Post (Quotes) too long -.- .... gonna split it
On July 30 2012 16:19 Mordanis wrote:Ange was very early in jumping on Golbat's case. She FOSs and votes in these posts: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 18:11 Ange777 wrote:
Hey guys.
Sorry for posting this late, but I was asleep when the game started. Deadline is at 11 pm for me so I should be online for it but probably going to bed shortly after deadline.
I just read through the posts and the case against Mordanis and Golbat.
Mordanis:
Right now I dont think he is scum. Basically people are calling him scum based on two things: Illogical arguments and persistence in his case on Keir. His post about Keir claiming blue was not very convincing, but he tried to use the little posting and information we had at that time to contribute to scum hunting. The first case made won't be of the finest quality because usually there is so little to work with. The far more important thing is to get people talking about something else than policy lynches so Mordanis was more than successful.
Not changing his view on Keir directly after being called out on his poor case is not suspicious in my opinion. On the contrary, as townie you aren't afraid of being held responsible because when you make cases you are convinced they are scum. It's more the scum players who try to not gain too much attention when making cases as they might be lynched for a mislynch.
So right now I have a slight town read on Mordanis.
Golbat:
You just unvoted Mordanis. Without an explanation. And you posted a list of every single player. I hate those lists. If you are town, you just show Mafia your entire town read. If you are scum, you can easily get town cred and posts with such a list. Why post that list? Town should makes cases, not lists.
Besides that you never commented on Mordanis' case against you which is far more convincing than his first one on Keir btw.
I am going to reread Golbat, but for now ##FoS Golbat
On July 27 2012 18:23 Ange777 wrote:EBWODP: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
Pretty sure Mord is scum. I did vote for him after all. But, there is always the chance he was just a very eager townie. The only thing about him being town that rubs me the wrong way is how emphatically he decided to stay with his line of reasoning, despite the fact that it had been slapped down by multiple people. Very suspicious. Perhaps I myself jumped the gun in voting for him, but being one to not throw around votes lightly, i'm keeping my vote on him unless there is completely overwhelming evidence that he is either not scum, or that someone else is scummier. I really like the OMGUS! vote though, <3.
So what exactly is the overwhelming evidence you just found out that he isn't scum? I assume you haven't found anyone else scummier as you haven't made a case.
##Vote Golbat+ Show Spoiler +Sorry for triple posting but guys where are you? :D I don't want to talk to myself ^^ . She jumps on the bandwagon early, but does not lead the charge. Her reasoning seems to be that bad play is scummy play. The reason for her vote seems to be his changing his vote and his list. Both are certainly not good play for a townie, but they don't really help scum. Overall, I'd say her vote on Golbat was pretty weak. Also, it's a pretty good place to jump onto a bandwagon to escape attention. As the 2nd, she is spared almost the entirety of the fallout for leading the lynch. But, for jumping on so early it's hard to pin her on bandwagon-jumping. So far she's looking fairly suspicious.
I would not say that I joined a bandwagon when I was the second person to vote for Golbat. My reasoning for that vote might not have been the strongest but bad play can be scummy play. Especially in a Newbie Game where a potential first time Mafia player rolls scum and has a hard time to overcome his own confirmation bias to make cases and could be scared into unvoting after being pressured.
Her later posts in the day are also pretty suspicious. + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 23:24 Ange777 wrote:@Promethelax: You made some good points on Shady. I must admit I missed them. I felt a strange vibe from all his fluff posts but couldn't put the finger on it. Although before reading your post I was astonished to read this: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 20:33 Shady Sands wrote:
I'm going to state that I share Mordanis' and Keir's concerns that Golbat may be scum. This is especially true if Mordanis flips green or blue--then Golbat is very clearly red, and vice versa.
@Shady: Why would you assume that one of them has to be scum? It's not like both of them were claiming one blue role and therefore one of them had to be lying. This really seems as if you were preparing for possible mislynches. I want to hear your defense. On July 28 2012 23:03 Ange777 wrote:@Golbat:Your explanation for voting and then unvoting Mordanis is just weird. I don't understand how you can assume that he is godfather just because he was actively pursuing a poor case. Furthermore why should early voting be scummy? It is important to use your vote to pressure others and sometimes casting a vote early into a day is the only weapon you have. So just to be sure I understood you correctly, your best scum read when you unvoted was still Mordanis, you only feared to appear scum because of this early vote and therefore unvoted? Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 06:36 Golbat wrote:
Basically, at the time I was thinking about why he would be so vocal about his case on Keir, and why he would pursue it for so long despite the fact he knew it was an awful case. It wasn't adding up, so I started thinking, "maybe he's scum, but he probably isn't scum, seeing as he thrust himself so far into the spotlight".
But after having some time to think about his play, I had the idea that he may be the godfather. I mean, think about it. It's a pretty smart play if he is, he can make all sorts of accusations, and then play like he was just trying to "stimulate discussion". He'll come back clean on a cop check, so he could also use that to further cement himself as a townie, while getting the town to lynch each other all day every day. My own flip floppiness can be attributed to realizing that brazenly voting so early is a bad idea. When I pushed Mord, he pushed back, and I thought to myself, "oh shit, I should probably back down, voting this early does seem kinda scummy". I didn't really think that doing what I thought was the most pro-town thing would cause myself to be brought under such suspicion, because I thought I made it abundantly clear that I was still suspicious, but just not as concrete about it. I wanted to see how the rest of the people were thinking before I actually casted my vote. I could easily still vote for Mord, but he isn't the only suspicious one here. I am curious because in your next post you state: Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 07:39 Golbat wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Just reading through your filter so far, I feel like you are saying "Oh shit, I made a mistake. Now how can I fix it?" The problem wasn't voting Mordanis early. You voted him without giving a solid reason why, then as soon as someone called you out on it, you backed off with "Sorry, I'm an over-zealous noob." Being wrong doesn't make you scum, but not having conviction and flip-flopping that fast is certainly suspicious. What do you mean I didn't have a solid reason to vote for Mordanis? His bullshit case against you seemed super scummy to me, and that's why I voted for him. I backed off because despite his bullshit case, voting that early only serves as a warning to shape up his posting, nothing that he says that early (besides "i'm scum, lynch me") is going to hang him without giving him at least a chance to explain it off. I did put my FoS on him, because i'm still wary, but not convinced QUITE yet. So now you vote aRyujin. He already gave up the haiku style posting which seems to be your only issue with him. Any other reason why he should be lynched in your opinion? And why is Mord missing in your scum reads? Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 13:46 Golbat wrote:
I'll probably be able to read the thread before I have to go to work tomorrow morning, but in case I don't get that chance,
##Vote aRyujin
This is why I am voting for him: His haiku style makes it easy for him to fill up his posts with a shit load of waffle and some nearly baseless accusations and almost get away with it. I hope in between now and deadline the eye of suspicion takes a long, hard look at him, because his confusing waffle is nothing short of a full-on impediment to real discussion.
I would also consider voting for Shady Sands, depending on the consensus of the town for these reasons : His direct swap from "I agree with golbat, let's lynch Mord" after Mord drew such attention to himself to "Let's lynch Golbat and then Mord, because one of them HAS to be scum" after people started questioning me is something that I don't think anybody else agreed with. The way he seemed so concrete about who we should lynch for multiple days is really suspicious. We should be picking lynches on a day by day basis as more discussion takes place, not queue up our votes for several days straight.
Right now these two seem to me to be the most scummy. Of course, if someone else decides to act scummy as all get out, i'd be happy to vote for them as well, but at the moment these two seem the most suspicious.
@goodkarma:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:08 goodkarma wrote:
I still would like to assert my opinion that removing lurkers from the game on day one is the most valuable play for town. Obviously, lurkers are hard to read. Mafia can easily hide as lurkers without any worry of slipping up. Meanwhile, day one, the most vocal people are sure to say some things that don't resonate quite right with the town. It is easy to start a lynch bandwagon on these people, while the lurkers sit back and provide no further information about themselves or their agendas. Lynch the vocal individuals day one, and you'll know just as little about the lurkers come day two. What? Yes, having lurkers is incredibly painful for town. Especially at MYLO or LYLO having lurkers just cripples town's ability to vote properly. But why would you even consider lynching a lurker when there are suspicious players? It's not always what they say that makes them scum but the intent behind it. And to be honest your post only deflects from the cases already made. Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:08 goodkarma wrote:
Redirection and "blending in with trending town arguements" are scum plays. Exactly. So why are you talking about lynching a lurker and totally ignoring existing cases? Scum? Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 10:17 goodkarma wrote:
First, @Keirathi, to address a few of your points:
Yes, not all lurkers are mafia. And not all mafia are lurkers. Obviously it's great if a target flips red. However, even if a target flips green, you can still be in a better position if that townie was not providing constructive criticism and clarity in his posts. Above all else, the town needs to have clarity and focus to win. Removing lurkers early helps with this goal. By instituting a lynch the lurker policy day one, lurking townies will hopefully realize lurking is bad town play and shape up. Sadly lurking isn't necessarily bad mafia play, and this helps to bring any lurking mafia into the spotlight. Can mafia be active posters playing on the townies' fears? Of coarse they can, but if they are active posters they can and will slip up. They can be found. You let them lurk and you will have trouble winning.
