|
/in
This would be my 4th and final game as Newbie
|
Every single time I see a new post in here I get really excited hoping the game will start soon and every single time I am dissappointed!! >_< You guys are spamming far too much :D
Deadline suits me perfectly btw
|
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
|
EBWOP:
On July 27 2012 17:14 Golbat wrote: I'm still not sure about your scum status, but at the same time, I want to explore all possibilities, and casting a vote before the halfway mark of the day is foolish anyways. If you're scum, it gives you time to shape up your posting, and if you're not, it gives scum time to run a train on you. Even while I was writing up my reads, I saw other people who could be scum just as easily as you. But now that I've been able to refocus, I really think I should give other people some space to talk, especially because half the town hasn't even really contributed, and that's never a good thing.
I do want to state that whatever my read are in my previous post, they should not be taken as me being 100% certain of a person's innocence/guilt. DarthPunk and Shady could easily be scum too, but I think that before we come to conclusions, we have to look at the big picture, and that hasn't really been completely painted yet.
Okay, I missed that explanation earlier. BUT this is such a bad explanation in my opinion. If you are convinced he is scum you should always pressure him. Of course pressuring him early would give a scum Mordanis and his team time to think of a good defense but Mafia would have to act upon it and therefore expose themselves.
The second part just feels like an excuse for backing off from Mordanis. In a previous vote you seemed pretty convinced by him being scum:
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.
|
EBWODP:
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 ^^
|
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.
Just to be clear, you mean Golbat is scum? Or Mordanis is scum?
|
@Golbat:
I don't like your explanation. You are just playing the newbie card. Yes, this is a Newbie game but that does not mean that I am willing to overlook scummy behaviour. Therefore my vote still stands on you until you can at least give some effort in scum hunting to show that you are town.
@Promethelax:
While I agree with your suspicions on Zorkmid there are several players who need to step up their game. Posting fluff is not helping town at all!
|
Obvious MrMedic aRyuujin Zork
All have posted next to nothing of content.
On to Shady:
His filter is a lot of policy talking and then the case against Mordanis. I am unsure about him.
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.
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.
The thing is, if Mordanis was convinced of the controversy of Keir's play than Mordanis' play is not scummy. I don't like Shady's case.
I have to head out now. I'll try give a better read on Shady when I come back.
|
@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:
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.
|
@aRyuujin:
Is this your standard way to play Mafia? I am confused ...
|
On July 28 2012 04:40 aRyuujin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 04:14 Ange777 wrote: @aRyuujin:
Is this your standard way to play Mafia? I am confused ... Posting in Haikus Makes the game more interesting Spoilers organize
Posting in Haikus just makes me want to skip your posts :D
@Obvious:
On July 28 2012 00:01 Obvious.660 wrote:Good morning. Going through filters before I end up suit shopping today. Ange777:+ Show Spoiler [Ange777's last post] +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. Totally agree with this concept. We should not let ourselves fall into the trap of confirming reds by mislynching town. This is true even on day 1. @Promethelax:I disagree that all lists are bad. That's just some people's method for addressing everything in a single post. While it is true that lists such as the one that got my lynched as town in my last game, as well as the one here posted by Golbat, can be misconstrued as scummy behavior, I don't feel that they indicate alignment. Look at the intent behind the list each time you read them. I don't want to have to read a bunch of lists, either. I wanted to give out as much information as I could knowing I probably couldn't get back before deadline. Outside of that my play was sloppy and ill informed. We shouldn't talk too much about my last game (Newbie Mini XXI), however, because that game is still not finished. Also, great catch in your last post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15625606We should keep an eye on everyone's posting behavior, though, not just Shady Sands and Mordanis. @Mordanis:Great initiative to get the ball rolling on conversation. Your early case has initiated a lot of discussion, right or wrong, and that's pro-town behavior. Anyone keeping an eye on Mordanis specifically might want to note that we're not anywhere close to the deadline and this kind of behavior (generating discussion) is at least opening up avenues of discussion. Mordanis can't make you vote one way or another, decide the strength of his case(s) on your own. @MrMedic:Don't be afraid to post! We promise Marvellosity won't come out and shoot you, too. Let us know your thoughts. @Golbat:Your play reminds me of my own in my first game. Some friendly advice: focus on motive, not on what's being said.
You enter this thread and all you do is (dis-)agreeing with other players about easy stuff or posting fluff? I want to hear your opinion on the cases made.
|
@Golbat: When I was asking for a case to show us that you are town I wasn't thinking of cases on semi-lurkers ...
On July 28 2012 05:24 Golbat wrote: It looks like pretty much everyone else in the thread seems to think I'm scum. Well that's not good, because i'm not. You all seem to think that my incredibly poor play has something to do with me being scum, when that's not the case at all. I'm town. I'm very town, I'm just bad. I Honestly thought all of my posts were helpful when I posted them. I can see now why they aren't. I also think you can do better than lynching me. I propose instead that today we lynch someone who hasn't been a part of the conversation much, as it's entirely possible that the mafia has decided to sit back and let me and Mord go at it while the town analyzes itself to pieces.
While you are right that lynching possible scum is always better than a mislynch on a townie, lynching a controversial player is most of the times preferable to lynching a lurker. There are several players including me who made cases on you and your death would just give so much more information right now than the death of Keir.
How about instead of making cases on lurkers you start to address the questions we posted earlier regarding Mordanis and explain why you believe Mordanis to be less scummy than before?
When unvoting you said:
On July 27 2012 16:49 Golbat wrote:# 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,
##unvote
|
On July 28 2012 06:36 Mordanis wrote:I'm starting to get a really bad feeling about Shady. Remember his post that said that no game in 20 lynched scum D1? + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 09:02 Shady Sands wrote: So pretty much, I looked through about 20 mafia games and found not a single night one lynch resulting in a red kill. This suggests one thing:
Day 1 scumhunting actually has a lower success rate than a random day 1 lynch. If the lynches had been truly random, then maybe 20-30% of the games should have had day 1 lynches turn up red, but none of them did. Here are the D1 lynches from several games: NMM XXI: blue NMM XX: red NMM XIX: blue NMM XVIII: green NMM XVII: red NMM XVI: blue (I couldn't find XV or XIV, so I chose to go to the SNMMs) SNMM XI: red SNMM X: green SNMM IX: green So we have 3 blues lynched, 3 VT lynched, and 3 scum lynched. So it would appear that in Newbie mini mafia games, there is about a 1/3 chance of lynching scum D1. With 3/13 chance a random lynch would hit scum (~24%), and historically a 1/3 chance of hitting scum through hunting, the choice is clear. This is for future reference really, as we're already hunting. But this brings up the fact that Shady almost certainly lied. Now there is sometimes a reason for a townie to lie. If it opens up an avenue for them to discover scum, or take one for the team, or accomplishes another goal it can be a boon to lie to the town. On the other hand, by suggesting that scum hunting D1 is useless, Shady is 1) discouraging discussion (why discuss when it only lowers the probability of hitting scum?), 2) stalling the game (mafia wants to stall as long as possible. they use their kp regardless of where our lynch ends up), and 3) trying to influence newbies' thinking (if analysis/scum hunt isn't the main priority, then mafia get off free for mistakes while being able to penalize some other player. This goes with stalling). In short, Shady lied in a pretty baldfaced manner, and the lie only serves the interest of mafia. Also, after reading through Obvious's filter last game, I saw that his behavior was almost identical to Golbat's. Golbat, you need to contribute, because if you don't, you're going to be looking even scummier. But I have seen almost identical play from a townie (Obvious was lynched D1 though), so for now I am going to switch my vote. ##Unvote ##Vote: Shady_Sands
I must admit I noticed this earlier as I played XV (we lynched scum day1) but didn't give it much thinking. Still waiting for Shady to reply to the questions earlier and this accusation.
|
Just finished watching GSTL! + Show Spoiler + I will catch up now with the thread.
|
@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?
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:
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?
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:
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.
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?
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 ...
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 goodkarma
And don't get me wrong. I am hundred percent behind getting rid of lurkers. So if we have vigs, please do your job!
|
EBWOP:
On July 28 2012 10:17 goodkarma wrote:
@ and regarding aRyuujin: Here's the issues I currently have that make me think you're a good lynch day one. You have not really added any meaningful discussion presently for town. Your viewpoints have been rehashings of towns'. Your first critical post is what I'm looking for. I hate to reiterate this point but neither you nor Keirathi have really addressed it. Until I see that first critical post, you are by my definition a lurker.
The other point is that there's one or two people that have come to your defense. You talk about scum buddies, which is most interesting to me. Because I would think scum buddies would be involved in the defense of their friend, especially on day one when it's nearly impossible to present a truely rock-solid case against anyone. Lynching you would give valuable information about those who choose to stand behind you. This is very valuable information, even if you flip town. If we were to lynch a Mord or golbat or shady right now and they flip town, all we would know is that no one in town really liked them much.
If we were to lynch Mordanis, Golbat or Shady we would have a lot of information. As far as I remember all three were accused and defended by several players. All three of them have made cases against other players.
|
@Obvious:
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 28 2012 23:30 Keirathi wrote:No one has any comments on my case against Golbat?
Valid points but I fear that we won't get an answer from Golbat before deadline.
In general, activity in this game is aweful. Zorkmid and MrMedic have disappeared as well.
|
On July 29 2012 00:15 Shady Sands wrote: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 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?
|
@Mordanis:
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?
|
On July 29 2012 00:28 ghost_403 wrote: V-V-V-V-VOTE COUNT: Ange777 ( 1 ): Golbat, aRyuujin ( 1 ): goodkarma, Golbat ( 3 ): Ange777, aRyuujin, Keirathi, Mordanis ( 1 ): DarthPunk, Shady Sands ( 4 ): alan133, Mordanis, Obvious.660, Promethelax, Presently, no one is set to be lynched! 5.5 hours remain in Day 1 ! MrMedic, Shady Sands, Zorkmid, have yet to vote!
Ehm ... I think there is something wrong with your votecount :D I believe Golbat and Mordanis both unvoted?
|
I will be away for a few hours but back before deadline! I am still waiting for satisfying answers from a few players, especially goodkarma and Shady!
+ Show Spoiler +
|
@Shady:
On July 29 2012 01:00 Shady Sands wrote: First, because, as I've stated before, Golbat is the player which I think is most likely to be scum based on his D1 posts and behavior, and second, because Mordanis is a very active player, which means that if Golbat flips blue/green Mordanis will need to make a lot of explanatory posting under quite a bit of pressure (since he was the first one to FoS Golbat). Either way, Golbat brings a lot of clarity to the town. I never said that we should auto-lynch Mordanis if Golbat flips green/blue--rather that since it will be easy for town to put pressure on Mordanis if Golbat flips non-scum, and that Mordanis is an active poster, then it will be easy to make him crack if he is scum.
So if we are not supposed to auto-lynch Mordanis if Golbat flips green/blue, how are we to interpret your following statement?
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.
|
On July 29 2012 02:54 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 02:31 Ange777 wrote:@Shady: On July 29 2012 01:00 Shady Sands wrote: First, because, as I've stated before, Golbat is the player which I think is most likely to be scum based on his D1 posts and behavior, and second, because Mordanis is a very active player, which means that if Golbat flips blue/green Mordanis will need to make a lot of explanatory posting under quite a bit of pressure (since he was the first one to FoS Golbat). Either way, Golbat brings a lot of clarity to the town. I never said that we should auto-lynch Mordanis if Golbat flips green/blue--rather that since it will be easy for town to put pressure on Mordanis if Golbat flips non-scum, and that Mordanis is an active poster, then it will be easy to make him crack if he is scum.
So if we are not supposed to auto-lynch Mordanis if Golbat flips green/blue, how are we to interpret your following statement? 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.
That if Mordanis flips red, Golbat is green/blue, and if Mordanis flips green/blue, Golbat is red.
Do you mind elaborating how you came up with this conclusion???
|
On July 29 2012 03:23 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 03:07 Ange777 wrote:On July 29 2012 02:54 Shady Sands wrote:On July 29 2012 02:31 Ange777 wrote:@Shady: On July 29 2012 01:00 Shady Sands wrote: First, because, as I've stated before, Golbat is the player which I think is most likely to be scum based on his D1 posts and behavior, and second, because Mordanis is a very active player, which means that if Golbat flips blue/green Mordanis will need to make a lot of explanatory posting under quite a bit of pressure (since he was the first one to FoS Golbat). Either way, Golbat brings a lot of clarity to the town. I never said that we should auto-lynch Mordanis if Golbat flips green/blue--rather that since it will be easy for town to put pressure on Mordanis if Golbat flips non-scum, and that Mordanis is an active poster, then it will be easy to make him crack if he is scum.
So if we are not supposed to auto-lynch Mordanis if Golbat flips green/blue, how are we to interpret your following statement? 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.
That if Mordanis flips red, Golbat is green/blue, and if Mordanis flips green/blue, Golbat is red. Do you mind elaborating how you came up with this conclusion??? This was part of a discussion on whether or not to lynch Mordanis and whether or not to lynch Golbat. From my POV, it looked unlikely that scum would be bussing their own members on Day 1, given that Day 1 lynch rates tended to mislynches anyhow. Therefore, the first half of the statement--that if Mord flips red, Golbat (his main accuser) should be green/blue. I did not state this in the thread because I thought this was apparent. The second half of the statement--that if Mord flips green/blue, Golbat should be red--is because Golbat was, as Mord noted, the first person to start hinting at lynching Mord (before other people had even made up their minds about it) and also made that extremely suspicious "end all discussion, vote Mord" post. This smelled to me like either extremely bad town play (which I, as a general rule, try not to believe in--I think that most players will behave fairly intelligently) or a clear attempt by a red to push for a mislynch. So if Mord was innocent, then the likeliest red would be Golbat. Then, after writing that, I started reading through Golbat's posts themselves, and they suggested an added layer of guilt--especially his flip-flopping and multiple backtracking to defend himself. Then Golbat tried defending himself some more, and looked even more scummy, etc. etc.
Did it ever occur to you that both might be mislead townies? You are already crossing out a lot of possibilities by saying that either of them has to be scum. And by commiting yourself to this as a fact, how can you say that we are not supposed to auto lynch the other one if the first one flips town?
|
@goodkarma:
Still waiting for an answer.
On July 28 2012 23:03 Ange777 wrote:@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!
|
@alan:
While you are still awake, would you please tell me your read on goodkarma?
|
On July 29 2012 04:14 alan133 wrote: @Shady I believe you meant to say if Mordanis flips green then Golbat looks really scummy since he is the first to bring out a case on him, and Golbat looks scummy to me, too. but no vice versa. I am really sensitive to posts like this. "So you think player X is scum. We will lynch you, and if you are innocent, then we will believe you and lynch him later". I know this is off by a bit, since you actually have more argument that that, but such logic is so easy overlooked and scums love to make use of silly logic like these, and make a second easy mislynch.
I don't think so. He explicitely said that if one of them is town, the other must be scum.
On July 29 2012 02:54 Shady Sands wrote:
On July 29 2012 02:31 Ange777 wrote:
So if we are not supposed to auto-lynch Mordanis if Golbat flips green/blue, how are we to interpret your following statement?
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.
On July 29 2012 04:14 alan133 wrote: That if Mordanis flips red, Golbat is green/blue, and if Mordanis flips green/blue, Golbat is red.
@Golbat Looks like most of you is set to get Golbat lynched. I am losing some confidence seeing how my reads are widely agreed upon. I hope I just suck and Golbat actually flips red.
I am off to bed, later.
[B]On July 29 2012 04:18 alan133 wrote: Also EBWOP: Show nested quote +@Golbat Looks like most of you is set to get Golbat lynched. I am losing some confidence seeing how my reads are widely [b]agreed disagreed upon.
What are you trying to say? That it just seems far too easy to get Golbat lynched? Yes, that occurred to me as well and I am aware that this might be because scum is safe from getting lynched and easily agrees on lynching semi-lurking Golbat. But as of right now, activity is still shitty and I don't think we can get much discussion started on potential other lynch candidates. Vote stays on Golbat for now.
|
On July 29 2012 04:39 alan133 wrote: @Ange It's 3am right now so I am skimming through goodkarma's filter and give an general impression: hope you don't mind. Please do ask if you need me to elaborate on any particular detail:
While I disagree with his lurker lynching policy, he is consistent with it and follow through with pressuring lurkers. One thing that raises my eyebrow is that he decided to go after aRyuujin and aRyuujin only, when there are several other players that is also lurking hard(There might be explanation that I missed). Also, I dislike how he lightly dismisses Mordanis' case, totally ignored Shady's (well, I guess shady's far from being a lurker) and most importantly, ignored Golbat's case right until the end. If Golbat flips scum I might have something to say about it, but lets not get ahead of ourselves.
On July 29 2012 04:35 DarthPunk wrote: @ange777 on Goodkarma. I mean I posted it before, all Goodkarma's posts are discussions on lurkers and policy lynch's. Seemed to be a bit overly defensive when I pointed this out. The problem with goodkarma is that there is almost nothing to go on with him, as there is no analysis in his posts.
While both of you are correct that he is consistent in his lynch all lurkers that is exactly the problem I see in him. Before he posted everyone was discussion the cases made against people with scummy behaviour/posts (especially Shady at that time). But after he institgated the policy talk without commenting on the existing cases people started talking about lurkers and policy lynching, he totally derailed the topic of conversation and talked about something super safe: lynching a lurker.
I already stated it earlier: It will always be harder for scum to make a good convincing case. So the easiest thing to do is just make a case on a lurker. Through his post he achieved two things: 1) Showing himself as an active player and 2) Getting town cred by making a case while in reality he did not take any stand by making that post.
|
On July 29 2012 05:07 Shady Sands wrote: I think you're getting a little confused here--I never said that either have to be scum. I said that if Mord is lynched and comes up as innocent, Golbat is likely scum. If Mord is lynched and comes up as guilty, then Golbat is likely to be innocent. However, I did not mean that if Golbat is innocent, Mord comes up as scum, or if Golbat is scum, Mord comes up as innocent. That is because Mord didn't seem like he was railroading Golbat, while Golbat did look like he was railroading Mord pretty hard.
That being said, though, if Golbat flips blue/green, the pressure will be on Mord to explain himself. The pressure will also be on me as well, since I've argued against Golbat fairly heavily (just as heavily as Mord, if not more). I'm glad about that, since pressure keeps activity up, and keeps the scumhunt moving forward.
Okay, this is a totally different thing than what I understood in the first place. Apologies! I am still unsure about you though and would like to hear your opinion on goodkarma.
|
Oh god ... he really should have been here and claimed ...
|
I am out for the most part of the day but will try to post before the night kill.
|
So I only got back now and read through the thread. Apparently people still don't see the need to be more active in this game. Voting your strongest scum read and then abstain from further discussion is not exactly pro town behaviour. Especially if there was so much worth of discussion and several people just did not care to comment on other scum candidates expect for Golbat.
Keep in mind please that I am not satisfied with goodkarma's (non-existent) response to my accusation. Entering the thread and shifting the discussion from scum hunting to policy lynches ... this is not town play! I still have goodkarma marked as my strongest scum read.
|
Nice save/roleblock :D Heading off to bed now but will be back for scum hunting first thing in the morning! Be warned scum <3
|
|
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?
|
The transition occurs in this post : + Show Spoiler +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! . The time: 23:00 of July 28. At that time it was apparent that the vote was going to be between Shady and Golbat. Funnily enough, when the vote is wide open she tunnels Golbat, and when it narrows to 2 people she suddenly starts talking about 1 other player. Even funnier, once Zorkmid changes his vote from Aryuu to Golbat, she starts ignoring the case on him while posting her suspicions on other players. With the momentum solidly going towards a Golbat lynch when I revoted him, she calls the vote too easy and focuses all her attention on other players. In other words, she was sort of important to lynching Golbat but didn't really contribute, and once it became clear that Golbat would be lynched, she distanced herself from the case. This accomplishes both goals I came up with for scum motivation D1 (mislynch, don't get lynched D2), with precision that is highly unlikely from someone who doesn't know the flip before it happens.
