|
Hey guys, just home from the golf course, 72.
I'm going to start off by answering questions I've seen and will try and post some analysis either tonight or tomorrow morning. Gf having laser eye surgery tomorrow, playing in this on the weekend.
On August 02 2012 05:39 goodkarma wrote:Ange's sudden switch on day 2 I feel is suspicious. His original vote was for Zork for "semi-lurking," and after one post he is "convinced" not to vote for him anymore. This feels a bit too sudden to me, and may not be coincidence. Especially when Zork says in that post of one of his earlier suspects, Shady Sands: Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 22:02 Zorkmid wrote:
I honestly just forgot about SS, but your accusation has led me to go back through his filter. I've noticed that he has never addressed my accusation about him.
This makes Zork more suspicious in my eyes since I can't see how you just "forget" about those you're suspicious of... It felt Ange let Zork off a bit too easily here to ensure Prox's lynching.
I did forget about him, early on in the game I found it hard to differentiate among the players. Not sure what else I can say about it.
From Keir's "will"
To one Mr. Zorkmid I would like to call into question some of your motives:
I am saddened by your lack of participation. I understand that it was your birthday, but you've shown the ability to make arguments. Therefor, I question your vote onto Goldbat without much explantion. Was it just to avoid a no-lynch? Or did you honestly think he was scum?
I am curious as to why the possibility of no-lynching makes you feel less certain about lynching liars and lurkers. Not stating a solid stance just because of the possibility of a no-lynch doesn't make much sense to me.
About Golbat, I did find his play scummy, especially his on again-off again Mordanis suspicions. I didn't vote for him to avoid a no-lynch, I actually have no problem whatsoever with a no-lynch that early in the game. I believe that now we're getting to the point in the game where a no-lynch hurts more than it did earlier in the game, Scum is getting closer to a win. Barring a lucky save, we're going to lose 2 more townies in the next two nights.
That said, another mis-lynch is even worse.
About why the possibility of no-lynching appealed to me early game, was that it would give us more time to make a better informed lynch, reducing the chance of a mis-lynch of a town lurker on day 2. We all what happened there. However, at this critical juncture in the game, I think it more likely that a lurker would flip red than a lurker earlier in the game.
|
Good morning. Right to it.
On August 02 2012 18:17 Ange777 wrote:Okay, so goodkarma's post made me go back to my original case on Zorkmid and I have to say stupid me! Why did I even let go off Zork? ZorkmidLet's go back to see his explanation on my case. + Show Spoiler +On July 31 2012 22:02 Zorkmid wrote:As for this: Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 20:24 Ange777 wrote:I'll be out for a few hours. For now I am putting my vote on Zorkmid for: - semi-lurking - playing inconsistently: he previously stated that he believes Shady to be suspicious and goodkarma seems to be on his scum list as well but now he says On July 31 2012 04:47 Zorkmid wrote:
I don't have any strong scum reads at this point at all, and the whole Golbat thing leaves me gun shy to start pushing up on another active poster. - waiting for others to start cases in order to sheep them On July 31 2012 04:47 Zorkmid wrote:
Unless I reach some epiphany soon, or am convinced by someones case, my next vote will likely fall upon a lurker. We have ~9 hours till deadline so I want to see something good coming from you Zork! ##Vote Zorkmid I honestly just forgot about SS, but your accusation has led me to go back through his filter. I've noticed that he has never addressed my accusation about him. + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 13:29 Shady Sands wrote:
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? I see this as a GIANT leap of reasoning, and I still see Mordanis's case as an attempt (albeit a clumbsy one) to get the ball rolling in XXII. I don't know if he didn't see this, or didn't feel he had to defend himself from it. He was under attack from Ange, and Prom around this same time. The other thing that I notice is that since the night post, the only posts that he has made have concerned: 1. Speculation about what night actions happened. 2. C9++ format possibilities 3. Posted massive quote walls with a useless sentence at the end. This is in stark contrast to his heavy activity earlier in the game. This could mean that he is part of the mafia, and that the medic save/roleblock in night 1 has confused the reds to the point where they haven't figured out how to proceed. It could also mean that Shady is mafia switching up strategies because he had so much heat on him day 1, and he wants to duck it by being more selective about what he My original case had three points: 1. semi-lurking 2. posting inconsistently 3. waiting for cases to sheep In his defense he states he just simply forgot about his previous suspicions. My mistake was that I simply thought could that be a townie who in the midst of discussion loses focus. But if you try to explain this with scum motivation you get this: Scum Zorkmid tries to hide the fact that he forgot who he was blaming earlier. It is so much more probable that a scum forgets whom he had blamed earlier than that a townie forgets whom he honestly suspected. Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 06:22 goodkarma wrote:ghost, you gave me such a heart attack lol. When I first read your post I thought I was dead... Great story though. Five stars  . which is odd given that he had been playing as if he was sure he would live to the morning and this is a really subtle way to say to people “I'm town too, I'm scared of dying” without coming out and saying that you are town. So, first you believe showing relief to still be alive would be suspicious for a townie to do when his name is spelled out in the night post like that?
