EPTAnyone trying to play that card is worth an investigation, so thank you for pre-validating the effort I'm going to put into the full case.
Newbie Mini Mafia XXI - Page 33
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Anyone trying to play that card is worth an investigation, so thank you for pre-validating the effort I'm going to put into the full case. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On July 16 2012 08:54 calgar wrote: Hey guys – excited to be playing with you all. Hope we have a great game! It’s interesting that half of you have had a lot of experience playing with each other already in XX – I’m curious to see how this will work out. As an FYI I live in EST time zone and am working full time M-F. This means my posting will be mostly focused in the 5-11PM EST during the weeks, but all times during the weekends. So, day 1, no one knows anything eh? Let’s get the conversation rolling and pull the lurkers out to get the mafia talking. The town benefits from clarity, transparency, and direction, so I’ll try my best to encompass these into my posts. Please call me out, for whatever reason, if you notice that this isn’t the case. Typical early D1 filler post. Doesn't automatically mean anything one way or the other, townies and scum both make these posts. For giggles, though, remember he was talking about clarity and transparency, which line up so well with some of his later, emotion-invoking responses. On July 16 2012 09:06 calgar wrote: 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. Mostly useless WIFOM gibberish, and makes a comment about not having meta to analyze. Could be seen as a dare, could be an effort to cast a faint pall of doubt over analysis, could be me giving him entirely too much credit. Also, as Hapa pointed out at the time, it could be a subtle playing of a noob card. On July 16 2012 10:07 calgar wrote: 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. Here, Calgar throws huge WIFOM doubt on scumtells, saying that nobody smart would make easy mistakes to be called out for. Seems potentially shady, and getting this far into WIFOM doesn't really line up with that whole clarity thing he was talking about earlier. On July 16 2012 11:45 calgar wrote: 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. 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 early "Wait and see" controversy. His main defense essentially boils down to "Honest guys, I'm not scum, I didn't mean anything bad by that." Followed by "Oh, and you think I said something scummy, let's call you illogical" Clarity and transparency at their finest, would you like some cheese with that WIFOM? On July 16 2012 12:08 calgar wrote: I'm just trying to promote discussion since it's slow right now. I don't even think this conversation is really about anything, other than you being suspicious of my words in ways I didn't intend them to be meant, so why would I point to it later? Seems like accusations, voting, and who suspects who would be much more important down the line. I'm not following your line of reasoning there. In summary - I seem to have stepped onto the hot plate, so to speak, but I'll accept that to generate discussion. I think you can read into just about anything as much as you want. I just don't think there's actually any substance here. I hope that makes sense. Here, the italicized bit and the underlined bit seem mutually exclusive. Long winded, sounds reasonable at first glance, but actually just meaningless fluff to deflect accusations. On July 16 2012 12:57 calgar wrote: You have to understand that I voluntarily posted with nothing to post about (essentially). This post about, what I felt was nothing, started it up. So it doesn't make sense to dismiss my part in it as "bullshit". I felt like in this beginning scenario making a rather content-less post was better than not posting at all. I'm glad my post has caused him to pressure. This post makes an effort to pull a "pro-town" spotlight on himself because he was under suspicion due to his word choice. Doesn't make much sense to me. On July 16 2012 20:49 calgar wrote: 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 He was so mad about me inferring meaning from what he said, but he doesn't seem to mind doing it himself. Glad we got that direction he talked about right at the start of D1! 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.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? 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”. This mostly looks like a mild OMGUS to deter suspicion. After this, he spends a few posts piling onto tube, like everyone else did. If I'm missing something relevant by leaving them out, feel free to add it in. I guess a couple of highlights of his "Me-too" attitude from that point won't be amiss. On July 17 2012 07:35 calgar wrote: Ah, your first real post of the game - congrats! There is a difference in the two, though. Jingle (and others) have made you talk. Discussion has been generated and you are using punctuation and sentences now. iamperfection came in, dropped a rash accusation, and disappeared. No discussion, no benefit to the town. Different, no? Subtly adding himself to the people who pressured tube's play. On July 17 2012 09:12 calgar wrote: