EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXI
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 13 2012 10:31 Hopeless1der wrote: Yay you found it! Meh, I wasn't expecting some hidden easter egg shiznit, and it's my final newbie game, so I was just going to /in and go back to dig out the juicy bits. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If he's unconfirmed townie with a shot left heading into MYLO day. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 14 2012 03:15 Blazinghand wrote: Couldn't he just shoot the other unconfirmed townie and win, though? You could, theoretically, have nothing but unconfirmed townies going into MYLO, courtesy of WIFOM type logic, depending on how people played. Also, MYLO can occur at as many people remaining as 8 in a 12 person game, assuming all scum are still alive. Mislynch, plus NK, puts scum at half the population. That's a LOT of people and not much guaranteed info to work with. Granted, it's a non-ideal situation, and a non-ideal situation, but assuming he recognizes the situation before it happens, he'd change it from MYLO to LYLO with more information available to the town. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 16 2012 09:40 tube wrote: whats the point of fos btw doesnt that just make the fos'ed person more careful in their posts if they actually are mafia i mean i would rather just gather more evidence then outright accuse them Letting someone know you're watching them can A: get other people to help out, and B: get them talking, which may let you gather evidence more easily. In plurality lynch, I despise voting for pressure, so an FoS can have a similar effect. In fact, trying to suggest that people keep their suspicions to themselves can only hurt the town, as we're already at an information disadvantage to the scum. Anything that helps them retain that edge is scummy, and that's what you just suggested. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. 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. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. "Wait and see" is mutually exclusive with "instigate discussion". And I mean exactly what I say about seeds of doubt. You could easily be working with a scum ulterior motive. Saying you don't expect things to be easy is basically just invoking WIFOM without saying anything, in a way that could be used to cover things you say later. Remember, in this game, it's about finding a way to cooperate in an intentional atmosphere of mutual distrust. We have to find enough grains of information hidden within the subtext of the conversation to negate some portion of the scum's information advantage. Everything you say or do has to be treated like there's the potential for an ulterior motive, until and unless you're confirmed townie. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
The real issue you're accusing me of being distracted from is the real issue of finding and lynching scum. In what way is pointing out dangerous statements distracting from that? There's not going to be much substance to any conversation at this point. There can't be, with nobody weighing in. So, when there's almost nothing to discuss, you talk about what you can talk about, so that if there's a case down the line, you're in a good position. Also, it's very shady to say "the scum wouldn't do that". We can't know what the scum would or wouldn't do yet. It's all guesswork. It always will be until we have information. In fact, just pointing to "Well, scummy behavior would be X, see how I'm not doing that" sounds scummy as all hell, since the only people who know what the scum have planned are the scum. I'm really curious though, when there's no votes (I hate the risk of early bandwagons), and if you think this accusation is such a pointless distraction and so on, why are you squirming around so much under this very light pressure? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Right now you sound like an "Active lurker". Posting to be visible, to try and demonstrate townieness, but without really saying much. Until I called you on it. Now you're explaining what the scum would do, which is pure WIFOM, especially this early in the game. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 16 2012 14:10 YourHarry wrote: Also, forcing an interpretation of "wait and see" the way Jingle did could mean either of two things: 1. He wanted to argue for the sake of discussion. 2. He wanted to start a bandwagon on calgar You accuse me of trying to start a bandwagon after voting on someone for their first post? Didn't we have this conversation already? Somewhere else? And so far, people here don't seem insane enough to take it as scummy behavior to not like early bandwagons. This almost gives me the impression you're trying too hard to match your meta, which makes me wonder about you. FOS YourHarry | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If anything, if he's scum trying to cover for an accomplice, I think it would be most likely to be Calgar. Let's look closely. He subtly casts doubt on the things I've pointed out. On July 16 2012 14:10 YourHarry wrote: Also, forcing an interpretation of "wait and see" the way Jingle did could mean either of two things: 1. He wanted to argue for the sake of discussion. 2. He wanted to start a bandwagon on calgar This, of course, flies in the face of his vote against Obvious, along with more doubts about what I said about Calgar. On July 16 2012 14:07 YourHarry wrote: ##Vote Obvious.660 Obvious scum BTW, "wait and see" does not mean that we should actively stop what we are discussing to see what happens. It could mean, carry on with discussions and finger pointing and see where our scum hunting leads us. Then, he does his own post pointing to the meta, jokingly implicating himself as scum, an air of confidence, in an effort to stir up feelings of "must be townie, no scum would say that". On July 17 2012 00:11 YourHarry wrote:  I actually had a thought that one of you may point this out. Not only we had a conversation about benefits of random voting, which I still disagree with you, but do you remember talking about the "contradictory first post"? I also replied in a similar - analyzing lazer's post to mean either #1 or #2. I realized this after I made both posts. So: 1. This is how I typically play OR 2. I am unconsciously trying to match my meta in the previous game, where I was vanilla town. OR 3. I consciously made plans to match the meta. If #3, you should be suspicious.  All in all, I think YourHarry looks suspicious as all hell, and while I'll keep my FOS Calgar, I'm going to ##Vote YourHarry based on the current signs. After all, he thinks that his vote on Obvious isn't a big risk, so he has no grounds to complain about mine based on considerably more evidence, right? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 04:30 tube wrote: what lol maybe i just dont see anything to analyze in day 1 with no information So instead of looking for information, reading between the lines, or talking at the people who ARE talking to try and get things established, you make useless one-liners that clutter up the thread? Did the other scum help you with this strategy? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:01 tube wrote: yes i am 3 people just talked about how somehow my not believing in analysis day 1 is a tell since you guys apparently think thats something to talk about if you think theres a motive to question do tell If there's no discussion day 1, if there's a mislynch, there's almost no information to work with day 2, at which point I suppose you still want us to avoid analysis on limited information? This game is all about finding a way to work despite the information disadvantage, and find the scum. Active non-contribution is a fairly valid reason for a D1 lynch, in absence of scumtells. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:04 tube wrote: half of the people in the game have already been accused and i literally dont agree with any of the arguments that were made yet because they're all too speculative yeah those are my thoughts i guess im mafia If you don't like the accusations, make your own, or better yet, go watch Elmo. What did you expect to happen in a game that's all about persuasion, scamming, and perception? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
##Vote Tube Until and unless we get a clear scumread, let's get rid of the guy who's actively not contributing by telling us we're doing it wrong and not doing anything else, like posting a read or starting a useful discussion. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:08 tube wrote: jesus what is with all this hostility We aren't being hostile. We're playing the game. You're basically telling us that until and unless the scum team decides to tell us who they are we should shut up and sit down, because you don't like our speculation. Without, might I add, elucidation on what's wrong with the arguments being presented. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:22 tube wrote: i didnt martyr myself i thought making a sarcastic statement like that would make people realize how pointless it is to lynch me You might be able to expect that to work if you've actually made an effort in the thread. I can't argue with the mindset, I've taken it myself. But if you haven't actually TRIED to be productive, and you have half the town on you, you need to start presenting a defense. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:39 tube wrote: the points against me are that im being an active lurker and thats supposedly our best lynch how am i supposed to respond to that other than "i just felt like posting" because i didnt want to be inactive from my point of view im not attracting suspicion to begin with Did you actually bother to read any of the guides, the rules, or anything at all about how this game works before signing up? What matters is a combination of intuition and persuasion. Discussion, analysis, and reading between the lines. The scum have information, we don't. We talk, we have conversations, we get people's stories, we look for things that don't make sense, we make guesses. In other words, the town speculates, and hopes for the best. The best is more likely if we have a lot of actual discussion (one line posts telling everybody you don't agree with them without saying why or what you believe isn't discussion). People who post things that only contribute clutter are bad for the town. "I don't agree." as the paraphrased sum of your post is a great example of only contributing clutter. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:44 tube wrote: and yeah in every accusation against other people so far you can tell that people are just trying to make something out of nothing which is why i dont agree with anyone yet also there should be pressure on the people who haven't even posted yet to say something: drwiggl3s fulla mufaa evulrabbitz thats 4 people any of which could be mafia just sitting there watching you guys gang up on the "active lurker" And if you flip town, I'll consider them as plausible targets. If you flip scum, I'll consider them confirmed townie. Deal? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:49 Hapahauli wrote: Let's not pre-determine our lynches less than 24 hours into day 1 Jingle. While tube is at the top of my list right now (even moreso after chainsaw defending himself with a list of lurkers), we don't know if he'll be the scummiest player by the D1 lynch deadline. I was actually fishing for a reaction more substantial than his current posting, thanks for interfering. And you're one to talk, remember XX N1 where you were like 72 hours away from deadline planning to lynch me until DT confirmed me on D2? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:54 tube wrote: lmao i seriously cant believe posting my beliefs in one-liners is considered a scumslip whats the day 1 success rate on that one, hapa? also i did say what i believed multiple times now, and i haven't started any arguments against people because like i said there's too little to go off on day 1 When do you expect us to get sufficient information to lynch people if we don't have active, meaningful discussions? Low-content posts are so useful for scum because they give the appearance of activity without having large amounts of content that could potentially be used in a case against you. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:55 Hapahauli wrote: Of course I remember - it was a huge mistake, and I don't want to see it repeated. With tube, I'm thinking the same way I was about Lazer. If they flip green, at least we don't have them hurting the town with their attitude. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 06:02 drwiggl3s wrote: Is this.. a scum slip? You should always go for mafia. Lynching someone for being bad-town is a mistake. This is a noobie game after all. No, it's not a scum slip. It's what I said earlier, if we don't have anybody who really screams "scum" at us, we can just lynch the person who might just be actively bad town. The "noob game" excuse doesn't fly with me, we're all newbs, thus being in the game. This game is plurality lynch. Most votes at the end of the day dies. So yes, someone who's actively not contributing can be a severe detriment. Ask Hapa about the town win in XX. Where the guy I would have lynched for being such a PITA was trying to coerce people into not voting for the guy we ended up lynching. Who flipped red and won us the game. Actively bad town are scum's best friend. And if they make it to MYLO or LYLO, they can cause a town loss, because they look scummy. In XVIII I won as scum because of an actively bad town player who I was able to lead a mislynch on and walk away from it because he was so scummy sounding. Scum had all 3 alive at endgame. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 06:37 tube wrote: by the by that also applies to jinglehell's reasoning as to why i should be lynched My reasoning to consider you a target is simple. 