me.
The mafia have the information advantage and if they wanted to risk it they could have not voted for obvious at all if they so desired. I will be able to work on this tommorow morning and i will post before the deadline what i think happened.
Hypothetical bullshit, followed by the bolded. That could also read as "I started the bandwagon on Obvious". Getting your vote off of Obvious later on does not remove this idea from play if you consider you were the second/third (depending on how you read it) vote on Obvious.660.
+ Show Spoiler +MY RESPONSES ARE ITALICIZEDOn July 18 2012 22:50 iamperfection wrote: There have been posts that havemade me greatly question the motivation of some of the players. Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 11:16 JingleHell wrote:
As it is, if he doesn't get NKed, we have almost 3 full days before deadline to try and force him to defend himself.
If, by then, he hasn't, he deserves what he gets. ? What is your goal jingle? Do you want to win or do you want to be just justfied in your reasoning for when you get lynches. What purpose does this comment make? Well if perfection flips town he deserved it so dont look at me it was his fault not mine. Our goal is to win not to look good in our reasoning. It dosent matter if your reasoning is solid it has to be right. The goal would have been to get you to defend yourself. Also, if your reasoning is terrible, you won't be able to convince anyone of anything. Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 12:49 Hopeless1der wrote:
I don't care if you have a scummy meta, SCUMMY PLAY DOES NOT HELP TOWN! If I find your play scummy, I'm going to read you as scum and push for your lynch.
I brought this up before but its worth revisiting. The mafia know what they and their other members are doing. When you set up these policies that say look thig guy is lurking thats scummy so he must be scum you give the mafia the grounds to rig the game. Let kill this guy because hes lurking is exactly what they want. Look past the obvious of the obvious killing what did i gain from it which would improve my scum position. There seems to be a lot less heat on people who were will nilly with their votes than their is on me who made a read and stuck with it. Once again, taken out of context. My post was directed at the meta discussions, NOT lurker policy lynchingLets take it further. When i was scum in http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=347856&user=149300 as a mafia member i felt more pressure to post so what came out was mostly fluff and and just trying to be confusing by twisting peoples logic. Our strategy for that game was that i would basically lurk while the other two would lead the discussion and the charge. In my posts i was wishy washy and non commital to make the apperance of just a bad newbie. In this game i took a definite stand and have not been wishy washy i made clear my fos and was clear on why i voted and didnt backtrack. If i knew obvious was not town why would i put myself in such a precarious position i could have just let others lead the charge and in fact i was the first person to call out obvious when i made that stupid list. WHEN I WAS SCUM YADDA YADDA YADDA.Now if weather or not you believe me where do we stand who do we go after if im town. These are some of th posts that stuck out to me. Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 06:13 Fulla wrote:On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote:
There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch. The first thing that springs to mind is IF this is the obvious thing scum do, why would he post this? Why do people say this a useless worthless post? He gives clear reasonable arguments on each person. They are thought out and logical. yet: On July 17 2012 22:36 iamperfection wrote:
Isnt posting meaningless lists about every one in the game a way that mafia try to do to buy town cred. By being non commital you are trying to keep you options open so nothing can be used against you later. In fact the first guide that is posted in this thread states that what you just did is something scum do to try and hide. Why would a townie try and do something like that. I would say you are reading a diffrent section of the guide.
## Vote Obvious.660 I thought this was pretty committed? According to him: YourHarry, Hopeless1der and iamperfection are the 3 scum. Word like leaning scum or my gut tells me is not being commital. This post appears to me to be a way in order to buy town cred because you are a mafia member and know that obvious is going to flip town so you try to come across as oh i dont know this isnt my idead and then vote for him anyways. Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 07:10 Fulla wrote:Where the hell is obvious? Sigh.. It seems it's all down to me, I hate it when this happens. Let obvious be lynched or vote tube and force a no lynch. On July 18 2012 06:16 JingleHell wrote:
Fulla, when he made that post, he was leaving his vote on tube, and also called me suspicious. Does that make us the fourth and fifth scum in that list of three you're accrediting to him?