Why have you been so quiet evul? Rather inactive recently besides picking at one of my posts. I understand what you mean about re-assessing; it's a big turn and it deserves careful thought. I think it's important to ask a few questions in regards to the 'change'. Is it such a big change after being nagged and attacked? I did request that he use sentences and punctuation. Would YOU have a philosophical change like that mid game? Does it make more sense for a townie or a mafia to change styles? Is the more complicated answer really the best one? This is what I've been thinking. It's certainly suspect but I am currently inclined to read town. I think it's a very risky strategy to try and escape suspicion because of a philosophical change. Very prone to backfire and I would think he would have had to plan it before the game even began. His last game was in 2011 and he posted similarly to how he did at the beginning of our thread (for what little use that meta-analysis is). This is him egging on the attention directed at Obvious for his attack on tube, and temporarily joining the fray. On July 17 2012 20:39 calgar wrote: 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 He starts jumping at iamperfection. Perfection is doing so little that scum would feel no qualms about throwing him under the bus to grab town credit, and if he isn't scum, he's townie that looks scummy enough to easily sell a mislynch. On July 18 2012 04:07 calgar wrote: Well guys, we have a clutserf*#@ of a mess here currently. I’ll do my best to outline my thoughts concisely. 1. @jingle and @hapa – jesus christ guys chill out already. Your back and forth is unproductive, distracting, spammy, and most importantly, anti-town. That is reason enough to stop, immediately. Deal with your issues outside of the thread. 2. My strongest mafia read is iamperfection. He has completely ignored my questions and has posted little. He has jumped to conclusions and used poor logic. He’s either mafia or a townie playing extremely poorly. Once again he just targets whoever is already receiving heat, in this case obvious (his logic isn’t as terrible this time around, but still). Very safe vote to make that doesn’t require him to do anything risky. He backs off of me when I vote him to avoid any confrontation. I acted very differently when people accused me – I took them seriously. I gave thorough responses and addressed concerns. He has ignored them. I suspect he is sliding by right now because of the large number of other targets currently being thrown around. 3. @jingle – can you briefly summarize the crux of your suspicions in two or three sentences? I ask because to me, obvious reads town. I think he reads town because: 1- He also has a read on iamperfection, who I think is a good d1 lynch choice 2- He casts FOS on yourharry early on, who I am inclined to think is mafia (see #4). 3- I think the ‘under the bus’ was read into similarly to how I was read into earlier 4- I think he tunneled and overanalyzed whereas a simpler solution may be more likely in the case of his rash tube accusation. 5- He tries to coax fulla into posting, which fulla ignores. I tried to coax evul into posting, which evul ignores. 6- In conclusion, obvious and I seem to be playing a very similar game. IMO, the only thing that separates him from me is his vote and unvote against tube. As an afterthought, he’s read me as town so I am slightly more inclined to believe him. Maybe a clever psychological play on his part. 4. I’m inclined to change my vote to yourharry now. I would like to go with my read but I realize my single vote isn’t going to matter if no one else feels the same way. Here’s why: 1- I like hapa’s case and think it is well-thought out. I agree with most of his points. 2- those one liners that yourharry posted really pissed me off. Anti-town play and spam. 3- he voted for jingle and I read jingle as strongly town 4- his posting style changes after he is accused. Look at his posts 1-14 in the thread. They seem to be useless, spam, and 1-liners. Until he is accused, and all the sudden he’s dropping paragraphs. Maybe he’s blue and trying to lay low but he played it very poorly if that’s the case. ##Unvote ##Vote YourHarry His strongest scumread is perfection, so he unvotes perfection to vote Harry. This is where his voting pattern starts bouncing around like Bugs Bunny on cocaine. On July 18 2012 05:18 calgar wrote: @ people voting for obvious.660 I still disagree with going for obvious. He has tried to be active, promote discussion, and make reads. I think he's posted a little carelessly and everyone is targeting him now. These mistakes are being interpreted for mafia but I'm seeing it as a town who is trying to be proactive. We still have mufaa and iamperfection playing like sheep, like 2 posts, weak reads, no content. I consider both to be a better lynch than obvious.660. Now that Obvious is in a precarious position, he starts taking a truly strong stance against voting for him. While talking about mufaa and iamperfection looking like the best targets. Of course, his vote is still on Harry at this point? On July 18 2012 06:00 calgar wrote: Yes, I'll do my best. I'll vote for anyone at this point that I think is more likely to be mafia than