I had asked Golbat to prove his town status by coming up with a case of his own. Unfortunately all he did was the unstatisfying case on semi lurkers. Why should I have repeated myself over and over again with Why do I think Golbat is scummy whenever I pressure another player? He was not there, I did all I could to pressure him by repeatedly asking him questions and by voting him. I never distanced myself from that case. I would have had more than enough time to unvote if I really wanted to keep clear from a Golbat mislynch. But I did not. I only stated the possibly mislynch thing because having a lynch candidate voted without any resistance at all is only possible under two circumstances: A real scum slip where scum can't defend their buddy at all or a mislynch. And that is an important fact to keep in mind!
My verdict after this analysis: Pretty suspicious. It isn't enough yet to vote for her, but it certainly warrants more investigation. I need to analyze her posts themselves before I do much more, but right now I just got back from work and I have to go back in 9 hours, so I need to grab some shut-eye while I can. Hopefully someone else can use this information while I sleep though.
TLDR: I don't really understand what exactly it is that is supposed to make me scummy. You might say that I am throwing suspicion at every single player (which is an exaggeration!) but I am only trying to get people to talk by pointing out flaws in their posting. Golbat was not online otherwise I would have pressured him for more information so I looked into other players instead.
|
On July 30 2012 16:41 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 14:56 goodkarma wrote: There... my response is finally posted... Sorry it took so long guys. I wanted to try to address everything in one go, and bring forward my own scum-reads into one post. I will check back in about an hour, and will give a thorough reread of everything tomorrow. I just want to say that this was 1.5 hours ago. If karma doesn't come back soon he moves even further into my scum column. On Ange: her posting follows a scummy pattern but her general Analysis is pretty good. Not enough to get her off the hook and she sheeped two cases but the general points are decent. Her Pressure on Shady for his 'if one of Golbat/Mordanis flips green the other is red' seems genuine however she was not the first to bring it up and, if SS is town, I would latch onto a thing like that as scum because it is such a scum tell. One of the scummiest things I found was Ange's use of the words "Promethelax's case on ShadySands" after she had made a case too. That seemed a little too much like an attempt to distance herself from the eventual lynch. Of course these things aren't always tells sometimes a case is just a case.
It was "your" case as you started it and I had only added one question to your case for Shady. Does not mean that i am distancing myself from that case.
Where did I sheep 2 cases??? Yes, I followed you after you posted a case on Shady but that's it!
|
EBWOP:
I am going to have a second look at the new cases.
|
Sorry, I had promised some posts but something came up. Activity should be back to normal in the second half of day 2.
|
On July 31 2012 04:56 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 18:37 Ange777 wrote: TLDR: I don't really understand what exactly it is that is supposed to make me scummy. You might say that I am throwing suspicion at every single player (which is an exaggeration!) but I am only trying to get people to talk by pointing out flaws in their posting. Golbat was not online otherwise I would have pressured him for more information so I looked into other players instead. Something doesn't sit right with me about this post.... If I were you, and it was my goal to look into other players, I would strongly consider moving my vote onto them. It's very tough to pressure a player so late in a day cycle when other players have multiple votes hanging over them. A vote on GK would have been much scarier than a FoS, don't you think?
Golbat was still my number 1 scum read at that moment. Don't see why I should have voted against my conviction. And without my vote I might have even lead to a no lynch.
@goodkarma:
While I didn't think your post against my accusation was satisfactory I do believe your posting has improved. For now I am dropping my case against you.
@Promethelax: When reading through someone else already mentioned it but I too dislike Promethelax buddying other players. I saw you gave up your case against goodkarma as well. What about your case against Shady? Why aren't you pushing it?
|
@Zorkmid:
In day 1 you stated that you found both Shady and Golbat suspicious.
On July 27 2012 22:11 Zorkmid wrote:Okie dokey. Just got finished reading the thread pages 10-14. First off on the advice of Promethelax, my schedule for this weekend is that I'll be following this thread throughout the day until about 4PM EDT, then I'm off to a Blue Jays game. Tomorrow is a bit of a milestone birthday for me (official old man), but I'll be back and active Sunday afternoon. Before I talk about the Mordanis-Keir thing, I want to answer Promethelax. The reason that my opinion from "lynch all liars and lynch all inactives" to not feeling as strongly about it is just because I was not aware that a non-lynch was possible. Mordanis's Case on KeirathiI actually got a town vibe from this post. We've all heard about how it is self contradictory and based on a false premise (Keir claiming RB), but I buy Mordanis' explanation that he rushed the case and that the lack of consistent logic and difficulty to follow the case is a result of this. On the same subject, I'm a little suspicious of those players who were so completely convinced that Mordanis is a scum based on this one post, as this was not a reaction I had. Among these people is Shady Sands:Show nested quote +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. Another of these people is Golbat: So far, Golbat has, in this order: voted Mordanis unvoted Mordanis FoS MordanisHis unvote seems to coincide with Mordanis's making a case on him. He claims he backed off the vote because: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 18:51 Golbat wrote: 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 Mordanis
+ Show Spoiler +This reminds me of that futurama ambassador from the neutral planet. "All I know is that my guy says maybe." I'm not sure what this could mean, but I think that it's worth pointing out. It's one of the stranger seeming posts I've read in this game. Is the deadline today at 17:00 EDT?I am suspicious of both of these players right now, but there's lots of daylight left.
After that post you don't even mention Shady a single time. Instead you go off to state your suspicion about goodkarma.
On July 30 2012 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:After reading the last 50 or 60 posts in this thread, one of the things that jumped out at me was this: Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 11:21 Keirathi wrote:On July 30 2012 10:44 Promethelax wrote: I wanted to know why it was those two mosre than the other three. That is why you feel that your cases against them are better than the ones against Me, Mord and Zork.
goodkarma - I just can't imagine a townie reasoning for his disrupting discussions and bringing us back to talking about lurkers repeatedly. Add in to that the case that you made, and for now I feel the strongest about him. Let's have a look at GK!Goodkarma says that he was hesistant to "join the Mordanis lynch bandwagon" early on in the game, a statement in keeping with his lurker policy. At this point he voted for aRyuujin, while averring his suspicions of MrMedic and Promethelax for the same reasons. He then changed his vote from aRyuujin to Golbat, at that time it was the 5th vote on Golbat. GK explains why he didn't vote for shady " he has provided some meaningful discussion for the town, and hasn't jumped on every bandwaggon he sees...". I'm curious as to why after dropping his vote on aRyujin, he leapt to Golbat next, and not those he was originally suspicious of: Myself, Obvious and MrMedic. I know I voted for the same guy, but I'm just a bit surprised at your choice to vote for Golbat given your "call to action". GK, would you have been likely to change your vote a second time, had Golbat done a better job of defending himself?
In total you have made three cases against players, all of them were made previously by other players. I can't get the feeling out of my head that you are just conveniently sheeping cases. Especially seeing this:
On July 31 2012 04:47 Zorkmid wrote: MrMedic, I really would like to hear a little bit more from you.
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. Unless I reach some epiphany soon, or am convinced by someones case, my next vote will likely fall upon a lurker.
It's a perfect excuse. What happend to Shady who was previously on your scum list? Are you just waiting for others to start a convincing case which you can bandwaggon?
|
EBWOP:
On July 31 2012 17:34 Ange777 wrote: It's a perfect excuse. What happend to Shady and goodkarma who were previously on your scum list? Are you just waiting for others to start a convincing case which you can bandwaggon?
|
@Promethelax:
On July 31 2012 17:16 Promethelax wrote: I still think that SS and GK are the scummiest players in this game and will be voting for one of them. I am going back over their filters now to decide which of them to vote. I'll be around for a little while so lets get this discussion going.
In your last post you just unvoted goodkarma for explaining his reasoning:
On July 31 2012 06:48 Promethelax wrote: GK: Since you have explained your reasoning ##: Unvote
If he was still scummy enough to be one of your top scum why unvote?
|
Regarding the aRyuujin case:
I went through his filter one more time. On the first impression there is not much. It's more like a case against a lurker than a scum.
What surprised me though is that aRyuujin had posted reads on other players using haiku whereas when he stopped using haiku he also stopped the reads. That would acutally fit goodkarma's argument about using haiku to make it more difficult to get a correct read on him. I thought it was a rather weird argument but now ... aRyuujin, I would like to see you make some effort in scum hunting.
|
On July 31 2012 17:53 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:17 Obvious.660 wrote:
See one of my more recent posts for my thoughts on alan133 and DarthPunk. Might be best to also make him aware of how you used a complete misrepresentation of what I actually posted to come to your conclusion. The fact that after I corrected you, you are still willing to refer people to that post without any clarification on how misleading/wrong it was is astounding.
What are you referring to?
Regarding lurker lynches:
I would differ between MrMedic and Zork. I strongly hope that MrMedic will be modkilled or at least replaced as he has not posted anything of importance at all while as Zork has posted little and therefore can be judged by what he has posted or when he has decided to not post/lurk.
I strongly disagree in lynching lurkers day 1. Sometimes real life issues are there and people can't manage to play. But if the lurking still continues after 72 hours I am inclined to say that it is intentional lurking. If we manage to find scummy things in lurkers I am not against lynching them. Right now I would put both Zork and aRyuujin in the scummy lurker category and strongly advise both to step up your scum hunting.
|
On July 31 2012 18:41 Obvious.660 wrote: Can't remember why I was looking at Ange777. Might have been because Ange777 was shutting down policy talk while talking up inactivity.
@Ange777: What do you make of alan133? Seems like two distinct writing styles are emergent in his last few posts.
Where have I been talking up inactivity?
I'll have to go through alan's filter again before I can answer.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Just to be clear, talking up means to promote something right? Or did you mean that I myself was inactive?
|
That post you quoted was a direct answer to Promethelax. He had made the case against Zork and asked me who else I thought was inactive at that time.
On July 27 2012 19:22 Ange777 wrote: @Promethelax:
While I agree with your suspicions on Zorkmid there are several players who need to step up their game. Posting fluff is not helping town at all!
On July 27 2012 19:28 Promethelax wrote: Which others players do you feel need to be looked at besides Zork? He clearly isn't the only guy who seems a little red, I just felt that he was flying too far under the radar.
Timing might have been unfortunate for you but you were pretty much inactive at that time. So I don't see anything wrong with my statement.
On July 31 2012 18:45 Promethelax wrote: I have an explanation for the buddying thing that you are unhappy with that I will reveal before the end of the night cycle. It has a good motivation and I promise town that I will explain it before the end of n2.
as opposed to this
On July 30 2012 18:16 Promethelax wrote: Oh, and based on the unwillingness to share this other mystery suspect with the thread I am going to ##Vote: Karma hiding your suspects doesn't help town and gives you as scum a huge asset in that you can come out with a case at any time and say "I've been suspicious of X for a long time. See this post here, I totally meant this guy you all see as scummy so I'm not jumping on this bandwagon, I've been on it forever"
I will not unvote you until you reveal your mystery scum read.
So you are not willing to share information that might help you to prove your town status and therefore help town to rule out one possible scum candidate? (Fake) claiming?
|
On July 31 2012 18:41 Obvious.660 wrote: @Ange777: What do you make of alan133? Seems like two distinct writing styles are emergent in his last few posts.
What do you mean by writing style? I re-read his last posts again and tried to compare it to his filter in general but I really don't know what you are hinting at. Reading his filter alone just gives me a null read, I have to see how he interacts with others.
|
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
|
@Zorkmid:
On July 31 2012 22:02 Zorkmid wrote:I'm happy to have a vote against me on a basis other than activity! It does kinda suck waking up everyday to 50 new posts when I was watching the thread all day yesterday and like 6 or 7 posts popped up, none of any value, but I guess everyone can't be on the same schedule. Schedule today: It's 8:30, I'm at work until 5 (might be another post or two out of me if I get some time), I think I'm going to be around the house afterwards, but I need to mow the lawn and stuff. Might be some evenings posts out of me. 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 If I vote for MrMedic and he is Modkilled does that mean my vote is wasted?
You say you have simply forgotten about Shady. Which I am inclined to believe for now for the apparent reason that Shady is just not active at all. You are right about his lack of analysis during day 2. Still all these points by you were already stated in Obvious' case against Shady so I am not completely happy with your own scum hunting.
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
I actually don't think that this is scummy behaviour at all. If it had been my name, the post would have scared the hell out of me as well so I see nothing wrong with that particular post.
On July 31 2012 23:53 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 18:45 Promethelax wrote: @DarthPunk My day two play is how I play the game when I have enough time. I'm glad you found my day one helpful and I'll try to replicate the strength of the cases I built but you'll note that d1 I had my SS case and since that point I have made others which are at least as strong (in my eyes stronger). I honestly don't feel that I am jumping up and down saying “oooh me I'm green! I'm green!” I am explaining the reasons for my play and my actions. As I said there are three goals that I have as a townie.
The bolded section of this quote is the MOST flagrant example of saying "oooh me I'm green! I'm green!" that I can imagine. This comes after questioning GK's "relief claim" after the flavored night post (which I agree, is not something I'd do if I were green or blue)
This however sounds valid. Especially in combination with the fact that Promethelax himself doubts goodkarma based on something similar. I am going to reread Promethelax' filter to see what I can find.
In light of your activity and effort ##Unvote Zorkmid
|
Because this is a post that I might have posted if it had been my name. I would not have thought that it might be seen as scummy. Please keep in mind that I also don't get a town vibe from that post. It's just a fluff post after a flip which sometimes happens in other games as well.
|
My top scum reads right now are mostly due to their sudden change in playstyle and/or activity: Shady and Promethelax.
While I think that goodkarma's case was a little stretched in some points (the word choice part especially), overall I can agree with it. DarthPunk's case was well written, the only thing I feel missing is something I stated earlier and to which Promethelax has not commented yet as well:
On July 31 2012 19:13 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 18:45 Promethelax wrote: I have an explanation for the buddying thing that you are unhappy with that I will reveal before the end of the night cycle. It has a good motivation and I promise town that I will explain it before the end of n2. as opposed to this Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 18:16 Promethelax wrote: Oh, and based on the unwillingness to share this other mystery suspect with the thread I am going to ##Vote: Karma hiding your suspects doesn't help town and gives you as scum a huge asset in that you can come out with a case at any time and say "I've been suspicious of X for a long time. See this post here, I totally meant this guy you all see as scummy so I'm not jumping on this bandwagon, I've been on it forever"
I will not unvote you until you reveal your mystery scum read. So you are not willing to share information that might help you to prove your town status and therefore help town to rule out one possible scum candidate? (Fake) claiming?
He suspects goodkarma for withholding information. Now he does the exact same. I can't think of a reason to imply a blue role without going through with it and actually claim.
Furthermore I think we all know that claiming to be townie is not exactly the most convincing way to get town cred. Just have a look at how badly Golbat's defense being a newbie townie was taken. Promethelax' last post:
On July 31 2012 18:45 Promethelax wrote: @DarthPunk My day two play is how I play the game when I have enough time. I'm glad you found my day one helpful and I'll try to replicate the strength of the cases I built but you'll note that d1 I had my SS case and since that point I have made others which are at least as strong (in my eyes stronger). I honestly don't feel that I am jumping up and down saying “oooh me I'm green! I'm green!” I am explaining the reasons for my play and my actions. As I said there are three goals that I have as a townie. We as town do win through living and having more obvious townies is a huge asset that is why Mason is an incredibly strong role. I'm going to stop harping on about my work and real life, when I'm here I am here and will be posting in a way that helps town you will have to decide for yourself if there is a scum agenda or a town one in my posts. As long as you promise to read over everything I say with no confirmation bias I welcome your FoS. Keep an eye on me and my actions should prove my alignment to you.
I have an explanation for the buddying thing that you are unhappy with that I will reveal before the end of the night cycle. It has a good motivation and I promise town that I will explain it before the end of n2.
You mentioned "town" six times. And this is after you explained previously that the constant mention of town was supposed to be a joke. Still joking? This is anti town play. Pro town play would be to stop the constant mentioning of being a townie town and instead hunt for scum. Which I am sure you would have had time to do if you had not been busy claiming town.
Given the obvious contradiction in Promethelax' play: ##Vote Promethelax
|
We have almost only 2 hours left till deadline and 6 guys still haven't voted yet ...
|
To be honest I think meta reads are not a good idea to use in newbie games. Everyone is a newb and being a newb we learn with every game we play. Therefore the playstyle may vary from game to game, especially if people point out your obvious mistakes/slips in the postgame discussion and you are eager to change them.
I don't know how many games Promethelax has played but it can't be more than 4. This isn't a very convincing basis for a meta read.
|
On August 01 2012 04:00 Keirathi wrote: EBWOP: In fact, I'll vote now.
I may consolidate just to avoid a no-lynch if I have to, but for now:
##Vote goodkarma
Could you give me your reasoning for this vote? I quickly skimmed through your filter to look for your suspicions against goodkarma and only found the following:
- pushing for lurker lynches - not immediately telling us his second scum read - the "in retrospect" thing
I feel his posting has improved a lot in comparison to earlier, he did reveal his second scum read later on and well about the "in restrospect" thing, I guess this is just whether you are willing to give him the benefit of doubt.
Compared to this I think the case on Promethelax is much more stronger. Is the meta read the only thing that is keeping you from voting him?
|
@Mordanis: Why are you waiting for your vote? Even if they do post, you are free to unvote if you are convinced by their defense. I believe it is important to take clear stances early as it gives the rest of us something to work with.
|
From page 1:
On July 17 2012 21:00 ghost_403 wrote:What Marv said, with the addendum that if the first one happened, it's gonna be super dramatic and suspenseful and stuff.
The scum work as a team, so one team member can send in the nightkill and any scum night actions (assuming the power role says it's okay). So, for example, if Marv, Chezinu and me were all scum, and I was a scum RB, Marv could send in
Chezinu kills Qatol, Ghost roleblocks Dreamflower If Chezinu was roleblocked, the nightkill would not go through.
On July 17 2012 22:42 ghost_403 wrote:Both roleblockers are notified that they are roleblocked. If one of the roleblockers is supposed to carry out the nightkill, it doesn't go through.
On July 17 2012 22:58 ghost_403 wrote: A single scum can carry out the nightkill and any night action they might have at any point in the game.
Can't say if that's a good idea or not.
|
On August 01 2012 04:28 Keirathi wrote: Also, I just want to add that I am curious about Prom's pseudo-claim. We know we have another blue role (Medic or Roleblocker) or that mafia held their KP to fake claim medic (which despite aRyuujin and Zorkmid's pessimism, I DO feel like is a possibility in a newbie game).
In my first game ever I rolled scum and I would have never thought of that possibility. What would they gain by faking a medic?
|
Ok, good point. Didn't occur to me. However they would have to get to LYLO/MYLO first and how do you do that? By getting rid of as many townies as you can before they get suspicious of you. So risky ...
Btw ... Shady, where are you? You popped back to the thread 2,5 hours ago with your promise to post.
|
@Mordanis: Mind commenting on this?
On August 01 2012 04:11 Ange777 wrote: @Mordanis: Why are you waiting for your vote? Even if they do post, you are free to unvote if you are convinced by their defense. I believe it is important to take clear stances early as it gives the rest of us something to work with.
|
On August 01 2012 04:50 Mordanis wrote: TT Was hoping I wouldn't have to do this, but here goes. I do not understand Promethelax's play. It has been at times hypocritical, illogical, and bad. I see very little scum motivation for the way he's been playing, assuming he's a competent player. I don't see any town motivation either, so I would prefer to wait to see if he continues to play the way he has. I haven't been able to look into GK's play much, and Promethelax's case on him isn't very strong, so I can't in good conscience vote for him unless I see another good case on him. Shady is in a similar position to Prom where he's had lurky play one day and weird play the other. Still, I can't seem to pin his play in this cycle as scummy. I don't know why people are suspicious of Zork.