I also think that your "relief post" is strange. It's sort of WIFOM, but I don't think that as a green or blue I would ever post something like that. It's just yelling out "I'm A TOWNIE huehuehue". I wouldn't post it because it reeks of redness[/QUOTE]
A few of us have stated that this thought alone is not a convincing tell for scummy behaviour. But your thought should be taken as one! You are basically claiming scum in that post! Why do you need to state that as green or blue you would never post that? Because you are red. I can't believe I missed such a huge scum slip!
##Vote Zorkmid[/QUOTE]
So reasoning out what types of statements I think that greens and blues would or wouldn't make is my scumslip? My HUGE scumslip? Give me a break. One of the ways that I do analysis is to try and look at the suspicious posts through the lens of different roles.
Going through the posts of Zorkmid I still have the problem that he does not make his own cases. Instead he takes wishy washy stances as seen in this explanation for his suspicions against Shady.
The above example IS my own case.
1. semi-lurking
2. posting inconsistently
These other accusations (and the spoilered points) are just weak, and I've already addressed.
|
Sorry, I fucked up a quote there. Hit post before preview again.
|
On August 03 2012 00:00 DarthPunk wrote:
@ ange777.
The zork scumslip combined with his lurky posting habits are certainly cause for suspicion. I don't like his explanation for the statement. He is saying that he looks at certain posts through different roles but does not actually explain the slip at all. What was he trying to say there? It was WIFOM pure and simple. He has not answered the case on him adequately and he has not provided much in the way of cases.
What are you talking about?
I honestly can't see how one person, let alone two people would see this as a slip.
Let me walk you through what I assumed to be pretty straight forward logic.
I believe that no smart green or blue would have made the post that Prom did....but he did, hence I thought that he may be red. I'm speculating on the meaning of Prom's actions based on what I would do, nothing more, nothing less.
I think that most people followed this logic just fine, as it contributed to Prom's mis-lynch.
On August 03 2012 00:00 DarthPunk wrote:The problem with both Zorkmid and aRyuujin is that there is so little to actually make a read from.
I don't post as often as many players, but at least what I do post has some thought behind it.
|
On August 03 2012 00:59 Ange777 wrote:@Zorkmid
Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 22:46 Zorkmid wrote:
I also think that your "relief post" is strange. It's sort of WIFOM, but I don't think that as a green or blue I would ever post something like that. It's just yelling out "I'm A TOWNIE huehuehue". I wouldn't post it because it reeks of redness Zork says he doesn't think that as a green or blue he would ever post that. Why does he need to say "as a green or blue"? This already proves that he does not think of himself as green or blue! Because when he sees the "relief post", he sees it from scum's perspective thinking it would be such a scummy statement for himself to say due to confirmation bias.
I'm going to let someone else explain to you why this is stupid. Volunteers?
|
On August 03 2012 01:08 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 01:02 Zorkmid wrote:On August 03 2012 00:59 Ange777 wrote:@Zorkmid
On July 31 2012 22:46 Zorkmid wrote:
I also think that your "relief post" is strange. It's sort of WIFOM, but I don't think that as a green or blue I would ever post something like that. It's just yelling out "I'm A TOWNIE huehuehue". I wouldn't post it because it reeks of redness Zork says he doesn't think that as a green or blue he would ever post that. Why does he need to say "as a green or blue"? This already proves that he does not think of himself as green or blue! Because when he sees the "relief post", he sees it from scum's perspective thinking it would be such a scummy statement for himself to say due to confirmation bias. I'm going to let someone else explain to you why this is stupid. Volunteers? Giving up? Not even trying to defend your blatant lie anymore?
By what logic does my saying "as a green or blue" prove that I'm red?
If someone said, "if I were a cop, I'd check player X" would that prove they're not cops?
Why are you tunnelling me with NOTHING?
|
On August 01 2012 14:20 aRyuujin wrote:
Im so sorry I completely forgot to vote -.-
My bad, I knew i would be busy but I didn't put up a vote before hand like I did day 1. Thanks hosts for not modkilling me yet <3, wont happen again
I think that you, just like MrMedic, owe us an explanation of who you would have voted for and why.