But here's the biggest reason I see to play lynch the lurker on day 1 (and I know some may disagree here): you cannot possibly have a good read on anyone before there's been a flip. A scum can sit in the background and lol at town. Scum can speak up in the first hour of day one as to why he thinks there's a premium lynch target. You just simply can't predict how they will play. They can have one scummy post and be town. It's the trend over time, including their voting histories, and the people they've attacked and defended, that will spell out their true intentions. However, by establishing a policy against lurking, you immediately set up a constructive town atmosphere even if you lynch town day one.
I would be happy to see an informative post on this topic if you have read a different viewpoint. However, from the guides I've read on this subject clarity is key, and lurkers are definitely a good lynch target. I would be happy to provide links for you if you need, though the TL mafia central library should have all the guides I've looked at. So you are saying that there is no way to have an accurate read on players before any flip. I would say it is hard but not impossible. Pressuring people for the content of their posts and not the quality of their posts allows for a good read. If instead we just ask people to be more active and talk about safe topics such as policy lynches than nothing is accomplished through this! Which by the way is exactly what you achieved with your post ... Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 11:56 goodkarma wrote:
@DarthPunk
Yes. I've talked a lot about lurkers. And tbh I consider that a very important contribution. It is day one and no one can truely have a good read on who is scum without any flips. We can go with our pitchforks at those we consider "scummy," and we should. But the absolute very first thing that needs to happen is that we establish solid town policy that ensures there's clarity in what is posted and everyone is participating. This is what I'm getting at with lynch the lurker. I apologize that I'm not bandwaggoning on some guy who has a couple scummy-looking posts right now, as many of our forum friends seem content to do, but I strongly feel that if we establish an atmosphere where we encourage participation that it will be that much easier to weed out scum. I will be more than happy to talk about scummy reads when there's more information to go off of, but that information just isn't there on day one. The scummiest looking people right now are the lurkers.
And it's not like this is some crazy half-baked idea. I encourage you, like I encouraged Keirathi, to read some basic town guides on TL. Lurkers are a good target, especially when you don't have any good leads to go off of. I've discussed this point to death, and now this discussion is being reduced to rehashing what I've already said. Please thoroughly read my post before telling me my posting is only about lurkers, because what I propose is also about establishing the foundation for a winning town by encouraging participation and clarity.
I feel I've talked this point to death, and I sincerely hope the town gets behind it. My biggest fear is that we will cherry-pick the most outspoken guy we can find, a couple of his posts read scummy, and he flips town. We have ~7 hours till deadline and yet the only thing you have talked about over and over again is your policy lynch. You may vote for whomever's death is most beneficial for town in your opinion but before that I want to hear you comment on the existent cases. And just to remind everyone making strong and logical cases is one of the more difficult things for scum. Therefore the easiest thing for scum is to just start a case on a lurker because let's admit it, everyone has to hate lurkers! ##FoS goodkarmaAnd don't get me wrong. I am hundred percent behind getting rid of lurkers. So if we have vigs, please do your job! On July 29 2012 00:01 Ange777 wrote:@Obvious:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 14:28 Obvious.660 wrote:
Shady Sands' is 100% convinced Mordanis is scum. And is willing to waiting 2 days to lynch him. This is bad play. If we identify scum, we kill them. No crazy circular logic of if x person dies then we have more information y person. Just no. Scum can scheme, they are aware of eachother. Town cannot, except in the case of Masons. Shady Sands is my current #1 scum read.
#FOS: Shady Sands While I have my suspicions about Shady I got the the feeling that Mordanis wasn't his strongest scum read especially as he soon after targeted Golbat. Your point is valid but I think it's quite common if you encounter active controversial players on day 1 to let them be and see how things go. Your filter is still pretty empty though, no other contribution than this rather sloppy case on Shady. I am still waiting for you to comment on Golbat! On July 29 2012 00:24 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 00:15 Shady Sands wrote:On July 28 2012 14:28 Obvious.660 wrote:
Shady Sands' is 100% convinced Mordanis is scum. And is willing to waiting 2 days to lynch him. This is bad play. If we identify scum, we kill them. No crazy circular logic of if x person dies then we have more information y person. Just no. Scum can scheme, they are aware of eachother. Town cannot, except in the case of Masons. Shady Sands is my current #1 scum read.
#FOS: Shady Sands Obvious, by the time I switched my vote off Mordanis to doing a 2 day wait on his lynch, I was no longer 100% convinced he was scum. I wrote that since he was playing "loud" (actively posting relatively strong analysis), if he was scum, he would quickly out himself in two or three days anyhow, so there was no need to rush a lynch. No offense Shady but it took you this long to write the defense above?? How about all the other questions we posted earlier? On July 29 2012 00:35 Ange777 wrote:@Mordanis:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 16:42 Mordanis wrote:Darth: Where did I lie? I want one expression that is a bald-faced lie. You may disagree with my rushed read on Keir, but a read is a read. It is not a statement of fact. Shady said that he looked through 20 games without seeing any mafia lynched D1. I referenced 20 games with 5 scum lynched D1. His claim was at best an exaggeration, at worst a flatout lie. What I did in posting about Keir was different though. Analysis of posts is inherently subjective, so even if the language is objective, the content never is. Earnest subjective opinions can differ without either being dishonest. So you may disagree with my reads, but don't call them dishonest. I fear that I've had about 10 hours of sleep over the last several days, and I need some shut-eye. I'll be back at least 4 hours before the deadline unless I practically pass out from exhaustion. To keep myself honest, I'll go ahead and ## unvote. The reason for this: Shady made a very dear mistake by suggesting that we not scumhunt, and being factually incorrect makes this much worse. Let me be clear, this is scummy behavior, but the rest of his play exonerates him. As soon as I force the game to scumhunting, he posts the most obvious case after allowing a reasonable attempt at defense for me. + Show Spoiler [Case Against Me] +On July 27 2012 12:51 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 12:23 DarthPunk wrote:On July 27 2012 11:54 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 10:17 DarthPunk wrote:So I just read through the thread and the first post that really sprang out at me was this. + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 07:43 Mordanis wrote:Rather than sitting in a circle and deciding whom to lynch based on who sing "Kum ba yah, My Lord" the most off key (what kind of villainous scum would do such a thing?), I think its time to begin the scumhunt. Anyways, I apologize in advance if this seems somewhat rushed. I want to get the hunt going as early as possible, and I feel we've wasted the first hour and a half. So without further ado, here comes (hopefully) the first case of the game: Mordanis's's case on KeirathiK (for some reason your name is really hard for me to type) began this game by virtually claiming Town RB. + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 05:41 Keirathi wrote:
First things first:
If we have a town roleblocker, I think its best not to use your role early. You generally have as much chance of hurting a teamate as you do a scum. I'm not saying to NEVER use it, but think carefully and only use it if you are reasonably sure that you are blocking a scum.
Some policy discussion:
Lynch All Liars - I'm of the opinion that there are very, very few cases where lying as a townie is beneficial to town. With that said, there ARE cases where it is a realistic option, so I think blanket policy lynching is a fairly bad thing. Case-by-case basis.
Lynch All Lurkers - As much as lurking hurts town, I feel like at least in newbie games, lurking is almost guaranteed. I encourage everyone to try as hard as they can to avoid lurking sot hat we won't have to discuss this later. Lurking as a townie hurts town. Please don't do it. Again, case-by-case basis.
Are all roleblocks notified, or only people with power roles?
I've seen games where it works both ways, so best to clarify early.