In other words, we have kind of a lousy set of cases today, for which I hold myself partly responsible. All in all though, I feel that Promethelax is the best target. His play could be described as a way to disrupt the scum-hunt, to get into a position of town-trust, to buddy up with players to make them feel bad for voting for him. I actually feel bad voting for him at this point, but he is my strongest read.
##Vote: Promethelax
You do realize that you are contradicting yourself right?
|
Well I would say that disrupting the scum hunt, getting town cred and buddy up with other players is quite a lot of scum motivation. But ok, I see your point. I was too hasty.
|
But why would buddying up with players be town motivation? There is no way you can know one's alignment for sure until they flip. So by buddying up with someone you are just tying yourself closer to someone whom you don't know if he is town or scum.
|
On August 01 2012 05:51 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 05:26 Ange777 wrote: But why would buddying up with players be town motivation? There is no way you can know one's alignment for sure until they flip. So by buddying up with someone you are just tying yourself closer to someone whom you don't know if he is town or scum.
It really depends on his flip. If he flips medic and he's the one that made the save last night, I can see him trying to buddy up with who he now knows is a townie without having to specifically claim.
But we still don't know whether it was a successful roleblock or medic save therefore I'd say even if he was the medic there could not be 100% assurance that the one he had targeted was townie.
|
All this inactivity is killing this game ...
|
I have been rereading the entire day 2 conversation in light of Promethelax' alignment and will be posting soon. Your filter is unfortunately the biggest null read at the moment so how about you state your other suspicions? Or are you only suspicious of Shady at the moment?
|
On August 02 2012 03:28 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2012 03:22 Ange777 wrote: I have been rereading the entire day 2 conversation in light of Promethelax' alignment and will be posting soon. Your filter is unfortunately the biggest null read at the moment so how about you state your other suspicions? Or are you only suspicious of Shady at the moment? Well, ignoring the fact that I still haven't finished reading all of the thread yet, I personally prefer not to branch out too much at a time. I'd rather get answers to one set of suspicions than dilute the thread with 20 different tangential arguments. Accusing me of being a null read is sort of reasonable, of course, but frankly, all I can do now is either try to make a case on every single person, which would provide some content but look fishy, or wait for enough discussion to happen for people to get a read on me. I have absolutely no idea why anybody with a pro-town mentality would want me to spam a huge pile of clutter trying to make sense out of 600-700 posts simultaneously. At best, trying to make reads on everyone still alive based on discussions I wasn't in for would amount to a lot of WIFOM.
I get the not having finished reading all of the thread part. And while I understand that it takes a while to get into a game at the start of night 2, I still believe that you can make good reads on the other players because you haven't been here for the discussion. It makes you unbiased. And looking back at the conversation after a mislynch only considering the flip and not your own judgement may be a plus point for you.
|
EBWOP:
I am not saying you should start spamming the thread with every little suspicious thing you have found so far only to retract your opinion a couple of minutes later. I just hoped that you might "create opportunities" yourself and not just ask for them.
|
Okay, so one player I am unhappy with at the moment is Shady and his last minute cases before the deadline.
First he starts with a case against Obvious:
On August 01 2012 05:56 Shady Sands wrote:The first point of suspicion on Obvious, is, as previously stated, his post seven minutes after Golbat's lynching. Obvious comes in and says this: Then he goes and makes a post that seeks to examine every single person that votes for Golbat, coming to the somewhat obvious conclusion that Mordanis, myself, and Keirathi were the key players in the Golbat lynch. Then he makes an ad hoc wedding excuse, which gets called out. His response to that is actually pretty long: Show nested quote +Seriously, if you want me to describe in minute detail every hour of my day from here out, I'm more than willing to share with you those details. I'm unemployed, I tend to sleep 12 hours at a time, my cousin is getting married in six weeks and this weekend was her bridal shower and bachelorette party which I was helping with (once again, Shady Sands at it again with the confusion that I was at a wedding. That's not what I said). I'm trying to emphasize here that there is no mystery to why I haven't been posting much up to this point, but my reasons are being dismissed as scummy excuses. I also already told you to expect my posting to pick up by Monday, which is now arriving soon (my time, EST). You can call me a liar and policy lynch if you want if my posting isn't up to your standards if it will make you feel better, but you'll find you're just distracting yourself from finding actual scum. Show nested quote +6) Claims I was at a wedding when I clearly said wedding stuff. >>>>Note I didn't say: "I'm going to a wedding guys I'm gonna be trashed and fucking useless for like two days, so don't expect to see me!" I just said I had stuff going on during the day (stuff that doesn't happen while I sleep, unfortunately) that was wedding related. Why assume it was a full wedding, a way better excuse that would let me get away without posting even longer. I'm not trying to get out of contributing, I just have shit to do. I certainly could have come back and used that as an excuse for not posting by delaying my contributions even further if I wanted to, as it was open to me with his assumption.
This is really wierd. He goes and talks about this wedding stuff twice in a row without any intervening posts about the wedding; instead he seems to be hell-bent on proving that his absences are not indicative of anti-town play. Then he claims that lynching him for this would be a policy lynch, which is not the point: The point is that when players have suspicious timing noted by others, and then claim IRL commitments after they've been accused of suspicious timings, then it makes people look like they're trying to cover up for something. Think back to the whole concept behind setting up to a D2 mislynch. This links to the next point on Promethelax too-- my strong suspicion is that both are working together to paint themselves as pro-town, and busy coordinating posts between each other while claiming IRL commitments.
His case has two points:
1) The timing of Obvious' WTF post 2) Overemphasis of RL commitments
Not exactly a convincing case in my opinion. When reading the posts after the flip night 1 I was astonished as well that Obvious had posted directly afterwards when he had claimed to be away. But Obvious explained that he had just caught up with the thread at that time. Which I am wiling to give him the benefit of doubt for just as well as for the over and over explanation that he had been to a wedding. Shady repeatedly stated that he found the wedding thing extremely suspicious so I can understand why Obvious would feel the need to explain himself again and again.
I do not believe that we should build up scum cases based only on things like the timing of posts or the RL excuses the players have made IF their posting has improved a lot after having been called out for lurking. He had stated that he would be more active starting Monday and looking at Obvious' filter I can only say that he kept his promise. The filter may not be the best regarding active scum hunting but I am getting a slight town vibe from it.
Now my biggest question, why does the timing of Obvious link him to Promethelax? Shady, you have been repeatedly called out for making dangerous links based on very little and in my opinion this is another one.
|
To be precise, Obvious stated that he was and would continue to be inactive for participating in a wedding and its preperations. That's when Shady jumped in accusing him of post-claiming RL activites after he had already lurked. Still I don't think this alone is a sufficient reason to accuse someone of being scum.
|
Post too long, I had to split them!
Another player I am suspicious of: Mordanis
On July 31 2012 19:10 Mordanis wrote:I'm really confused by Promethelax's play. He just admonished me for fluff posts. His entire first page of his filter is fluff. He comments on my opening case being really bad, regardless of my alignment. Look at his first FOS: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 18:55 Promethelax wrote:I'd like to bring some attention to Zorkmid: He starts with policy talk, as we all did. Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Follows it up with an immediate about face when he learns about the no-lynch option Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:46 Zorkmid wrote: Well in that case, I don't feel as strongly about lynching all liars and inactives. He leaves hoping for more from others Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:48 Zorkmid wrote: I'll have to think about that for a little while, hopefully while I'm gone we'll hear more from the others! and after that comes back with a question and than dissapears Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 08:15 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 08:12 Shady Sands wrote: From a logic standpoint, it makes sense to always have a lynch target each day, because voting patterns, voting times, and the order in which players vote are some of the most important clues that the town can use.
For example, if the target turns out to be green or blue, then we can backtrack and start seeing who started the bandwagoning and go from there. If the target turns out to be red, we can see who did the last minute voting or tried to swing the balance away from them, and add those to the list.
But if we simply go for a no-lynch, there's no pressure on the scum to actually put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. This makes perfect sense to me, so how we determine who to target initially? That was over ten hours ago, I don't get it. Where did you go Zork? I don't like his play so far and, thus, a FoS is declared. . The reasoning seems to be that Zork isn't an expert yet. I don't see why not knowing the setup in the first hour and a half is scummy. This case makes my own seem sophisticated.
I don't know how you can interpret this as him being suspicious of Zork for asking questions. Promethelax was only pointing out the amount of posts and the very little content Zork had posted until then.
His second case is reasonably sound, but when Darth says that my case about Angie is ironic, it pales in comparison to his own. Having only posted the one case, ask for others' opinions, and posted fluff + Show Spoiler [No, Really] +On July 27 2012 07:18 Promethelax wrote: Okay Ghost, will do. On July 27 2012 07:26 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:19 aRyuujin wrote:On July 27 2012 07:04 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:58 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:53 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:48 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:45 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:43 Zorkmid wrote: I'm not saying that the "best town play" isn't to lynch scum, I'm just saying that in the absence of that inactivity and liars are the next logical targets.
Warning: Nub question::::We HAVE to lynch someone each day, right? No, we do not. We can no-lynch by making sure that no single candidate has a majority on them. Correct. We can engineer a no-lynch, but everyone HAS to vote. If we are able to ##Vote No-Lynch is up to the hosts discretion, but in a previous game with ghost as the host, we weren't able to, so to no-lynch we had to spread our votes out. I've only seen that as a possibility in a plurality lynch while we are playing a majority lynch. Different mechanics. So Keir: any thoughts yet? Shall we lynch Obvious for being obviously scum? and keep the pattern going, shall we attack Zork for being unable to answer my vague questions or try to lynch one of the two of us for being too active? All of the above. Lynch EVERYTHING! Nah, I just hope more people show up so we can get the ball rolling. Well while we're waiting let's breadcrumb secrets to each other. Victory, I'm sure, will be ours if we strive for it. Ghost must be being really nice to us because I already have a town read on all the players in this game, he must want us all to live happily ever after and not have to kill each other. Okay, so that isn't actually true but I hope a host does that eventually just to be a dick. its quite clear that he is breadcrumbing that his role is that of a dick You win for my favourite response ever. If you are ever in my neck of the woods hit me up and I'll buy you a drink just for that. On July 27 2012 07:37 Promethelax wrote:Unrelated to the discussion so far after reading Shady Sands' Op here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=355847 I expect awesome posts from him/her. Slim Shady: you've got some awesome to live up to. Since we haven't been productive so far I would like us to turn our attention to pressure: I for one am concerned that MrMedic may not be a medic and is lying about his role in his name. Okay, what I'm actually concerned about is that all he posted is that he is here. I want more. On July 27 2012 07:38 Promethelax wrote: EBWOP: I'm also concerned that his post was edited. Watch yourself my man or Ghost will smite you with his mighty powers. On July 27 2012 08:27 Promethelax wrote: My girlfriend got home so I don't have time to read one last time before going to work. I'll see you in 10-12 hours. Good luck town. , some people (DP + Ange) post others whom they perceive to be relatively inactive. Neither DarthPunk nor Ange mention him though. Then he makes his second case on Golbat + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 21:49 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 20:04 Ange777 wrote:Obvious MrMedic aRyuujin ZorkAll have posted next to nothing of content. On to Shady: His filter is a lot of policy talking and then the case against Mordanis. I am unsure about him. 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.
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.
The thing is, if Mordanis was convinced of the controversy of Keir's play than Mordanis' play is not scummy. I don't like Shady's case. I have to head out now. I'll try give a better read on Shady when I come back. Alright, I'll look into their filters and see if anything is popping there. What I found, and still find weird about shady is this: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 08:38 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +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. I'm not sure how Keir telling RB not to use their powers equals Keir roleclaiming as RB. Of course Day 1 roleclaiming is suspicious but this post doesn't fit the bill. But if a clear consensus emerges that he's suspicious, I'd volunteer myself to watch his posting behavior. That said, I do think Day 1 scumhunting could work--but only after everyone (or nearly everyone) has posted. I'm going to go down the list of posters now and do a quick tally. Ange777 - No posts yet Keirathi - Six posts Promethelax - More than 10 posts alan133 - 1 "GLHF" post Mordanis - Three posts Obvious.660 - 2 posts MrMedic - 1 post, edited aRyuujin - 2 posts, both haiku DarthPunk - No posts yet goodkarma - No posts yet Golbat - No posts yet Shady Sands - 2 posts so far Zorkmid - 5 posts Players in order of activity: Promethelax Keirathi Zorkmid Mordanis Obvious.660 aRyuujin Shady Sands alan133 MrMedic -- Lurkers -- Ange777 Darthpunk goodkarma Golbat Once the remaining few lurkers have posted, then we can start scumhunting. The next task is to read through past mafia games and find those with successful Day 1 scumhunts--and see what common lessons can be drawn from them. I'm going to compile a list of those right now. Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter. the other thing in here I want to focus on is his lets wait attitude. for example: from the above post and others He also says that Show nested quote +Day 1 scumhunting actually has a lower success rate than a random day 1 lynch. If the lynches had been truly random, then maybe 20-30% of the games should have had day 1 lynches turn up red, but none of them did. both of these things push town away from hunting for scum, attempting to prevent scum hunting is a huge scum trait. On top of this he misrepresents the facts in newbie 21 (I think) Hopeless1der was lynched d1 as scum so scum hunting has shown to be effective recently. He also replys to my advice by saying Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 09:11 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 06:41 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Day 1 is like any other day, we don't have all the information we want to have but we should use what information we do have to lynch a guy who looks scummy. Not a guy who looks like bad town. Marv said it best in the QT for I can't believe its not themed mini mafia: "best town play is to lynch scum" post 101 if you are curious. It was in reply to something dumb I said. While I'm not saying we will hit scum without fail we should try to. We can eliminate shitty players later with Vigi shots or scum will shoot them. A lurky scum team will have no ability to control where we look, if me and my boys had lurked in XIX we would have been crushed in LYLO but because 2/3 of us were active we managed a perfect victory despite Keirathi replacing in and figuring out all three of us at just the wrong time. aR: you make me happy with your Haiku Obvious: your limerick is excellent as well There are a couple points here that are bad advice: 1) Scum will not shoot bad town players. It just makes no sense 2) Do not, I repeat, do not, waste vigi shots on bad town players. Indeed, vigi shots are the single most critical resource the town has. scum will blue snipe, they will kill players who won't vote for the right mislynch or who are tunneling scum. There are a million reasons for scum to shoot a bad town player so his first point is wrong and his second point again pushes us away from scum hunting since he insists that vigi shots are our most powerful tool. No they aren't. We are the most powerful town asset and scum hunting is the most powerful town tool. His next post tells us to wait for more people to post until we make cases and the one after that is a case... Show nested quote +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. Sands tells us that we should still hold off even though this guy is the best lynch target. He also tells us that he will likely flip green based on (I assume) the statistics which seems, to me, to be a way to distance himself from a Mord town flip. What originally felt scummy to me in Sands' filter was this post where he says: Show nested quote +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. Re-read that. Do yourself a favour and beat your face against a hard surface. He think that Mord will flip green unless he replys in the way that he (Sands) expects him to in which case he is red...alrighty than. I also hate this post: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 21:22 Shady Sands wrote: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. the bolded part at the end is essentially saying that we should lynch Golbat and if he is green lynch Mord. That seems to be setting us up for two mislynches and, if Sands ever flips red these two are pretty much confirmed town. So based on Sands' play I think that he is scum. He has earned my FoS and as of this moment he would be my vote if nothing changed between now and lynch. I'll be keeping my eye on him because, as he said, Show nested quote +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 just replace Mord with Sands and you see the truth of the statement. He has to keep going and, as Keir well knows, loud scum are easy to find. , which contains the nugget: "Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter." I'd like to know how you, Promethelax, can try to moderate for inane/useless posts when you've been at least as bad as anyone else.
To be fair, quite a lot of fluff posts you quoted were from before the game had started and should not be included as evidence. At that time I was going after my strongest scum read (which was not Promethelax) and tried to get the lurkers active. Promethelax had some presence in the thread and therefore I was not concerned with him.
The case you quoted was from Promethelax against Shady, not Golbat. Still I don't think that it is fair of you to reduce his case to "Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter." I myself have agreed that there were quite a few filler posts from Shady and had my suspicions because of the Golbat/Mordanis flip theory. Sometimes scum doesn't show themselves by posting a scum slip. So it is important to keep in mind that people who are using lots and lots of fluff posts may just be trying to get town cred.
The other thing that confuses me is the petulance with which Promethelax is trying to become the "town mayor". Here are a few examples: + Show Spoiler +On July 31 2012 17:33 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:29 Mordanis wrote:On July 31 2012 17:16 DarthPunk wrote:On July 31 2012 17:14 Mordanis wrote: Just for clarity, is there definitely 3 scum or is the number ambiguous? Same for other roles, i.e. could there be multiple vigis or medics etc.? This has been answered previously http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=C9++ we are loosely based on this setup. so multiple blue roles and no confirmed number of reds or blues. C9++ also allows for SK, which is why I wanted to make sure this is indeed the case. How loose is loosely? If you have set up questions ask the host otherwise you are just wasting thread space and padding your filter while adding nothing to the thread. On July 30 2012 18:14 Promethelax wrote: Sorry I'm on my way to bed and I figured I would quickly reply to Karma before falling asleep. I am sure I'll miss some points but the basic one of why is my play so different now than it was is that I work Tuesday-Saturday. I play better on my days off.
As to the town leader thing: I just spent like ten minutes looking for the quote but couldn't find it. I think it was Marv who said (and I'm paraphrasing) "town needs two things, a good annalist and a good leader; they don't have to be the same person they just both have to exist" I'm not saying I should be a town leader or a town analyst, I am saying that town is following my analysis and that I am taking things said by players whom I greatly respect and trying to forge my town play around that. If the two things that town needs are a good leader and someone with good analysis I will try to provide both. I think you and I don't see eye to eye on what a town leader is. I'm not saying we should elect a mayor, I'm saying having someone who is clearly pro-town trying to create a pro-town environment is a necessity for town. By town leader I mean someone who is creating an environment where town flourishes even if the person creating that environment has their head up their ass on every single one of their reads. . Now I am familiar with how some things in this game just don't function the way you'd expect them to, but why town would need a leader is beyond me. People who disrupt scum-hunting should be noticed, but I don't know why having a judiciary saying "Thou shalt not do X" helps, especially when scum tend to try to gain that position quite often. And why town only needs one analyst is also beyond me, as it seems that the more the merrier. I think scum would be the ones wanting people following one of 2 people at all times, not town.
Well, I can't say much to this as this was one of the reasons I voted for him.
Essentially, from what I've read about XIX Promethelax kind of mauled town by getting into the "town circle", and controlling the game from there. I don't think a smart person could try the same strategy against people its already been used on and expect to win again. For that reason, Promethelax's inconsistent/illogical/ seems to be a mild indicator of scumminess. Also, being relatively inactive during one day reduces the amount of stuff any player needs to defend himself later.
Edit before having to double post (EBHTDP) I am still confused by large parts of his play. For instance the part about lynching semi-lurkers seems sort of like what he's doing. GK hasn't posted nearly as many times as Prom himself, myself, Keir, Ange, Obvious, or Shady. 6 players of 12 left have 3 or more pages in their filter, the other 6 have 2. GK has spent a lot of his time defending himself, so if you take that away he's pretty lurky. But the caffeine is wearing off now, see y'all in the morning. Still, I like the content he generated with that post on GK, so I'll be watching Prom closely. I seriously need to pass out now though :/
So after reading your big big big case I get the feeling that you posted a lot (and not everything is correct) only to say that you feel unsure about him. It's very very safe to say that you feel unsure. You don't have to take any stance by that. Same goes for your voting post:
On August 01 2012 04:50 Mordanis wrote: TT Was hoping I wouldn't have to do this, but here goes. I do not understand Promethelax's play. It has been at times hypocritical, illogical, and bad. I see very little scum motivation for the way he's been playing, assuming he's a competent player. I don't see any town motivation either, so I would prefer to wait to see if he continues to play the way he has. I haven't been able to look into GK's play much, and Promethelax's case on him isn't very strong, so I can't in good conscience vote for him unless I see another good case on him. Shady is in a similar position to Prom where he's had lurky play one day and weird play the other. Still, I can't seem to pin his play in this cycle as scummy. I don't know why people are suspicious of Zork.