If it weren't for the Mod lowering the number of votes required, there would have been a no-lynch.
|
@Goodkarma
I'm looking at your post about voting records. On day 2, both Keirathi and Prom voted for you. I want to examine their cases on you, since they were made by 2 confirmed townies, as well as Shady's.
From Prom:
+ Show Spoiler +I know it is obscenely long don't worry. It is easy to simplify. There are three points.
1 the use of 'a' instead of 'my'
2 I told him not to do something that is actually against the rules
3 my overuse of the word town
and
4 OMGUSOMGUSOMGUS
seriously that is the entirety of his case against me. The only point which might be valid is the third but it was a joke (one I now regret obviously) since saying I was pro-town without being pro-town was how Kier had caught me in XIX. I honestly thought the use of town beers and a town line instead of town circle made it really obvious it was a joke. I should have known there were secret Romanians on TL Mafia.
So karma: out of those three points one is pants-on-head, one is semantics and one is me being dumb enough to joke around. Where is this case you don't think I can respond to. You have talked about my posting habits as a possible fourth point but I can't do anything about that. I'm here while I am home and awake and that will continue until town wins or I am lynched/nk'd
He follows all of this up with a decent case against the same lurker he wanted to lynch d1. Cases against semi-lurkers are the easiest to make as mafia and tunneling one player gives you an easy out when you are wrong about anything else. This play continues to read as scum to me and, therefore,
## Vote: Karma
At the time, it seemed like a big part of his case on you was him just trying to turn the focus back onto you, which can indicate scumminess, but he wasn't. He believed your tunnelling, and accusations on "semi-lurkers" reads as scum behavior. I agree with him to the extent that those are the easier targets. You yourself are one of the least active posters so far (in a game fraught with inactivity).
From Keir:
+ Show Spoiler +
It doesn't make any sense for a townie to claim that he has reads and not share them before the night ends. If you had died, you never would have gotten to post them, and you would have completely wasted your time and hurt the thread overall. Were you completely unafraid of dying?
Also, you said you would post them before the night ended in your previous post - Hide Spoiler -
On July 29 2012 07:57 goodkarma wrote:
With the day passed, and our first flip, I plan on making a rather lengthy analysis thread on top suspects. I promise to have it before night ends, but don't expect to see it for several hours.
. I don't particularly like that you promised something and didn't deliver.
After reading through the thread again, I still feel the strongest about GK and Obvious. However, I admit I am still super wary of Promethelax, but I don't know if he deserves a lynch yet. My real concern though is that if he is town, Mafia has very, very little reason to NK him at this point even if he doesn't get lynched. In our last game together, the fact that he was so obviously "pro-town" and still alive by the 4th day was really suspicious. I'm pretty torn about what to do regarding him, because if he IS town, mislynching him would hurt us fairly badly.
I will say that his cases in this game, compared to his cases in XIX where he was scum, are 100% better. To use his own terms from the end of XIX: "I liked my pants-on-head retarded connection theories."
There is one similarity from XIX and this game that I will mention that I haven't before. In day 1 on XIX, he pushed a case on another townie really hard, and then after day 1 he virtually quit mentioning it for no reason. Or rather, mentioned it a few times but without any real conviction or pressure. It kind of feels like the same thing he's done to Shady in this game.
I think that the most salient point that Keir brought up in his case against you was your not sharing your reads before the night was over. You responded that:
It clearly states in the thread that I was following Alan's advice. I was afraid that by posting something wrong and dieing, I would be leading the town into another mislynch. Alan has since then brought up the point that it wasn't that impressions were posted, but rather that the people in his game who were night-killed had tunnel vision and were only pursuing single suspects.
In other words, yes. Not posting my impressions at night was a mistake, and I realize that now.
If I were a town player, + Show Spoiler + I'd feel more worried about getting NKed if I posted something right, not wrong.
From Keir's will:
+ Show Spoiler +Regarding goodkarma, this is what I had to say and I want it remembered in my absence: I find repeatedly pushing to have lurkers lynched is an anti-town trait. Our goal is to lynch scum. You claim it's impossible to make solid reads on day 1, but without people making reads, our ability to get successful lynches later in the game diminishes. Repeatedly trying to sheep us back onto lurkers and away from active cases is suspicious.
Just another re-iteration of Prom's point that lurkers are easier to form cases about, and the risk of a scum slip is lower as a result. I agree.
From Shady:
Shady never FoS'ed or Voted for you, but he has talked about you.