obvious.660. iamperfection has a bad history so I think he is a good option instead. I don't mean to be wishy-washy and go back and forth but it's a scramble at this point to try and swing the vote. ##Unvote YourHarry ##Vote iamperfection Now that he's convinced Hapa to go for perfection, he's finally willing to change his own vote back to his top target. Except for all his other top targets. And now, his next significant post, "VIGI SHOOT PERFECTION NAO!!" On July 18 2012 11:08 calgar wrote: @vigilante – I believe our next lynch has a high likelihood of being iamperfection. A number of people currently consider him the best choice now. It doesn’t look like he is bothered to respond to accusations or post much in general. I strongly advise to (carefully) consider a hit on him to save us a day, imo. Then on to the bigger fish. If Perfection is scum, buys town cred, if he's town, he points to the same thing that happened with Obvious. Should have played better. Of course, he's tried to discredit me based on Obvious dying for that exact reason, so that would be awkward, huh? On July 19 2012 02:43 calgar wrote: @jingle Why do you propose sealing my fate to the vigilante kill? That doesn’t make sense because it would be poor play for both town and mafia. Why are you trying to bait me? It seems like only a mafia would try to set me up to look bad after the vigilante hit. I would only make that as town if I had delusions of grandeur and being the town hero. If I were right then I’d have made a big call. If wrong, then I would basically be giving the game away since 8 towns would go to 7 with the vig kill, then lynch on me to 6, then a night kill to 5. Game over, essentially, at the very least handed mafia a massive lead that requires perfect play to overcome. If I’m mafia then I doubt I would tie myself down to the verdict because I know I’d be lynched after. Here, he very heavily implies I'm scummy. Remember that later when he gets to saying I'm one of his very pro-town reads... On July 19 2012 07:30 calgar wrote: Alright townies, I'll call it like I see it. @hapa I’ll agree with you that it may be too soon to call a vig hit. I’m with you on the YourHarry case. Whatever they say, it’s process of elimination and if out of 11 players remaining there are 6-7 behaving town-ish and 3-4 behaving mafia-ish then we need to go for those in the 3-4. Fulla doesn’t know what’s going on which is funny to me in some sense. Better case for being a bad-townie I think than YourHarry. But it’s definitely anti-town play. I’d say YourHarry is higher on the list because his anti-town play is more extensive. about iamperfection: The problem is that, as far as I’m concerned, we’re already at the end of the road. He’s either mafia or a bad townie. Watching him post more bad reads, contradictions, and poor logic (which he continues to do) isn’t going to change any of that. He’s already crazy suspicious, what is more dirt on him going to do? It’s still back to the basic problem of whether or not he’s just a bad town. An invest on him is risky because he is a likely candidate for the role change cloak since so much attention is targeted at him. I've got to laugh and shake my head at "ill be back later tonight" that he said. Did he consider the chance of being killed? So sure that he won't be? Probably right, since he's so anti-town. Even if he was town they wouldn't touch him. His haphazard play would be poor for both town and mafia so it's a tough call. @fulla There isn’t much to say about you. I’ll start with your pledge at the beginning of the game “I will be active Very active /in x100” You don’t seem so excited now. You contribute absolutely nothing in the first 24 hours. You seem to have contributed a fair amount in your magic mafia game so don’t know what happened. You make one or two short posts that contribute relatively little content-wise. You said “Where the hell is obvious?” - my response to that is where the hell are YOU? I don’t even have anything to analyze here you’ve been so inactive. @YourHarry You’ve been called out for anti-town play and you haven’t done a single thing in my eyes to change. I can’t come up with a list this long for any other player besides iamperfection. 1. Your “read” on how fulla is “positively town” is very bad logic. Piling on to a vote right before the deadline is far from pro-town. I’m pretty sure you’re the only one getting that feeling because he is crazy suspicious to me. You then backtrack – see #9. 2. You lack any strong reads or dedicated suspicion. See what I’m doing here with this list? 3. I think it’s possible that you bussed iamperfection in your post: “Jingle, iamperfection, tube... Can't be this easy right.” 4. Your analysis of obvious’ summary quote as sounding like “like forced narration to seem pro townie” is a weak justification for piling onto the veteran. In fact, your words sound like what is quoted. 