. Now this may have been a case of extreme newbiness, which would be understandable, but Mr. K has played in at least 2 other games, so I believe he knew how this post would be interpreted. This brings up 3 possibilities: 1: Mr. K is VT, and he is trying to "take one for the team". He knows that the scum will see this post and read him blue, and he'll die tonight instead of a real blue. If this were to happen, he'd have helped town. If he gets lynched today, it'll be bad for town, but it will be deal-with-able. 2: Mr. K is actually townie RB. Perhaps he is trying to make his "claim" so obvious the scum will think option 1 is happening. Trying to hide out in the open. If he is killed during the night, we're in pretty bad shape. But if this option is the case and he's lynched today, we're in even worse shape, because he won't have used his power even once. That said, he implied that he wouldn't want to use it N1 anyway, so the options are virtually the same. 3: Mr. K is scum, and is trying to use this as means to get himself out of trouble. If he ever gets some heat brought to him, he just says "Dude, I basically claimed town RB, I don't think its a good idea to lynch me" The claim also puts pressure on any real blues to claim, and when everyone claims, a claim isn't worth anything. Basically, this post seems mildly non-protown, and it gives him a way to defend himself. Destabilizing town and giving yourself an extra cycle seems very scummy to me. If we lynch him today, we're off to a great start. And if this option is the case, scum aren't killing him tonight. Of these three, option 2 seems by far the least probable. So that being said, I think that right now Keirathi is the best candidate for lynching. Still, its pretty early so I don't think it would be wise in any way to commit right now. Last thing: I have to go to work now, and I'll be back in probably 5 hours (rakin in the cash makin pizza), just FYI. So after some policy discussion Mordanis makes his case against Keirathi. After some WIFOM we get to this - If he is killed during the night, we're in pretty bad shape. But if this option is the case and he's lynched today, we're in even worse shape, because he won't have used his power even once. So Keirathi is blue and we are in bad shape if he is NK/Lynched. but then we get to this: If we lynch him today, we're off to a great start. And this: So that being said, I think that right now Keirathi is the best candidate for lynching. Twice stating that Keirath is is our best lynch at the moment which is a direct contradiction to his other premise. he ends with this: I don't think it would be wise in any way to commit right now So after backflipping from his first premise (that it would be terribad for Keirathi to be NK and an even worse for us to mislynch him), and TWICE stating that Keirathi is our best Lynch. Mordanis decides that it isn't wise to commit right now after all. This post was WIFOM, contradiction and confusion. At best it is saying something while saying nothing. At worst it is a deliberate attempt of scum to mislynch their blue read day 1. Destabilizing town and giving yourself an extra cycle seems very scummy to me. Yeah it does doesn't it. FoS Mordanis I'm not sure we can use internal contradictions between Mordanis' three different points as evidence, given that they are illustrating three different "what-ifs". That being said, though, his logic as to why point #2 is the least likely and point #3 is the most likely doesn't hold water (or rather, doesn't exist), and each of his points are pretty farfetched. I'd say he's our best option for a day 1 lynch at this point, but to be extra sure, we should wait until Ange777 has had a chance to post as well, and Mordanis gets back from making pizzas and has had a chance to defend himself. Even if he flips green (which is likely, let's not get our hopes up here), his lynch will tell us a lot about who we should go after next, since people seem to have had strong reactions to both his proposal to go after Keir, his own lynching, and his arguments against policy lynching. -He posts 3 different scenario's on Keir which contradicted one another (he states these as a 'case', whatever). 2 of the 3 have Keir as a blue and the third as scum. Yet he still sees Keir as the best lynch. The case is completely confused and without a logical narrative, based on a 'virtual claim' by Keirathi that I honestly don't think is there. There is no reason whatsoever that I can think of to make a case with internal contradictions. Am I missing something here? -It is statistically likely that he will flip green. but you can say that about anyone. If you think he is town or not suspicious don't vote for him. Read filters, make a case etc. Nope, you're not missing anything. However, I was saying that it's fine to post scenarios which are mutually contradictory. That in and of itself should not be grounds to dismiss someone's arguments. I agree though that Mordanis' case itself doesn't make much sense. The reason I think it's likely he'll flip green right now is because we haven't been able to see his response to these accusations. If he responds in the way in which I think he will (or chooses not to respond at all) then I think he's a clear red. The other reason I think it's likely he'll flip green is because in the other games I looked through, it was very hard for the town to actually make a successful day 1 lynch. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, though. Generally a Day 1 lynch is critical for filtering out who is actually a contributing member of the town versus who is simply generating more heat than light. On July 27 2012 13:29 Shady Sands wrote:Mordanis' response pretty much sealed the deal for me. I think it is clear that Mordanis is a red. Let's parse through his response. Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 12:44 Mordanis wrote:
Soo apparently everyone has decided that scumhunting is a bad idea D1? The point of this game is to analyze things. Context does matter, but some of the things that have been suggested so far are sort of ridiculous. If someone went to bed right before the game began and had to go straight to work, and maybe forgets they could easily go almost a full 24 hours before posting. It doesn't make them scum, it just makes them busy. On the other hand, if you delay posting content until other people post content, then the scum hunt is never going to get going. I'm completely unsure of what point Mordanis is trying to make here. So people who post are innocent, and people who don't post are also innocent? The town isn't talking about lynching people for heading to work--it's talking about lynching people who have never made a single post since the game began.Show nested quote +I admit, my case again Keir was somewhat rushed, but if we don't start posting analysis, we lose any information that could have been gained, and basically start fresh D2, just down 1 or 2 townies (rando-lynch vs. no-lynch). Another thing: Mislynching D1 is sort of to be expected. Unless the scum choose to bus one of their own, the scum have allies and are therefore less likely to be lynched. You have to use the information that is gained from discussion to figure out who is scum most of the time. From Ver's Town Guide: The most useless kind of lynch is a last minute switch that is really easy and safe to hop on the bandwagon for. If there's a highly polarized lynch, the dead information + voting lists can provide a lot, even if the people accused are all innocent (then you can see who's manipulating just out of site).
In other words, if we have a constructive D1 but mislynch, town is in much better position than if a random lynch happens to hit scum. Nothing to argue against here, but when combined with the next part of Mordanis' post, it gets troubling: Show nested quote +Anyways, apparently people want me to respond to the FOS put on me. Darth seems to have misunderstood me. The 3 situations I posed were the 3 possible roles that Keir could be. I ran through what the outcome would be for each hypothetical. I would think it was obvious that I didn't believe that Keir was simultaneously red, green, and blue, but ... Aside from what appear to be a misunderstanding, there doesn't seem to be anything else. The reason that I think that Keir isn't blue is because blues tend to be somewhat lurky but do contribute to the scumhunt.Keir has been fairly active, though no scum-hunting (yet!), but brought attention to himself by trying to seem like a blue. From Ver's Town Guide: To keep this simple and save time, let's look at some heuristics to find potential targets, then go through their post history to get the best ones. Here are some common heuristics I use of blue indicators:
-Tries to contribute but doesn't stick their neck out
-Shows fear/wants to instinctively hide
-Drastically lower post quantity compared to games when they are green but still tries to contribute.
-Focuses most of their posts on blue roles or ignores them entirely.
-To figure out which role specifically, they will focus unnatural amounts of attention on that role, know the rules for that role thoroughly, or ignore it entirely while mentioning other blue roles. Figuring out the specific is difficult to ascertain and not always applicable, but these heuristics will hold up more often than not. Look at the post I indicated in my case, it fits those last two heuristics to a tee, but the other two are off(policy is sort of a gray-zone, sort of pro-town and sort of "safe play" but everyone does it + Show Spoiler +). That's why I feel Keir isn't blue, because he seems to be trying to seem blue but some of his actions are the opposite. And there was the public question: when I was vigi, I asked several questions about my role, but to try to hide my role I never posted them publically, I PMd them. His play screams to me a somewhat experienced player trying to fake blue. So... wait a second. Mordanis thinks that because Keir posted a policy question, then fits two out of the five other indicators for being blue, he's trying to fake blue? Then Mordanis cites his own actions playing as a blue in a prior game to contrast with Keir's supposed blue fakery. This is weak logic at best, but when combined with his last post, really makes things an open and shut case: Show nested quote +I hate doing this, but I feel there are some points that people should not miss.