In other words, we have kind of a lousy set of cases today, for which I hold myself partly responsible. All in all though, I feel that Promethelax is the best target. His play could be described as a way to disrupt the scum-hunt, to get into a position of town-trust, to buddy up with players to make them feel bad for voting for him. I actually feel bad voting for him at this point, but he is my strongest read.
##Vote: Promethelax
Summary of that post: I don't know if he is scum. I think he might be scum. Might be town though.
Hm, okay. It's not always easy to have someone nailed as scum. But somehow this summary doesn't only fit this one case you made ...
Part 2 coming!
|
Part 2:
See the case on me:
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. 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. The transition occurs in this post : + Show Spoiler +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! . The time: 23:00 of July 28. At that time it was apparent that the vote was going to be between Shady and Golbat. Funnily enough, when the vote is wide open she tunnels Golbat, and when it narrows to 2 people she suddenly starts talking about 1 other player. Even funnier, once Zorkmid changes his vote from Aryuu to Golbat, she starts ignoring the case on him while posting her suspicions on other players. With the momentum solidly going towards a Golbat lynch when I revoted him, she calls the vote too easy and focuses all her attention on other players. In other words, she was sort of important to lynching Golbat but didn't really contribute, and once it became clear that Golbat would be lynched, she distanced herself from the case. This accomplishes both goals I came up with for scum motivation D1 (mislynch, don't get lynched D2), with precision that is highly unlikely from someone who doesn't know the flip before it happens. My verdict after this analysis: Pretty suspicious. It isn't enough yet to vote for her, but it certainly warrants more investigation. I need to analyze her posts themselves before I do much more, but right now I just got back from work and I have to go back in 9 hours, so I need to grab some shut-eye while I can. Hopefully someone else can use this information while I sleep though.
Another huge case of speculations and in my opinion a very poor case. And yet again a case where you are taking a very wishy washy stance. Did you read my answers? You have yet to post your promised follow up btw.
Where is the active Mordanis from day 1 who wasn't afraid of taking a clear stance and making the opening case? The more I read from you, the more I have a scummy feeling. Especially you already backing away from Promethelax in the same post as you are voting for him.
|
Back to the case from Shady on Promethelax:
The case on PromethelaxNow to the meat here: On D1, Promethelax posted the following things: -snip- There are two points to note here:
1) He says say no to fluff, but only after posting the fluffiest posts in the entire thread--beer, my novella, joking about lynching Obvious, etc.
2) He always has a tendency to try and get other people to do research for him/buddy up to people first, before posting cases on specific people. This is something that is very strange--why would a townie feel the need to try and make friends/build alliances with other townies before cases are even active? Note that this isn't done out of self-preservation either--no one was FoSing Prome on D1, yet he decided to do this quite actively.
Regarding 1): You are just repeating Mordanis' argument. And do you know how many fluff posts you have?
Then on D2, Prome goes and forms his "trusted townie" idea. I wish I had more time prior to the lynch to dissect this, but this is just an extension of point 2 above. Mordanis pretty much covered all the relevant points here: Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 19:10 Mordanis wrote:I'm really confused by Promethelax's play. He just admonished me for fluff posts. His entire first page of his filter is fluff. He comments on my opening case being really bad, regardless of my alignment. Look at his first FOS: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 18:55 Promethelax wrote:I'd like to bring some attention to Zorkmid: He starts with policy talk, as we all did. Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Follows it up with an immediate about face when he learns about the no-lynch option Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:46 Zorkmid wrote: Well in that case, I don't feel as strongly about lynching all liars and inactives. He leaves hoping for more from others Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:48 Zorkmid wrote: I'll have to think about that for a little while, hopefully while I'm gone we'll hear more from the others! and after that comes back with a question and than dissapears Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 08:15 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 08:12 Shady Sands wrote: From a logic standpoint, it makes sense to always have a lynch target each day, because voting patterns, voting times, and the order in which players vote are some of the most important clues that the town can use.
For example, if the target turns out to be green or blue, then we can backtrack and start seeing who started the bandwagoning and go from there. If the target turns out to be red, we can see who did the last minute voting or tried to swing the balance away from them, and add those to the list.
But if we simply go for a no-lynch, there's no pressure on the scum to actually put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. This makes perfect sense to me, so how we determine who to target initially? That was over ten hours ago, I don't get it. Where did you go Zork? I don't like his play so far and, thus, a FoS is declared. . The reasoning seems to be that Zork isn't an expert yet. I don't see why not knowing the setup in the first hour and a half is scummy. This case makes my own seem sophisticated. His second case is reasonably sound, but when Darth says that my case about Angie is ironic, it pales in comparison to his own. Having only posted the one case, ask for others' opinions, and posted fluff + Show Spoiler [No, Really] +On July 27 2012 07:18 Promethelax wrote: Okay Ghost, will do. On July 27 2012 07:26 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:19 aRyuujin wrote:On July 27 2012 07:04 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:58 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:53 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:48 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:45 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:43 Zorkmid wrote: I'm not saying that the "best town play" isn't to lynch scum, I'm just saying that in the absence of that inactivity and liars are the next logical targets.
Warning: Nub question::::We HAVE to lynch someone each day, right? No, we do not. We can no-lynch by making sure that no single candidate has a majority on them. Correct. We can engineer a no-lynch, but everyone HAS to vote. If we are able to ##Vote No-Lynch is up to the hosts discretion, but in a previous game with ghost as the host, we weren't able to, so to no-lynch we had to spread our votes out. I've only seen that as a possibility in a plurality lynch while we are playing a majority lynch. Different mechanics. So Keir: any thoughts yet? Shall we lynch Obvious for being obviously scum? and keep the pattern going, shall we attack Zork for being unable to answer my vague questions or try to lynch one of the two of us for being too active? All of the above. Lynch EVERYTHING! Nah, I just hope more people show up so we can get the ball rolling. Well while we're waiting let's breadcrumb secrets to each other. Victory, I'm sure, will be ours if we strive for it. Ghost must be being really nice to us because I already have a town read on all the players in this game, he must want us all to live happily ever after and not have to kill each other. Okay, so that isn't actually true but I hope a host does that eventually just to be a dick. its quite clear that he is breadcrumbing that his role is that of a dick You win for my favourite response ever. If you are ever in my neck of the woods hit me up and I'll buy you a drink just for that. On July 27 2012 07:37 Promethelax wrote:Unrelated to the discussion so far after reading Shady Sands' Op here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=355847 I expect awesome posts from him/her. Slim Shady: you've got some awesome to live up to. Since we haven't been productive so far I would like us to turn our attention to pressure: I for one am concerned that MrMedic may not be a medic and is lying about his role in his name. Okay, what I'm actually concerned about is that all he posted is that he is here. I want more. On July 27 2012 07:38 Promethelax wrote: EBWOP: I'm also concerned that his post was edited. Watch yourself my man or Ghost will smite you with his mighty powers. On July 27 2012 08:27 Promethelax wrote: My girlfriend got home so I don't have time to read one last time before going to work. I'll see you in 10-12 hours. Good luck town. , some people (DP + Ange) post others whom they perceive to be relatively inactive. Neither DarthPunk nor Ange mention him though. Then he makes his second case on Golbat + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 21:49 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 20:04 Ange777 wrote:Obvious MrMedic aRyuujin ZorkAll have posted next to nothing of content. On to Shady: His filter is a lot of policy talking and then the case against Mordanis. I am unsure about him. 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.
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.
The thing is, if Mordanis was convinced of the controversy of Keir's play than Mordanis' play is not scummy. I don't like Shady's case. I have to head out now. I'll try give a better read on Shady when I come back. Alright, I'll look into their filters and see if anything is popping there. What I found, and still find weird about shady is this: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 08:38 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +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. I'm not sure how Keir telling RB not to use their powers equals Keir roleclaiming as RB. Of course Day 1 roleclaiming is suspicious but this post doesn't fit the bill. But if a clear consensus emerges that he's suspicious, I'd volunteer myself to watch his posting behavior. That said, I do think Day 1 scumhunting could work--but only after everyone (or nearly everyone) has posted. I'm going to go down the list of posters now and do a quick tally. Ange777 - No posts yet Keirathi - Six posts Promethelax - More than 10 posts alan133 - 1 "GLHF" post Mordanis - Three posts Obvious.660 - 2 posts MrMedic - 1 post, edited aRyuujin - 2 posts, both haiku DarthPunk - No posts yet goodkarma - No posts yet Golbat - No posts yet Shady Sands - 2 posts so far Zorkmid - 5 posts Players in order of activity: Promethelax Keirathi Zorkmid Mordanis Obvious.660 aRyuujin Shady Sands alan133 MrMedic -- Lurkers -- Ange777 Darthpunk goodkarma Golbat Once the remaining few lurkers have posted, then we can start scumhunting. The next task is to read through past mafia games and find those with successful Day 1 scumhunts--and see what common lessons can be drawn from them. I'm going to compile a list of those right now. Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter. the other thing in here I want to focus on is his lets wait attitude. for example: from the above post and others He also says that Show nested quote +Day 1 scumhunting actually has a lower success rate than a random day 1 lynch. If the lynches had been truly random, then maybe 20-30% of the games should have had day 1 lynches turn up red, but none of them did. both of these things push town away from hunting for scum, attempting to prevent scum hunting is a huge scum trait. On top of this he misrepresents the facts in newbie 21 (I think) Hopeless1der was lynched d1 as scum so scum hunting has shown to be effective recently. He also replys to my advice by saying Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 09:11 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 06:41 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Day 1 is like any other day, we don't have all the information we want to have but we should use what information we do have to lynch a guy who looks scummy. Not a guy who looks like bad town. Marv said it best in the QT for I can't believe its not themed mini mafia: "best town play is to lynch scum" post 101 if you are curious. It was in reply to something dumb I said. While I'm not saying we will hit scum without fail we should try to. We can eliminate shitty players later with Vigi shots or scum will shoot them. A lurky scum team will have no ability to control where we look, if me and my boys had lurked in XIX we would have been crushed in LYLO but because 2/3 of us were active we managed a perfect victory despite Keirathi replacing in and figuring out all three of us at just the wrong time. aR: you make me happy with your Haiku Obvious: your limerick is excellent as well There are a couple points here that are bad advice: 1) Scum will not shoot bad town players. It just makes no sense 2) Do not, I repeat, do not, waste vigi shots on bad town players. Indeed, vigi shots are the single most critical resource the town has. scum will blue snipe, they will kill players who won't vote for the right mislynch or who are tunneling scum. There are a million reasons for scum to shoot a bad town player so his first point is wrong and his second point again pushes us away from scum hunting since he insists that vigi shots are our most powerful tool. No they aren't. We are the most powerful town asset and scum hunting is the most powerful town tool. His next post tells us to wait for more people to post until we make cases and the one after that is a case... Show nested quote +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. Sands tells us that we should still hold off even though this guy is the best lynch target. He also tells us that he will likely flip green based on (I assume) the statistics which seems, to me, to be a way to distance himself from a Mord town flip. What originally felt scummy to me in Sands' filter was this post where he says: Show nested quote +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. Re-read that. Do yourself a favour and beat your face against a hard surface. He think that Mord will flip green unless he replys in the way that he (Sands) expects him to in which case he is red...alrighty than. I also hate this post: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 21:22 Shady Sands wrote: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. the bolded part at the end is essentially saying that we should lynch Golbat and if he is green lynch Mord. That seems to be setting us up for two mislynches and, if Sands ever flips red these two are pretty much confirmed town. So based on Sands' play I think that he is scum. He has earned my FoS and as of this moment he would be my vote if nothing changed between now and lynch. I'll be keeping my eye on him because, as he said, Show nested quote +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 just replace Mord with Sands and you see the truth of the statement. He has to keep going and, as Keir well knows, loud scum are easy to find. , which contains the nugget: "Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter." I'd like to know how you, Promethelax, can try to moderate for inane/useless posts when you've been at least as bad as anyone else. The other thing that confuses me is the petulance with which Promethelax is trying to become the "town mayor". Here are a few examples: + Show Spoiler +On July 31 2012 17:33 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:29 Mordanis wrote:On July 31 2012 17:16 DarthPunk wrote:On July 31 2012 17:14 Mordanis wrote: Just for clarity, is there definitely 3 scum or is the number ambiguous? Same for other roles, i.e. could there be multiple vigis or medics etc.? This has been answered previously http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=C9++ we are loosely based on this setup. so multiple blue roles and no confirmed number of reds or blues. C9++ also allows for SK, which is why I wanted to make sure this is indeed the case. How loose is loosely? If you have set up questions ask the host otherwise you are just wasting thread space and padding your filter while adding nothing to the thread. On July 30 2012 18:14 Promethelax wrote: Sorry I'm on my way to bed and I figured I would quickly reply to Karma before falling asleep. I am sure I'll miss some points but the basic one of why is my play so different now than it was is that I work Tuesday-Saturday. I play better on my days off.
As to the town leader thing: I just spent like ten minutes looking for the quote but couldn't find it. I think it was Marv who said (and I'm paraphrasing) "town needs two things, a good annalist and a good leader; they don't have to be the same person they just both have to exist" I'm not saying I should be a town leader or a town analyst, I am saying that town is following my analysis and that I am taking things said by players whom I greatly respect and trying to forge my town play around that. If the two things that town needs are a good leader and someone with good analysis I will try to provide both. I think you and I don't see eye to eye on what a town leader is. I'm not saying we should elect a mayor, I'm saying having someone who is clearly pro-town trying to create a pro-town environment is a necessity for town. By town leader I mean someone who is creating an environment where town flourishes even if the person creating that environment has their head up their ass on every single one of their reads. . Now I am familiar with how some things in this game just don't function the way you'd expect them to, but why town would need a leader is beyond me. People who disrupt scum-hunting should be noticed, but I don't know why having a judiciary saying "Thou shalt not do X" helps, especially when scum tend to try to gain that position quite often. And why town only needs one analyst is also beyond me, as it seems that the more the merrier. I think scum would be the ones wanting people following one of 2 people at all times, not town. Essentially, from what I've read about XIX Promethelax kind of mauled town by getting into the "town circle", and controlling the game from there. I don't think a smart person could try the same strategy against people its already been used on and expect to win again. For that reason, Promethelax's inconsistent/illogical/ seems to be a mild indicator of scumminess. Also, being relatively inactive during one day reduces the amount of stuff any player needs to defend himself later. Edit before having to double post (EBHTDP) I am still confused by large parts of his play. For instance the part about lynching semi-lurkers seems sort of like what he's doing. GK hasn't posted nearly as many times as Prom himself, myself, Keir, Ange, Obvious, or Shady. 6 players of 12 left have 3 or more pages in their filter, the other 6 have 2. GK has spent a lot of his time defending himself, so if you take that away he's pretty lurky. But the caffeine is wearing off now, see y'all in the morning. Still, I like the content he generated with that post on GK, so I'll be watching Prom closely. I seriously need to pass out now though :/ So basically there you have it--why I am voting Prome, and why I am FoSing Obvious. There are a couple of dead links above that I will be filling with anchor tags as the night goes on. Again, ##Vote Promethelax. Sorry about the lateness of this post, but as I stated earlier a major IRL commitment came up (brother's DUI) that required me to spend all night at the police station and all morning at the lawyers.
Did you even read Mordanis' case? It was full of doubts whether or not Promethelax could be scum or not. So if you say that you completely agree with Mordanis' case, you also state that you were unsure whether he would flip red or not but were willing to vote him?
|
Seeing as night is ending and no one else wants to join this discussion is so frustrating. As townie you should really be playing with your win-con in mind. Valid RL excuses are kind of acceptable but you should have known what you signed up for. Even if you just subbed in there has been plenty of time to form an opinion on everybody by now, not stating your reads is anti town play.
Going to bed in a couple of minutes (Have to see the doc tomorrow). Keep posting guys.
|
Now that's what I call an awesome claim. This couldn't have been fabricated in this short time after the flip, therefore I am dropping my case on you Shady.
@Mordanis:
On August 02 2012 05:46 Mordanis wrote:1.) None of the posts I quoted were from before the game began. Look up his filter, his first post + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. came before all of the ones I posted. Look at the times if you feel like it, but this is simply wrong.
Ok, my mistake. I was trying to cram in everything I could before deadline and should have double checked before posting.
2.)I felt the case on Prom was very weak. I committed to my case on Golbat because I felt it was a much stronger case, but I felt Prom was a pretty weak scum read. I hold myself in large part responsible for this because I haven't been spending nearly as much time as I should reviewing the game, and therefore I haven't been able to hunt as much as I would have liked. I am sorry about this.
3.) What was scummy about your patterns were, simply, the patterns. The timing was just so perfect to minimize the fallout from the results. As the second person to vote for Golbat, you avoid suspicion for jumping on a bandwagon. Pressuring other players is good, but it also separates you from your case on the person you voted for. The exact timing of tunelling Golbat when the day was wide open, Mixing your play when the lynch would go between Golbat or SS, and then exclusively pressuring other players when it became clear that Golbat would be lynched seems tailored to avoid negative attention. So perfectly tailored it seems more likely that you somehow knew Golbat would flip town than random play.
So you are still convinced of my scummy voting pattern? Because when I read your third point, I don't know if you are actually still thinking this or if you are stepping away from your case against me. You need to take a stance, this again is wishy-washy and so scummy. ##FoS Mordanis
@JingleHell:
On August 02 2012 06:41 JingleHell wrote: Well, either SS is a VERY smart rolecop scum, (plausible, and this would be one sexy play if that was the case), or he's a mason. For now, I think, I'll give BOTD instead of WIFOMing to death, and move on to something I've been interested in for a while now, but refrained from comment on.
There is no rolecop scum in this setup. Please check the OP about the setup.
Mr Ange777, I note that you at one point wanted me to dive through the thread, and post reads on as many people as I could. Show nested quote +On August 02 2012 03:36 Ange777 wrote:On August 02 2012 03:28 JingleHell wrote:On August 02 2012 03:22 Ange777 wrote: I have been rereading the entire day 2 conversation in light of Promethelax' alignment and will be posting soon. Your filter is unfortunately the biggest null read at the moment so how about you state your other suspicions? Or are you only suspicious of Shady at the moment? Well, ignoring the fact that I still haven't finished reading all of the thread yet, I personally prefer not to branch out too much at a time. I'd rather get answers to one set of suspicions than dilute the thread with 20 different tangential arguments. Accusing me of being a null read is sort of reasonable, of course, but frankly, all I can do now is either try to make a case on every single person, which would provide some content but look fishy, or wait for enough discussion to happen for people to get a read on me. I have absolutely no idea why anybody with a pro-town mentality would want me to spam a huge pile of clutter trying to make sense out of 600-700 posts simultaneously. At best, trying to make reads on everyone still alive based on discussions I wasn't in for would amount to a lot of WIFOM. I get the not having finished reading all of the thread part. And while I understand that it takes a while to get into a game at the start of night 2, I still believe that you can make good reads on the other players because you haven't been here for the discussion. It makes you unbiased. And looking back at the conversation after a mislynch only considering the flip and not your own judgement may be a plus point for you. Unfortunately, shortly after that point, you suddenly were perfectly happy to jump onto the real Sand Shady. Show nested quote +On August 02 2012 04:13 Ange777 wrote: Okay, so one player I am unhappy with at the moment is Shady and his last minute cases before the deadline.
The only motive I can see for this is to set up a fall guy, namely myself, for the death of one Shady Sands, by encouraging me down that track. I was already wondering if this was a possibility before the flip and claim, and now... well, you don't look so hot to me. Can you please explain a rational and plausible townie motive for this?
Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch.
And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads?
Seeing as quite a lot of people seemed quite excited for you to join this game I had hoped you would contribute more. At this moment, I don't see any pro town behaviour at all.
@goodkarma:
On August 02 2012 05:39 goodkarma wrote:So I talked a little earlier about voting histories, and felt it would be helpful for others to take a look at who has voted, in order of when they voted for each respective person: Day 2: Promethelax (7): goodkarma, Zorkmid, DarthPunk, Ange777, alan133, Mordanis, Shady Sandsgoodkarma (2): Promethelax (voted, unvoted, then re-voted), Keirathi Shady Sands (1): Obvious.660 Zorkmid (0): Ange777 - unvoted and shortly thereafter votes Prom-snip- 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.
My vote on Zork was intended as a pressure vote to get him posting while I was more convinced of Promethelax and Shady being scum. I saw Zork contribute to the discussion (three times, I just checked) and thought that I had achieved my goal and therefore unvoted. I just re-read the part and I can see why you would think that I let him off too easily, especially as I myself was not exactly satisfied with the content of what he posted.
Actually, you are right goodkarma. One simply should not forget about those that one has suspicions against. When I was pressuring other players day 1 I definitely did not forget about Golbat. Therefore I think I might have made a mistake (being too focused on Promethelax and Shady) when I let him off that quick. I'll quickly read through Zork's filter one more time.
|
@Mordanis: Could you please try to format your cases better next time, I find them rather tiring to read.
|
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?
Zorkmid
Let's go back to see his explanation on my case.
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.
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.
What made me feel extremely stupid when re-reading:
On July 31 2012 22:46 Zorkmid wrote:About this: Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 22:28 goodkarma wrote:On July 31 2012 18:33 Promethelax wrote: Since this case he has continued to play in a way that makes him seem scummy to me. IN this post which follows on the lack of NK he says 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
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
|
On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote: -snip- His reason is that Golbat made the mistake of changing his attitudes too quickly. It seems like a pretty weak case to say that scum would for some reason be trying to confuse people by changing quickly, and Zork didn't even mention this. He only said that Golbat made the mistake, not how it was scummy. Voting for people because they make mistakes is not a townie characteristic. For his posting history, Zork has more than earned a finger of suspicion.
While I agree with most of the content of your post, I still have a problem with your playstyle. In the last part, you say that Zork has earned more than just a FoS. So the natural thing would be a vote on him. But where is yours? Or at least that FoS?
|
Fine. FoSs are not your thing. I can accept that. But what I have a hard time accepting is that you always seem to wait for a few votes to be cast on players before you add your own.
Until now your more convincing cases and votes (Golbat and Promethelax) where made after that player had already been targeted by others. Although you made cases and voted of your own (Keir and Shady) they were rather poor and you unvoted them quite quickly. And than we have the third category: You made cases and didn't follow them up (me and Zork). Until now I have not seen you comment on my previously so scummy play (maybe because no one else joined you in your opinion on me?) and you have yet to vote for Zork.
Seeing this I can't shake the feeling off that you are trying to avoid any attention. Building some poor cases to gain town cred but always going with and hiding in the majoritiy. Voting is such a strong pressure tool, why do you want to wait to vote? Because you want to see how it goes and how other players react to your case before casting your final vote?
What I don't like in your playstyle is this as well:
On August 02 2012 05:46 Mordanis wrote: 2.)I felt the case on Prom was very weak. I committed to my case on Golbat because I felt it was a much stronger case, but I felt Prom was a pretty weak scum read. I hold myself in large part responsible for this because I haven't been spending nearly as much time as I should reviewing the game, and therefore I haven't been able to hunt as much as I would have liked. I am sorry about this.
On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote: Hey guys, I'm really sorry about the inactivity. Hopefully it won't continue to hurt my play. -snip- Finally, my inactivity has been really bad. I feel that I have a lot more information to go on now, so I'll be able to post better. Right below I'll be posting my best reads as of now.
On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote: Analytical-Active scum tend to try to out-logic their opponents. Players whose playstyle has been dominated by arguing in pure logic include: No one. Maybe JH at this point, but he's new. Ange, Obvious, Alan, GK, Aryuu, Zork and myself don't fit. The first 5 because they haven't really posted a case, and myself because I've made some pretty bad mistakes. Over-pushing the thing about Keir not being blue, shitty D2 play, and no content N2 when people said I would seem really scummy if I started to go inactive are really dumb mistakes. Mistakes that I should not have made, but they don't fit the motives for an analytical-active scum.
So many sorrys and excuses for your inactive/bad play. I don't know what you want to achieve by stating that over and over again. If you really were sorry and felt bad, you would step up your play. This gives me a really scummy vibe.
Another thing that makes me suspicious right now is how you completely ignore the scumslip by Zork. Apparentely you are suspicious of Zork but after reading that scumslip you decide to just solely answer my question instead of commenting on it? Were you trying to distance yourself from your scum buddy but were taken by surprise by the revealment of this slip and now you don't know how to react?
|
Could you add JingleHell's filter to the OP please ghost?
|
@alan: Did you see my post about Zork's scumslip?
|
@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.
On August 02 2012 21:42 Zorkmid wrote: 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.
He explains he just likes to analyze through different roles. If you were town, YOU WOULD NOT BE A DIFFERENT ROLE!
On August 03 2012 00:17 Zorkmid wrote: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.Show nested quote +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.
You say your posts have some thought behind it? The "relief post" did not in any way lead to Prom's mislynch as the post was made by goodkarma. Instead of defending yourself appropriately and posting thoughtful cases you are trying to twist the existing facts. Running out of explanation options?
|
On August 03 2012 01:02 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +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?
|
On August 03 2012 01:18 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2012 16:57 Ange777 wrote:@JingleHell:On August 02 2012 06:41 JingleHell wrote: Well, either SS is a VERY smart rolecop scum, (plausible, and this would be one sexy play if that was the case), or he's a mason. For now, I think, I'll give BOTD instead of WIFOMing to death, and move on to something I've been interested in for a while now, but refrained from comment on. There is no rolecop scum in this setup. Please check the OP about the setup. Mr Ange777, I note that you at one point wanted me to dive through the thread, and post reads on as many people as I could. On August 02 2012 03:36 Ange777 wrote:On August 02 2012 03:28 JingleHell wrote:On August 02 2012 03:22 Ange777 wrote: I have been rereading the entire day 2 conversation in light of Promethelax' alignment and will be posting soon. Your filter is unfortunately the biggest null read at the moment so how about you state your other suspicions? Or are you only suspicious of Shady at the moment? Well, ignoring the fact that I still haven't finished reading all of the thread yet, I personally prefer not to branch out too much at a time. I'd rather get answers to one set of suspicions than dilute the thread with 20 different tangential arguments. Accusing me of being a null read is sort of reasonable, of course, but frankly, all I can do now is either try to make a case on every single person, which would provide some content but look fishy, or wait for enough discussion to happen for people to get a read on me. I have absolutely no idea why anybody with a pro-town mentality would want me to spam a huge pile of clutter trying to make sense out of 600-700 posts simultaneously. At best, trying to make reads on everyone still alive based on discussions I wasn't in for would amount to a lot of WIFOM. I get the not having finished reading all of the thread part. And while I understand that it takes a while to get into a game at the start of night 2, I still believe that you can make good reads on the other players because you haven't been here for the discussion. It makes you unbiased. And looking back at the conversation after a mislynch only considering the flip and not your own judgement may be a plus point for you. Unfortunately, shortly after that point, you suddenly were perfectly happy to jump onto the real Sand Shady. On August 02 2012 04:13 Ange777 wrote: Okay, so one player I am unhappy with at the moment is Shady and his last minute cases before the deadline.
The only motive I can see for this is to set up a fall guy, namely myself, for the death of one Shady Sands, by encouraging me down that track. I was already wondering if this was a possibility before the flip and claim, and now... well, you don't look so hot to me. Can you please explain a rational and plausible townie motive for this? Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch. And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads? Seeing as quite a lot of people seemed quite excited for you to join this game I had hoped you would contribute more. At this moment, I don't see any pro town behaviour at all. This isn't a defense. You aren't showing me a town motive. You're dismissing a question. That's not a quick read. That's called discussing things and looking for potential slips. It's how I work. Don't like it? Too bad. Frankly, it looks like you're trying to push me into playing differently because you don't like what I said, with an implicit threat to try and get me lynched if I don't do what you want. It's shady as all hell. ##Vote Ange777Now, if you want to have any hope of my vote changing, you'll explain a town motive for your play regarding myself and Shady, rather than trying to turn things back on me, which is scum behavior. Funny how all of a sudden you don't like the unbiased outsider when he sees something you said as funny.
This case against me is simply bad. I'll start from the beginning:
You are asking me for a town motivation for asking about your scum reads? Since when is it scummy to pressure others for their reads especially when that player has not taken any stance at all in the game? I have been completely open with whoever I thought was suspicious and posted cases or questions regarding those players. You just subbed in. We don't know anything about your alignment. Of course it is in the interest of town to get an understanding for whom you believe is suspicious. You saw my explanation: Because you were not involved in previous discussion, you were unbiased and therefore perfectly able to judge what we had posted. Keir agreed with me in this point as well.
Then you accuse me of setting you up for a mislynch. You seem to have a brilliant imagination for I can't make up my mind why you would think that. I have stated my suspicions about Shady several times. Giving one's read before the night ends is perfectly normal as I could have died that night and I wanted to make sure that everyone knows whom I believe is suspicious. If I had indeed been trying to set you up in a mislynch because of your suspicions regarding Shady, shouldn't I have taken a step back from my own case against Shady so that I could accuse you?
So it seems that your explanation for not giving any further comments on players is that you have a different playstyle. One that includes discussion and potential scumslips. Fine, but then show it to me! Oh no wait ... seems like in your entire post you skipped the discussion about Zorkmid and his scumslip! Instead you build up a huge case against me based on what? Literally nothing.
Can the Jingle, who was hyped when joining the game as the savior, really be this bad? No, I don't think so. I believe you saw your scum buddy Zork in trouble and went out to discredit my case and me.
Now, if you want to have any hope of my vote changing, you'll explain a town motive for your play regarding myself and Shady, rather than trying to turn things back on me, which is scum behavior.
So "turning things back on you" would be scummy. Cute. Because somehow YOU turned things back on to me. And to be clear, right now I am not pushing you for playing in a different way than me! I am pushing your case for playing the most obvious scum play I have ever seen.
|
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.
On August 03 2012 01:55 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +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?
|
On August 03 2012 03:24 Zorkmid wrote:Fucking formatting.... Show nested quote +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.
Zork, I explained it already twice. If you refuse to admit being scum than I can't help it. It's not my job to convince you but town that you are scum. Therefore the following is intended for town's better understanding:
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. Show nested quote +On August 02 2012 21:42 Zorkmid wrote: 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.
He explains he just likes to analyze through different roles. If you were town, YOU WOULD NOT BE A DIFFERENT ROLE!
1. Slip: Only scum would see the need to explain that as green or blue he wouldn't have posted that. Town would just simply state: I wouldn't have posted that. 2. Slip: You explain you were looking at suspicious posts from the perspective of a different role. You said being town-aligned you wouldn't post that. You are looking at town-alignment as a different role.
I mean I didn't even pick this relief post up as scummy! But as you are scum, your mind is set differentely. While town is looking at both sides (town motivation and scum motivation), you only need to consider how do I paint others as scum while avoiding any attention on yourself. You can easily spot posts like these and feel "Wow, that would be incredibely scummy!" because that is exactly what you would think makes you look scummy if you had posted it!
Even if we put your scumslip aside and analyze what you have posted since my accusation I would say you are behaving extremely scummy:
You said the following:
On August 03 2012 00:17 Zorkmid wrote: 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. -snip- 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 01:55 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +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.
When I brought up the obvious contradiction - 1) Prom did not make that post! That post did not lead to Prom's mislynch! and 2) MrMedic was already replaced by Jingle and can't give us any explanation about his voting behaviour - you totally ignored it and instead focused on the part where I analyze your scumslip.
You claim that you are a thoughtful poster. So how do you explain that blatant lie about Prom? And that post to MrMedic ... You are just desperately trying to deflect from the topic of today's discussion: Your lynch!
And even if all of that were not enough, the reaction from not only you but Jingle just seals the deal for me. You know what is different with you in comparison with our lynch candidates from day 1 and 2? None of them instigated such a heavy discussion. Most of us were politely dis-/agreeing with other players and in the end we always lynched someone without any real resistance. Encountering this much resistance I am so convinced that this time I did catch scum (and not just one!)
|
On August 03 2012 03:35 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 03:02 Ange777 wrote:On August 03 2012 01:18 JingleHell wrote:On August 02 2012 16:57 Ange777 wrote:@JingleHell:On August 02 2012 06:41 JingleHell wrote: Well, either SS is a VERY smart rolecop scum, (plausible, and this would be one sexy play if that was the case), or he's a mason. For now, I think, I'll give BOTD instead of WIFOMing to death, and move on to something I've been interested in for a while now, but refrained from comment on. There is no rolecop scum in this setup. Please check the OP about the setup. Mr Ange777, I note that you at one point wanted me to dive through the thread, and post reads on as many people as I could. On August 02 2012 03:36 Ange777 wrote:On August 02 2012 03:28 JingleHell wrote:On August 02 2012 03:22 Ange777 wrote: I have been rereading the entire day 2 conversation in light of Promethelax' alignment and will be posting soon. Your filter is unfortunately the biggest null read at the moment so how about you state your other suspicions? Or are you only suspicious of Shady at the moment? Well, ignoring the fact that I still haven't finished reading all of the thread yet, I personally prefer not to branch out too much at a time. I'd rather get answers to one set of suspicions than dilute the thread with 20 different tangential arguments. Accusing me of being a null read is sort of reasonable, of course, but frankly, all I can do now is either try to make a case on every single person, which would provide some content but look fishy, or wait for enough discussion to happen for people to get a read on me. I have absolutely no idea why anybody with a pro-town mentality would want me to spam a huge pile of clutter trying to make sense out of 600-700 posts simultaneously. At best, trying to make reads on everyone still alive based on discussions I wasn't in for would amount to a lot of WIFOM. I get the not having finished reading all of the thread part. And while I understand that it takes a while to get into a game at the start of night 2, I still believe that you can make good reads on the other players because you haven't been here for the discussion. It makes you unbiased. And looking back at the conversation after a mislynch only considering the flip and not your own judgement may be a plus point for you. Unfortunately, shortly after that point, you suddenly were perfectly happy to jump onto the real Sand Shady. On August 02 2012 04:13 Ange777 wrote: Okay, so one player I am unhappy with at the moment is Shady and his last minute cases before the deadline.
The only motive I can see for this is to set up a fall guy, namely myself, for the death of one Shady Sands, by encouraging me down that track. I was already wondering if this was a possibility before the flip and claim, and now... well, you don't look so hot to me. Can you please explain a rational and plausible townie motive for this? Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch. And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads? Seeing as quite a lot of people seemed quite excited for you to join this game I had hoped you would contribute more. At this moment, I don't see any pro town behaviour at all. This isn't a defense. You aren't showing me a town motive. You're dismissing a question. That's not a quick read. That's called discussing things and looking for potential slips. It's how I work. Don't like it? Too bad. Frankly, it looks like you're trying to push me into playing differently because you don't like what I said, with an implicit threat to try and get me lynched if I don't do what you want. It's shady as all hell. ##Vote Ange777Now, if you want to have any hope of my vote changing, you'll explain a town motive for your play regarding myself and Shady, rather than trying to turn things back on me, which is scum behavior. Funny how all of a sudden you don't like the unbiased outsider when he sees something you said as funny. This case against me is simply bad. I'll start from the beginning: You are asking me for a town motivation for asking about your scum reads? Since when is it scummy to pressure others for their reads especially when that player has not taken any stance at all in the game? I have been completely open with whoever I thought was suspicious and posted cases or questions regarding those players. You just subbed in. We don't know anything about your alignment. Of course it is in the interest of town to get an understanding for whom you believe is suspicious. You saw my explanation: Because you were not involved in previous discussion, you were unbiased and therefore perfectly able to judge what we had posted. Keir agreed with me in this point as well. Then you accuse me of setting you up for a mislynch. You seem to have a brilliant imagination for I can't make up my mind why you would think that. I have stated my suspicions about Shady several times. Giving one's read before the night ends is perfectly normal as I could have died that night and I wanted to make sure that everyone knows whom I believe is suspicious. If I had indeed been trying to set you up in a mislynch because of your suspicions regarding Shady, shouldn't I have taken a step back from my own case against Shady so that I could accuse you? So it seems that your explanation for not giving any further comments on players is that you have a different playstyle. One that includes discussion and potential scumslips. Fine, but then show it to me! Oh no wait ... seems like in your entire post you skipped the discussion about Zorkmid and his scumslip! Instead you build up a huge case against me based on what? Literally nothing. Can the Jingle, who was hyped when joining the game as the savior, really be this bad? No, I don't think so. I believe you saw your scum buddy Zork in trouble and went out to discredit my case and me. Now, if you want to have any hope of my vote changing, you'll explain a town motive for your play regarding myself and Shady, rather than trying to turn things back on me, which is scum behavior.
So "turning things back on you" would be scummy. Cute. Because somehow YOU turned things back on to me. And to be clear, right now I am not pushing you for playing in a different way than me! I am pushing your case for playing the most obvious scum play I have ever seen. Dear you: You're either trying to get me to answer for the terrible play of the guy I replaced, or asking me to do things I've already explained why I don't want to do. When I ask you what your motive is for something, you both OMGUS me and try to make it sound like I'm the one dropping an OMGUS. Yes, I find that scummy. Start defending yourself. Attacking me does not qualify as a defense.
Jingle, than tell me please what I am supposed to defend myself against. I have yet to see a question I have not answered. I explained that there is indeed town motivation for asking others for scum reads and I explained that I was in no way trying to set you up for making a case aganist Shady.
Accusing me of blaming you for the play of MrMedic? Again a result of your imagination. I simply told you that unfortunately you are subbing in for someone who was lurking almost all day long and therefore was a null read with all of us. Therefore I had hoped that you would be able to contribute something. I have in no way blamed you for MrMedic's play which was in my opinion not terrible. It was almost non-existent. So I can't even blame you for MrMedic's play because I don't think it is relevant at all.
Accusing me of asking you to do things you've explained why you don't want to do? I assume you are referring to giving a read? Well that might actually be a true statement from you. Of course I am going to ask you for reads. (Please see the above for town motivation for my behaviour.) Without reads scum won't just simply come out of their hiding places and yell lynch me, lynch me.
I accepted your explanation that you had not finished catching up with the thread and that you would be willing to contribute by participating in discussions and by looking for scumslips. But only a couple of hours later (to be precise directly after I had posted my case against Zork) you had miraculously not only finished reading the thread, no you also had a very strong conviction that I am scummy. Based on arguments you yet have to show me.And while you have been tunneling me you have totally ignored my case on Zork based on his scumslip and the following reactions.
Would you please give me a town motivation for ignoring the case on Zork? Oh, and please keep in mind, attacking me doesn't qualify as a defense!
|
@Mordanis:
On August 03 2012 05:52 Mordanis wrote: Last 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.
I do realize that connection based play is rather dangerous. That is why I am sticking to my strongest scum read Zork and not trying to lynch Jingle first. But I was not convinced that Jingle is scum based on the fact that he tries to save Zork, it is the way he tries to save Zork. Have you seen his case on me? He accuses me based on nothing. He starts by claiming I was setting him up for trying to mislynch Shady. Everytime I explain myself against one of his imaginary arguments he twists my words and claims that I have not defended myself.