5. My reads are all different than yours so maybe I just suck. Or maybe you’re purposely spreading suspicion on other players I have pegged as town. 6. “And, I want you guys to be convinced that if tube is town, so am I.” WHAT? You just called him out for being suspicious for piling on. Where does this one liner come from? Where is your reasoning, your logic? Why would a town drop random one-liners like that making vague suggestions about innocence. You don’t need to claim innocence, you show it, which you haven’t. 7. Your posts have attempted to spread blame to me (subtly), jingle, iamperfection, tube, and obvious. Which is it, now? 8. You began the game with contentless, spammy, directionless one-liners until you were pressured. Anti-town as I have said before. You even agree with me on this one! 9. Your votes lack conviction and you backtrack. Obvious backtracked also but we agreed on most things and he pressured people to talk. That's why I felt strongly he was town. You happen to share neither category with obvious. 10. Mind telling me what this great excuse that explains your anti-town play is? “(LOL, this is actually exactly how I acted on D1, but I have an excuse )” Your days are numbered playing like this. IGMEOY iamperfection, YourHarry, fulla As for town direction, I propose to pressure the above and decide from there. "Me-Too"s onto Hapa, changes his mind about wanting a vigi shot on perfection. On July 19 2012 09:03 calgar wrote: alright Jingle. you’re a bull in the china shop; an elephant tip-toeing over the piano Keys. i knew; what can i say – you’re like arguing with a brick wall. Your case is weak right now but I’ll grant you a reply. Wait, what? If he is mafia, then you’re suggesting that I’m mafia and I voted to kill another mafia, to boost my town cred, when you are saying to leave the mafia alive for more questioning? Doesn’t that mean I am currently pushing for a mafia player to get killed, while you are arguing to leave him alive? Explain to me how that makes ANY sense. If he is town, we’ll never really be able to know – see my thoughts on him and why an invest isn’t very useful. You argued to kill a town member, I argued to save him. How does this ‘mediocre’ effort by a vote you caused with a POOR READ reflect guilt on my part? It was clear to me by inactivity and lack of conversation that people were going to stick their vote and not listen. I don’t understand how trying to save the townie made me look more guilty. If hopeless and one vote had swung over, iamperfection could have gotten 5 votes first. I jump votes like it’s going out of style to SAVE A TOWN MEMBER. How has this escaped your notice? You have some master vision of my theory crafting and play in order to build credit. Don’t you think these pro-town actions might have a simpler expalantion? I didn’t change my vote until after hapa because I was being resourceful to pool votes to wherever they could go. I thought YourHarry or iamperfection were better D1 lynches so I would have voted either to save obvious. I switched because we got a third onto iamperfection and it looked plausible that we might swing it over. Your language is much more cloudy and less straightforward than mine. WTF do you mean with “seeds of doubt”. Why are you speaking like you’re a poet? Your previous argument was based on suspicious words like “under the bus”. Where did that get you? I’ve voluntarily chosen to be in the spotlight. This is a bad play for mafia – it’s even in the advice guide. Sooner or later you can’t keep up your town cred by making pro town votes (like trying to save a myslynch from you). WIFOM, whatever. I’ve never called you scummy. You’ve never been on my scumlist. I read you as strongly town. I’ve said so before, check my filter. I called you out there because your reasoning was stupid. You won’t agree because you are stubborn. That’s just what we have to deal with in a thread that includes you. I'll let it slide because sometimes townies don't always make the best calls (obvious). I would imagine you don't think I'll be a mislynch, either? @YourHarryCare to respond to anything? Nice OMGUS also. You were joking about defending me earlier. Asking people to claim? There's #12 on my list. "I do not want to disclose that right now." --> anti-town play. #13 Huge, emotion-inspiring pile of ad-homs directed at me, and denies he ever suggested I was scummy after he asked for a hit on perfection. Oops. I think that's about all for now. Any further thoughts? | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
iamperfection
United States9642 Posts
On July 19 2012 10:46 JingleHell wrote: Calgar got my attention when he screamed for a night hit on Perfection. Perfection, there's not much new to say on, so I figured address the one who's been skating by but seeming a bit off. I cant change what happened on the first day. Did i lurk yes but we can only go ahead with the situation that is at hand. I was thinking a lot about what i was going to do on this day and i cam fully prepared to lead a charge against someone because i believed their would be a lot of pressure on me and if i were to go down i was going to try and get as much info as possible for the town. Im a little taken aback by your vs jingle argument as i wasent expecting it to happen. 