TLDR:Scumhunt should begin the moment content is posted, and Keir is almost certainly green or red. Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 12:53 Mordanis wrote:
The reason I am talking about blues is because Keir seems to be trying to make people who are looking for blues beeline to him, but his play doesn't resonate with that of a true blue. If he's green, then he's trying to secretly manipulate the scum (trying to secretly "dig a yard under to make your enemy hoist to his own petard" is very dangerous), potentially harming town as a whole. The alternative is that he's red and trying to force the real blues to claim, and possibly being able to get out of a lynch by claiming Town RB. I have no idea which is more likely, but I think he is more likely scum than anyone else at this moment. That said, I need to eat and then read through more carefully before I can go any further. Mordanis claims Keir is trying to make people who are looking for blues beeline to him. This is a claim that Mordanis has not backed up with logic. All Keir said was for RBs not to RB on day 1. That's not trying to make blues beeline to him, it's sound advice--just like telling vigis not to waste their hits on night 1. Second, how does Keir's behavior not resonate with that of a "true blue?" Throughout both his posts, Mordanis has claimed to be able to tell who a "true blue" is, but he hasn't really shared what the criteria are other than saying "be lurky but still contribute", which is so vague as to be meaningless. Third, where has Keir claimed town RB? Where has he encouraged blues to roleclaim? Indeed, these two sentences serve only one purpose: showing that somehow, Mordanis is scared of blues roleclaiming to Keir because of some unstated belief that Keir is red. When you look at all that, and the weak logic against Keir, then what you see is the following pattern: Mordanis first claims that Keir is the likeliest candidate for lynching because he a likely candidate to be red. Then he backs off and claims that Keir could go red or green. Then he argues that we should lynch controversial candidates first. The point is, lynching controversial candidates would be fine, if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. This totally smacks of a Red finding out his original tactic for generating a bandwagon has failed, acknowledging that he is the only one arguing for a lynch, and then stating that because he is the only one arguing for a lynch, the person is "controversial" and should be lynched. What? Despite claiming to be against hunting scum D1, he constructs a case that is somewhat reasonable. Before I go any further, I want to point out that I think several people are going about scum-hunting the wrong way. Play that hurts town but benefits scum is indicative of scumminess. Illogical posting is not necessarily scummy though. I didn't learn this lesson until I prepared for this game, and I played in two games earlier. Anyways, Shady's case against me was probably more substantive than my own against Keir. Jumping into the scumhunt this early with the best read to that point helps town. Later, he switches gear to focus on Golbat. He continues to hunt for scum with these posts + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 20:33 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 15:36 Mordanis wrote:... *Sigh* I'll begin by saying this: If the people jumping on my bandwagon 1/6th of the way through the first day are town, they are really doing a good job of muddling up the conversation. Look through the thread so far, and see that the only discussion before I posted my case was policy, and that very lenient. There was a lot of "Oop, don't want to attract attention, guess I'll say that we shouldn't policy lynch any lurkers". I admit that I rushed my two main posts, and they may have been suboptimal, but compare that to the entire rest of the populace. We've managed 2 cases so far, and I was one of them. The other is a direct response to mine. I really don't understand why the people who are tunnelling me are doing so: attacking the only person who has posted anything of substance (that isn't within the same bandwagon as you) seems anti-discussion. So while I certainly made a mistake in talking too much about Keir and potential blue roles, the biggest reason that I seem to be "in danger" is that I've been willing to say what I believe. Regardless, I see the bandwagon as being very interesting. There are 3 people who have had an overwhelming share in the activity against me. DarthPunk: He seems to have a hard time with my line of thought. I apologize, my last game ended with me and another player (Release <3) in a duel that had a lot secrecy and enigmatic reasoning. I came to this game expecting the same. If you take people at the face value of their words (In which case, I'm town so don't lynch me :D), then you tend to miss a lot of good reads. The way to catch scum is not to find the first invalid argument, but rather to find the players who are playing in an anti-town way. This includes delaying to reduce the amount of analysis, making the atmosphere bad for town, and muddling with plans. By posting my case on the first thing that I saw, I went in the direction of an atmosphere that welcomes content posting, started the scumhunt before it would have started had I not posted, and laid a fairly straightforward path for the town without explicitly discussing policy. We lynch the player with the scummiest play. So while my read may not have been perfect, my post should have helped town. On the other hand, creating a mass bandwagon on the one person who has posted anything of substance (besides the counter substance) seems to accomplish the goals of scum. Still, he seems more to have an issue following my logic than to be following a plan, as well as being the first to place suspicion on me. I give him a solid "mEh" on the scum-scale Shady: The most brazen of my accusers. Doesn't seem to be following the fine points of the game very closely. Still doesn't appear to get that the day cycle is 48 hours and not 12. Has a great time posting out perceived errors in my logic and then votes for me on said perceptions, without seeming to notice that one of his main points + Show Spoiler +if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. makes no sense. Why would scum draw attention to himself on a case this early? Why especially would the scum stick to his guns rather than move on to greener pastures? Seems like really dumb play for scum, although perhaps he thinks I am that dumb. I am pretty sure I'm more intelligent than a garbage can though... Anyways, despite my annoyance with him, his play seems more uniformed than scummy. So to you Shady I say: Read through the OP again, and preferably some of the guides. Your play so far has been far from inspiring. And compared to this group, that's saying something. Golbat: The entire time so far he seems to have been itching to get on my bandwagon. His first post with more than 1 line says: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 09:15 Golbat wrote:
Howdy guys! This will be my first game of mafia ever that wasn't an sc2 UMS, and those I could never quite get the hang of (mostly due to nobody else having a clue what was going on either). Hopefully, I'll be able to make more sense of the game in a format like this.
As far as the game goes, Mordanis' post about Keir's post where he was "virtually claiming town RB" seems to be a pretty scummy thing to do. It didn't seem to me to be a secret claim of any sort, just a rules clarification. Even if it was a super-secret claim that he could use later, I wouldn't believe him if that was the only evidence he had.
From what I've read elsewhere, that type of posting is classic scum behavior. Look like you're helping the town and trying to hunt scum, when in reality you're just blowing a townie's mistakes clear out of proportion to sow confusion and doubt.
Not everyone has posted, so I don't yet want to commit to a vote, but I've got my eye on you Mordanis. First he makes an excuse for potential scumslips (First time in a non UMS, take it easy on me), and then proceeds to quietly second the position of DarthPunk. He seems to be trying to avoid attention while being able to make excuses later on, with the added bonus of being able to hop onto a bandwagon on me without much thought from other players. His second post + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 11:31 Golbat wrote:
I think that lynching a lurker day one is only a good idea if we have no reads on people who might be scum. As far as that goes for me, I already have an idea of who might be scum, so I won't get behind lynching a lurker today.
Also, there's not so many people playing that we can afford to kill people off just because they aren't contributing enough. I mean, if you don't post at least once per day, you get modkilled anyways, so it's not lurkers we should watch out for, it's multiple contentless posts (i'm looking at you MrMedic).
is more of the same: he is trying to come off as pro-town without having to commit to anything as of yet. Particularly of importance is the phrase "I already have an idea of who might be scum". Almost brilliant, as it gives him the ability to jump on any bandwagon that forms. He could just say "Yep, just as I thought" and hop right on. Sure, it works better if the bandwagon was me, but if it ended on anyone else no one could say that he had flip-flopped. Finally, he posts this + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 13:36 Golbat wrote:
I mean honestly, it's gone on long enough.
##Vote Mordanis
If you're red, try to be less obvious next time.
If you're green, try to be less scummy next time.
I certainly hope you're not a blue. Awesome, he jumps on the bandwagon in 2nd/3rd position, early enough that he seems to be "leading", but late enough that he can avoid later suspicion by saying "Shady was in front of me!". He even tries to end the discussion by agreeing that the case on me is open and shut. Vague Pro-town comments + early excuse + bandwagon-ing + anti-discussion = quadruple scummy. So for right now at least: ##Vote: Golbat+ Show Spoiler [nonsense about Keir] +I'm really getting bored with the stuff about this. Read my second post about his "claim" + Show Spoiler [spoilered for you convenience] +On July 27 2012 12:44 Mordanis wrote:Soo apparently everyone has decided that scumhunting is a bad idea D1? The point of this game is to analyze things. Context does matter, but some of the things that have been suggested so far are sort of ridiculous. If someone went to bed right before the game began and had to go straight to work, and maybe forgets they could easily go almost a full 24 hours before posting. It doesn't make them scum, it just makes them busy. On the other hand, if you delay posting content until other people post content, then the scum hunt is never going to get going. I admit, my case again Keir was somewhat rushed, but if we don't start posting analysis, we lose any information that could have been gained, and basically start fresh D2, just down 1 or 2 townies (rando-lynch vs. no-lynch). Another thing: Mislynching D1 is sort of to be expected. Unless the scum choose to bus one of their own, the scum have allies and are therefore less likely to be lynched. You have to use the information that is gained from discussion to figure out who is scum most of the time. From Ver's Town Guide: Show nested quote +The most useless kind of lynch is a last minute switch that is really easy and safe to hop on the bandwagon for. If there's a highly polarized lynch, the dead information + voting lists can provide a lot, even if the people accused are all innocent (then you can see who's manipulating just out of site).