I have never played with Jingle and to be honest I don't have the time and don't feel like going through his previous games but a lot of you guys seem to have played with him earlier and were generally happy to have a good player joining this game. I simply can't imagine some decent town player to make such a bad case on me and twist my words.
|
On August 03 2012 06:11 JingleHell wrote: Actually, I had a read on Shady, which went away with the claim, and was curious about your motive for something. That's a long way from what you're saying I did. All I want is an explanation.
If you can explain why first you were wanting me to post more than one read, and right after were posting a read on the same guy I'd had a read on, I'll be happy with it. All I said was that I didn't see a town motive.
For your question, please see my earlier explanation in the added quotes.
On August 02 2012 16:57 Ange777 wrote: Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch.
And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads?
Oh, I guess you didn't read them? Well, I'll make a too long didn't read for you!
TLDR: 1) I was simply asking you whether you have more reads than just Shady. 2) Shady was one of my top scum reads and therefore the case on him and on Mordanis (which you conveniently seem to have forgotten) was posted before deadline.
The quote is taken from my first response directly after your vote btw.
Still waiting for an answer to this one as well:
On August 03 2012 06:01 Ange777 wrote: Would you please give me a town motivation for ignoring the case on Zork? Oh, and please keep in mind, attacking me doesn't qualify as a defense!
|
On August 03 2012 06:33 JingleHell wrote: And so far, you've refused to explain, and gone so far as to OMGUS me. Don't like it, convince me, instead of hoping to use an emotion based argument full of WIFOM to draw imaginary lines between me and another person.
@Jingle:
I have answered your question:
On August 03 2012 06:11 JingleHell wrote: If you can explain why first you were wanting me to post more than one read, and right after were posting a read on the same guy I'd had a read on, I'll be happy with it. All I said was that I didn't see a town motive.
directly in the first post after you voting for me. I'll quote myself one more time. Please keep the time stamp in mind.
On August 02 2012 16:57 Ange777 wrote: Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch.
And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads?
Get you facts straight! I have not refused to explain. You are refusing to read my answers. And that is the reason why we are still discussing this matter hours later.
|
@Jingle:
On August 03 2012 06:47 JingleHell wrote: I don't consider you telling me you already suspected Shady to be explaining your motive. You wanted me to be after multiple people, but you were happy to just pile evidence on the guy I was already looking at.
Saying you already had your eye on him is telling me an action. Not telling me what, from a townie perspective, could motivate that action (hence "motive").
Do I really need to explain to you how that filter button works?
|
@Jingle:
If you need a motive, please take a look at the case I made on Shady in night2. For your convenience, I'll just quote them for you:
On August 02 2012 04:13 Ange777 wrote:Okay, so one player I am unhappy with at the moment is Shady and his last minute cases before the deadline. First he starts with a case against Obvious: Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 05:56 Shady Sands wrote:The first point of suspicion on Obvious, is, as previously stated, his post seven minutes after Golbat's lynching. Obvious comes in and says this: On July 29 2012 06:07 Obvious.660 wrote: What the fuck. Then he goes and makes a post that seeks to examine every single person that votes for Golbat, coming to the somewhat obvious conclusion that Mordanis, myself, and Keirathi were the key players in the Golbat lynch. Then he makes an ad hoc wedding excuse, which gets called out. His response to that is actually pretty long: Seriously, if you want me to describe in minute detail every hour of my day from here out, I'm more than willing to share with you those details. I'm unemployed, I tend to sleep 12 hours at a time, my cousin is getting married in six weeks and this weekend was her bridal shower and bachelorette party which I was helping with (once again, Shady Sands at it again with the confusion that I was at a wedding. That's not what I said). I'm trying to emphasize here that there is no mystery to why I haven't been posting much up to this point, but my reasons are being dismissed as scummy excuses. I also already told you to expect my posting to pick up by Monday, which is now arriving soon (my time, EST). You can call me a liar and policy lynch if you want if my posting isn't up to your standards if it will make you feel better, but you'll find you're just distracting yourself from finding actual scum. 6) Claims I was at a wedding when I clearly said wedding stuff. >>>>Note I didn't say: "I'm going to a wedding guys I'm gonna be trashed and fucking useless for like two days, so don't expect to see me!" I just said I had stuff going on during the day (stuff that doesn't happen while I sleep, unfortunately) that was wedding related. Why assume it was a full wedding, a way better excuse that would let me get away without posting even longer. I'm not trying to get out of contributing, I just have shit to do. I certainly could have come back and used that as an excuse for not posting by delaying my contributions even further if I wanted to, as it was open to me with his assumption.
This is really wierd. He goes and talks about this wedding stuff twice in a row without any intervening posts about the wedding; instead he seems to be hell-bent on proving that his absences are not indicative of anti-town play. Then he claims that lynching him for this would be a policy lynch, which is not the point: The point is that when players have suspicious timing noted by others, and then claim IRL commitments after they've been accused of suspicious timings, then it makes people look like they're trying to cover up for something. Think back to the whole concept behind setting up to a D2 mislynch. This links to the next point on Promethelax too-- my strong suspicion is that both are working together to paint themselves as pro-town, and busy coordinating posts between each other while claiming IRL commitments. His case has two points: 1) The timing of Obvious' WTF post 2) Overemphasis of RL commitments Not exactly a convincing case in my opinion. When reading the posts after the flip night 1 I was astonished as well that Obvious had posted directly afterwards when he had claimed to be away. But Obvious explained that he had just caught up with the thread at that time. Which I am wiling to give him the benefit of doubt for just as well as for the over and over explanation that he had been to a wedding. Shady repeatedly stated that he found the wedding thing extremely suspicious so I can understand why Obvious would feel the need to explain himself again and again. I do not believe that we should build up scum cases based only on things like the timing of posts or the RL excuses the players have made IF their posting has improved a lot after having been called out for lurking. He had stated that he would be more active starting Monday and looking at Obvious' filter I can only say that he kept his promise. The filter may not be the best regarding active scum hunting but I am getting a slight town vibe from it. Now my biggest question, why does the timing of Obvious link him to Promethelax? Shady, you have been repeatedly called out for making dangerous links based on very little and in my opinion this is another one.
On August 02 2012 05:29 Ange777 wrote:Back to the case from Shady on Promethelax: Show nested quote +The case on PromethelaxNow to the meat here: On D1, Promethelax posted the following things: -snip- There are two points to note here:
1) He says say no to fluff, but only after posting the fluffiest posts in the entire thread--beer, my novella, joking about lynching Obvious, etc.
2) He always has a tendency to try and get other people to do research for him/buddy up to people first, before posting cases on specific people. This is something that is very strange--why would a townie feel the need to try and make friends/build alliances with other townies before cases are even active? Note that this isn't done out of self-preservation either--no one was FoSing Prome on D1, yet he decided to do this quite actively. Regarding 1): You are just repeating Mordanis' argument. And do you know how many fluff posts you have? Show nested quote +Then on D2, Prome goes and forms his "trusted townie" idea. I wish I had more time prior to the lynch to dissect this, but this is just an extension of point 2 above. Mordanis pretty much covered all the relevant points here: On July 31 2012 19:10 Mordanis wrote:I'm really confused by Promethelax's play. He just admonished me for fluff posts. His entire first page of his filter is fluff. He comments on my opening case being really bad, regardless of my alignment. Look at his first FOS: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 18:55 Promethelax wrote:I'd like to bring some attention to Zorkmid: He starts with policy talk, as we all did. Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Follows it up with an immediate about face when he learns about the no-lynch option Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:46 Zorkmid wrote: Well in that case, I don't feel as strongly about lynching all liars and inactives. He leaves hoping for more from others Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:48 Zorkmid wrote: I'll have to think about that for a little while, hopefully while I'm gone we'll hear more from the others! and after that comes back with a question and than dissapears Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 08:15 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 08:12 Shady Sands wrote: From a logic standpoint, it makes sense to always have a lynch target each day, because voting patterns, voting times, and the order in which players vote are some of the most important clues that the town can use.
For example, if the target turns out to be green or blue, then we can backtrack and start seeing who started the bandwagoning and go from there. If the target turns out to be red, we can see who did the last minute voting or tried to swing the balance away from them, and add those to the list.
But if we simply go for a no-lynch, there's no pressure on the scum to actually put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. This makes perfect sense to me, so how we determine who to target initially? That was over ten hours ago, I don't get it. Where did you go Zork? I don't like his play so far and, thus, a FoS is declared. . The reasoning seems to be that Zork isn't an expert yet. I don't see why not knowing the setup in the first hour and a half is scummy. This case makes my own seem sophisticated. His second case is reasonably sound, but when Darth says that my case about Angie is ironic, it pales in comparison to his own. Having only posted the one case, ask for others' opinions, and posted fluff + Show Spoiler [No, Really] +On July 27 2012 07:18 Promethelax wrote: Okay Ghost, will do. On July 27 2012 07:26 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:19 aRyuujin wrote:On July 27 2012 07:04 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:58 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:53 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:48 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:45 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:43 Zorkmid wrote: I'm not saying that the "best town play" isn't to lynch scum, I'm just saying that in the absence of that inactivity and liars are the next logical targets.
Warning: Nub question::::We HAVE to lynch someone each day, right? No, we do not. We can no-lynch by making sure that no single candidate has a majority on them. Correct. We can engineer a no-lynch, but everyone HAS to vote. If we are able to ##Vote No-Lynch is up to the hosts discretion, but in a previous game with ghost as the host, we weren't able to, so to no-lynch we had to spread our votes out. I've only seen that as a possibility in a plurality lynch while we are playing a majority lynch. Different mechanics. So Keir: any thoughts yet? Shall we lynch Obvious for being obviously scum? and keep the pattern going, shall we attack Zork for being unable to answer my vague questions or try to lynch one of the two of us for being too active? All of the above. Lynch EVERYTHING! Nah, I just hope more people show up so we can get the ball rolling. Well while we're waiting let's breadcrumb secrets to each other. Victory, I'm sure, will be ours if we strive for it. Ghost must be being really nice to us because I already have a town read on all the players in this game, he must want us all to live happily ever after and not have to kill each other. Okay, so that isn't actually true but I hope a host does that eventually just to be a dick. its quite clear that he is breadcrumbing that his role is that of a dick You win for my favourite response ever. If you are ever in my neck of the woods hit me up and I'll buy you a drink just for that. On July 27 2012 07:37 Promethelax wrote:Unrelated to the discussion so far after reading Shady Sands' Op here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=355847 I expect awesome posts from him/her. Slim Shady: you've got some awesome to live up to. Since we haven't been productive so far I would like us to turn our attention to pressure: I for one am concerned that MrMedic may not be a medic and is lying about his role in his name. Okay, what I'm actually concerned about is that all he posted is that he is here. I want more. On July 27 2012 07:38 Promethelax wrote: EBWOP: I'm also concerned that his post was edited. Watch yourself my man or Ghost will smite you with his mighty powers. On July 27 2012 08:27 Promethelax wrote: My girlfriend got home so I don't have time to read one last time before going to work. I'll see you in 10-12 hours. Good luck town. , some people (DP + Ange) post others whom they perceive to be relatively inactive. Neither DarthPunk nor Ange mention him though. Then he makes his second case on Golbat + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 21:49 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 20:04 Ange777 wrote:Obvious MrMedic aRyuujin ZorkAll have posted next to nothing of content. On to Shady: His filter is a lot of policy talking and then the case against Mordanis. I am unsure about him. 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.
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.
The thing is, if Mordanis was convinced of the controversy of Keir's play than Mordanis' play is not scummy. I don't like Shady's case. I have to head out now. I'll try give a better read on Shady when I come back. Alright, I'll look into their filters and see if anything is popping there. What I found, and still find weird about shady is this: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 08:38 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +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. I'm not sure how Keir telling RB not to use their powers equals Keir roleclaiming as RB. Of course Day 1 roleclaiming is suspicious but this post doesn't fit the bill. But if a clear consensus emerges that he's suspicious, I'd volunteer myself to watch his posting behavior. That said, I do think Day 1 scumhunting could work--but only after everyone (or nearly everyone) has posted. I'm going to go down the list of posters now and do a quick tally. Ange777 - No posts yet Keirathi - Six posts Promethelax - More than 10 posts alan133 - 1 "GLHF" post Mordanis - Three posts Obvious.660 - 2 posts MrMedic - 1 post, edited aRyuujin - 2 posts, both haiku DarthPunk - No posts yet goodkarma - No posts yet Golbat - No posts yet Shady Sands - 2 posts so far Zorkmid - 5 posts Players in order of activity: Promethelax Keirathi Zorkmid Mordanis Obvious.660 aRyuujin Shady Sands alan133 MrMedic -- Lurkers -- Ange777 Darthpunk goodkarma Golbat Once the remaining few lurkers have posted, then we can start scumhunting. The next task is to read through past mafia games and find those with successful Day 1 scumhunts--and see what common lessons can be drawn from them. I'm going to compile a list of those right now. Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter. the other thing in here I want to focus on is his lets wait attitude. for example: from the above post and others He also says that Show nested quote +Day 1 scumhunting actually has a lower success rate than a random day 1 lynch. If the lynches had been truly random, then maybe 20-30% of the games should have had day 1 lynches turn up red, but none of them did. both of these things push town away from hunting for scum, attempting to prevent scum hunting is a huge scum trait. On top of this he misrepresents the facts in newbie 21 (I think) Hopeless1der was lynched d1 as scum so scum hunting has shown to be effective recently. He also replys to my advice by saying Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 09:11 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 06:41 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Day 1 is like any other day, we don't have all the information we want to have but we should use what information we do have to lynch a guy who looks scummy. Not a guy who looks like bad town. Marv said it best in the QT for I can't believe its not themed mini mafia: "best town play is to lynch scum" post 101 if you are curious. It was in reply to something dumb I said. While I'm not saying we will hit scum without fail we should try to. We can eliminate shitty players later with Vigi shots or scum will shoot them. A lurky scum team will have no ability to control where we look, if me and my boys had lurked in XIX we would have been crushed in LYLO but because 2/3 of us were active we managed a perfect victory despite Keirathi replacing in and figuring out all three of us at just the wrong time. aR: you make me happy with your Haiku Obvious: your limerick is excellent as well There are a couple points here that are bad advice: 1) Scum will not shoot bad town players. It just makes no sense 2) Do not, I repeat, do not, waste vigi shots on bad town players. Indeed, vigi shots are the single most critical resource the town has. scum will blue snipe, they will kill players who won't vote for the right mislynch or who are tunneling scum. There are a million reasons for scum to shoot a bad town player so his first point is wrong and his second point again pushes us away from scum hunting since he insists that vigi shots are our most powerful tool. No they aren't. We are the most powerful town asset and scum hunting is the most powerful town tool. His next post tells us to wait for more people to post until we make cases and the one after that is a case... Show nested quote +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. Sands tells us that we should still hold off even though this guy is the best lynch target. He also tells us that he will likely flip green based on (I assume) the statistics which seems, to me, to be a way to distance himself from a Mord town flip. What originally felt scummy to me in Sands' filter was this post where he says: Show nested quote +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. Re-read that. Do yourself a favour and beat your face against a hard surface. He think that Mord will flip green unless he replys in the way that he (Sands) expects him to in which case he is red...alrighty than. I also hate this post: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 21:22 Shady Sands wrote: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. the bolded part at the end is essentially saying that we should lynch Golbat and if he is green lynch Mord. That seems to be setting us up for two mislynches and, if Sands ever flips red these two are pretty much confirmed town. So based on Sands' play I think that he is scum. He has earned my FoS and as of this moment he would be my vote if nothing changed between now and lynch. I'll be keeping my eye on him because, as he said, Show nested quote +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 just replace Mord with Sands and you see the truth of the statement. He has to keep going and, as Keir well knows, loud scum are easy to find. , which contains the nugget: "Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter." I'd like to know how you, Promethelax, can try to moderate for inane/useless posts when you've been at least as bad as anyone else. The other thing that confuses me is the petulance with which Promethelax is trying to become the "town mayor". Here are a few examples: + Show Spoiler +On July 31 2012 17:33 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:29 Mordanis wrote:On July 31 2012 17:16 DarthPunk wrote:On July 31 2012 17:14 Mordanis wrote: Just for clarity, is there definitely 3 scum or is the number ambiguous? Same for other roles, i.e. could there be multiple vigis or medics etc.? This has been answered previously http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=C9++ we are loosely based on this setup. so multiple blue roles and no confirmed number of reds or blues. C9++ also allows for SK, which is why I wanted to make sure this is indeed the case. How loose is loosely? If you have set up questions ask the host otherwise you are just wasting thread space and padding your filter while adding nothing to the thread. On July 30 2012 18:14 Promethelax wrote: Sorry I'm on my way to bed and I figured I would quickly reply to Karma before falling asleep. I am sure I'll miss some points but the basic one of why is my play so different now than it was is that I work Tuesday-Saturday. I play better on my days off.
As to the town leader thing: I just spent like ten minutes looking for the quote but couldn't find it. I think it was Marv who said (and I'm paraphrasing) "town needs two things, a good annalist and a good leader; they don't have to be the same person they just both have to exist" I'm not saying I should be a town leader or a town analyst, I am saying that town is following my analysis and that I am taking things said by players whom I greatly respect and trying to forge my town play around that. If the two things that town needs are a good leader and someone with good analysis I will try to provide both. I think you and I don't see eye to eye on what a town leader is. I'm not saying we should elect a mayor, I'm saying having someone who is clearly pro-town trying to create a pro-town environment is a necessity for town. By town leader I mean someone who is creating an environment where town flourishes even if the person creating that environment has their head up their ass on every single one of their reads. . Now I am familiar with how some things in this game just don't function the way you'd expect them to, but why town would need a leader is beyond me. People who disrupt scum-hunting should be noticed, but I don't know why having a judiciary saying "Thou shalt not do X" helps, especially when scum tend to try to gain that position quite often. And why town only needs one analyst is also beyond me, as it seems that the more the merrier. I think scum would be the ones wanting people following one of 2 people at all times, not town. Essentially, from what I've read about XIX Promethelax kind of mauled town by getting into the "town circle", and controlling the game from there. I don't think a smart person could try the same strategy against people its already been used on and expect to win again. For that reason, Promethelax's inconsistent/illogical/ seems to be a mild indicator of scumminess. Also, being relatively inactive during one day reduces the amount of stuff any player needs to defend himself later. Edit before having to double post (EBHTDP) I am still confused by large parts of his play. For instance the part about lynching semi-lurkers seems sort of like what he's doing. GK hasn't posted nearly as many times as Prom himself, myself, Keir, Ange, Obvious, or Shady. 6 players of 12 left have 3 or more pages in their filter, the other 6 have 2. GK has spent a lot of his time defending himself, so if you take that away he's pretty lurky. But the caffeine is wearing off now, see y'all in the morning. Still, I like the content he generated with that post on GK, so I'll be watching Prom closely. I seriously need to pass out now though :/ So basically there you have it--why I am voting Prome, and why I am FoSing Obvious. There are a couple of dead links above that I will be filling with anchor tags as the night goes on. Again, ##Vote Promethelax. Sorry about the lateness of this post, but as I stated earlier a major IRL commitment came up (brother's DUI) that required me to spend all night at the police station and all morning at the lawyers. Did you even read Mordanis' case? It was full of doubts whether or not Promethelax could be scum or not. So if you say that you completely agree with Mordanis' case, you also state that you were unsure whether he would flip red or not but were willing to vote him?
|
Dear lurkers!
I'll be going to bed now as it is midnight in Germany and I am tired of this pointless discussion with Jingle. I'll be happy to answer any further questions tomorrow but please do me a favor: Read my filter first! Thanks.
|
Ok, I just got up and quickly skimmed through and I really can't believe that people are not voting for Zork .... I can only urge you to go back and read my case against him and his defense against it!
|
On August 03 2012 16:25 Obvious.660 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 16:23 Ange777 wrote: Ok, I just got up and quickly skimmed through and I really can't believe that people are not voting for Zork .... I can only urge you to go back and read my case against him and his defense against it! I don't trust you, either.