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? You have semi defended me but i want your thoughts on that situation in itself not your thoughts on me as a player just that situation. Calgar has come and attacked me saying that my defense is not strong On July 19 2012 07:30 calgar wrote: about iamperfection: The problem is that, as far as I’m concerned, we’re already at the end of the road. He’s either mafia or a bad townie. Watching him post more bad reads, contradictions, and poor logic (which he continues to do) isn’t going to change any of that. He’s already crazy suspicious, what is more dirt on him going to do? It’s still back to the basic problem of whether or not he’s just a bad town. An invest on him is risky because he is a likely candidate for the role change cloak since so much attention is targeted at him. I've got to laugh and shake my head at "ill be back later tonight" that he said. Did he consider the chance of being killed? So sure that he won't be? Probably right, since he's so anti-town. Even if he was town they wouldn't touch him. His haphazard play would be poor for both town and mafia so it's a tough call. To calgar i ask you the same you have said my defense is not strong i want specifically what about my situation on day 1 make you think im scum. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
We aren't giving what you seem to consider "clear thoughts" on you because there's so damn little to talk about. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
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: 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: 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: 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. 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: 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: 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: 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. | ||
|
iamperfection
United States9642 Posts
I think ive made enough posts defending myself on what happened on day one you continue to hurl insults at everyone or try to actually help the town instead of thinking your helping the town. I dont get whats so difficult about my point. no one has stated a reason that if im a scum player why would i put myself in that day 1 situation. What would be my strategy going forward. I cant think of any. So all im guilty of is lurking on day one. | ||
|
iamperfection
United States9642 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 19 2012 11:42 iamperfection wrote: So then why would calgar go so strong against me. Are we both mafia in some sort of gambit? That would seem highly risky to me. Unless your case against cagar is incorrect and i am the scum. I think ive made enough posts defending myself on what happened on day one you continue to hurl insults at everyone or try to actually help the town instead of thinking your helping the town. I dont get whats so difficult about my point. no one has stated a reason that if im a scum player why would i put myself in that day 1 situation. What would be my strategy going forward. I cant think of any. So all im guilty of is lurking on day one. So your entire explanation for your play is based on WIFOM logic, applied by you, to you... right. Someone else want to do this guy? I'm going to bed. And I've seen enough filters for tonight. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
tl;dr - I think Calgar is very townie. When looking for suspicious posts, its important to take the entire context of a person's play rather than individual posts. For example, I can dig through Jingle's filter and build a case on him for "suspicious and inconsistent play," yet Jingle is one of my very strong townie reads. Why? Because his play in full context shows a reckless player who tries to generate discussion - he's bound to have inconsistent/suspicious play based on his posting style alone. In the case against Calgar, I'm seeing all his inconsistent posts brought to light while ignoring the context of his play and any pro-townie evidence in his favor. So here's a question; has Calgar's play hurt or helped us this game? I'd say he helped us quite a bit. He generated a lot of discussion and got a lot of lurkers to talk. In Jingle's case, this is interpreted as him bandwagonning suspicion on several players before casting a vote on iamperfection. His fingerpointing play appears townie in full context. Another point Jingle makes is his "me-too" bandwagonning on my suspicions/ideas. Again, in full context, this isn't suspicious. I assume that Calgar thinks his strongest townie reads are Jingle and I, and he's been actively trying to make peace with (and between) us. Just take a look at this post: 1. @jingle and @hapa – jesus christ guys chill out already. Your back and forth is unproductive, distracting, spammy, and most importantly, anti-town. That is reason enough to stop, immediately. Deal with your issues outside of the thread. What part of this even makes sense from a mafia perspective? Why the hell would he attempt to break up a fight between us? Other than his last post to Jingle, he's been very active in trying to get on good terms with his top townie reads and stopped us from our distracting fight. This is 100% pure-colombian townie. As a final point, while I see "inconsistency" in Calgar's play, I don't see any any attemps to lie, mislead, or deflect. Inconsistency is indicative of reckless townie play - misleading play is very very mafia oriented. I don't see any indication of the latter at all. So before the town goes and bandwagons Calgar, ask yourself; is he really the most suspicious player here? Does he have any mafia-motive? In my opinion, no and no. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