In other words, if we have a constructive D1 but mislynch, town is in much better position than if a random lynch happens to hit scum. Anyways, apparently people want me to respond to the FOS put on me. Darth seems to have misunderstood me. The 3 situations I posed were the 3 possible roles that Keir could be. I ran through what the outcome would be for each hypothetical. I would think it was obvious that I didn't believe that Keir was simultaneously red, green, and blue, but ... Aside from what appear to be a misunderstanding, there doesn't seem to be anything else. The reason that I think that Keir isn't blue is because blues tend to be somewhat lurky but do contribute to the scumhunt.Keir has been fairly active, though no scum-hunting (yet!), but brought attention to himself by trying to seem like a blue. From Ver's Town Guide: Show nested quote +To keep this simple and save time, let's look at some heuristics to find potential targets, then go through their post history to get the best ones. Here are some common heuristics I use of blue indicators:
-Tries to contribute but doesn't stick their neck out
-Shows fear/wants to instinctively hide
-Drastically lower post quantity compared to games when they are green but still tries to contribute.
-Focuses most of their posts on blue roles or ignores them entirely.
-To figure out which role specifically, they will focus unnatural amounts of attention on that role, know the rules for that role thoroughly, or ignore it entirely while mentioning other blue roles. Figuring out the specific is difficult to ascertain and not always applicable, but these heuristics will hold up more often than not. Look at the post I indicated in my case, it fits those last two heuristics to a tee, but the other two are off(policy is sort of a gray-zone, sort of pro-town and sort of "safe play" but everyone does it + Show Spoiler +). That's why I feel Keir isn't blue, because he seems to be trying to seem blue but some of his actions are the opposite. And there was the public question: when I was vigi, I asked several questions about my role, but to try to hide my role I never posted them publically, I PMd them. His play screams to me a somewhat experienced player trying to fake blue. I hate doing this, but I feel there are some points that people should not miss. TLDR:Scumhunt should begin the moment content is posted, and Keir is almost certainly green or red. , and find for me one place where I explicitly say that we should lynch Keir. All I said was that he isn't blue. Which leaves the two possibilities of him being scum or VT, which everyone seemed to interpret as pushing for a lynch. I over committed to defending what I still believe to be a good read for being 2 pages in, but I didn't try to start a bandwagon on him. If you really want to make a big deal out of a mistake and end the discussion before the day cycle is 1/4 of the way done, by all means just vote for me and agree that its obvious. If you don't feel that way, do your own analysis and point fingers. Town doesn't win by singing Kum Ba Yah, My Lord. I think this is pretty important to parse through, because it makes me want to refrain from lynching Mordanis until day 2 or 3. I'm going to state that I share Mordanis' and Keir's concerns that Golbat may be scum. This is especially true if Mordanis flips green or blue--then Golbat is very clearly red, and vice versa. That being said, however, I'm still pretty suspicious of Mordanis' desire to start scumhunting an hour and a half into the game, when only half of the players had even posted. This was exacerbated by the fact that his case against Keir was extremely poor, almost intentionally so--as if Mordanis wanted more heat than light to be shed on the situation. One of the main things I'd like to point out here is that scum do not necessarily have to play quietly. It's easier for the scum to play that way, but playing loudly is also a valid scum tactic for sowing discord and division within the town--which is what I thought Mord's post was trying to do. Now that the Keir case is closed, however, and Mord+Keir have both identified Golbat's behavior as pretty odd in and of itself, then I think it would be worthwhile to take a look at Golbat. (I'm still a suspicious of Mord, but mainly because his behavior has created so much uncertainty as to what he really could be--and Golbat can clear up a lot of that.) Besides being the first one to "formally" vote for Mordanis, Golbat was also the first one to accuse Mord of faulty analysis. Granted, Golbat's claims were valid--but his more recent posts have made me pretty suspicious. First, let's ignore the list for a bit--we'll circle back to it, but one general thing to note about Golbat's posting: he seems to spend more time trying to make himself look like a townie than trying to figure out who is scum. This is the kicker that shifted my focus from Mord to him. Look at this train of posts below: + Show Spoiler [Golbat's posts since the "…] +On July 27 2012 16:21 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 16:14 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
Keir He hasn't even called out his accuser as being scummy at all.
On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
Mord I really like the OMGUS! vote though, <3.
So you call Mord out for OMGUS'ing you, but want me to OMGUS him? That's not what I said. I said that you didn't call him out at all, not that you didn't vote for him. I wouldn't expect you to vote for someone just because they voted for you. But saying "hey bro, cool your jets" at least would have been something. Until page 12 I'm pretty sure you didn't even respond to his accusations, but I might have missed a post. What Mord did was go "Oh so you're gonna vote for me? WELL I'M GONNA VOTE FOR YOU, TAKE THAT! Completely different. And then this post: On July 27 2012 16:49 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 16:26 Keirathi wrote:
@Goldbat: I responded to both of his posts regarding me with pretty strong dismissals for being a bad case. My apologies. I completely forgot about those two posts. Maybe i'm being too hasty with my accusing Mord of being scum from one bad read early in the game. It just seems really fishy that he stuck with it for so long. For the time being mord, I'm not convinced you're not scum, but i'm being convinced less and less that you are the more I think about it. So for the time being, ##unvoteI just really want to win my first game, and I want to do it while playing well, which is what got me excited to get a slam-dunk mafia kill on day one. I know for a fact that i'm not scum, and that's all I really know at this point. Right now, besides Mord, I think that our best bet is to see who isn't contributing anything to the discusssion and then get rid of them. I admit that all of my reads so far could be wrong 100%. However, i don't think posting my day1 reads about all of the people is the same thing as making a town list, because I didn't even give an opinion on half of the people. I could also do without your "oh look at how good I am, you guys are bad" attitude. This is a newbie game, and calling people bad accomplishes nothing except potentially driving people away. P.S. I know I said "i'm not one to throw votes around yadda yadda yadda, but + Show Spoiler +That was me trying to be all internet tough . I'll try to tone down my accusatory-ness, but that's just me being new to the game. And this: On July 27 2012 18:51 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 18:42 alan133 wrote:
I have read and re-read the filters but couldn't find anything other than Mordanis' "meh" case on Kei and subsequent cases against Mordanis for that.
I was kinda thrown off when Golbat decides to unvote Mordanis because he started off having high confidence that he is scum. His "I am a newbie post" also contributes to my suspicions on him. I quickly dismissed them because I still have my FOS on Mordanis and he did a case on Golbat too.
Now that Ange777 has mentioned it, I would like to ask Golbat, what makes you think that Mordanis is not scum anymore? To me, his only "townie points" is that he is the first player who built a case, but that's about it. Is there some "obvious" reason that I missed? Every time I re-read Mordanis's posts I am more convinced that he is scum. The reason I backed off of Mord is because I felt like I may have been pushing too strongly against him based on his first bad read. I didn't want to appear to be scum myself, so I backed off for the moment. I still have a sneaking suspicion about him that he may be mafia, but I didn't want to lynch myself by pushing too hard on a bad read. I feel like i've been talking in circles around mord, "He's scum, no he's town, no he might be scum, no he's probably town", so I feel like I need to take a definite stance on the matter, and that is ##FoS MordanisIt's not the flat-out vote that it was before, but I still don't trust you. I've heard several times to trust my reads, and so this is my position. We'll see what happens between now and lynch time. + Show Spoiler +but for real now, I need to step away from the thread for a few hours And this: On July 27 2012 18:44 Golbat wrote:
I can understand why you would read my actions so far in the game as scum, but they're honestly just the actions of a bad player who thought he had a dead on scum read and was most likely very, very wrong. From now on i'll be more careful with who I vote for, because while I DID indeed redact my vote, I really really dislike when that happens on the whole. I got a little carried away and luckily it happened this early on and not in a situation where I might have cause a loss for town.