1: If we hit MYLO or LYLO with someone posting like you are alive, it greatly increases our odds of a mislynch. 2: If we don't get any scum to lynch (which you seem to think we can't possibly get any information on D1, which is a self-fulfilling prophecy, if nobody gets people talking we're guaranteed to never have information) we can only go by "scummiest". Right now, whether you like it or not, your behavior strikes me as scummy. And, it seems, everybody else agrees that your play is somewhere in the realm of bad town or scum. Which makes you one of the current scummiest. Hence, a target. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 06:42 Mufaa wrote: Ok, time to get to work. @Tube - You need to start contributing if you want to live. I wouldn't vote for you currently, but only because it's still early. You're the most obvious lynch right now. Instead of telling everyone why you should live, show everyone why you should live. Contribute something other than one liners (Who do you suspect? What seems suspicious to you?). It doesn't have to be an airtight case, but we need to force scum to make slips, not dropping one liners that lets everyone bandwagon you halfway through d1. @Jingle- Early in the day you say: A reasonable opinion, except for the fact that you have two out of the three total votes so far. Both of your votes/cases so far have been the most obvious choices, which if the day ended right now I would be upset if we didnt lynch one of them. When you're claiming that you hate the risk of early bandwagons however and you're the most likely cause of a bandwagon forming I have to question it. I'm not sure if you're scum, but this feels like you're trying to skirt around discussions by picking the most obvious tells without actually trying to find scum. More to come, but I need to check over filters more closely before I do. The "early bandwagons" I was referring to, for the sake of context, is votes where you don't have an explanation. It's hard to defend against no reason, hence making for a danger of bandwagons. I try to have some sort of reason for a vote, which leaves room for them to counter, which means that people might have more reason to jump OFF of an early bandwagon if the need arises. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 06:50 tube wrote: i've said it over and over all ive done is tell people that i dont accuse anyone as of yet still dont see how that convinces anyone that im playing against town and i already said people need to generally post more (i myself was trying to do this but didn't want to lie to do so i just said what i thought about people's accusations) You don't get information without discussion. You aren't fomenting discussion, you're hampering it by posting low content posts, saying, basically, that everyone's arguments suck, but you can't be assed to tell us what's wrong with them. If you don't understand how that doesn't help, you're definitely a hindrance. And if you do understand and don't actually try to fix it, that's even worse. What you need to do is make your behavior useful. Short, non-committal posts are very much a scummy thing. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I'm saying tube sounds scummy as all hell, and if we don't lynch him because of it now, if he IS town, his scummy play may bite us in the ass later. If the only two options for someone are "scum" and "seems like scum", it's a choice between "Lynch now" and "lynch later", unless they fix their play enough to get some BOTD. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 07:14 tube wrote: how is there even such a thing as mafia "generally" act this way because if that were true a mafia would never act that way you guys find it really hard to believe that a townie wouldn't want to attract attention until he found more evidence or made some kind of actual connection between nights and days Welcome to the wide world of WIFOM. The thing is, there's some scum tells that are still relatively solid, despite scum knowing them. Not committing is one of them. Just because scum know it's dangerous, doesn't mean they can avoid it completely. If you take strong stances, it can come back and bite you later, unless your strong stances, and your transition from one to another, make sense. It's more prone to making sense if you're town. No, you can't "know" that something is or isn't scummy. But you also can't make a case without deciding something seems scummy for X reason. If you never make cases, the scum are guaranteed to win. It doesn't matter what your reasoning is, HAVING reasoning for what you do or say is always relevant. So far, you've failed horrible in that regard. And a townie wanting to withhold judgment for a lack of evidence should either show some initiative and look into the case, and post their reasoning on it, or stay the hell out from underfoot so they don't clutter things up and start sidetracks. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 07:30 tube wrote: 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: 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. Feel free to respond showing how my paraphrasing was so unreasonable, in context, without reading your mind, otherwise this sounds like an OMGUS. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 07:32 Obvious.660 wrote: Woah! It's like a completely different person sat down at your computer and started typing. WELCOME TO THE GAME, TUBE! to 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 | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 07:57 Obvious.660 wrote: Remember this? 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. Frankly, your sudden shift from welcoming him to the thread to voting for him sounds more like a coached response from a QT than him starting to make an effort after the entire active population of the thread told him to. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
So, strategery! I'm going to apply my strategery to our discussion, and so far, our discussion has been good. By the way, you kind of have something SERIOUS to explain here. On July 17 2012 08:40 Obvious.660 wrote: give you the chance to participate before I throw you under the bus. Throwing someone under the bus is what SCUM do... | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
He was the Scum team's MVP, and he was a townie. He last second secured two mislynches, and then promptly died at MYLO to give us the game. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. Your "contribution" is a giant summary post listing each person and a thought about them? Even tube's posting wasn't this bad, because it would have taken him about a week's worth of posting to provide this much clutter. My vote is in the right place, and going nowhere. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. And Hapahauli kicks off his usual behavior of trying to railroad the town, based on his oh so exemplary record of finding one whole scum in Newbie XX, and conveniently ignoring all the bad cases he personally had going there while knocking any cases he disliked from it. /yawn I'll just stick with ignoring you, thanks. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 00:10 Hapahauli wrote: Jingle. I don't want us getting into a dickfight again in this game. It'll only create chaos in the town. I will make every effort to remain civil with you, and all I ask you provide reasoning for your opinions as opposed to dismissing my case based on my "ego" or whatever. Are you blind, or just ignoring everything you disagree with again? I already provided my reasoning for voting on Obvious, and you dismissed it completely, based purely on WIFOM and assumptions. You're a brick wall in an argument, so I'm not going to bother. Would you like me to link some posts (which you ignored completely) explaining why you're at the very least not worth the bother of arguing against, and in some ways, have the potential to be bad for town? Would you like me remind you of the BassInSpace case you were busily trying to tear to shreds? You know, the guy we lynched in part because of my ego, who was the LAST SCUM? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=51#1001 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=51#1007 | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
His sudden backtracking the instant he came under suspicion also makes me wonder. That's scum getting something to backfire. As for "misinterpreting his definition of 'bus'", you must be high. Contextually, there's only one serious definition for bussing someone. It's not the sort of thing any townie should refer to themselves doing. He should certainly know that, if he wanted to be in on jumping on tube for posting in an anti-town manner. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 01:35 Hapahauli wrote: For christ sake Jingle - the backhanded comments are getting rediculous. Exactly how do you think this helps the town? Cut it out. I'll cut it out the second you stop thinking that cardboard crown you got from Burger King proves you're king shit. Did you actually read the posts I referred you to, and try being open minded about them, or were you too busy trying to decide how best to subjugate others to your ego? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 01:43 Hapahauli wrote: Since when does pushing for my case constitute "ego?" Its a scumhunt, and I'm going to try to argue to get the scummiest player lynch. You're doing the exact same thing with Obvious.660. Actually, I'm only arguing because you are. You're trying to persuade people, and in so doing, you've attacked me repeatedly, of course I'm going to return the favor. My arguments against Obvious seem to have stood on their own, as I don't need to con people into agreeing with them. They either agree or they don't, based on the clear, visible things I've commented on. The big difference is that I don't have this compulsion to get everyone to agree with me. If they do, they do, if they don't, they don't. If I'm wrong, (go check my meta) I have a tendency to own up to it, instead of just plowing forward recklessly. You're so busy trying to assert your authority over the entire thread that you ignore anything contrary to your own opinions. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
2: I've already gone into detail on my belief of "Hapa being Hapa", you're failing to address any of that, and just calling that quote shady. 3: I made my (minor) suspicion about you clear quite a while ago. The fact that Hapa was ignoring it doesn't make me reminding him of it sudden, or backtracking. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
This almost looks like an effort to keep votes on you to a minimum by making it look like an OMGUS if I shift my vote, which makes me want to do it, somewhat. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 02:44 Hapahauli wrote: @ YourHarry: Jingle is playing exactly like he was last game as a townie. Look at my case from last game; he's perfectly capable of blatantly bad advice, lack of reasoning, and anti-town mentality. Yet he flipped town. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=21#404 So far, he's as reckless as he was in his town game, and I see no reason to suspect him. Recklessness is ignoring a DT investigation to stroke your own ego, which one of us did that? Oh right. You. Bad advice, lack of reasoning, and anti-town mentality. Like trying to pressure people into not voting on the guy DT investigated as scum? The guy we lynched for the win? Look who's talking. Get your attitude in check. There's only one of us who's trying to force the town to follow them, and it's you. Your flagrant arrogance almost destroyed town in XX, if we hadn't had a scum get modkilled, and had all listened to you, we probably would have lost, and here you are touting it as a reason people should worship the ground you walk on, while you make idiotic, hypocritical attacks against me. This is why I'll continue to tell you to kiss my ass. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:31 tube wrote: Why would someone blame you for a possible mislynch should Obvious get lynched. If it's not obvious, nobody was taking you seriously when you were randomly voting Obvious except Obvious himself. I only voted him once I actually started getting a read, as did Jingle and perfection. Three people found it scummy because it's scummy, how's that fascinating? I don't need anyone to distract the town away from me because nobody had any good reason to lynch me to begin with. If you think otherwise explain, not with some roundabout theory that bases itself on false assumptions. We did actually have good reason to suspect you, but once it was explained, you started making an effort to fix it, which earned you some BOTD, and Obvious's sudden reversal definitely made him appear more scummy than you. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:36 drwiggl3s wrote: Deadline is soon approaching and we still aren't at a consensus. Currently I think both tube and Obvious can be seen as scum. But the meta switch by tube (where he all of a sudden changed his tone, style, writing) seemed way too coached to have been his own doing. A vote against Obviousis a decent one, but I gotta go with my gut here and think tube is the more "obvious" scum player.. Unless I can pull more reasoning out of why Obvious is mafia, I'll leave my vote where it is now. ##tube You forgot the word "Vote" in your vote. Also, if you go back and look, the entire active portion of the thread was "coaching" tube's sudden shift in style. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:42 YourHarry wrote: Of course agreeing with something that is agreeable is not scummy. It is possible that towns can agree on something. Agreeing with something that I do not find agreeable - that Obvious.660's post is a "meanginless" scummy post - in a very short period of time, with the common motivation to lynch the same person, is scummy. You're literally not making any sense. Scum all making the same point is beyond silly behavior. Like I said, you're taking us into useless WIFOM arguments here, but unless a situation is clutch, scum should be trying to avoid linking their fates like that. Especially in a D1 situation, where there's people making miniature cases every direction, the last thing scum should do is all be pointing the same direction. You're grasping at ridiculous straws, and not doing much to convince me of your innocence. Frankly, if obvious flips red, you and Hapa will be the first people I'll be looking at. Clearly a lot of people find him at least worthy of watching, if not a current vote, as evidenced by the many posts stating such. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:48 YourHarry wrote: Your reasoning that I may not be the person to be blamed if Obvious.660 lead to mislynch is logical. I agree that if I was away, and Obvious flipped town, I should not be the one to seem most scummy.. But even despite not providing any reason to vote Obvious.660, I did strongly push his bandwagon - mostly to see his reactions - which could seem scummy in many people's eyes. As you recently read, Hapha's accusation against me included this as my scuminess. Also, I still fail to see how Obvious.660 personal reads of everyone in the game is scummy. At least when I play mafia, we frequently take turns to reveal reads on every player in the game. Obvious's "reads" were over-simplified jokes, including a mild OMGUS against me, which you've since picked up on as a possible bandwagon, and basically the whole post was just faux contribution useless clutter. Mostly non-committal nonsense. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:48 Hapahauli wrote: But Tube didn't make a scumslip! He was asked to change his tone for the town and did so! And if the two of us are agreeing on it, you'd think it would be obvious as all hell to anyone else, right? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:52 Hapahauli wrote: I'm shocked we're on the same side of this issue tbh o_O That's because you still think I'm disagreeing with you on principle rather than because I actually see things differently than you do. Now granted, I loathe your style, but if I see the same thing you do, I'm not going to argue against it. And if I agree with you for a different set of reasons, I'm just going to list my own reasons. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 04:00 YourHarry wrote: An argument that tube's change of writing style is a scumslip could not have come from a person who actually read this thread. It is just ridiculous. Unless I missed something. Actually it came from someone who was in on pressuring the change of style, right after they said welcome to the thread. That person was obvious, and is the reason for my vote on him, which you're using as a "case" against me. That's equally ridiculous. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 07:32 Obvious.660 wrote: Woah! It's like a completely different person sat down at your computer and started typing. WELCOME TO THE GAME, TUBE! On July 17 2012 07:39 Obvious.660 wrote: ##Vote tube Reason: out of character posting. Coached response. Further, he was pushing 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 YourHarry I 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 iamperfection as 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. 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. talking about the sacrificial lamb strategy. I mean, really? Nothing's impossible, but I don't buy it, and never will. Further, there's this bolded bit: On July 17 2012 10:13 Obvious.660 wrote: @JingleHell I would rather have a strategy and have a discussion than lurk, make no claims, or hold no convictions. We have agreed that non-participation is bad. If you want me to adjust my strategy then propose another that holds more merit. Sitting around waiting for something to happen is boring. Again, I was tunneling tube, I got somewhat over-impassioned about maybe finding a scum and I let myself be taken over by it. Lesson learned. I already conceded the I was wrong about the tell. That doesn't excuse everything else that has been discussed. Then posts all his "convictions" 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. Where this is mostly non-committal, cluttering, and a useless list. He also used this post: On July 17 2012 10:29 Obvious.660 wrote: @JingleHell hi. I'm the guy who noted you used a colloquialism and defended you for it earlier. Anyone can throw anyone to the wolves. Take them out in back of the barn and shoot them. Leave them for dead. Thanks for letting me know my figures of speech are tells when they match anything ever said or used in a mafia game. I'll try to avoid them if it makes you feel better. Please, take everything I say and compare it to everything ever written about scum. When you're done, you can lynch me and watch me flip town. Such nonsense. to try and guilt me into removing my vote. Plus there's this gem: On July 17 2012 08:40 Obvious.660 wrote: certainly give you the chance to participate before I throw you under the bus. . When throwing someone under the bus is a term for what scum does. A lot of people seem to dislike this, but I think they're forgetting that evidence is either hearsay, circumstantial, or based in WIFOM, every single time. This is enough for me to consider him scummy, and regardless of whether others agree with that, I do think it's bizarre anyone would try to turn it into a case against me. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 05:32 Hapahauli wrote: I haven't gone through iamperfection's filter all too thorougly yet. Let me take a look, and I'll get back to you in a few minutes. That's all it should take  | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 05:51 drwiggl3s wrote: Don't you think if he was really mafia.. He'd be here defending himself? is the case against him SO STRONG that he sees it as an imovable mountain that can never be overcome? If obvious was really mafia his scum buddies would be pressuring him to post. They would be defending him, or trying to push lynches even harder onto other players. 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. Also you saying I posted a bunch of one liners is halarious coming from you. Anyone with half a second can check out my filter and see that's simply not true. There are people strongly defending him. Also, it's plausible they'd not try too hard to save him, for fear of looking scummy following a mislynch. Also, he hasn't defended himself recently, but his primary defense was to flip-flop about tube and then post a list that boiled down to an OMGUS against me and spread suspicion every direction he could. Frankly, you can't trust WIFOM on it's own, and that's exactly why you're saying he's not scum. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 05:57 calgar wrote: 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. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Call me crazy, but I'd rather lynch the guy who seems scummy based on activity, and if it turns out to be a mislynch due to poor town play, take the information we can from how people handled it. And I'm saying that knowing full well that if he does turn out to be a mislynch, I'll be one of the people in the spotlight. I'm willing to take that risk because A: I know I'm town and he honestly feels scummy for all the reasons I've given, and B: because we will get information based on the behavior of other people involving his case. And frankly, I don't expect Obvious to be a mislynch. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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. Good point, I overlooked that. Let's see what he flips then. ## Vote Obvious.660 Well, we're actually plurality lynch, most votes at the end of the day, in case of a tie, first to the number. We have to intentionally decide, as a group, to no-lynch. Which, depending on how the mod runs it, can be iffy. In Newbie XVIII, it would only fly if literally everyone agreed to no-lynch. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 07:40 Hopeless1der wrote: 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. Both of those scenarios suggest that he's town and you know it, but you're considering swapping votes to him? If he flips green, this post of yours is going to look REALLY bad. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
It certainly lends some credence to the Iamperfection argument, though. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 08:27 calgar wrote: You would claim vanilla townie so as to not negate the value. Oh, great idea. Ok, since we can trust anyone who claims townie, let's just ask. Guys, who's scum? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 08:29 Hapahauli wrote: Fuck. GG Obvious.660, wish I could've done more to save ya. @ Jingle - well if he claimed vet, he would've survived, no? It also confirms a townie and doesn't waste a lynch. @ Town - Balls. Fortunately we should be able to get some information from the bandwagon. I'll be looking through vote patterns and rereading filters tonight. In the mean time, make sure you post your reads before the end of the night!! I'll try to post mine in a couple of hours - we don't want anyone dying from the mafia night kill without providing any information. I wouldn't count someone claiming vet as confirmed townie unless they actually survived an attack. That's like claiming VT, with the exception that if they're telling the truth, it means scum won't waste an NK on them, and the only ways to confirm it are to have a Vigi shoot them or have a DT investigate them. I can't say GG, myself, when, even if we assume that 100% of the scum voted for him, which we have no way of knowing for sure, he still seemed scummy to enough townies to be in serious danger without scum voting on him. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
My primary reason for thinking this is plausible, tube was too happy to jump behind me, but once the heat on him dies down, and people start remembering "he made an effort", his posting starts regressing mostly. Thoughts? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If, by then, he hasn't, he deserves what he gets. But a vigi shot, that's easy to sell, could be a disaster if he's just inactive. I'm all for everyone stacking votes on him come daytime, at least until he starts talking. Calgar, would you feel comfortable suggesting a vigi shot on him if we came to a consensus that if it flipped him town, you were next in line for a lynch? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 11:45 tube wrote: Alright, this sounds suspicious, why do you need to make such a proposition? To me, it's pretty ridiculous that anyone should have to bet their life on a read that still has some chance of being wrong. I hope you're just trying to incite a reaction because this seems like something scum would try to setup. I gave my reasoning in the post you trimmed in the process of quoting me. Any particular reason for you conveniently ignoring it? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 12:01 tube wrote: You're trying to convince vigi not to shoot perfection because it would be too easy, but we have no better targets and Vigi might not live until night 2 (or exist, for that matter). The more of us alive earlier, the better. Your suggestion that we wait an entire 3 days to lynch our most prime suspect almost sounds like you're trying to protect a red role or something so that he can use it tonight at least. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. If a vigi doesn't exist, I don't need to dissuade them. They only get one shot, so if perfection is town, it's two things lost, the shot and a townie. I already said I think perfection is an easy read, but he's too easy, and it's easy to see how scum could want the vigi to take that easy shot. Remove the shot from play to prevent a death on a scum, remove a town from play if he's town. He's posted so little that while I think we should pile a pisston of pressure on him, I still find it easy to see him as just utterly inactive. You know how in movies and books there's always cliches about too easy, or too quiet? That's what perfection is. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 12:13 tube wrote: You just stated all the consequences of vigi shooting a townie, which are inherent and already known to everyone. However, the much more likely scenario is that he actually is mafia and should therefore be taken out as early as possible. If you disagree with all of Mufaa's, Hapa's, and calgar's cases against him, then you should explain where the reasonable doubt comes from, because "it's too easy" doesn't really convince anyone. So you're using "Me too" as an argument to discredit the utter lack of evidence that I've pointed to? There's not exactly much case to attack on him, which is my whole damn point as to why him living until the end of D2 isn't such a bad thing. A hasty bullet into the easy target could be a bad thing. Yes, it's plausible he's scum, nobody is saying that's not the case. All I'm saying is that we don't have a whole lot to work with, making it a rather hefty gamble. Your refusal to see that sounds terribly like you're paranoid you might be next and want to jump up and down waving your arms to get people's attention and convince them you're townie with your "me too" attitude. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
That makes loads of sense. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 12:35 tube wrote: I have no idea what you're talking about with this "me too" attitude. And are you trying to say it's too easy or it's too quiet? Make up your mind. When someone makes few posts, and those few posts are also very scummy, that doesn't somehow give him a probable chance of being innocent. I'm saying too easy and too quiet are the same general thing here. He's an easy target. "It's quiet, too quiet" *Sudden huge influx of random plot villain A shows up to murder every fucking thing in sight*. When something looks too simple, too easy, or too obvious, sometimes it really is. As was obviously the case with... well, Obvious. But hey, let's go back to your logic. When someone posts next to nothing useful, and it's mostly obviously scummy, lynch that mofo. Who's cool with lynching tube on his own logic? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