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. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
should be: On him "trying" to get iamperfection lynched Damn my lack of proofreading. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + 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. 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. 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: 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. 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.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? 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: 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) 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 ITALICIZED On July 18 2012 22:50 iamperfection wrote: There have been posts that havemade me greatly question the motivation of some of the players. 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. 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 lynching Lets 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. 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. 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: 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.  | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
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... | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 19 2012 07:30 calgar wrote: Alright townies, I'll call it like I see it. @YourHarry You’ve been called out for anti-town play and you haven’t done a single thing in my eyes to change. I can’t come up with a list this long for any other player besides iamperfection. 1. Your “read” on how fulla is “positively town” is very bad logic. Piling on to a vote right before the deadline is far from pro-town. I’m pretty sure you’re the only one getting that feeling because he is crazy suspicious to me. You then backtrack – see #9. First, I retracted my assertion that Fulla is definitely town. This is NOT because my logic was bad, but that I realized that the premise in which I drew the conclusion from was incorrect. After Obvious.660 flipped town, I wanted to see what kind of conclusions I could draw from it. I quickly skimmed the pages prior to the mislynch and noticed Fulla voting for Obvious.660 even though his vote did not matter. This struck me as an obvious townie action, because while scums want to execute mislynches, no scum would unnecessarily contribute to lynch a player they know will flip town. This logic still stands. Above argument is even stronger in Fulla's case because Fulla did not have previous suspicion of Obvious.660. He suddenly appeared, and without much reason, unnecessarily added his name under the list of players contributing to Obvious.660's bandwagon. Scum Fulla would not have done this, knowing that simply staying away or voting for another player would still end up in Obvious.660's death. Of course, it turns out that Fulla did not know the rules of plurality lynch and that he actually thought that his vote would make a difference. So, my argument no longer stands because my argument relied on Fulla knowing that mislynch would occur regardless of his vote. As an aside, I still think Fulla is very likely to be town. I outlined why this is the case in earlier post, but this has nothing to do with my defense. 2. You lack any strong reads or dedicated suspicion. See what I’m doing here with this list? True. Is this a scum tell? Are you going to argue that scums, since they know everyone else is town, would have hard time coming up with arguments for their "fake" suspicion? If so, I would agree with it. But it would not be difficult to manufacture fake suspicions. And I personally know that making lengthy posts analyzing players' scumminess would seem very protown. Scum Harry would have spent the effort to engineer some of these "dedicated suspicion". Sometimes, I may have somewhat strong scum reads by Day 1. In this game, I had fleeting suspicions on various players which is clearly outlined by my (albeit short) posts and voting patterns. Again, you can argue that this is suspicious, but scum Harry, wanting to fit in with town, would have controlled his voting. Be strong and dedicated in your read, scum Harry would have reminded himself. Always back your voting and explain yourself, too, scum Harry, so people would read you as town. Incidentally, I do not blame people for finding me suspicious for being all over the place, often with little reason. I often get in this kind of trouble in my other games. And I agree that I should explain myself more, although this is sometimes hard because my suspicions are often based on things that are seemingly trivial stuff. So, while it would be better for the town if I explained myself better and kept myself away from other players' suspicion, if there is one thing I am NOT going to do as a town, it is to build a fake case or engineer plausible reasons that I don't necessarily believe to be true just to convince others to lynch a player I think is scum. 3. I think it’s possible that you bussed iamperfection in your post: “Jingle, iamperfection, tube... Can't be this easy right.” It is a possibility. So? This is not evidence. Pick any combinations of players, and you can come up with a fiction of X, Y, and Z scum team based on bussing and buddying. 