Basically, I'm NOT scum, and anything scummy I have said or done so far can be explained by my inexperience.
After reading Prom's post (especially the bit regarding self-imposed posting limits), I feel like it's time for me to take a break, especially after spewing so much bullshit and bad play all over the thread. See you in about 6-12 hours. As soon as people start pressuring him, Golbat says that he's not scum in 4 different ways. He emphasizes his newbieness, he says he's just eager to win, then he self-consciously makes a post to make himself not seem like a flip-flopper. Then, when he finally realizes he's digging himself into a hole, he decides to pull the Ostrich maneuver and stick his head into said hole for 6-12 hours. Undoubtedly, if he is red, he is now sending a clear signal to his buddies to bail him out and hopefully shift the discussion to someone else by the time he is out of said hole. Next post will be about Golbat's "list post". On July 27 2012 20:39 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 19:49 DarthPunk wrote:On July 27 2012 19:07 Mordanis wrote:
I just want to point out that if internal contradiction is grounds for lynching, I think pretty much everyone's dead D1. And I really do want to know why Alan is suspicious of me, because I see one mistake (over-pursuing my case on Keir), and I'd argue that this post is equally a mistake. So I wait patiently. Really? You have no idea why someone may be suspicious of you? The entire Keirathi case was terrible. It remains terrible. I reread mordanis' filter and looking back I don't even think he thought his case had any substance. Right from the get go you doubt yourself and the claim against Keirathi. I think that right now Keirathi is the best candidate for lynching. Still, its pretty early so I don't think it would be wise in any way to commit right now.. Keir is almost certainly green or red. I have no idea which is more likely, but I think he is more likely scum than anyone else at this moment. Read my second post about his "claim" + Show Spoiler [spoilered for you convenience] +, and find for me one place where I explicitly say that we should lynch Keir. So for right now at least: ##Vote: Golbat Although you push your read you never commit yourself to it. As soon as you start taking heat from people you switch on to one of your accusers with no resolution to your kerathi case. You just walk away from it altogether and start throwing accusations at someone else. Right, while I think Mordanis' train of posts is suspicious, I think Golbat just sort of exposed himself with his giant train of self-covering posts. I'd go with Golbat right now as I think lynching him does one of two things: 1) He flips red, in which case we've gotten a D1 red lynch which puts us in the 75% win range 2) He flips green or blue, in which case Mordanis will be under quite a bit of pressure. On July 27 2012 21:16 Shady Sands wrote:Onto the list post by Golbat: + Show Spoiler [List post by Golbat] +Now let's look at his list post: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
While we're all here, let's not waste time. We might as well discuss people other than Keir, because there ARE other people besides Keir.
I think MrMedic may be scum, and is "reluctant to make a big first post" because he doesn't know how to post without being scummy. It's a legitimate concern, and if I had rolled scum in my first game, I might be in much the same state of mind. That being said, he might also be town, and reluctant to make a big post because he doesn't want to look scummy. I can understand that as well, and that was my concern before I actually got stuck into the discussion. Basically what my point is is that he either is or is not scum (lol), and that i'm going to be reading his posts very carefully until further notice.
Keir seems to me to be town. He gave some good advice for our (potential) roleblocker where scum might have done the opposite and given intentionally bad advice while appearing to have good intentions. However, beyond that first bit of advice, he hasn't contributed anything to the scumhunt. He hasn't even called out his accuser as being scummy at all. It is possible that, knowing that they are both mafia, Mord made a really bad case against him so that the town would rally to his defense, thus keeping suspicion away from him, while also making Mord seem like a townie who had simply jumped at the first thing he saw that was a bit off. I hope he isn't scum, but I won't rule it out just yet.
Pretty sure Mord is scum. I did vote for him after all. But, there is always the chance he was just a very eager townie. The only thing about him being town that rubs me the wrong way is how emphatically he decided to stay with his line of reasoning, despite the fact that it had been slapped down by multiple people. Very suspicious. Perhaps I myself jumped the gun in voting for him, but being one to not throw around votes lightly, i'm keeping my vote on him unless there is completely overwhelming evidence that he is either not scum, or that someone else is scummier. I really like the OMGUS! vote though, <3.
DarthPunk seems like a pretty straight-forward townie to me. He picked apart Mord's case against Keir, and hasn't said one thing yet that doesn't seem pro-town. I agree with almost all of the things he says, and look forward to winning with him after we lynch the final mafia.
Promethelax Hasn't said much of substance, but that can be excused due to not being able to post. He said he'd be here to watch GSL, so he's probably going to post very soon. I have no idea about his alignment, other than that he claimed to be town.
aRyuujin Has said nothing of substance, and hasn't given a reason for his lack of content. Seems to be a lurker, and if he doesn't speak up with something useful by the day2 deadline, he's certainly one of the people I have my sights on.
goodkarma has given a legitimate reason not to vote Mord, and I can respect that. Going for the policy lynch on a lurker I can respect too, but I think that we should lynch someone who feels scummy before someone who feels asleep on their keyboard.
alan133 has one good post, and nothing else of substance. But being from Malaysia I can understand not being synched up with the rest of us. I'll have to read his posts when I wake up tomorrow.
Zorkmid seemed to be active before the ball truly got rolling, and then ceased to post after it did. Being canadian, he's probably asleep, and as such I'll have to wait to pass judgement on him as well.
Shady Sands, aside from being a good writer, also seems to be town. He agrees with my assessment of Mord, and that is a good enough reason for me to avoid casting too much suspicion on him, but of course I can't completely trust anyone on day one.
Obvious.660 is asleep
Ange777 has said nothing since the game started. I hope to hear from him soon
I'd like to hear other people's reads as well, this is going to be the only time I post a list of my reads on everyone, so as not to appear too spammy, even though I hope this clears me of any potential scum suspicion, seeing as i'm town as all get out.
Very spurious reasoning on MrMedic, even more spurious than Mord's reasoning on Keir. The reason this looks worse than Mord's post on Keir is that this comes after he himself has made a giant post about how poor reasoning by Mord is counterproductive as his very first post in the game. What makes it seem guilty is that again, after making that accusation, Golbat drops it without bringing up MrMedic again in any of his other posts. Then Golbat states, again, that his only reason for posting a list is to clear himself of town suspicion. This is, again, pretty weird. It's almost as if Golbat is saying "Hey! Look, I'm contributing by making a giant long post! Don't lynch me!" Golbat says that he's going to keep the vote on Mordanis until better evidence comes up that shows Mord is innocent. Then a few posts down, Golbat unvotes Mord (in spite of Mord doing more of what Mord was doing--arguing his point emphatically and often alone against the rest of the town), then puts him on FoS. Then Golbat moves down to systematically state that every member of the town is innocent in his eyes due to a wide variety of excuses. This was a major WTF moment for me, as I didn't really understand the necessity of doing something like that. The only way this move makes sense is if Golbat is somehow trying to cover for his scum buddies by lumping them all in with the rest of the town, and by subtly equivocating any sort of analysis (from time of posting analysis to post content analysis to voting analysis) into mediocrity and uselessness. On July 27 2012 21:22 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 20:33 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 15:36 Mordanis wrote:... *Sigh* I'll begin by saying this: If the people jumping on my bandwagon 1/6th of the way through the first day are town, they are really doing a good job of muddling up the conversation. Look through the thread so far, and see that the only discussion before I posted my case was policy, and that very lenient. There was a lot of "Oop, don't want to attract attention, guess I'll say that we shouldn't policy lynch any lurkers". I admit that I rushed my two main posts, and they may have been suboptimal, but compare that to the entire rest of the populace. We've managed 2 cases so far, and I was one of them. The other is a direct response to mine. I really don't understand why the people who are tunnelling me are doing so: attacking the only person who has posted anything of substance (that isn't within the same bandwagon as you) seems anti-discussion. So while I certainly made a mistake in talking too much about Keir and potential blue roles, the biggest reason that I seem to be "in danger" is that I've been willing to say what I believe. Regardless, I see the bandwagon as being very interesting. There are 3 people who have had an overwhelming share in the activity against me. DarthPunk: He seems to have a hard time with my line of thought. I apologize, my last game ended with me and another player (Release <3) in a duel that had a lot secrecy and enigmatic reasoning. I came to this game expecting the same. If you take people at the face value of their words (In which case, I'm town so don't lynch me :D), then you tend to miss a lot of good reads. The way to catch scum is not to find the first invalid argument, but rather to find the players who are playing in an anti-town way. This includes delaying to reduce the amount of analysis, making the atmosphere bad for town, and muddling with plans. By posting my case on the first thing that I saw, I went in the direction of an atmosphere that welcomes content posting, started the scumhunt before it would have started had I not posted, and laid a fairly straightforward path for the town without explicitly discussing policy. We lynch the player with the scummiest play. So while my read may not have been perfect, my post should have helped town. On the other hand, creating a mass bandwagon on the one person who has posted anything of substance (besides the counter substance) seems to accomplish the goals of scum. Still, he seems more to have an issue following my logic than to be following a plan, as well as being the first to place suspicion on me. I give him a solid "mEh" on the scum-scale Shady: The most brazen of my accusers. Doesn't seem to be following the fine points of the game very closely. Still doesn't appear to get that the day cycle is 48 hours and not 12. Has a great time posting out perceived errors in my logic and then votes for me on said perceptions, without seeming to notice that one of his main points + Show Spoiler +if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. makes no sense. Why would scum draw attention to himself on a case this early? Why especially would the scum stick to his guns rather than move on to greener pastures? Seems like really dumb play for scum, although perhaps he thinks I am that dumb. I am pretty sure I'm more intelligent than a garbage can though... Anyways, despite my annoyance with him, his play seems more uniformed than scummy. So to you Shady I say: Read through the OP again, and preferably some of the guides. Your play so far has been far from inspiring. And compared to this group, that's saying something. Golbat: The entire time so far he seems to have been itching to get on my bandwagon. His first post with more than 1 line says: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 09:15 Golbat wrote:
Howdy guys! This will be my first game of mafia ever that wasn't an sc2 UMS, and those I could never quite get the hang of (mostly due to nobody else having a clue what was going on either). Hopefully, I'll be able to make more sense of the game in a format like this.