And by the way, I'm not sure you answered what I pointed out. How would it make sense, if you were town and I was scum, for me to put a huge spotlight on myself to change which person was set to be mislynched? That would be utterly idiotic. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 12:47 tube wrote: Too easy and too quiet are definitely not the same thing. If the few posts he made didn't scream scum, then you would only be saying "too quiet", which doesn't implicate him in anything. How was that the case with Obvious? He made a good number of posts until his summary, and retrospectively some of them were helping town and some just looked plain scummy. Perfection, on the other hand, has only made posts that have not helped town in any way. So now all my posts are both useless and scummy? Mind going into further detail? I'm very specifically talking about "too easy" and "too quiet" as the movie/book lines they get used as, a cliched precursor to pure trouble. That's as a comparison to the plausible situation I see with someone asking for a vigi shot against perfection. He's such a simple, obvious sort of target that it makes SENSE to suggest it, and if there's a scum motive, it kills two birds with one stone. Obvious was easy to see as scum, and got lynched, and it turned out to have been too easy. Too good to be true. And saying the majority of your posts are useless and easily seen as scummy? Let's go back to yesterday, the posting you did before your sudden change of heart, and a bit of your posting since the attention was lifted off of you. You've been highly active, but not in a serious sort of way. Oh, wait, let me guess, we still don't have enough information, right? Because yesterday, that's why you weren't saying anything useful. Not enough information. Well now you want Iamperfection to die based on NO DAMN INFORMATION. And you're STILL ignoring my question about why your theoretical scum Jingle diverts attention off your theoretical townie you, and onto the (now) confirmed townie Obvious, when I could have just sat back and watched the chaos with MUCH less attention on me. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 12:48 tube wrote: Also, you're doing that thing again where you put words in people's mouths. First of all, I didn't even suggest that situation, the issue of you being scummy is separate from the one where perfection should be vig'd. Also, like I said, if that was the situation, then it WOULD make sense if perfection IS scum, because then it wouldn't be a mislynch on him. You're actually saying this? You suggested it was scummy for ME to dare ask Calgar to say he's 100% sure about Perfection based on practically no info. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
As soon as we start following your implications backwards through the thread, they start breaking down. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 13:09 tube wrote: And your entire reasoning to let him live for now is that he looks too scummy to be scum. Because that's much more reasonable than suggesting that he actually he is scum. Again, I and other users don't see that realistic probability that he's townie that you so easily seem to. Now who's putting words in mouths? I've said over and over that I don't think he's townie. I'm pointing to a VERY plausible hypothetical situation that could come from Calgar's vigi suggestion. Simple. You pushing back is suspicious as all hell. Obvious getting lynched was his own misplay, he didn't defend himself at all. Not exactly the town's fault for lynching someone who looked scummy. Your suggesting that perfection's case is the same is pretty out there, when perfection is much easier to see as scum now that Obvious flipped town. Perfection only seems somewhat scummier based on Obvious flipping town. He's a fair read, and again, you're putting words in my mouth, ironically, to suggest I'm saying he isn't. All I've said is that it seems too easy, just like Obvious did, now that we know he was town. Same reason I'm trying to bury the hatchet with Hapa, sometimes it's too easy. It's also very dumb of you to push the idea that I still hold no suspicions against anyone due to a lack of information when it's obvious I'm presenting my own analysis now that things have actually happened. And if perfection's few, scummy posts are NO DAMN INFORMATION to you, what does it take for you to be convinced that someone's scum? You're not presenting your own analysis, you're piggybacking other people's. Unless, of course, you're talking about the "analysis" of calling me scummy based on the strangest WIFOM imaginable because I suggested that Perfection might be too easy of a target. Before, you had a problem with people not having enough information, because we were looking at you based on a few scummy posts. Now you want perfection dead for a few scummy posts. Make up your damn mind. Simple. I'm going to bed. Someone else try to reason with this clown. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Basically, I'm saying that it's too scary of a gamble to be asking a Vigi to shoot you now, because we have no evidence to work with, and if we pressure you to join the party, we might have evidence to work with one way or another. Pointing to your own meta is nothing but a bad joke. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Obviously, I'm all for forcing Perfection to be active during the day today, how do you guys feel about frontloading a few votes on him while we do our discussion? I'm still a bit nervous about YourHarry, and frankly, as much as there's going to be people calling this scummy, I still feel it's wise to give a slight BOTD to perfection, just because he really does seem too easy to lynch. A hypothetical townie perfection would just be the world's easiest mislynch to feed us. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
So yes, if a Townie gets themselves killed, I do think it's their own fault. This is not scummy, this is a fact. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 19 2012 00:08 iamperfection wrote: i dont understand the first line? GGing talking about saying good game to someone after they get killed? Yes. It's apparently something you should avoid overdoing. Which kinda makes sense. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
It's the same risk every single person takes when they cast their vote. If it's a mislynch, you're tied to it. If you try to tell the vigi to kill someone, and it's wrong, you should be associated with the suggestion you made. If you're not all that confident that he's scum that you're willing to take credit for it, then it's not wasted time to put pressure on him before killing him. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Perfection is NOT helping his situation at all, hence why I'm perfectly comfortable with frontloading votes on him until and unless he proves some town value. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I'm pointing out the reasoning for vig NOT to shoot you based on limited information, Perfection. And asking Calgar if he's so confident in your guilt based off the limited information we had at the time, because he wanted to tell the Vig that they should definitely shoot a person to save us time or whatever. Now granted, you're selling me more and more on your guilt, but I'm entirely unsure of your logic. Although your guilt wouldn't confirm Calgar for me at this point, because frankly, if you were scum, at this point, your best value would be as proof of other scum's innocence. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I'm going to skip perfection, because we all know the deal with him. At this point, I plan to start working up a case against Calgar if I live long enough. If Perfection is scum, the calling for a vigi hit was an attempt to earn calgar town credit, and if Perfection is town, he's an easy sell for a mislynch. Regardless, Calgar's late in the day effort to "Save" obvious once it became clear saving him would be difficult looks like an effort at town cred. It's heavy WIFOM, but it was a mediocre effort, and too little too late. Certainly not enough to make him look clean to me. Furthermore, he jumps votes like it's going out of style, and despite pushing his side bandwagon on perfection late D1, he didn't change his vote until he got Hapa onboard with it. Check the timing in the filter. Despite his seeming desperation to "save" obvious by pushing perfection, Calgar left his vote on YourHarry until AFTER Hapa changed votes. What? Go back to the very beginning of D1, he was pointing to his lack of history to analyze, and hoping to cast doubts on the various methods people can use to spot scum. He was actively spreading the seeds of doubt for any analysis that could be directed his way. 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: 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. This second one casts huge WIFOM type doubts around, he can point to it later as needed. "See guys, I even said back then we should avoid watching this stuff". I plan to go through and work up a complete case once it's daytime, unless I'm dead. This should be enough to at least consider if I do die. Also, Calgar was, at first, one of the people calling me scummy for saying we don't have sufficient info for a vigi kill to feel really safe. When Hapa agreed, I'm suddenly not on Calgar's scumlist in his recent post? Again, "me-too"-ing on Hapa. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
1: he pointed at Calgar at one point. This follows on my interest in Calgar, admittedly. 2: They don't want a person they know as townie to potentially get BOTD after a replacement. 3: Failed Blue hunt. Can anyone think of another reason? Now obviously, we could have something screwy involving a vigi and a blocked NK going on, but I can't imagine a vigi thinking Evul was the best target right now. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
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? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
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
| ||
|
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. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 19 2012 20:56 Hapahauli wrote: First of all, I don't see where he casts suspicion on Jingle. He's definetely critical of Jingle's play, but I don't see any instances of him casting direct suspicion (link me a post if I'm wrong, could've missed something). Critical =/= accusatory. Secondly, his "bus" on iamperfection isn't weak at all. He's really consistent about his attitude towards him throughout D1 and holds his suspicions throughout N1. But here's the key point: why would mafia EVER try to push for a N1 vigi kill on their ally?! There's no difference between 6-3 and 5-3. Both situations still require two people to switch votes. Furthermore, there was a lot of reason to believe that the relatively inactive Fulla wouldn't come in to vote at all. Is it wildly inconsistent and not make sense? Yes. Is it mafia-motivated? No. Why would he ever establish Jingle as a strong townie read? It just doesn't make sense from a mafia perspective. It's more plausible from a bad analysis/bad townie post perspective. 1: The post was already linked. He directly implied only a scummy motive would want more evidence with perfection rather than wanting a vigi hit. You bring up WIFOM, but let's face it. At that point in time, if I was on the scum team, I'd be thinking the best possible use for Perfection would be dying to get me town credit. 2:Scum need at least one visible townie to keep around as a smokescreen for their own active players until later in the game. If they've been known to be unlucky like me, so much the better. Scum can't push an agenda if the entire thread is quiet. 3: Calgar, despite being so much more logical than me (according to himself) has yet to respond to my points with anything other than attempts to pick fights. 4: You've asked why scum Calgar would have posted telling us to stop fighting. That's ridiculous. Visible scum aiming for town leadership should do exactly that. 5: My case may seem like it's made up of tiny little things... wasn't it Calgar who, at the beginning, gave the scum a huge amount of credit saying not to look for big obvious things? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 19 2012 22:31 calgar wrote: I'm curious. I've said I'll answer anything specific. I don't think it will be productive to go through everyone's huge lists with a long typed up response. Too much clutter. Fulla, your question is about to be answered here, too, I think. Calgar, let's make sure we're on the same page with what you want me to be answering. And I'll be more than thrilled to answer. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I have something relatively damning waiting to come to light, the only reason I've held off on it was to wait for it to become less circumstantial, which it has. Since Calgar commented on it, I'll present it. Although since I agreed to it, he suddenly seems wary of bringing my breadcrumb he commented on to light. On July 18 2012 23:57 JingleHell wrote: Just As well I Love EvulRabbitz, since he seems a bit off. Could just be A blue again. Loved his Great job As detective Really. Obviously, I'm all for forcing Perfection to be active during the day today, how do you guys feel about frontloading a few votes on him while we do our discussion? I'm still a bit nervous about YourHarry, and frankly, as much as there's going to be people calling this scummy, I still feel it's wise to give a slight BOTD to perfection, just because he really does seem too easy to lynch. A hypothetical townie perfection would just be the world's easiest mislynch to feed us. Rather visible, yes? "Jailer Calgar." That's right, Calgar was jailed. Now, you might wonder what good that could do? Well, something I've been paranoid about was the possibility of a Hapa scum. It would take fairly damning evidence for me to accuse him without it looking like an extension of our dislike for each other, even though we've kept votes off each other throughout. Well, if we assume townie, with Calgar blocked and protected, the most obvious target for an NK would be Hapa. Especially since there's usually not that many blue roles in newbie games, with Vet flipped, and me obviously on Calgar, Hapa should have been fair game. Instead, they went for Evul. Two possible values for this. One, it could look like I was breadcrumbing an NK, putting suspicion on me, but since scum can talk in QT, that would just be arrogant and foolish. Also, if Hapahauli was scum, they obviously wouldn't NK him, so they just killed a random dude. Since I posted heavy suspicions on Calgar for his post about vigi hit on Perfection after that, Hapa has stepped in to defend him, posting copious amounts of WIFOM. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