4. Your analysis of obvious’ summary quote as sounding like “like forced narration to seem pro townie” is a weak justification for piling onto the veteran. In fact, your words sound like what is quoted. [sarcasm]Yes, I knew he was the veteran!! [/sarcasm] BTW. Based on the your questions regarding the mechanics of game (before this game started), I think you are intelligent enough to avoid this kind of fallacy if you are genuinely scumhunting. Regardless, I still maintain that I do not understand why people think/thought that they found Obvious.660's list scummy. (But then, why did I vote for Obvious.660? I already explained this. I initially dismissed Obvious.660's sudden accusation of tube for changing his writing style, but I changed my mind after reading Jingle's post). But just because I think Obvious.660 is scummy, does not mean that I would find all of his posts scummy. 5. My reads are all different than yours so maybe I just suck. Or maybe you’re purposely spreading suspicion on other players I have pegged as town. Well, I was wrong about Obvious.660. So, I can't say that your reads have been good. But if I really wanted to spread suspicion, whether town or scum, I would do it in a much more constructive way instead of posting one liners. 6. “And, I want you guys to be convinced that if tube is town, so am I.” WHAT? You just called him out for being suspicious for piling on. Where does this one liner come from? Where is your reasoning, your logic? Why would a town drop random one-liners like that making vague suggestions about innocence. You don’t need to claim innocence, you show it, which you haven’t. I almost forgot about explaining why I said that. My reason for saying that was based on the fact that scum Harry would not have a strong reason for preferring Obvious.660 mislynch over tube mislynch. And at the time, the two primary suspects projected to be lynched were tube and Obvious.660. And if tube is town, it would be hard to explain why scum Harry would suddenly change his vote to jump on a different bandwagon. Either mislynch would have suited scum Harry just fine. 7. Your posts have attempted to spread blame to me (subtly), jingle, iamperfection, tube, and obvious. Which is it, now? You?  Well, technically, I am not trying to spread blame. That doesn't sound good. How about, I am trying to find scums!8. You began the game with contentless, spammy, directionless one-liners until you were pressured. Anti-town as I have said before. You even agree with me on this one! Did I say I was being anti-town? If I did, I would be guilty for not inciting more discussions by providing stronger reads. But I did not have any strong reads - which was reflected in my quick changes in my voting. Don't blame me for not trying, though. 9. Your votes lack conviction and you backtrack. Obvious backtracked also but we agreed on most things and he pressured people to talk. That's why I felt strongly he was town. You happen to share neither category with obvious. I will repeat: I did lack conviction. I did backtrack. I am guilty of these things. But I explained why these are not necessarily scummy. And while we disagreed on many things (? what did we disagree on?), I don't see how that makes me scum. Scum may even try to agree with others. And as for pressuring people to talk, I did some of that too. But even if I didn't, I wouldn't consider it as a strong evidence. 10. Mind telling me what this great excuse that explains your anti-town play is? “(LOL, this is actually exactly how I acted on D1, but I have an excuse )” Well, my excuse is that I intended to pressure people. But more importantly, shh... + Show Spoiler + I am town LOL LOL Your days are numbered playing like this. Wait, is this a scum tell LOL. Do you actually know that I am town and blaming my poor play for what is obviously going to turn out to be a mislynch? IGMEOY iamperfection, YourHarry, fulla As for town direction, I propose to pressure the above and decide from there. WOW So many reasons why I am scum. I must have made many mistakes playing scum Many of the points he made above are redundant. If you were genuinely scum hunting, you could have simply stated something like "Harry is suspicious because he lacks conviction and has changed his votes many times without reasons," instead of carefully packaging redundant "evidence" into different dressings. I accuse calgar of trying to scam town into thinking your case is actually more substantial than it is. In addition, I accuse calgar of trying to rolehunt and making a fallacy that only scums would make (assuming decent intelligence) to artificially make me look scummier. Another evidence for similar scummy behavior can be seen HERE. He did add an EDBWOP post immediately after that, but I am not sure what he was referring to. Waiting for him to clarify. He also seems to be planning ahead to guide the towns to agree on the "list of people to be lynched" to choose from. But this could just be my imagination. | ||
| ||