As far as the game goes, Mordanis' post about Keir's post where he was "virtually claiming town RB" seems to be a pretty scummy thing to do. It didn't seem to me to be a secret claim of any sort, just a rules clarification. Even if it was a super-secret claim that he could use later, I wouldn't believe him if that was the only evidence he had.
From what I've read elsewhere, that type of posting is classic scum behavior. Look like you're helping the town and trying to hunt scum, when in reality you're just blowing a townie's mistakes clear out of proportion to sow confusion and doubt.
Not everyone has posted, so I don't yet want to commit to a vote, but I've got my eye on you Mordanis. First he makes an excuse for potential scumslips (First time in a non UMS, take it easy on me), and then proceeds to quietly second the position of DarthPunk. He seems to be trying to avoid attention while being able to make excuses later on, with the added bonus of being able to hop onto a bandwagon on me without much thought from other players. His second post + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 11:31 Golbat wrote:
I think that lynching a lurker day one is only a good idea if we have no reads on people who might be scum. As far as that goes for me, I already have an idea of who might be scum, so I won't get behind lynching a lurker today.
Also, there's not so many people playing that we can afford to kill people off just because they aren't contributing enough. I mean, if you don't post at least once per day, you get modkilled anyways, so it's not lurkers we should watch out for, it's multiple contentless posts (i'm looking at you MrMedic).
is more of the same: he is trying to come off as pro-town without having to commit to anything as of yet. Particularly of importance is the phrase "I already have an idea of who might be scum". Almost brilliant, as it gives him the ability to jump on any bandwagon that forms. He could just say "Yep, just as I thought" and hop right on. Sure, it works better if the bandwagon was me, but if it ended on anyone else no one could say that he had flip-flopped. Finally, he posts this + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 13:36 Golbat wrote:
I mean honestly, it's gone on long enough.
##Vote Mordanis
If you're red, try to be less obvious next time.
If you're green, try to be less scummy next time.
I certainly hope you're not a blue. Awesome, he jumps on the bandwagon in 2nd/3rd position, early enough that he seems to be "leading", but late enough that he can avoid later suspicion by saying "Shady was in front of me!". He even tries to end the discussion by agreeing that the case on me is open and shut. Vague Pro-town comments + early excuse + bandwagon-ing + anti-discussion = quadruple scummy. So for right now at least: ##Vote: Golbat+ Show Spoiler [nonsense about Keir] +I'm really getting bored with the stuff about this. Read my second post about his "claim" + Show Spoiler [spoilered for you convenience] +On July 27 2012 12:44 Mordanis wrote:Soo apparently everyone has decided that scumhunting is a bad idea D1? The point of this game is to analyze things. Context does matter, but some of the things that have been suggested so far are sort of ridiculous. If someone went to bed right before the game began and had to go straight to work, and maybe forgets they could easily go almost a full 24 hours before posting. It doesn't make them scum, it just makes them busy. On the other hand, if you delay posting content until other people post content, then the scum hunt is never going to get going. I admit, my case again Keir was somewhat rushed, but if we don't start posting analysis, we lose any information that could have been gained, and basically start fresh D2, just down 1 or 2 townies (rando-lynch vs. no-lynch). Another thing: Mislynching D1 is sort of to be expected. Unless the scum choose to bus one of their own, the scum have allies and are therefore less likely to be lynched. You have to use the information that is gained from discussion to figure out who is scum most of the time. From Ver's Town Guide: Show nested quote +The most useless kind of lynch is a last minute switch that is really easy and safe to hop on the bandwagon for. If there's a highly polarized lynch, the dead information + voting lists can provide a lot, even if the people accused are all innocent (then you can see who's manipulating just out of site).
In other words, if we have a constructive D1 but mislynch, town is in much better position than if a random lynch happens to hit scum. Anyways, apparently people want me to respond to the FOS put on me. Darth seems to have misunderstood me. The 3 situations I posed were the 3 possible roles that Keir could be. I ran through what the outcome would be for each hypothetical. I would think it was obvious that I didn't believe that Keir was simultaneously red, green, and blue, but ... Aside from what appear to be a misunderstanding, there doesn't seem to be anything else. The reason that I think that Keir isn't blue is because blues tend to be somewhat lurky but do contribute to the scumhunt.Keir has been fairly active, though no scum-hunting (yet!), but brought attention to himself by trying to seem like a blue. From Ver's Town Guide: Show nested quote +To keep this simple and save time, let's look at some heuristics to find potential targets, then go through their post history to get the best ones. Here are some common heuristics I use of blue indicators:
-Tries to contribute but doesn't stick their neck out
-Shows fear/wants to instinctively hide
-Drastically lower post quantity compared to games when they are green but still tries to contribute.
-Focuses most of their posts on blue roles or ignores them entirely.
-To figure out which role specifically, they will focus unnatural amounts of attention on that role, know the rules for that role thoroughly, or ignore it entirely while mentioning other blue roles. Figuring out the specific is difficult to ascertain and not always applicable, but these heuristics will hold up more often than not. Look at the post I indicated in my case, it fits those last two heuristics to a tee, but the other two are off(policy is sort of a gray-zone, sort of pro-town and sort of "safe play" but everyone does it + Show Spoiler +). That's why I feel Keir isn't blue, because he seems to be trying to seem blue but some of his actions are the opposite. And there was the public question: when I was vigi, I asked several questions about my role, but to try to hide my role I never posted them publically, I PMd them. His play screams to me a somewhat experienced player trying to fake blue. I hate doing this, but I feel there are some points that people should not miss. TLDR:Scumhunt should begin the moment content is posted, and Keir is almost certainly green or red. , and find for me one place where I explicitly say that we should lynch Keir. All I said was that he isn't blue. Which leaves the two possibilities of him being scum or VT, which everyone seemed to interpret as pushing for a lynch. I over committed to defending what I still believe to be a good read for being 2 pages in, but I didn't try to start a bandwagon on him. If you really want to make a big deal out of a mistake and end the discussion before the day cycle is 1/4 of the way done, by all means just vote for me and agree that its obvious. If you don't feel that way, do your own analysis and point fingers. Town doesn't win by singing Kum Ba Yah, My Lord. I think this is pretty important to parse through, because it makes me want to refrain from lynching Mordanis until day 2 or 3. I'm going to state that I share Mordanis' and Keir's concerns that Golbat may be scum. This is especially true if Mordanis flips green or blue--then Golbat is very clearly red, and vice versa. That being said, however, I'm still pretty suspicious of Mordanis' desire to start scumhunting an hour and a half into the game, when only half of the players had even posted. This was exacerbated by the fact that his case against Keir was extremely poor, almost intentionally so--as if Mordanis wanted more heat than light to be shed on the situation. One of the main things I'd like to point out here is that scum do not necessarily have to play quietly. It's easier for the scum to play that way, but playing loudly is also a valid scum tactic for sowing discord and division within the town--which is what I thought Mord's post was trying to do. Now that the Keir case is closed, however, and Mord+Keir have both identified Golbat's behavior as pretty odd in and of itself, then I think it would be worthwhile to take a look at Golbat. (I'm still a suspicious of Mord, but mainly because his behavior has created so much uncertainty as to what he really could be--and Golbat can clear up a lot of that.) Besides being the first one to "formally" vote for Mordanis, Golbat was also the first one to accuse Mord of faulty analysis. Granted, Golbat's claims were valid--but his more recent posts have made me pretty suspicious. First, let's ignore the list for a bit--we'll circle back to it, but one general thing to note about Golbat's posting: he seems to spend more time trying to make himself look like a townie than trying to figure out who is scum. This is the kicker that shifted my focus from Mord to him. Look at this train of posts below: + Show Spoiler [Golbat's posts since the "…] +On July 27 2012 16:21 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 16:14 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
Keir He hasn't even called out his accuser as being scummy at all.