They didn't, which lends credence to my fear that Hapa is scum. Calling it "trying to encourage scum to kill Hapa" is an unfair misrepresentation. This is mafia. Everyone is guilty until proven innocent. So I left a deliberate opening, Hapa wasn't killed, and when the case starts showing up against Calgar, Hapa defends him with very weak WIFOM. Yeah, circumstance. Welcome to how Mafia is played. It's not conclusive in and of itself, but it certainly would make sense. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 19 2012 23:41 Hapahauli wrote: So you're saying that both Calgar AND I are scum? All this based on a breadcrumb that mafia may or may not have seen?! Really? I'm saying it fits. Calgar certainly seemed to think it was pretty visible. You'll notice I freely admit it's a pile of circumstance. I'd say people besides you should maybe try and decide for themselves on Calgar, and if he flips scum, we should maybe look closely at you. I did it specifically because we've had enough issues with each other that it's pretty easy to have bias get in the way, so I looked for something that could point to itself. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
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? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:08 Hapahauli wrote: @ Jingle - Assuming that Mafia saw your breadcrumb, why didn't they shoot you? You should be dead a thousand times over by that logic. Secondly, if Calgar and I were mafia, wouldn't killing the only other vocal townie (and sniping a blue on top of that) be really freggin' good for us? We would dominate the discussion for the rest of the game and get people lynched at will. Thirdly, why the hell would we both be actively establishing your innocence, even AFTER you pushed the Obvious.660 mislynch? Haven't I already commented on the pile of WIFOM you're trying to feed me? Shooting me would have removed the panic button of pointing fingers at me for mislynches. I already explained that twice, so if you're not going to respond to the explanation, I've got nothing further to say on this. And your thirdly I've also answered. Please don't respond by asking questions I answered already with no substance, all WIFOM. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If that doesn't make sense, I've given you far too much credit. In fact, I hope people won't believe you suddenly not being able to think. More than anyone else here, I can't stand your personality, but I still know you're sharp enough to understand what I'm saying, and feigning ignorance is so grossly out of character for you as a defense, that I hope others see it too. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:24 Fulla wrote: Jingle I find this whole thing requires too much of a leap of faith. I really don't think pursuing this is a good idea. The more I think about the more killing the silent guy was the best choice for scum. - 1 town was removed, without giving ANY information out. - Alot of fingers going around.already It has only increased the paranoia. Anybody here as Mafia could have made the choice to kill the silent guy. It doesn't make anyone more suspicious in my eyes? Fulla, have you actually read my case against Calgar, independent of the suspicion on Hapa? I find it hard to believe. If mine's too long for a lurker, try reading Hopeless's case instead. I've already said Hapa isn't guaranteed to be scum even if Calgar is. I've just established a plausible link to pursue following Calgar. Right now, their primary defense is a combination of WIFOM and the Obvious mislynch. Quite a few people believed in that, and given that it was a mislynch, most likely one or two scum didn't even vote for obvious, so there's very solid odds that there were enough town on Obvious to secure his lynch without any scum votes at all. Pointing to the mislynch is an easy and obvious means of discrediting me, but, if you take the fact that they only feel sort of scummy, in a way that requires a leap of faith, and combine it with the WIFOM people seem to want to follow now that scum wouldn't be glaringly obvious (pointed to by Calgar early in D1 no less), well, they become better targets if it requires a leap of faith, not worse. And going back to Calgar's early statement about scum probably being too smart to be obvious scum... why then, was Calgar so interested in the easy target of Perfection? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
##Vote Calgar Until and unless Calgar stops trying to dismiss my case against him as "too long" (too much evidence, lolwut?) and actually responds to it. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:50 calgar wrote: Your case is WIFOM, what is there to address? I'm spreading seeds of doubt? I flop votes like a bunny on cocaine? Like its going out of style? I lobbied to save a townie as part of a malicious plan? Because hapa is still alive after your silly breadcrumb? You aren't worth a response so you're not going to get another. Show me a mafia case that isn't based on WIFOM. I dare you. Every single mafia case can be turned into WIFOM, literally. And my case is based on your entire posting history, broken down into piles and piles of scummy behavior. Don't like the rhetoric? That's nice. But basing a dismissal of that much evidence on the phrasing is as scummy as it gets. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I can't stop lurkers from lurking, I can't force them to read the case and come to their own conclusions. But if they don't choose to play to win, it's literally impossible for me to do it by myself. So I'll just give it some time, and see what the town decides. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If you can explain to me how that makes me scummier than him, I'd love to hear it. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 16 2012 08:54 calgar wrote: 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. Clarity, transparency and direction. Keep these three things he wishes to provide in mind when reading his posts. 1: Early play: he plays the noob card subtly, and comments about having no meta. He also says, essentially, that scum are probably too smart to make big, visible, blatant mistakes. This is shortly followed by the "Wait and see" line of posting, where his defense boils down to "I swear I'm not scum, so you must just be illogical." 2: Second part of day 1: He jumps on the tube wagon, shifts votes everywhere, and "me-too"s onto myself and Hapa incessantly. Calls for votes on perfection, but doesn't vote for perfection himself until Hapa does. He has his vote on someone other than the various people he calls his strongest scum read quite often. 3: Night 1: He calls for a vigi hit on perfection, until Hapa agrees it's too early, then backs off. Still playing "me-too", and easily shifting his self-assuredness. 3: D2: Dismisses my huge case against him as being too long to bother with, and accuses me of digging too deep for subtlety, even though early in D1 he said that blatant scum tells were probably just clumsy town play. Uses a combination of ad hominem attacks and witty remarks about my rhetoric to gloss over having no response to the actual case against him. Again, this is just the condensed part, independent of my possible follow-on suspicion against Hapa. That will only gain credence if Calgar flips scum based on the evidence against him. Please go back and read the un-summarized version for supporting quotes and additional shady behavior. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 02:00 YourHarry wrote: And I already outlined my suspicion that calgar is scum. So, if I am right, then above post also makes JingleHell not because he is simply bussing calgar, but because he is leaving room for him to change his mind if calgar comes back to defend himself. In addition, I have to go check to read the post Jingle's "breadcrumb" post, but if other people's narrations of what happened is correct, Calgar was the one player who "deciphered" Jingle's breadcrumb. This also is consistent with calgar & JingleHell scum team, who have QT. Actually, I've been consistently using that wording when trying to get someone to respond. I wasn't planning to vote this early off of mostly my own case, but since he was refusing to defend himself, I was hoping to pressure him to do exactly that. I also don't plan to shift my vote off him unless there's overwhelming reason to do so. Track my suspicions on him, and if he flips red, revisit this theory. Unless we're going to go back to the silly sacrificial lamb strategy that I think nobody has any respect for, or interest in (who wants to win by not playing?), I don't think me going for Calgar's throat will still look scummy later. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
However, if I get NKed and flip blue, it adds a lot of weight to my case. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 05:43 calgar wrote: You aren't going to decide for yourself who to lynch D2? This is what the game is all about, it's the crux; why are you playing? Let's put all the complicated theories aside for a second. Have I managed to help the town at all with any of my actions. Has iamperfection helped the town with any of his actions? Who would you lynch of the two if one has and one hasn't? What are we calling helping the town? What have you done that's demonstrably pro-town, and not just pro-you? Have you confirmed a townie? Been confirmed townie? Made a solid case? Defended yourself against a case? Hell, you complained about me having "too much" against you, and then ignored the concise, summarized version. If my case is as weak as you say, you should be able to put it to bed easily, which would be more pro-town than ignoring it for being too much. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
It's one thing to defend against a case that's based in OMGUS or a logical fallacy that way, but when it's a mountain of your posts straight up not fitting when taken in the context of the thread as a whole at the time, you need to be able to respond to them. You overtly refuse to, aside from attempts to look witty. Is it any surprise other people are getting onboard? If the case is actually compelling in and of itself, you should present a compelling defense. You can only afford to ignore a case when it's weak enough that nobody sees anything in it. It's not like Hapa's attacks on my case were any better than yours, they boiled down to the same range of trying to discredit me and ignore the case itself. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Your original vote on perfection has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that you then jumped from one "strong read" to another, with your votes frequently being directly contradictory to your "strongest read", up until you got Hapa to shift a vote, at which point you finally voted for perfection. Let's face it. You spend more time in your response here asserting that "Since I'm town - WIFOM". That's not an explanation for scummy behavior, that's asserting that people should trust you because you say so. You keep pointing fingers back to Obvious to make my case against you look weaker, but you're ignoring that the case against him was a result of his own actions. Was I a major factor in the case? Yes. Do I regret the needless loss of a town vote? Absolutely. Does that make it my fault that he appeared scummy? No. His posts were his downfall, not mine. Your posts are what have me breathing down your neck, and even while putting up this facade of a response, you continue in your need for personal attacks. You didn't exactly make the post saying you'd been in multiple games elsewhere until Hapa called you out on subtly playing the noob card. A reaction doesn't change the post itself. Overall, you're starting to do a credible job of explaining yourself. I can at least accept your explanation for most of the "me-too" attitude, although I do find it foolish to have a strong town read that early in D1. I'm not exactly at the point of no return here, I just want answers, which you've withheld, while acting like it would be some sort of waste to respond, even when it's anything but. If I can stop arguing with Hapa outside of case arguments, surely you'd be able to believe I'd be able to back off on a case I'm actually persuaded is bad. Hell, the Obvious case, IIRC, you said you saw where I was coming from, but didn't draw the same conclusions. That's a far cry from how you're treating it now, trying to weaponize it against me. You know what, just for giggles, I'll even give benefit of the doubt on the vigi hit thing, since the numbers at least seem like a reasonable assessment, and it comes down to a gut feeling on whether it's just too damn easy of a target. The breadcrumb and hapa thing, of course, is purely circumstantial and WIFOM, and only applicable if you flip scum, so it doesn't need to be part of your defense, really. So, if you can just explain the scummy behavior in your responses to me, and finish with the shortcomings I've already outlined, I'll move on to someone else happily. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