You have suspicions against me? Fire away.
|
|
@Shady:
Being confirmed town gives you so much opportunies to pressure others without having to worry about defending your own alignment and yet since the day post there has not been much from you besides that vote against Mordanis. Please come back and get active!! Town is awfully split right now and we need every single vote especially yours.
|
@DarthPunk:
The slip I am talking about is not only WIFOM. It is literally a scumslip.
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
On August 02 2012 21:42 Zorkmid wrote: 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.
I tried explaining it earlier.
A regular town player would just say: I wouldn't have posted that. Only being scum you would say: Oh, if I was town, I wouldn't have posted that.
When Zork tries to explain that he used a different role to analyze he makes the second mistake. If he was town, he would not use a different role when he thinks about whether a town player would say that or not. I agree that the mindset thing might look a bit WIFOM. But the slip alone is damning enough to be sure that Zork is scum. Just have a look at his non-existent defense against my case. In his struggle to come up with a defense or any other topic, he even lies about the relief posting leading to Prom's mislynch and wants an explanation from MrMedic.
This is not a thoughtful town player who has made one mistake. He slipped twice. He makes no try at defending himself besides saying that he can't catch my point about the slip. Add all of the above to the other problems we had with Zork:
1. semi-lurking 2. posting inconsistently 3. waiting for cases to sheep
If you still have doubts about Zork, try to come up with a town motivation for the lack of defense against my case. Unfortunately there is none. Now think about a scum motivation for his play and recent absence. Yeah, trying to wriggle himself out of this situation.
One more point which I believe proves my point is the weird case Jingle made on me. He started a case just after I had accused Zork. What a timing ... he claims that I had pressured him to give reads and than afterwards agreed with the single read he had offered until then. As he can't think of any town motivation for my behaviour, he votes me.
I explain that asking for reads is a perfectly normal thing to do for any town player, especially if the one you are asking is a null read for every player. And I had made that case on Shady because I was still suspicious of him until his mason claim. After a lot of pointless discussion Jingle than claims that he can't see any town motivation for me being suspicious of Shady. Well but all my suspicions were stated in the case I made which originally made him think I am scummy. In my opinion it's such a contradiction and therefore not a real case on me but rather a hasty try to doubt my credibilty as I have hit home with my case on Zork. As I have stated previously, connection based cases are indeed dangerous which is why I won't pressure for a Jingle lynch until after we have lynched scum Zork.
|
On August 03 2012 20:01 DarthPunk wrote:When I first saw it last night I saw it the same way that you do, but then I read this. Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 00:17 Zorkmid wrote: 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.
This whilst far from enough to convince me of his innocence, IS a plausible explanation of his slip. I am not comfortable with risking a mislynch on a player based off reading one sentence a certain way when there is a plausible explanation which can cause it to be looked at in a different way. Remember the last 'scumslip' in this game. With golbat? I don't want a repeat of that. So I need more than the perceived Scumslip to go off on Zorkmid. The rest of the case is much less developed. 1. semi-lurking 2. posting inconsistently 3. waiting for cases to sheep These are all true. And I have read his filter several times. However, as I have said before, I feel the cases on mordanis are much stronger. In terms of the MrMedic thing that you have mentioned a few times. I noticed reading through his filter that he was actually talking about aRyuujin in the post you referenced. as I stated previously I can't see any logical motivation to his posting. Although I don't see how having little if any defense at all on a case against him proves his motive one way or another. If he wrote a disproportionate amount in his defense and on closer inspection it contained nothing of substance that would give me a definite scum vibe. but no defense at all? I can't see that helping scum OR town. If we are going to lynch a lurker which seems to be the other main argument against Zorkmid I would rather lynch the player with a 1 page filter than the one with a 3 page filter. As for the thing with jingle. I will need to read through it again.
@DarthPunk:
I hope you realize that the post you quoted by Zorkmid was the one where he lied about the relief post being made by Prom and leading to Prom's mislynch. I can only repeat myself. The relief post was made by goodkarma. And not by Prom. Zork lied!
And he addressed both, aRyuujin and MrMedic in that post.
I didn't vote for Golbat because of any kind of scumslip. I voted for him because I thought he behaved scummily. And now I am voting for Zork not because he is a lurker. But because of his slip in addition to his always wishy-washy stance.
I think your case against Mordanis is good. But right now, I am not willing to vote for someone, whom I think has a decent chance of flipping scum when I am convinced that Zork will flip scum!
|
On August 03 2012 20:35 DarthPunk wrote: Yeah I know he said the wrong person. He is very confused and constantly make mistakes. But if you replace prom with GK the intent behind it is Plausible.
But he should not make these mistakes. He claims that he is a thoughtful poster and therefore has not contributed that much as other players may have. Being this thoughtful such an obvious mistake should not happen. This should prove that his lurking has nothing to do with being thoughtful and careful rather than he is intentionally lurking.
On August 03 2012 00:17 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +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.
About the MrMedic thing: Ok, I can see another way to explain that.
|
On August 03 2012 21:03 DarthPunk wrote: He is making mistakes. But there doesn't seem to be a discernible motive behind them. If these mistakes in some way furthered an agenda they would be a lot more worrying to me than just making mistakes for no reason whatsoever. This actually makes me lean towards just a bad townie more than anything. Why as scum would he make such obvious mistakes and cast suspicion on him for nothing? To me it seems less likely for scum to make stupid mistakes like this exactly because they are more likely to be careful. Even mords day 1 posting was better than this. What made it scummy? he was actively pursuing an agenda. If zork has an agenda with his mistakes it is to make everyone super suspicious of him. This is the reason I don't think these mistakes can be used as 100% proof of his scumminess as you do.
Okay, your explanation is as lot of WIFOM but I guess you could say the same to mine :D
When town plays mafia, they don't know any other role than their own. Therefore everything that's said will be scrutinzed and read over and over again in every little detail.
When scum plays mafia, they know everyone's roles. Therefore they are more looking for things that can be used to make other people scummy than analyzing every post town has made. So they will focus on what they can use and maybe be a little lazy when reading. And that's why not keeping up with the correct facts and misquoting other player's statements can't be only deemed as a tell for bad town players but has to make him scummy as well.
|
On August 03 2012 21:41 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 21:34 Ange777 wrote: And that's why not keeping up with the correct facts and misquoting other player's statements can't be only deemed as a tell for bad town players but has to make him scummy as well. Yep. You are exactly right. that is why I can't be 100% sure if he is playing badly as scum or playing badly as town.
So tell me why you say that the mistake seems to only give you a town vibe? Or did I misunderstand that earlier post?
On August 03 2012 21:03 DarthPunk wrote: He is making mistakes. But there doesn't seem to be a discernible motive behind them. If these mistakes in some way furthered an agenda they would be a lot more worrying to me than just making mistakes for no reason whatsoever. This actually makes me lean towards just a bad townie more than anything. Why as scum would he make such obvious mistakes and cast suspicion on him for nothing? To me it seems less likely for scum to make stupid mistakes like this exactly because they are more likely to be careful. Even mords day 1 posting was better than this. What made it scummy? he was actively pursuing an agenda. If zork has an agenda with his mistakes it is to make everyone super suspicious of him. This is the reason I don't think these mistakes can be used as 100% proof of his scumminess as you do.
On August 03 2012 22:13 DarthPunk wrote: @ange777 We seem to have exactly the same positions as each other on our respective lynches. I don't supposed I have convinced you to vote for Mordanis again?
Sorry no :D I really hope that Shady, alan and aRyuujin show up though. I have not seen them take part in this discussion so maybe they will consider my case on Zork.
|
I'll be out now and will hopefully be back 1-2 hours before the deadline.
@DarthPunk: You said you will re-read my case on Jingle? What's your opinion?
|
Hey guys, sorry I missed the deadline but we finally lynched scum! Good job
I only quickly skimmed through and what I saw proves me right in my case against scum Jingle. It starts here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=353315¤tpage=38#752
If there are any doubts, I strongly urge you to go back and re-read that post and the following conversation with Jingle. Furthermore Shady did an awesome case on Jingle and explained the motive for that more than obvious fake claim pretty well.
It's after 2 am now, so I'll be off to bed. I will definitely be back before deadline to give my read for the remaining scum besides Jingle.
|
@Jingle:
On August 04 2012 07:48 JingleHell wrote: My primary defense will be that I'm a much worse target than Alan. Given that I'm under suspicion for some rather paltry WIFOM based on one of a couple of things.
1: When I ask people why they said something, they repeat it, and OMGUS me. 2: I came in looking at people who weren't the major targets, which, ironically, people wanted me to do.
I guess that is referring to me again:
1. You asked me why I would make a case against Shady. I said it's because I was suspicious of him. Then you twist my words saying that is no defense because I didn't give a reason for being suspicious of him. My reasons were stated in the case against Shady which originally lead to your suspicions against me. You were just deliberately wasting my time and trying to discredit me.
2. I never once said that I wanted you to look at major targets. I have repeated myself over and over again explaining that I only wanted to know whether or not you had more reads except for Shady. When I started my case on Zork, he was no major target at all. Still you refused to comment on him for a long time.
|
On August 03 2012 23:04 DarthPunk wrote:@Jingle @Ange777 Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 22:19 Ange777 wrote: @DarthPunk: You said you will re-read my case on Jingle? What's your opinion? Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 06:01 Ange777 wrote: But only a couple of hours later (to be precise directly after I had posted my case against Zork) you had miraculously not only finished reading the thread, no you also had a very strong conviction that I am scummy. Based on arguments you yet have to show me. And while you have been tunneling me you have totally ignored my case on Zork based on his scumslip and the following reactions. Would you please give me a town motivation for ignoring the case on Zork? Oh, and please keep in mind, attacking me doesn't qualify as a defense! So this is just wrong. Jingle started airing suspicions against you well before you started going after zork. In no way is the jingle situation between you and him relevant to the zork case. I don't know why you would draw that connection at all. If you had read the last game you will see that jingle caught scum by Identifying and avoiding a similar situation so it is understandable that he would be on the look out for a repeat of that. Your response to him was OMGUS and WIFOM. I can understand why he finds you suspicious, particularly when you immediately become super aggressive towards him when he posts a case on you. I don't really think you have a case on him to be honest. I initially had a small town read on you but after actually reading through the discussion between yourself and jingle I am starting to worry about you. Your reaction to jingle's pressure was an incredibly disproportionate response, and trying to draw a connection to a case you posted hours after jingle had first cast suspicion on you is very suspicious to me. I don't see any connections whatsoever between Jingles pressure on you and your case on zork. I have no idea why you would try and draw a connection that wasn't there. It seems to be OMGUS. but I don't like the fact that several aspects of your case (Jingle connection, MrMedic post) seem to have fallen apart on closer inspection and the fact that many of the other points could just be bad town play, makes me even more wary of following your lynch on Zork. It seems like it is just an attempt to make an easy mislynch on a lurky bad town player. [/b]
Okay, to be precise Jingle started so voice his suspicions against me directly after Shady claimed mason. But he seemed to be really strongly convinced that I am scum after I made the case on Zork as Jingle then voted me. That's what I meant for the timing.
I think I have explained why Jingle's case was really ridiciulous more than enough. If you still haven't understood why I am happy to refer you to someone else's explanation:
On August 03 2012 23:35 alan133 wrote: @JingleHell+ Show Spoiler +What the hell? What's up with that most painfully narrow tunnel I have ever seen? Why do you make me regret saying I adore your play? How does: - suggesting you to post more reads because you are new and might open more perspective to town
- proceed to post another case on people HE ALREADY HAVE HIS FOS ON
- OH WAIT! HIS CASE HAS THE SAME AS MY TARGET!!! I DON'T GET IT!!!
Why do he needs to explain a townie motive? How do you explain one? What motive could he have, at all. How about, give me a townie motive for tunnelling and voting on such a ridiculous case? I don't see a townie motive. Mind explaining yourself? I suggest you drop your case on Ange, and votes one of the candidates here instead, as it is very possible that there is a SCUM in here. + Show Spoiler +Oh wait I need to explain a townie motivation. How about REDUCING THE RISK OF GETTING A NO LYNCH?. In all seriousness, mind posting something that is other than: + Show Spoiler +Target's latest defence against No! You did not explain a town motive! I vote you ##v0t3 example1over a thousand times?
I admit my responses might have gotten a tiny little bit bitchy in the end but that was due to the fact that I did answer every single question from Jingle and yet he always claimed that he could not see a defense or a town motivation. And I don't believe my replys were disproportionate as every question Jingle asked could have been answered by looking at previous posts I made.
Initially Jingle got my suspicions because of the timing he started to cast suspicion on me but I can promise you that I am not pushing for his lynch only based on the connection to Zork but for the worst case I have ever seen which is clear scum motivation.
By the way you state that my discussion with Jingle made you think I am scummy. Your reasoning please! And don't tell me it's because of the tone of my answers because that was totally appropriate for such a nonsense case.
|
On August 04 2012 22:44 JingleHell wrote: I'm going to try and get this concept through people's skulls one more time. My reasoning for suspecting Ange was not for any specific thing he said. It was for the timing of asking me to post cases on people besides Shady, followed by immediately adding evidence to the case against Shady.
It looked like an effort to give me a confirmation bias.
I was asking about motives. Not about semantics. (Granted, semantics seems to be the only thing you people understand)
When I asked you for your reads, you had just posted the following:
On August 02 2012 02:55 JingleHell wrote: This inactivity is ridiculous, people. Post. Lurking town = free scum win, so POST. Create opportunity.
This was after you had posted your one read on Shady. One single read. I guess in your opinion it is not approriate for town to ask you to stick to your own advice: Create opportunities.
|
@DarthPunk, aRyuujin, alan: Where have you guys gone? There has been cases and suspicions on you and I sincerely hope that you will come back before deadline to defend yourselves! Even if we have night right now, it does not prevent you from proving that you are indeed playing for town!
|
@goodkarma: We don't need a "town leader". We are currently at Night 3 and everyone of us should have some decent scum and town reads on the others. If everyone just steps up their activity we can lynch both remaining scum.
|
@alan: Your defense post better be overwhelmingly good ... it took you at least two hours already.
|
@alan: So you are saying that tunneling other players without a solid case is Jingle's town meta? I have a hard time believing that ...
|
EBWOP: If it indeed was his town meta, than I suppose it would not be far fetched to at least see him tunnel someone else right now? And yet when I see his case on you and compare it with him endlessly tunneling me I feel there is a huge huge difference.
|
Because apparently people know your meta and would have called you out directly based on that?
|
So I guess there is a pretty decent chance that I might be shot tonight. As I already stated I am convinced that we have nailed the second scum in Jingle. Veto the case as much as you want Jingle, there is no way you can wriggle yourself out of this. Extremely obvious scum play like this can't be ignored.
On to the third scum. Based on the theory Shady already mentioned with scum actively trying to counter bandwagon the Zork case there is one more player I think we need to analyze closely. Very much unsuspected by most of the players ... DarthPunk. I believe only goodkarma called him out. Originally I had a town read on him, he came across as a thoughtful poster who analyzed the play of others first before jumping on any kind of bandwagon. Under normal circumstances I probably still wouldn't have noticed him but the recent situation with Zork made me reconsider. See for yourselves:
The first time he mentions the Zork case he says the following:
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. The problem with both Zorkmid and aRyuujin is that there is so little to actually make a read from.
He just states that he doesn't have a strong read because Zork is too lurky. He puts Zork and aRyuujin into the same category although Zork has posted far more than aRyuujin. He admits that the slip and the lurking are suspicious, yet he does not take any step in pressuring Zork for more information.
The next time he talks about Zork:
On August 03 2012 12:57 DarthPunk wrote: on zorkmid There is a case on Zork. I just feel like it is weaker than the case on Mordanis. Add that to the fact that mord is once again ad hearing to his Modus Operandi.
He says the case is weaker. No reasons. When I ask him for his reasoning:
On August 03 2012 18:40 DarthPunk wrote:Ok my analysis - ignoring the scum slip which I will get to later. Zork is playing really badly. He is playing really badly as town OR as scum. He has been confused more than once as to what is happening in the game, who he has suspicions on etc. 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. Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 00:17 Zorkmid wrote: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. Which makes me tend to believe him when he says that he is not paying attention to the thread because of IRL commitments. Because why? what are the scum motivations behind his posts? This is still bad play and hurts town. As I said earlier It isn't easy to get a scum read when there has been so little activity from him. His posts make no sense as either scum or town. He is Lurking though. If we get to LYLO and we have nothing to go off in terms of reads that is a major liability. on the scum slip. @ange777 I don't think your logic is as iron clad as you believe. 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 What I think he is trying to say is this. He thinks saying this is scummy. No town player would need to say this, he is town so he wouldn't say it. It is WIFOM and speculation and is written poorly. (which I hate) yet can't see a scum motivation or plan for this. It is possible that he is scum and that this is the evidence. It is also possible that he is bad at explaining himself, a poor writer and you are reading too much into this. Your entire case is based around reading a few statements a certain way, and thus seems to be weaker than my case on mordanis and weaker than your case on mordanis (that you seem to have dropped off the face of the earth). If it comes to a no lynch situation I will be willing to change my vote. (as everyone should be) but at this time the cases on Mordanis are far stronger. If people are set on lynching lurky players aRyuujin is a stronger lynch IMO. He has less than a one page filter he votes Golbat day 1. went AFK for 2 cycles comes back and puts a vote on mord that just echos my position and then leaves again. I wish we still had a Vig cause aRyuujin has been and will increasingly become a serious liability.
A huge soft defense on Zork. DarthPunk explains that everything I believe makes Zork scummy can be explained as bad town play. Therefore there would be no evidence for lynching Zork and instead we should just lynch aRyuujin if we were after a lurker.
When I again push DarthPunk for more reasons on why he thinks Zork is town he states:
On August 03 2012 20:01 DarthPunk wrote:When I first saw it last night I saw it the same way that you do, but then I read this. Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 00:17 Zorkmid wrote: 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.
This whilst far from enough to convince me of his innocence, IS a plausible explanation of his slip. I am not comfortable with risking a mislynch on a player based off reading one sentence a certain way when there is a plausible explanation which can cause it to be looked at in a different way. Remember the last 'scumslip' in this game. With golbat? I don't want a repeat of that. So I need more than the perceived Scumslip to go off on Zorkmid. -snip- as I stated previously I can't see any logical motivation to his posting. Although I don't see how having little if any defense at all on a case against him proves his motive one way or another. If he wrote a disproportionate amount in his defense and on closer inspection it contained nothing of substance that would give me a definite scum vibe. but no defense at all? I can't see that helping scum OR town. If we are going to lynch a lurker which seems to be the other main argument against Zorkmid I would rather lynch the player with a 1 page filter than the one with a 3 page filter. As for the thing with jingle. I will need to read through it again.
His first sentence says that at first he saw it the same way as I did? But he never once mentioned that in the beginning. He then proceeds to explain that scumslips are not indicative at all as we mislynched Golbat based on a misperceived scumslip. I really don't know which "scumslip" he is referring to. Again he goes on to defend Zork without properly giving any other reason than he might be town. And again he emphasizes that we should really lynch aRyuujin instead. Interesting ...
When I confront him about why I think my discussion with Jingle makes me think that I hit home with the case on Zork he says:
On August 03 2012 23:04 DarthPunk wrote: So this is just wrong. Jingle started airing suspicions against you well before you started going after zork. In no way is the jingle situation between you and him relevant to the zork case. I don't know why you would draw that connection at all. If you had read the last game you will see that jingle caught scum by Identifying and avoiding a similar situation so it is understandable that he would be on the look out for a repeat of that. Your response to him was OMGUS and WIFOM. I can understand why he finds you suspicious, particularly when you immediately become super aggressive towards him when he posts a case on you. I don't really think you have a case on him to be honest.