+ Show Spoiler +Here's my read on GK:
I'm not really sure why he would zero in on aRyuujin like that. Basically GK's rationale for lynching people is:
Filter people who "appear active" --> Find those who are active but who are light on the content --> Start analyzing and prepping for lynch.
So he filtered 3 people out who appear active:
aRyu
MrMedic
Promethelax
Then he says hmmm aRyu is contributing the least... and then seems to forget about the other two and keep digging on aRyu.
Now aRyu obviously doesn't do town any favors by making his defense consist of haikus, but the shift by GK to just focusing on aRyu was a little off to me.
His shift Golbat was well-timed and well-explained, so nothing can be really inferred from that.
I'm not suspicious of GK right now, but I am a little puzzled by why he would drop MrMedic and Promethelax so quickly from his list of suspicious inactives, given that MrMedic hasn't voted and Promethelax seems to space his posts 14 hours apart and ignored the giant debate on Mordanis/Golbat entirely.
This a third player who suspects that GK's play is essentially focused on the easy targets, as well as continuing to tunnel them after they have defended themselves.
@GoodKarma
Your posts are big on encouraging others to post cases and contribute, but your filter is lacking in both regards.
Prove me wrong!
##Vote GoodKarma
|
On August 03 2012 03:18 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 01:38 Zorkmid wrote:
By what logic does my saying "as a green or blue" prove that I'm red?
If someone said, "if I were a cop, I'd check player X" would that prove they're not cops?
Why are you tunnelling me with NOTHING? Dear Zork. As you are the target of my case I would say there is a hundred percent guarantee that you and I won't agree on this matter. So please save me the trouble of having to repeat myself over and over again and re-read my case once more. Thank you. If someone else besides Zork and Jingle hav any questions regarding my case on Zork, I'll be happy to oblige. Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 01:55 Zorkmid wrote:No. You need to explain the logic that led to "that proves you're red". It is not apparent. On August 01 2012 14:20 aRyuujin wrote:
Im so sorry I completely forgot to vote -.-
My bad, I knew i would be busy but I didn't put up a vote before hand like I did day 1. Thanks hosts for not modkilling me yet <3, wont happen again I think that you, just like MrMedic, owe us an explanation of who you would have voted for and why. If it weren't for the Mod lowering the number of votes required, there would have been a no-lynch. You do realize that MrMedic was replaced right?
I do.
|
Fucking formatting....
On August 03 2012 03:18 Ange777 wrote:
Dear Zork. As you are the target of my case I would say there is a hundred percent guarantee that you and I won't agree on this matter. So please save me the trouble of having to repeat myself over and over again and re-read my case once more. Thank you. If someone else besides Zork and Jingle hav any questions regarding my case on Zork, I'll be happy to oblige.
No. You need to explain the logic that led to "that proves you're red". It is not apparent.
You do realize that MrMedic was replaced right?
I do.
|
On August 03 2012 05:52 Mordanis wrote:Finally, I think his emotion post + Show Spoiler [link for !!Formatting!!] + is incredibly scummy. The way he had self-control for large parts of the post but lost it for others makes it seem contrived. Like he's trying to walk a thin line between coming off as a frustrated townie and coming off as an illogical jerk. I don't see any townie trying to contrive an emotional post to gain town cred. It doesn't contribute to the scum-hunt, it doesn't help gain information, it is just a defense that appeals to emotion. Scum who are trying to deny information gain incredible help from this, as it detracts from analytical discussion of motives and alters the way townies think about the player. So for 3 major things that jive with scum play plus a possible scum-slip, and little contribution (besides defending himself) ##Vote: ZorkmidLast thing: @ Ange, please refrain from connection based play until you know the flip. Your argument about JH falls apart completely if Zork flips green, so right now its entirely WIFOM. Connection based play is one of the best tools for hunting scum, but if you misuse it by trying to connect before you know how someone flipped, it is meaningless.
Just thought you should know that my TL mafia ban from a year ago all began from being tunneled as a townie. Got emotional, make some huge mistakes, year ban. I've learned not to lose my cool since then (a little).
Food for thought.
|
I didn't want to have to do this just yet.
I am a Doctor
On day one I saved Keir.
Day 2 I attempted to save aRyuujin.
I tried to breadcrumb this early on.
On July 28 2012 01:14 Zorkmid wrote:
Activity seems woefully slow. I guess that most of you are on different clocks that I am.
##unvote
##vote Mordanis
I think we're going to lose.
|
The kind that isn't obvious enough to get me NKed
|
But obviously not obvious enough to save me from getting DKed
|
Hopefully not everyone is blind.
|
Activity seems woefully slow. I guess thAt Most of you Are on Different cloCks that I am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