e see him flip town and glean what we can from that (nothing). We move on to lurkers/suspicious. 6:2 I can assume that's a brain fart, but it would be 6:3 going into today, had vigi hit him and he was town. I still kinda see the reasoning, but based off of too little evidence like I said. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + 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 Can you not see where that's an entirely different type of game than I was trying to play? Quite a few rude comments in there for just getting called out for things I saw as shady. I have no qualms responding rudely to someone who tries to make a "case" against me via ad homs, or someone I dislike (as we've seen) but I try to keep my cases off this level of play, because it just turns into a clusterfuck for all involved. See D2 of XVIII where I was scum and a response like this from a townie turned what was supposed to be "Hey look I'm visible" pressure into an OMGUS "Someone dies" scenario. So I strongly avoid getting dragged down into that kind of argument where real cases are concerned, they're an utter debacle. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 08:45 YourHarry wrote: Jingle, is this your the breadcrumb post? BREADCRUMB What exactly was your purpose of breadcrumbing at that point? I've already explained this. However, the specific value depends on a few factors, also available in the explanation. I think it was discussed 8-9 hours ago. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
##Unvote ##Vote iamperfection | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Would be pretty epic if NK ended up being so pro-town because of that, and would kinda nuke the ever-living hell out of my WIFOM case involving a Hapa/Calgar scumteam. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 09:21 YourHarry wrote: calgar, after realizing the breadcrumb, were you every suspicious of Jingle for being scum? also could you provide the link to your breadcrumb, where you communicated to Jingle that you read his? Jingle, did you notice calgar's breadcrumb immediately? Apologies if these have been already discussed. Not reading the thread completely, twice now you've tried to get people to claim blue roles, along with everything else you've had commented on already... You're looking better and better. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
He's been content to sit back and watch for the most part, only chipping in a little as long as things were moving, but when misunderstandings smooth over, he goes back to machine gun posts, half of which can't even be WIFOM'd into something pro town... | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 09:28 YourHarry wrote: I am just trying to gather more and more evidence why you and calgar are scums You know what, at potential risk of sounding like an OMGUS, ##Unvote ##Vote YourHarry | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
[green][b] Insert Text Here [/b][/green] | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
And this is the sum total of both your defense and your "case" against me after you "skimmed through the game from the beginning"? To quote myself after you announced your plan... On July 20 2012 10:05 JingleHell wrote: Anyone else expecting some grandiose epic thriller that makes the craziest WIFOM anyone else (like me) has used so far look mundane? Now I admit, it's shorter than I was expecting, but what the fucking fuckity fuck? Does anyone (who doesn't have several votes on them) expect me to do sufficient amounts of hallucinogens to respond to this? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 13:04 YourHarry wrote: Jingle, in XX it was brought up multiple times that townies should claim "roleblocked". I personally brought this up at least 3 times. Your "evidence"? is based on a game I mostly ignored because certain players were putting my blood pressure through the roof. And the parts of the game where I was paying attention to the thread, I was paying as much attention to you personally as anyone else was. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Huh? Love, Jingle Harry is by far my strongest current read. But even if he wasn't... here's how I feel. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 20 2012 23:11 YourHarry wrote: In Jingle's 1st game XVIII, unfortunately whether vanilla townies get roleblocked does not get mentioned, at least in the rules. In Jingle's 2nd game XIX, this is also mentioned by the mod. I didn't not read the whole thread to see it is mentioned again by other players. He died on night 1 though, but I assume he probably read the list of the roles. Whether vanillas get roleblocked is not specifically mentioned, and but the writing of the rules should be reasonably interpreted as everyone getting roleblocked notification - as it does not say only power roles get the notification. Still, there is some room for misunderstanding, if this was Jingle's only game. + Show Spoiler + Skilled Bullshitter (Role Blocker) You are a skilled thread derailer, you have the ability to take any thread on TL and subtly derail it with complete bullshit. So subtle that no one notices, but effective enough that no one in the thread can have a coherent conversation and spend the entire night trying to refute the total nonsensical bullshit that you brought up. Each night you may choose one target of your choice to bullshit. That player will not be able to perform any actions for the night. Your target will be informed they were roleblocked. Roleblocks do not block passive abilities. Jingle's 3rd game, XX, it had been mentioned ample of times by me and other players that vanillas also get roleblock notifications. But it is also mentioned by the moderator Radfield (I bolded the part specifying this): + Show Spoiler + On June 30 2012 05:27 Radfield wrote: Things to keep in mind: *The Godfather is immune to tracking. *The godfather will return as Innocent, and a miller with return as Guilty to detective checks. *The Miller will show up to tracking as visiting a random player. *Mafia players will be tracked to the target of their roles, not to the kill target. In the event a mafia player does NOT use his role, he will be tracked to the kill target. *Players will be notified if they are roleblocked, whether they have a role or not. Dear Harry, Remember this? On July 13 2012 10:41 JingleHell wrote: Meh, I wasn't expecting some hidden easter egg shiznit, and it's my final newbie game, so I was just going to /in and go back to dig out the juicy bits. Or was I casually setting up my own defense back then when I posted something humorously self-aggrandizing to explain missing that? Before I knew roles? If you'd like to make a case, please feel free to do so. Currently you're just making my head hurt. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If anyone feels the need, and has the ability, feel free to translate Harry's "case" against me into something I can understand without controlled substances, and I'll happily refute it. So far, the parts I've understood best have been the ones where he's suggested I'm involved in some overly complex, grandiose plot because my memory isn't perfect. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 18 2012 08:28 JingleHell wrote: Oh, great idea. Ok, since we can trust anyone who claims townie, let's just ask. Guys, who's scum? Also... On July 21 2012 00:06 YourHarry wrote: EDBWOP: hopefully a miller Harry says he HOPES he's a miller? Trying to discredit potential DT investigations or something? Yeah, ok scum, byebye. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 00:08 YourHarry wrote: What do you think about my case on calgar? Him not suspecting you even though he didn't get "roleblocked" notification from the mod? I don't understand your "case" on Calgar, either, actually. It seems to require the same sort of mental yoga that made me sprain my cerebral cortex trying to read your accusation against me. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Vanilla townies also get roleblocked. So do scums In no way contains the words "receive notification". Regardless, if you'll notice, he ASKED IN THE THREAD when a person gets notification once he understood you. Sometimes people "Understand" something, and then realize that they don't. Something can make some sort of sense the first time around to one part of your brain, and then later you realize "wait I don't get it". Also, you were trying to cast suspicion in a game of FORUM MAFIA by making a response time sensitive. You were pressuring a fast response and then you accuse him because everything you say has seven different meanings, usually mutually exclusive. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Anyways, I think the last several pages of utterly nonsensical spam OMGUS have more value as evidence against Harry than anyone else. Any dissent? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Frankly, I find it incredibly fishy that someone who's under suspicion would try to defend Harry. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
"Heavy" WIFOM is when there's so much of it that you need a fucking flowchart to keep track of the argument, like everything you say. "Useless" WIFOM is when you're in a position where an argument involves both parties arguing circular WIFOM back and forth at each other. And everything in Mafia being WIFOM merely refers to the fact that you can make a WIFOM case in any direction you want based off of literally everything said in a mafia game. Not to mention that you're actually not even pretending to take either of those bits in context of themselves, let alone the thread as a whole at the time. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Trying to make it a black and white thing is also scum behavior. The so called circular logic of calling things WIFOM and dismissing things as WIFOM involves CONTEXT. For reference, to be sure you understand this word, please include a definition from an English dictionary at some point. And then start using context in this stand up comedy routine you call a case. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 02:35 drwiggl3s wrote: Jingle since your leading this I want to ask you a question. If YourHarry flips scum, what information do you think we will gain from that conclusion? What if YourHarry flips town. What will be your opinion on Calgar, Hap, et all? If YourHarry flips scum, I'm kind of hoping the rest of the scumteam will surrender out of gratitude at not having him in the QT anymore. If YourHarry flips town, my opinion on everyone will require significant re-analysis. However, I've actually decided that if the scumteam includes both Hapa and Calgar, the town has already lost due to the number of inactive players. I'll try to have some concise stuff written up during the night since the odds of me making it to the morning are slim, unless there's a medic around. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Once the info is revealed, not sharing it would be bad, but revealing what I plan to look at in advance would be ridiculous. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
If hopeless is scummy for being a sheep, then what does that make you for being a chaotic sheep who seems to mainly care about instigating and maintaining drama, whose main defense was to attack Calgar, and who roleclaimed VT and said he hoped he was miller? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 03:00 drwiggl3s wrote: Its d2. We should have enough to go on to lynch for mafia scum not just for the sake of getting rid of clutter. No shit, thus the whole being 95% certain he's scum. Trying to take a tiny fraction of a snarky comment out of context to cast doubt on my case, plus trying to find out what sort of information we can get based on voting patterns, plus lurking like a mofo... Hi, D3. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 03:27 drwiggl3s wrote: .. Well I hope your right on this Jingle. For your sake.. being 95% sure and all. Being the person who's mostly been controlling this game, I really hope your right. Why don't you go read the case and decide for yourself? I mean, unless it's going to interfere with all those productive posts of yours. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Votecount please? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 03:50 drwiggl3s wrote: Jingle I think you could be scum. Despite your Jailer breadcrumb / claim crap. But before I make a (possibly wrong) case, I want to see more information. Since you're 95% sure that he's scum, I'm sure your comfortable with this. As tomorrow when he's lynched and flips scum I'll be able to believe your actually jailer. As some famous admiral once said... + Show Spoiler + it's a trap! Anyone want to lay down bets on what kind of trap Wiggles is setting? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Wiggles, based in his recent posting is almost certainly scum. He's been relatively inactive, until now. He's setting up posting to cast suspicion on me if Harry flips green, and to make me look wishy-washy and scummy if I change targets now. I'm almost certain to be accused of an OMGUS if I vote on him. Now, the problem we face is twofold. One: Do we look for some grandiose plan worthy of YourHarry's conspiracy theories and continue to assume that Harry is scum, or do we give BOTD down to "Townie off his meds"? And secondly, do we lynch Harry now and worry about Wiggles later, or do we get Wiggles now and give Harry a shock collar? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 17 2012 05:46 drwiggl3s wrote: Hmm.. Usually Mafia feel the need to post and "fit in" as they have an inherit sense of guilt. Do you think making non-productive posts makes you look more town? Seems like it has the opposite effect. I'd suggest you share some of your reads with us. What you think about other players etc. If you are town and really do want to get the heat of you.. If you're mafia than keep doing what your doing On July 17 2012 08:53 drwiggl3s wrote: Glad you could join is Fulla In my experience (LVI) it seemed that the first lynch did not turn out to be scum. But that's just down to odds right.. However, one player who posted short reads, accusations, one liners (Bill Murray in that game) ended up being Mafia Boss and was shot N1. Food for thought I guess. Kind of hard to extrapolate good data or trends for D1. Truly food for thought. Day 1, he voted for Tube well after that dust had cleared. On July 18 2012 03:42 drwiggl3s wrote: Ah ebwop Vote ##tube There was a huge difference. But since that post and everyone calling you out on it, YOU have since back tracked and modified your play and posting style to the way it was before. He visibly disassociated himself from the Obvious mislynch, which he seems to be capitalizing on now. Here, he makes a scummy statement about killing Calgar purely for the information. On July 20 2012 03:34 drwiggl3s wrote: For my reads right now, I wouldn't mind testing the waters with a Calgar lynch. Getting one of the major players out of the way and see what he flips. This could tell us a lot about iamperfection as well as others who are resistant (or soft defending) a Calgar lynch. And now his recent posting binge. Asking great questions, like what kind of info people might be able to glean from current situations once they resolve. On July 21 2012 02:35 drwiggl3s wrote: Jingle since your leading this I want to ask you a question. If YourHarry flips scum, what information do you think we will gain from that conclusion? What if YourHarry flips town. What will be your opinion on Calgar, Hap, et all? And generally setting things up so that no matter how Harry flips, he's in a good position. On July 21 2012 03:50 drwiggl3s wrote: Jingle I think you could be scum. Despite your Jailer breadcrumb / claim crap. But before I make a (possibly wrong) case, I want to see more information. Since you're 95% sure that he's scum, I'm sure your comfortable with this. As tomorrow when he's lynched and flips scum I'll be able to believe your actually jailer. Thoughts? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 04:21 drwiggl3s wrote: Lol you kidding me? Basically you're saying I'm more suspicious as scum for settling on your lynch, than you are for leading it? Nice way to get out of taking responsibility for your cases. And now this one too. This is quite blatantly setting me up. Maybe Harry is actually just a few boxes of tinfoil short of a good conspiracy theory. Who knows. But he's already laying blame at my feet when Harry looks scummy. Like he knows how Harry will flip. ##Unvote ##Vote drwiggl3s | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 04:37 drwiggl3s wrote: Yes I agree that maybe Hairy is town. I never said he was either alignment. But I'm saying that you have been leading the game thus far. And that if Harry turns out to flip town it's going to look bad on you. And I'm telling you I want to see how he flips since you have been so strongly saying he's mafia. And what, now after a tiny bit of pressure you go from "95" to saying Harry is "maybe a few boxes of tinfoil short of a good conspiracy theory"? To me it looks like your controlling this game. And soon as someone casts suspicion on you, you make a case on them. I want to see him lynched after your grandoise case against him. Because it will tell me a lot about your alignment. But, I'm sure being someone who doesn't want people to know about his alignment, you switch to a vote on me? I know what color I'll flip if I suddenly get lynched because of being willing to shift my vote to the person trying to lead me into a blatant trap. And if that lynch happens, when I flip town, you die next, so I'm at peace with it. Are you? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 04:38 calgar wrote: I'll agree with you that drwiggles is a good lynch right now. Is he better than harry though? I'm planning to move my vote away from iamperfection - I may have come up with a solution to him, I'll post more on that in a little. Harry under fire has given us good reads on how several people have reacted. Well, with wiggles suddenly making a lot of noise that would make me look completely horrid if Harry flips town, yeah, I'd rather smash the guy who's trying to lay a trap before calling his potential bluff. Like I said, if this makes me look bad, and I suddenly get mislynched, I know it will just get the town the scum kill tomorrow, so yes. Wiggles first, then once we're further from MYLO/LYLO, find out if he was bluffing about Harry or not. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 04:47 drwiggl3s wrote: A "blatant trap"? All it is is that we have different play styles Jingle. You make WIFOM cases on people. You make cases based off of what they may or may not have meant in their posts. I prefer to make judgements of alignment based on reactions. It was the reason I stuck with wanting to lynch tube after I saw how when pressured he totally changed his play style. To me, this tells a lot more about ones alignment than whatever you may perceive to be as a "slip" or whatever. I know what colour I'll flip to. And since you've been the person controlling the game, if Harry flips green I'll conclude that your either mafia, or bad town leading us down a hole. Anyway, what is your reaction to my pressure? Hmm? Soon as one of your town full of sheep (thus far) tries to call you out you switch your vote to him. This does 2 things. For one, it makes it so Harry won't get lynched (therefore you don't have to be responsible to the case I'm making against you). And for two, you're trying to kill off me (as someone who could push for a lynch against you) just to keep the town full of people that'll only sheep you. Yes, a blatant trap, which you're continuing to try and set for me, and in doing so, shoving your foot deeper into your mouth. Your plan backfired. A lurker can't suddenly come out of the woodwork without drawing heavy attention to motive, and the only plausible motive for your current play is to get me lynched. And now you're in survival mode because it was spotted and called out. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 04:58 drwiggl3s wrote: So the case on me is that I suggested Jingle might be just leading town down the shitter? Would someone else like to answer this? He actually managed to stop my sarcasm generator from getting power temporarily. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
2: You're not a prolific poster, you say And that it's only town (who naturally don't feel a sense of worry or guilt as much as mafia) to post more freely and make these "slips" you are even accusing me of. Except again, you're not posting that freely. Until just now, you've been fairly careful and cagey, hiding behind safe blanket statement things like outlined in the first portion. Everyone makes slips, and you're going into hypothetical "Scum me would be smarter than townie me" territory. Factor in that you're calling me scummy based on play that that quote of you calls a town trait... yeah, that sounds scummy to me. 3: You were ignoring the case, and instead suggesting lynching for information. That sounds scummy no matter how you cut it. You didn't care about the details either way, but you were fine with the notion of a bandwagon happening under someone else's guidance "for information". 4: You're suspicious of me for playing in what you called a town manner in your own defense, and trying to say things in advance of the flip that will make me look bad if he flips green, and you would look good, because you said those things. The townie play would be to try to defend him if you think my case is so terrible, not to allow him to be mislynched for information without the slightest attempt at defense. The only rationale for the way you played it is if you already have info on how Harry will flip, and want to set the stage to make me look bad, and you good, to secure a mislynch on me tomorrow. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 05:39 drwiggl3s wrote: 1 & 2) I think posting that "Hey I think the guy you think is confirmed town/ jailer could actually be scum if he lives to D3" qualifies as "posting pretty freely". I don't, it falls into what I've said about obvious attempts to set a trap for me. 3) I was not ignoring the case or suggesting to lynch for information. Did you just read my explanation? I was trying to get someone to come out from being a lurker and defend him, possibly netting us two Mafia if Calgar went on to be lynched. I even gave you my reason as to why I didn't throw my vote on Calgar that early. And let me guess, someone wrote "gullible" on the ceiling? 4) How would that make me look good? I'm not trying to take over the game here, you're the one that's in control since D1 are you not? All I was doing was telling straight to YOU that I think you could be scum depending on how today and tonight turns out. Don't you agree that if you live past tonight it will be seen as suspicious? I never said I was for lynching Harry for information, I said I can settle on that case because it will tell me something about you (especially if you live to D3). What part about that don't you get? You shouldn't be trying to tell me I'm scum. You should be trying to tell the town. And you do that by waiting to see proof of scumminess, not by trying to establish it prior to something. The implication that you have foreknowledge of a flip suggests you're scum. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 05:55 drwiggl3s wrote: 1) I'm not trying to set a trap for you. The whole reason for me telling you this out right was to see your reaction and to see how confident you actually were with your read on Harry. It can be said that your decision to vote switch to me was because of my "apparent sudden scuminess", or self preservation. Trying to discredit me or get me lynched as scum just like your trying to lynch Harry for actually speaking up against you and being honest about suspicions I'm sure others must have against you. Remember my "Shades of gray" post earlier? Guess what, things change, especially when new information comes to light in the form of a lurker rearing their head to make dodgy posts. 2) How was my posting on Calgar not at the very worst a good try to get more mafia to come out? Was this post any worse than your stupid "bread crumbing"? It was an honest attempt to scum hunt. And no, it wasn't "gullible". You yourself didn't even realise my intention behind posting that until I explained it to you. All you seem to know to jump on is scum "slips" or threats against yourself. You aren't actually participating in scum hunting that isn't full blown and throwing huge piles of WIFOM at each other. I refuse to buy this. You might be able to convince me you're into active scum hunting if you weren't attacking me for active scum hunting. 3) I made it clear that I will make the case and tell the town if D3 should come and you're still alive and Harry is flipped as green. I wasn't implying I had knowledge you don't. I wasn't even posting when you weren't there. I posted straight after you did to say directly to you that I'm suspicious of you. And your reaction was to vote for me DESPITE having "95%" FOR SURE case against Harry. I wanted to gauge your reaction (one of self preservation), and it has given me more proof that if you live past the night, that you're actually scum and playing us all for fools. I'm quite confident that if you flip green, your wish to see me flipped will come true, you can just serve as the test instead of harry. Isn't that altruistic of you? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 06:06 drwiggl3s wrote: Well yes I said I'm fine lynching either me or Harry. But I said I'd rather we go with Harry who I know may or may not be actual scum, than myself who I know is town. Well, if your primary intent is to use a sacrifice to somehow prove I'm scum, use yourself. It's only polite. And the best test of whether I'm really scum hunting or not. After all, if me shifting to you is only a self preservation instinct, and harry might be scum, and you're so definitely town (according to you) then a harry lynch (led by me) might actually just let me mislead everybody. After all, hypothetical scum me could just be throwing Harry to the wolves to earn sufficient town credit to win the game! That, plus my (clearly faked) JK claim could add up to some brilliant strategy with at least as many layers as an ogre. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