Good point, I overlooked that. Let's see what he flips then. ## Vote Obvious.660 And this once again this isnt my idead you guys came up with the point not me so non commital becasue he dosent want the obvious lynch to come back on him. I also fully believe that at least one mafia member is probally talking a lot. When mafia have a good voice in town they can help steer the talk in a way that benfits them. My goal for the rest of the day is to find the mafia member that is being very active and talking a lot. If i find something i will post before the deadline. My goal is to make empty promises that I can just respond with "I dunno" if I get called out
+ Show Spoiler +On July 18 2012 23:59 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 23:39 Hapahauli wrote:
@iamperfection, you have a lot of suspicion on you right now. I suggest defending yourself and addressing people's concerns instead of chainsaw defending yourself by pointing out 3 different people (Fulla, Jingle, and a mystery 3rd "active mafia").
Secondly, what's the point of your experience as mafia in a past game? Its useless to speculate what mafia will do based on completely seperate player pools. Moreover, you cast suspicion on Jingle (who me and Calgar have strong townie reads on), and suggest that you believe there's an active mafia based on the events of completely different players!!!
Lastly, what's with your language? You're suspicious of two players, and you don't even cast an FOS or take any strong stances. What are you afraid of - if you're suspicious, make it clear instead of saying something wishy-washy like "There have been posts that havemade me greatly question the motivation of some of the players."
FOS iamperfection
So what are you suggesting that there isnt an active mafia member that anyone that does some lurking can and is mafia. Guess what a mafia member wants to appears as a townie at all costs from the early on the who population of the thread have basically stated that lurking is bad it is only natural to think that there is a mafia member that is active. Also dont twist my words i never said that i was supicious of jingle and hopeless i said i question on what they were trying to accomplish. I feel like their goal was to appear to the mafia community that "im a good player my logic will be sound if i lynch some one and they are a townie it must be their fault for being a bad townie". 1st paragraph is a steaming pile of garbage. I mean WIFOM. Manages to completely disregard Hapa's problems with making a read and using FoS or Votes or something. And also in the second paragraph, did he just not read the post he quoted? My name is not there at all, Fulla's is. This could just be careless, but its like hes trying to muck up his filter or something
+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2012 04:32 iamperfection wrote:So you want me to throw out fingers of suspicon that really would serve no purpose other than to be used against me later. What purpose would fos serve the game will change in a few hours and as town the very little information we get come from the result of the night actions. Why be pigenholed now during the night. Its the same reason calgar is upset that jinglehell is trying to make a final be all decesion on who vig should kill. Also you didnt answer the question. my position on obvious was by far the worse i can do nothing to change on what i posted on day 1. Why wouldnt i just make a throwaway vote and semi bandwagon later on sombody else with less votes if i was a lurking mafia? If iamperfection FoS's anyone, it means we'll use it against him later according to him. Why is this not viewed as a huge red flag of anti-town behavior. Honestly, this entire post sounds stupid to me.
The last few posts are all riddled with WIFOM and also a request for someone else to tell him why he looks scummy after he should have some clear indications as to why that is already.
He did have this gem:
iamperfection:
So im gonna ask you what are your thoughts on my situation on day 1. No one has yet to give me a good answer on this. In what way did i benefit from the kill in my regards if im a scum palyer?
Uhh...you would have managed a mislynch? The simplest answer ever and you can't figure it out? Gawd you're a scummy guy. You and calgar.
I'm tired. 
|
On July 19 2012 12:43 Hapahauli wrote:
Oh there are two more important points that I missed:
Regarding the "vigi hit" proposed by Calgar - The point about him disagreeing with Jingle and then agreeing with me is certainly "inconsistent," but where's the mafia motive?
On him "trying" to get Obvious.660 Lynched - at that point, it was pretty much a hopeless cause. The votecout was 6 to 3, and swinging two votes given the town's general attitude seemed impossible, especially without any help (since I was gone catching a train).
Regarding him "implying" suspicion Jingle then calling him strong townie read - Again, this seems more reckless than mafia-oriented. It looks like he was upset at Jingle's play rather than implying suspicion. There would be no reason for mafia to call Jingle a strong townie. It doesn't make sense.