On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
Mord I really like the OMGUS! vote though, <3.
So you call Mord out for OMGUS'ing you, but want me to OMGUS him? That's not what I said. I said that you didn't call him out at all, not that you didn't vote for him. I wouldn't expect you to vote for someone just because they voted for you. But saying "hey bro, cool your jets" at least would have been something. Until page 12 I'm pretty sure you didn't even respond to his accusations, but I might have missed a post. What Mord did was go "Oh so you're gonna vote for me? WELL I'M GONNA VOTE FOR YOU, TAKE THAT! Completely different. And then this post: On July 27 2012 16:49 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 16:26 Keirathi wrote:
@Goldbat: I responded to both of his posts regarding me with pretty strong dismissals for being a bad case. My apologies. I completely forgot about those two posts. Maybe i'm being too hasty with my accusing Mord of being scum from one bad read early in the game. It just seems really fishy that he stuck with it for so long. For the time being mord, I'm not convinced you're not scum, but i'm being convinced less and less that you are the more I think about it. So for the time being, ##unvoteI just really want to win my first game, and I want to do it while playing well, which is what got me excited to get a slam-dunk mafia kill on day one. I know for a fact that i'm not scum, and that's all I really know at this point. Right now, besides Mord, I think that our best bet is to see who isn't contributing anything to the discusssion and then get rid of them. I admit that all of my reads so far could be wrong 100%. However, i don't think posting my day1 reads about all of the people is the same thing as making a town list, because I didn't even give an opinion on half of the people. I could also do without your "oh look at how good I am, you guys are bad" attitude. This is a newbie game, and calling people bad accomplishes nothing except potentially driving people away. P.S. I know I said "i'm not one to throw votes around yadda yadda yadda, but + Show Spoiler +That was me trying to be all internet tough. I'll try to tone down my accusatory-ness, but that's just me being new to the game. And this: On July 27 2012 18:51 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 18:42 alan133 wrote:
I have read and re-read the filters but couldn't find anything other than Mordanis' "meh" case on Kei and subsequent cases against Mordanis for that.
I was kinda thrown off when Golbat decides to unvote Mordanis because he started off having high confidence that he is scum. His "I am a newbie post" also contributes to my suspicions on him. I quickly dismissed them because I still have my FOS on Mordanis and he did a case on Golbat too.
Now that Ange777 has mentioned it, I would like to ask Golbat, what makes you think that Mordanis is not scum anymore? To me, his only "townie points" is that he is the first player who built a case, but that's about it. Is there some "obvious" reason that I missed? Every time I re-read Mordanis's posts I am more convinced that he is scum. The reason I backed off of Mord is because I felt like I may have been pushing too strongly against him based on his first bad read. I didn't want to appear to be scum myself, so I backed off for the moment. I still have a sneaking suspicion about him that he may be mafia, but I didn't want to lynch myself by pushing too hard on a bad read. I feel like i've been talking in circles around mord, "He's scum, no he's town, no he might be scum, no he's probably town", so I feel like I need to take a definite stance on the matter, and that is ##FoS MordanisIt's not the flat-out vote that it was before, but I still don't trust you. I've heard several times to trust my reads, and so this is my position. We'll see what happens between now and lynch time. + Show Spoiler +but for real now, I need to step away from the thread for a few hours And this: On July 27 2012 18:44 Golbat wrote:
I can understand why you would read my actions so far in the game as scum, but they're honestly just the actions of a bad player who thought he had a dead on scum read and was most likely very, very wrong. From now on i'll be more careful with who I vote for, because while I DID indeed redact my vote, I really really dislike when that happens on the whole. I got a little carried away and luckily it happened this early on and not in a situation where I might have cause a loss for town.
Basically, I'm NOT scum, and anything scummy I have said or done so far can be explained by my inexperience.
After reading Prom's post (especially the bit regarding self-imposed posting limits), I feel like it's time for me to take a break, especially after spewing so much bullshit and bad play all over the thread. See you in about 6-12 hours. As soon as people start pressuring him, Golbat says that he's not scum in 4 different ways. He emphasizes his newbieness, he says he's just eager to win, then he self-consciously makes a post to make himself not seem like a flip-flopper. Then, when he finally realizes he's digging himself into a hole, he decides to pull the Ostrich maneuver and stick his head into said hole for 6-12 hours. Undoubtedly, if he is red, he is now sending a clear signal to his buddies to bail him out and hopefully shift the discussion to someone else by the time he is out of said hole. Next post will be about Golbat's "list post". EBWOP: Just realized I forgot to slot in why Mord's post makes me want to hold off to Day2/3--Mord highlights "drawing attention to himself" and a willingness to stand up for his beliefs as keystones of his in-game habits. The thing with this playstyle is that playing as a "noisy scum" is very hard to keep up over 2 or 3 in-game days, because in a game as small as this, the analysis will very quickly start to shift in the right direction and noisy attempts to derail become more and more risky as the posts pile on--inevitably a fairly major scumslip will be made. By committing publicly to this sort of strategy, we can judge Mord the following way: if Mord continues to play loud and does not get quiet over the next few days, then Mord will either burn out quickly and scumslip or prove that he is not scum. If Mord quiets down after Day 1, then his above post basically consigns him to becoming an easy lynch--especially if Golbat flips blue/green. There are portions of these that don't seem to flow logically, but the essence of these posts is that he is looking for play that fits mafia goals, and trying to convince others about his read. In other words, he is contributing. He is not just posting several times per day, but he is actively contributing to legitimate discussion, which helps town. In short, before the scumhunt began, he seemed very scummy, but since then seems very town. Golbat, on the other hand, has played fairly scummily the entire game. Shady has contributed, Golbat has not. I need time to look more closely at these two and some other players, but now is unfortunately not the time. I need rest now, and I will be able to post tomorrow much more cohesively. My sincere apologies if this is poorly worded/spelled :C Wait ... did you even consider Promethelax' case on Shady? Shady's latest posts have made a few people suspicious (including me) and yet you believe his posting to have improved? And then more posts where she casts suspicion on every player but Golbat. So once the lynch train is moving pretty solidly on Golbat, Ange starts to cast suspicion on other players. This turns out excellently in hindsight knowing that Golbat flips green. She gets points for agreeing with a case most players found agreeable (Even if all 3 scum voted for Golbat, 4 townies voted for Golbat, 3 for Shady, so most townies found Golbat the scummiest), points for getting in on the case very early, points for keeping the lynch going even though she suspected other players, points for distancing herself from the case against Golbat by posting mostly on other players. It's all just too perfect. She played in the way that minimized her scumminess, which strains credulity to believe meshes with belief that she had no knowledge of the flip. But we need to know the timing of her switch to truly see how suspicious her play is.
Once I stated my suspicions against Golbat I moved on to analyze other players' post. He was semi-lurking and not answering to my last accusations and therefore I saw no need and possibilty to further pressure him as my vote was already on him. There is more than just one scum in this game so why tunnel a player so hard that you forget the others?
|
EPT
.