The only WIFOM I'm throwing around is YOUR WIFOM that you're trying to use against me. I'm just trying to summarize it. And if you flip green, I WANT people to lynch me to get me out of the town's way, wiggles, so no need to worry about that. You still seem very worried about lynching for info, by the way, which is still scummy as all fuck. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 06:20 drwiggl3s wrote: I am not throwing ANY WIFOM at you Jingle. I was stating my thoughts and why I did what I did. I haven't even made a case against you at this point as I said I wouldn't until we see what happens past the night. The only theoretical content I mentioned was this "Lynch for info"? did you not say you were 95% sure that Harry is scum? I want to kill scum. Self lynching myself would just be purely for information that you may or may not dissuade the town into ignoring. This is heavy WIFOM. On July 21 2012 05:23 drwiggl3s wrote: . And IF you survived N2 as a confirmed town / jailer, it'd make me VERY suspicious if that is your actual alignment. At least, considering that you were apparently very convinced I could be right about Harry. And again, if you weren't, you should be presenting evidence on his behalf. Not trying to change how someone looks after the lynch. On July 21 2012 02:44 drwiggl3s wrote: So basically your saying no real information comes out of a YourHarry lynch. We're shooting for a mafia and if we miss we're back to square one? Talking about lynching for info like it should be a priority over lynching for red. On July 20 2012 03:34 drwiggl3s wrote: For my reads right now, I wouldn't mind testing the waters with a Calgar lynch. Getting one of the major players out of the way and see what he flips. This could tell us a lot about iamperfection as well as others who are resistant (or soft defending) a Calgar lynch. No matter how you dress it up, this is suggesting lynching for info... And, of course, I'm pretty sure that each time you respond, more chunks of my original case against you disappear from what you're responding to. Without me or anyone else sounding even slightly convinced. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 06:35 drwiggl3s wrote: Yes that would be a good plan but your suggesting that there's nothing Jingle can do at night (as jailer) to confirm himself. Couldn't he role block someone we consider to be town and if they vouch than we know he's actually jailer. Can anyone else say something as well. I don't want to only talk to Jingle and Fulla who said Oh? What happened to this attitude? On July 21 2012 05:03 drwiggl3s wrote: I want you to answer it Jingle. Since your the one leading another bandwagon on another townie here. Don't draw the attention away from yourself. If I'm going to get lynched and when I flip town I want everyone to know and be sure that they should think twice about what your alignment really is. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Your countercase is a joke without a punchline, you cherry pick tiny chunks and ignore all the inconvenient bits, and make things up. Of course I'm not satisfied. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 06:45 drwiggl3s wrote: What did I ignore? You said the case on Harry is a dark shade of grey did you not? All this says to me is you were giving yourself some wiggle room should he flip green. You even mentioned how maybe he is honestly scum hunting with his case on you... seems like you were just giving yourself room to negotiate should he flip green and the town ask you wtf? Actually, I was just discussing the fact that there is no way to be 100% certain until someone flips. Your interpretation is certainly amusing, since you keep suggesting that you're not trying to use WIFOM to get out of this situation you're in. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 08:48 Hopeless1der wrote: Okay Jingle, we can pretty much assume that YourHarry is town now, yes? Either that or the scum are pulling the most obscenely overly complicated con since Oceans whatever the fuck number we're up to now. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 08:57 calgar wrote: Thirteen. And careful there, Eleven happens to be one of my favorites. Harry - please explain this request for someone to claim. You were trying to make a case for jingle but why would it be beneficial to the town to reveal the blue? Eleven was fine, it was the other 37 I had an issue with. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 09:53 tube wrote: i voted perfection because i didn't see why he was cleared of suspicion You're going to need to go into more detail than that after a fishy looking vote like yours. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Fulla and Tube, of course, are both suspicious. Given the pace of the voting, Hapa and Calgar are mostly clear in my eyes, because they were very fast to jump to Wiggles, and their support was likely what helped shift the voting effectively. Generally scum would only bus if the situation was untenable, not as a precautionary measure, plus they probably both would have shot me N1. Unless they're playing some sort of WIFOM head game that would doom town, I don't expect they'll flip red. Maybe one of them, but definitely not both. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 08:53 Fulla wrote: Simple, wiggles had more than enough votes so I just left it. I'd like to add I think hopeless if scum with him, I will post more on that tomorrow. I more have the impression you bussed him, but without contributing your vote. Given you were around at the time, making posts like this one: On July 21 2012 04:43 Fulla wrote: I REALLY dislike how many votes Harry is getting it just makes me think of an exact bandwagon repeat of the obvious lynch. If he was scum I'd at least expect a struggle other scum trying to defend him or accuse others. Or if not scum jumping in and bussing him for town cred. As far as I know jingle is confirmed town? So I will just vote whatever he says. He's a much better player than me anyways. I'm at work so I can't contribute much this is from my mobile. I'll be back 30 min before deadline for a better read and vote. I still think my current vote is scum hopeless or hapless sorry I forgot? The guy trying to lynch me for nothing. But I'll back jingle. Last thing the eerie silence about Harry getting lynched makes me think mafia are just sitting back laughing letting it happen. Can we vote someone else please? That almost looks like a better version of what wiggles tried to do to me. Of course, Tube also looks completely shady right now, as Hapa outlined. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 21 2012 23:57 calgar wrote: Careful, you know where this got me last time around lol Last time around was N1, based on half the posts. Besides, me going after you got me switched onto Harry, which dragged Wiggles out. Is that so bad since you weren't mislynched? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 22 2012 00:02 Fulla wrote: Earlier on I thought tube was just a noob and being overly bashed for little reason. Considering his utter sudden silence and last second voting patterns as everyone else has pointed out I'm leaning more towards scum now. Vigi kill, I thought there was a low chance of a vigi now? 2 blues I don't know what the usual blue count is, I recall someone saying in newb mafia there tends to be alot of greens. Anyways, I guess Jingle will have to pray there's a medic or hopefully he'll guess and protect the right target. SCUM I think it's tube & hopeless. (notice how hopeless is also trying to protect him). I say vigi shoot/lynch tube, then me or hopeless in either order. I'm satisfied with that and we win. Unless there are other suspects? Speedbump/Mufa can anything said about them/him? I think you should explain yourself before accusing others. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 22 2012 00:27 Fulla wrote: I just did. I gave my reasons about hopeless from the start, nobody seemed to care. I mean explain what I just recently posted about, why YOU look scummy. You conveniently ignored it. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 30 2012 08:04 Probulous wrote: Post coming 2 hours early?  | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Was just a joke about the fact that the host/cohosts seem to have been busy taking naps around deadline every day, while hypocritically calling US old. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
False sense of security in scum, good. Obvious breadcrumb, bad. Obvious breadcrumb being completely missed by scum, utterly irrelevant, and trying to use plan Q to WIFOM breadcrumb into a case? Priceless. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 30 2012 13:13 Critter wrote: I feel beyond noob having to ask this... but where/what was Jingle's "obvious" breadcrumb? I'm not ashamed that I missed it while following the game, but the fact that I can't find it afterwards is quite embarassing. It was discussed during the game. Read through my filter for the post where I talked about it? Early D2. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 30 2012 13:30 Blazinghand wrote: No problem dude! Only Calgar and I spotted it-- most people didn't till it was pointed out to them. And you told me it was too obvious. Which is when I started coming up with tons of contingency plans for it that had NOTHING to do with the original intent. Never show indecisiveness. Even if you backtrack all over yourself, do it aggressively. It makes you townie. Like Hapa. He stayed assertive and stayed below people's most scummy spot. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 30 2012 22:14 Hapahauli wrote: What was the original plan behind your breadcrumb? I didn't know what to think when you mentioned you were trying to get me NK'd xD The original plan was to RB Calgar, who I thought was shady. The notion of "trying" to get you NKed to see if scum were after you came when I was told it was blatantly obvious by BallsinHand. Well, if it's that obvious, how can I use that? You got to admit, from a contingency plan point of view, it was a good use. Or could have been, had it been actually noticed. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 31 2012 07:20 Hapahauli wrote: I thought your read (regarding me being not dead) was pretty good, and you might have gotten on the right track had you not stuck to the Me + Calgar scumteam theory. Wasn't too much a fan of the "obviousness" of the breadcrumb though - Jailer's a pretty powerful townie role, and is pretty bad to get a blue role like that shot N2. Well, yes, like I said, I wasn't expecting people to notice it readily since I was already a prolific poster. Apparently that worked better than BH thought, but since Calgar brought it up, I decided to play that hand instead. I just overdid it a bit, instead of seeing the obvious part that I did later, where only one of you could possibly be scum, or I'd just have turned into a mislynch, since any two of the three of us could have controlled town opinion at that point in the game. It wasn't until the Wiggles vote that I realized that, though, since both of you being scum might not have been able to turn it into a mislynch on me safely, but you certainly could have sustained the votes on YH into a mislynch and brushed it off easily for a cakewalk D3 mislynch on me. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 31 2012 10:08 Blazinghand wrote: As a personal stylistic choice, I assume literally every excuse for inactivity is a bald faced lie. Only legit scum hunting and pro town play can alleviate some of this suspicion- excuses are as easily made by scum as by town, and therefore carry zero meaning whatsoever. Anyone who leans on one has something to hide. But I'm a paranoid bastard-- don't mind me. Yeah, like I told Obvious in the obs thread. You don't trust anyone, always be ready to pound someone else if they make a slip. Like Wiggles. Frankly, if someone looks scummy enough that inactivity looks scummy, you probably have enough case to pressure anyways, and if they look townie enough that inactivity doesn't get questioned, they probably don't need to mention a reason unless it's going to be directly prior to deadline. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 31 2012 10:42 Blazinghand wrote: Regardless, like most things in Mafia, Its not what's true that matters, its who you can convince and what you can prove. Whether or not he was really busy is literally irrelevant IMO. True story. The mafia know who's who. Everyone else only knows about themselves and flips. Best solution, never trust anybody. Never make a soft case. Even if a case is weak, make a hard sale. People seemed to think I was overly relentless early, that's actually just because if you back off from a position without a good reason, it's scummy as all hell. Hapa, can you honestly tell me you wouldn't have had me mislynched in five minutes if I'd been similarly vocal, but with soft pressure instead of the relentless shit I did? Wishy washy, preparing busses, spreading confusion... The only way to play active town is to be implacable. If you're really town, you should be able to explain most of your motive for actions if you get quizzed on them. That's why scum lurk a lot. Less to explain. But it does lose you the hidden benefit of having provided a town read (assuming you can stay fairly consistent). Example - If Hapa had tried what Wiggles did, when he did, it would have turned into a last minute 50/50 OMGUS shouting match to see who got lynched. Or just a straight up success for the ploy. 50% from an OMGUS war would have been my BEST odds of living through it. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 31 2012 10:57 Probulous wrote: I have to say I disgree here. By your own logic town don't know who is scum, so pressuring someone and then changing your mind is not a scum tell. There is a fine line between throwing around doubt with no intent to make things clear and changing your read based on responses. Being relentless in the early game is dangerous because you can implicate townies who just don't know how to respond. In addition you create a situation where it is hard to change your read. I used to play like that, go hard, go early, never let go. But it lead to me lynching townies and letting scum hide. There is nothing wrong with strong pressure but it can be dangerous. I find scum in the people who immediately agree with my pressure without thinking clearly, also those that don't comment on anything that is happening. It is very rare that my firt pressure target is actually scum. Thoughts? Well, I can kind of agree. Day 2 I really got into that stride more, D1 was just a disaster. Partly due to being relentless on slim info, but, let's face it, Obvious's direction shift on D1 sounded incredibly bad. It was actually just a careless play, but it set things into a good position for scum, happening so early D1, it prevented too much need for discussion, and created an early bandwagon. I think, more than anything, it's just a double edged sword. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
The second you start second guessing your reads under the assumption that it could just be strange or bad play, you've set yourself up for serious WIFOM trouble. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
| ||