Vigi hit: The mafia motive is to very weakly bus iamperfection, assuming they are both scum, while casting suspicion on Jingle and hoping to turn to you later to support him. The bus is the primary motive here to me.
Trying to Lynch Iamperfection: It WAS NOT completely hopeless at that point. The vote count never changed until after he'd made his statement that he was having a hard time defending Obvious.660 and gave up trying.
- You switched vote to iamperfection --> Obvious 5, iamperfection 2
- Calgar joins your vote --> Obvious 5, iamperfection 3
- Calgar half asses his defense of Obvious and fails to push for iamperfection in any meaningful manner (I know he has a lack of posts to analyze and make a case with, but there was essentially nothing done other than rehash the fact that he looks scummy without adding anything new)
- Fulla drops what could have been considered the hammer vote (plurality so not exactly, but whatever) At THIS point it is inevitable. Calgar had just about conceded his position two posts PRIOR to Fulla's vote.
Implying suspicion: There isn't a good reason for him to call Jingle town AND imply that he is being scummy. Calgar has seemingly done both, in that order. Though he maintains that Jingle is a town read, his 'elephant on piano keys' post details how Jingle's actions are scummier than calgar's, BUT Jingle is still a town read. This does not make sense to me and I considered that post to be riddled with scummy behavior.
And now I sleep. Sweet sweet sleep...
|
Jingle, my problem with you're trying to set Hapa up as the NK is that your breadcrumb really stood out. It was so blatant that I suspected it of being a fake claim by scum, and if not, you just advertised your blue role. We don't know if there's a medic. We know we had a vet and potentially a jailer based on your breadcrumb. Scum took the pretty much guaranteed hit on Evul last night, but I would have definitely considered shooting you down for breadcrumbing a blue.
@Fulla: This is not worth the time right now. Someone else read his case and my filter and if you think there's a case that we need to discuss today, I'll make a defense. Otherwise, I will defend myself after the lynch.
|
On July 20 2012 00:01 JingleHell wrote:
Remember, Hopeless, you seemed to like my case against Calgar. I'm not guaranteeing that Hapa is scum. What I am doing is saying that if Calgar is scum, Hapa may well be scum too. This just provides a chunk of evidence that isn't in how I read a post.
Although you calling it so visible seems to really hurt Hapa's comment about scum may or may not have seen it, wouldn't you agree?
I still agree with your case, I'm just pointing out that if the scum actually picked up on the breadcrumb and considered taking out Hapa, why would they NOT consider you seeing as you have a blue role. Your underlying suspicions have significantly less merit if you flip blue because the kill will be seen more as a rolehunt instead of killing to cripple towns analysis potential.
If Hapa wants to suggest that scum aren't looking for blue roles, let him. Any number of things MAY have happened, but I still expect 1 of 3 scum to have picked up on it and point it out in the QT. I'll eat my hat if its not in the QT at the end of the game. and if you scum bastards edit it out of the QT afterwards, I hate you
@Hapa, if scum did see it and didn't shoot Jingle then WIFOM. That's all the reasoning I need to explain why scum might have done something. If that doesn't fly with you, then this is going to fall on deaf ears no matter what I say. You're usually the one pushing for mafia-oriented motives, and keeping a vocal townie who has made the wrong reads is very valuable to scum. However, only the scum know whether our reads are correct. They have the information and the opportunity to manipulate us using it.
Vote: iamperfection
I want to see calgar's conviction to stay alive here. Let's see you either convince Jingle of your innocence or iamperfection's scumminess. OTHERWISE I'M VOTING FOR CALGAR. Seriously, I plan to sheep Jingle today regarding the decision on voting for calgar. If Jingle removes his vote, I'll learn to think for myself again. There is too much suspicious dialogue between Jingle, Hapa and calgar for me to make a good read, and I believe Jingle's breadcrumb, so he's the one I'm going to follow.
|
EBWOP: ##Vote: iamperfection
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