I initially had a small town read on you but after actually reading through the discussion between yourself and jingle I am starting to worry about you. Your reaction to jingle's pressure was an incredibly disproportionate response, and trying to draw a connection to a case you posted hours after jingle had first cast suspicion on you is very suspicious to me. I don't see any connections whatsoever between Jingles pressure on you and your case on zork. I have no idea why you would try and draw a connection that wasn't there. It seems to be OMGUS. but I don't like the fact that several aspects of your case (Jingle connection, MrMedic post) seem to have fallen apart on closer inspection and the fact that many of the other points could just be bad town play, makes me even more wary of following your lynch on Zork. It seems like it is just an attempt to make an easy mislynch on a lurky bad town player.
He explains that he now believes me scummy and that my replys were disproportinate. And does not explain what exactly made him change his mind. He further states that he can't see any kind of scum motivation for a scum Jingle to tunnel me and discredit me when I am pushing the case on scum Zork. But he was able to see so much town motivation for Zork's play to defend him over and over again. And again he mentions that I am trying to get a lurker lynched while I have repeatedly said that my main reason for lynching Zork is not his semi-lurking.
Next is his vote switch timing. It's very close to Zork's fake medic claim. Very very close.
On August 04 2012 03:05 Zorkmid wrote: I didn't want to have to do this just yet.
I am a Doctor
On August 04 2012 03:07 DarthPunk wrote: so are we headed towards a no lynch now? I did say I would change my vote to zorkmid to stop a nolynch. Although I think he is probably just a bad town.
I find it unbelievable mord is escaping a lynch once again.
##:Unvote ##:vote: zorkmid
The timing is so close that I could say that scum discussed their situation in the scum QT and decided to concede in the Zork lynch. Why would DarthPunk otherwise switch his vote? There was still a lot of time for him to potentially convince others to vote for Mordanis. This is no last minute vote switch just to ensure that there is a majority at the deadline. And it's not like he was heading to bed anyway and needed to put the vote on Zork before leaving as he was still awake an hour later.
On August 04 2012 04:16 DarthPunk wrote: Right it's 5am and I have stayed up far too long. night all.
I believe that the scum team was desperately trying to save Zork. Which is exactly why our thread suddenly exploded when the case on Zork started. So scum definitely went all in with their defense for Zork. I see a lot of scum motivation for DarthPunk to over and over push for the Mordanis lynch, to discredit the Zork case as a lurker case, to soft defend Zork and to try to convince town into compromise into lynching aRyuujin instead.
So after Zork and Jingle, my third scum member would be DarthPunk. I have seen the cases against alan and aRyuujin and while there are some valid points I believe it is more likely for DarthPunk to flip red than those two. If DarthPunk were to flip green, alan would be my first scum pick and aRyuujin my last scum pick. I have to admit though that aRyuujin is behind alan due to the fact that his excessive lurking has left me with little to analyze and therefore I am not that confident in his alignment.
Edit: Mordanis ninja'd my case. I didn't want to post that early before deadline.
|
GG Mordanis
##Vote JingleHell
|
On August 05 2012 06:03 JingleHell wrote: Well, whoever RBed me seems to have failed to stop the NK. Good job.
If you can get anyone to claim having RBed you, than congrats we've got the third scum.
|
On August 05 2012 06:08 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 06:06 Ange777 wrote:On August 05 2012 06:03 JingleHell wrote: Well, whoever RBed me seems to have failed to stop the NK. Good job. If you can get anyone to claim having RBed you, than congrats we've got the third scum. Why would a scum have RBed me if I'm such a blatant scum, Ange? Why not a Town RB? Wouldn't that make more sense?
Because I am pretty sure you are just fake claiming your RB to survive this day. Zork claimed doc, therefore scum know that it was a doc who prevented the night 1 kill and not a roleblocker. With 1 doc, 1 vig and 2 masons I don't think there is another town power role.
|
|
On August 05 2012 06:13 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 06:11 Ange777 wrote:On August 05 2012 06:08 JingleHell wrote:On August 05 2012 06:06 Ange777 wrote:On August 05 2012 06:03 JingleHell wrote: Well, whoever RBed me seems to have failed to stop the NK. Good job. If you can get anyone to claim having RBed you, than congrats we've got the third scum. Why would a scum have RBed me if I'm such a blatant scum, Ange? Why not a Town RB? Wouldn't that make more sense? Because I am pretty sure you are just fake claiming your RB to survive this day. Zork claimed doc, therefore scum know that it was a doc who prevented the night 1 kill and not a roleblocker. With 1 doc, 1 vig and 2 masons I don't think there is another town power role. Well, I guess newbie games are a great place to learn how not to make a case, glad to have helped you learn why WIFOM is a piss-poor alternative to actual scum-hunting.
Are you talking to yourself?
|
On August 05 2012 06:16 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 06:15 Ange777 wrote:On August 05 2012 06:13 JingleHell wrote:On August 05 2012 06:11 Ange777 wrote:On August 05 2012 06:08 JingleHell wrote:On August 05 2012 06:06 Ange777 wrote:On August 05 2012 06:03 JingleHell wrote: Well, whoever RBed me seems to have failed to stop the NK. Good job. If you can get anyone to claim having RBed you, than congrats we've got the third scum. Why would a scum have RBed me if I'm such a blatant scum, Ange? Why not a Town RB? Wouldn't that make more sense? Because I am pretty sure you are just fake claiming your RB to survive this day. Zork claimed doc, therefore scum know that it was a doc who prevented the night 1 kill and not a roleblocker. With 1 doc, 1 vig and 2 masons I don't think there is another town power role. Well, I guess newbie games are a great place to learn how not to make a case, glad to have helped you learn why WIFOM is a piss-poor alternative to actual scum-hunting. Are you talking to yourself? No, but childish responses instead of introspection really just help cement in my mind that trying to convince you I'm town is a waste of my precious time. I'll just watch the thread, and laugh hysterically. Sound good?
That's perfectly fine with me. I sincerely hope you'll have a good time.
|
@Shady:
Maybe scum was trying to kill the medic instead of WIFOMing who the medic would save. I mean both of us thought we might die this night.
|
@alan:
My problem with Jingle is that he doesn't show us any kind of town behaviour. He was extremely active and aggressive tunneling me which everyone said fits his meta. But after the flip there has been the one case on you and a lot of WIFOM defense. If he were town, he should know better that you don't just get away simply be WIFOMing. You need to show you are town by pushing reads and cases ... not fake claiming RBed.
So what are your scum reads for the two remaining scum? What do you think of Mordanis and my case on DarthPunk?
|
@aRyuujin: What do you make of alan?
|
@Obvious: So your top scum read is aRyuujin? Your second one?
|
Are you guys just dumping your reads and leaving the thread instantly?
|
Oh ninja'd. Okay then please explain your scum reads.
|
A wise man once said: When you are ahead, get more ahead. Why bus their own team member when scum could have easily get a mislynch on another townie: Mordanis? Votes were stuck evenly for quite a long time.
Anyway, I want to hear your scum reads. I have a feeling you are accusing me of bussing Zork?
|
On August 05 2012 18:37 DarthPunk wrote: When I originally thought about zork. I questioned how scum could make such silly mistakes and be so blatantly bad. This is the reason I thought he may be town. Scum have the ability to communicate, they can aid each other in their posting etc. and are therefore less likely to make the flagrant errors zorkmid did. But now that I know zork was scum my perspective on certain things has been altered. It is very possible zork was a bus because scum were so far ahead at that point in the game. If he was a bus? with the cases people are making right now? we are screwed.
You said you believe it highly likely that Zork was bussed. I was the one who pushed Zork the most. So logical conclusion: You are suspecting me of bussing Zork.
|
On August 05 2012 19:21 DarthPunk wrote:You specifically asked me to state the reasons I thought the case on zork was weaker than the case on mordanis. You are now calling my reasoning behind why the case on zork was weaker that you asked for as a huge soft defense on zork WTF? I answered a question you asked as transparently as possible and you are now delivering that answer without context as me defending a scum. and therefore I should be lynched. I admitted there was a case on zork/zork was suspicious. I thought it was weaker than my case on mord because I believed he was just as likely to be a bad townie as a bad scum. And I was 100% certain that mord was scum. You are now presenting my answers on why I thought Zork was a weaker case, as me defending scum zork. Right. -snip- Jingle started making a case on you hours before your case on zork. Your main argument against Jingle was that he was chainsaw defending zork. The reason I found this scummy? you seemed to be DESPERATE to try and establish a link between zork and Jingle that wasn't there and quite obviously wasn't there. I have already posted on the motivation isssue. I would say check my filter, but it is obvious no one is doing that. So here it is: Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 11:47 DarthPunk wrote:On August 05 2012 05:58 Ange777 wrote: He (myself) further states that he can't see any kind of scum motivation for a scum Jingle to tunnel me and discredit me when I am pushing the case on scum Zork. On August 05 2012 05:49 JingleHell wrote: By the way, since we're kinda up to our neck in WIFOM right now regarding the "case" on me anyways...
Why the hell would I, if I was scum, come into the thread taking some convoluted route of being suspicious of people who weren't under fire? I could have easily taken the easy way out, piled onto Mordanis, and played the "unbiased outsider" card people were handing me to agree with the case against him?
If you think that makes sense from the hypothetical scum me viewpoint, I think I'm going to take it as an insult. This is part of the reason the Jingle case does not make sense to me. When he first came to the thread people were even talking about everyone sheeping his vote (obvious). If he was scum I see no rational in his play. He could have just quietly jumped on a bandwagon and consolidated the goodwill that everyone was showing him when he first joined. Instead he disregards staying alive and makes his own reads, own case and starts pressuring those people. To me this is town behaviour and would be retarded as scum. I don't get why everyone thinks that all scum in the game were forming a counter wagon to zork. He was a bad player I think everyone can agree on that. I don't know why people think that scum would go all in in order to save someone whom was obviously a liability. That is largely WIFOM though, which I dislike. read that. Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 05:58 Ange777 wrote: The timing is so close that I could say that scum discussed their situation in the scum QT and decided to concede in the Zork lynch. Why would DarthPunk otherwise switch his vote? There was still a lot of time for him to potentially convince others to vote for Mordanis. This is no last minute vote switch just to ensure that there is a majority at the deadline. And it's not like he was heading to bed anyway and needed to put the vote on Zork before leaving as he was still awake an hour later. Posted on this also: Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 11:27 DarthPunk wrote:On August 05 2012 05:21 Mordanis wrote: DP: Why did you change your vote from someone you've been suspicious of literally all game to someone you've only defended, in the middle of a tied vote situation, for the most vague reason possible.
I said I would. I think it was to Ange in the second part of day 2. I was always willing to change my vote to avoid a no lynch. at that point in time I had every intention of going to sleep and didn't want to leave it in the hands of others. Would I rather people to have changed their votes to you at that time 100% yes. But I didn't see that happening and some were even putting forward the idea of a no lynch which i was 100% against. So I tried to consolidate the vote onto one candidate. I am not sure others would have switched off mord had zork not made his medic claim. Anyway that was my thoughts behind it. Honestly I don't see what else there is to say. There is a fundamental lack of a case present in your case. What I will say is this. I am very fucking suspicious of you right now. You seem to have been desperate to link jingle hell to your zorkmid case even though his case on you began hours earlier. You asked me several times to state why I felt the Zork case was weaker, and are now using all those answers you dug for yesterday in order to build a case that isn't there. It seems as if you 100% KNEW that zork would flip red. And then desperately tried to manufacture connections to him wherever you could. I can 100% see a scum motivation for this you bussed zork and not only gained 'confirmed town' status but have also set up 2 mislynches.
Yes, I asked you why you believe the Zork case to be weaker. The only explanation you were offering was he might just be a bad townie. You were not even convinced of his bad town status yourself, you were only giving him the benefit of doubt. This of course will look like a huge soft defense after a red flip.
You proceed to say that I tried and still am trying to link Zork with Jingle. While I agree that he first caught my eye due to his behaviour towards Zork (not commenting on Zork at all etc), the reason why I believe him to be scum is not only based on this. I have stated it now a few times, if Jingle were town, I'd expect him to be active here in the thread and discuss his scum reads with us. Furthermore, I believe his claim to being roleblocked to be even more suspicious. In a Mini Game like this, there is no reason why not to claim that you got roleblocked but the first time we get a roleblocked claim is in Day 3? If there was anyone who got roleblocked previously, claim it now please!
Regarding the last past: Yes, I knew that Zork would flip red because I saw the scumslip which everyone else failed to see. You say that you see a scum motivation for me to make the case against Zork but you are not willing to give me any benefit of doubt (which you were so happy to give to Zork) that I might have just saw the scumslip, be convinced of Zork's scum-alignment by it and therefore started the case? Instead you claim that me making the Zork case was 100% scum motivation?
Let's go to your scenario with me being scum and bussing Zork. There might have been a few cases against Zork but none of them really got any traction so if it had not been for me strongly pushing Zork, I don't think he would have been lynched. I suppose it could have been Mordanis instead. I don't know how you can now claim that Zork was the most obvious scum member if at the time when I pushed him you were leaning on him as bad town player and at first no one agreed with my case? Wouldn't I have made a more convincing case for town to sheep? And why would a scum me see the need to bus the not obvious scum Zork at all? Only to get town cred? If we had mislynched Mordanis instead, we'd be at 5 town, 3 scum. A far more preferable situation for scum as they would have so much more possibilites to switch lynches with 3 votes instead of 2.
What I don't understand until now is that you say that the discussion between Jingle and me made you think I'm suspicious. What exactly made you think that?
|
EBWOP:
So are you saying that the discussion between Jingle and me made me look desperate and therefore scummy?
|
EBWODP:
Of course I was desperate.
1. I was trying to get you to see the obvious scumslip but nobody seemed to understand. 2. Jingle was claiming that I didn't defend myself and accused my based on nothing while I had explained my behaviour more than once to him.
And while he was needlessly tunneling me, he completely ignored the case on Zork (and the one on Mordanis btw). This is no pro town play therefore my frustration.
|
On August 05 2012 20:15 Ange777 wrote: EBWODP:
Of course I was desperate.
1. I was trying to get you to see the obvious scumslip but nobody seemed to understand. 2. Jingle was claiming that I didn't defend myself and accused my based on nothing while I had explained my behaviour more than once to him.
And while he was needlessly tunneling me, he completely ignored the case on Zork (and the one on Mordanis btw). This is no pro town play therefore my frustration.
Sorry, he accused me, not my -.-
|
I am not lying. The situation with Jingle might have started earlier. But everyone makes bad cases from time to time. That's why I didn't give it that much thought when Jingle first started to accuse me. I only became really suspicious of him when he continued to accuse me (without good reason), voted for me and refused to even acknowledge the fact that there were cases against other people as well.
|
No, I am only saying he tunneled me. When I defended myself against his accusations, he refused to accept them and instead tunneled me even more. His vote on me only came after I had posted the case on Zork. Might be unfortunate timing but it seems just too coincidental. Furthermore his case was just simply bad. Go back and re-read it for yourself. If you don't feel that way, please tell me why but his case did not have any solid points! And given the fact that right now Jingle has disappeared instead of making a decent case, playing his town meta, etc ... it just supports the scum Jingle case.
|
On August 05 2012 20:52 DarthPunk wrote:Yes I believed he may just be a bad town. I also believed he could be a bad scum. However I was 100% convinced that mord was scum. So I followed my own case I had made over several days and that I was 100% sure of. Rather than switch to a case I was 50/50 on until it was evident that there would be a no lynch if I did not switch. (which I had stated previously to you I would do, so why is it so surprising that I carried through on my word?) Is that a problem? Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 20:09 Ange777 wrote: This of course will look like a huge soft defense after a red flip. Except the 'soft defense' you are speaking of is entirely of your own making through asking me for my thought processes behind not voting your way. You obviously were aware of how the questions you asked would cause me to look when zork flipped red and thus proceeded to lead me into a trap that I was blissfully unaware of until now. Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 20:09 Ange777 wrote: You proceed to say that I tried and still am trying to link Zork with Jingle. While I agree that he first caught my eye due to his behaviour towards Zork (not commenting on Zork at all etc) He did not catch your eye because of zork. Why are you lying? the situation between yourself and jingle started BEFORE YOUR CASE ON ZORKOriginally I thought it was just an OMGUS against Jingle. I later found the case on jingle suspicious because you were trying to link someone who had cast suspicion on you BEFORE YOUR CASE ON ZORK to Zork when the link obviously wasn't there at that time. Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 20:09 Ange777 wrote: Regarding the last past: Yes, I knew that Zork would flip red because I saw the scumslip which everyone else failed to see. You say that you see a scum motivation for me to make the case against Zork but you are not willing to give me any benefit of doubt (which you were so happy to give to Zork) that I might have just saw the scumslip, be convinced of Zork's scum-alignment by it and therefore started the case? Instead you claim that me making the Zork case was 100% scum motivation? You knew zork would flip red based on a scumslip you had ignored for an entire day and even quoted when unvoting him to join the prom bandwagon? A scum slip that still could have very easily come from a bad town? If zork was a bus then scum are in a FAR better position now than if we had mislynched mordanis. They have set up consecutive lynches into the future. They have sewn this game up. I see a scum motivation for you. I did not see any motivation for zorks blatantly bad play. Until now.
Yes, I asked you for the reasons of you not voting Zork. So now I am the all-knowing mastermind who planned out that you would soft defend Zork? How the hell was I supposed to know what you would say? You could have easily said that you were 100% convinced that Zork was town. And while you are arguing that the case against you seems like well initiated and perfectly planned by me there was another one who made a case against you even before me. Confirmed and unfortunately dead townie Mordanis! You might even say I am sheeping his case because most of what he mentioned in his case was repeated in my case. The only difference is that he is not able to argue his case anymore.
I have explained why I didn't notice the slip earlier. I was only thinking about what town Zork would have said and done and totally ignored the fact, that it made so much more sense for a scum Zork to say that.
So you are saying that by bussing Zork scum would have ensured two mislynches. Well if we lynched Jingle and he flipped green, I am sure that the lynch the following day would not be that sure anymore. People would question me as I am pushing for Jingle's lynch and while Shady did the same I am not that confirmed townie as Shady is. Therefore it would be a bold move of a scum me to trade Zork just for one single mislynch which scum would have gotten easily by going with the Mordanis lynch.
|
On August 05 2012 21:53 DarthPunk wrote: One thing before I leave. You say you had no way of knowing how I would respond? you knew I thought the case was weaker so you knew I would respond with something other than zork is 100% scum. Either way you were baiting out ammunition to mislynch me with. If I had stated zork is 100% town would i have looked just as bad if not worse?
Why are you saying that you are sheeping mords case? are you trying to make it seem as if it was a confirmed towns error when you mislynch me? the whole reason there is a case is from what you baited from me. Why ask for my opinion if you were confirmed in your mind that zork was 100% town? I was obviously stupid enough to have an open and transparent discussion with you over my thoughts in good faith. And you are now using that to say I was defending him (you knew i wouldn't be screaming he was scum or I would have voted for him) and now you are distancing yourself from my mislynch by saying you are sheeping a dead town.
Your excuse on missing the slip the first time is the weakest excuse ever..You had a vote on zork but you were only analysing him as if he were town? wtf? do i seem stupid to you? OK going to bed. won;t be around for 12 hours.
If you had said you beleive Zork to be town 100% at least you would have taken a clear stance. And it is always more difficult for scum to take a clear stance instead of saying he could be a bad town player despite his scummy behaviour.
You misunderstood me. I am by no way saying that I am sheeping Mords case. I only wanted to make it clear that as it seems that you are dismissing my case against you as a scum player who is leading a mislynch on you that there has been another player who has made a case against you even before me. And that player is undisputably town.
Why I would ask for your opinion on Zork? Because I was certain of having caught a scum yet no one voted for him. Therefore I wanted to see what the reasons ware for not voting him. Some reasons might be town motivation, some might be scum motivation but I need to see that clearly in order to know who to lynch next.
My excuse on missing the slip might be weak but at least it is honest. I explained it earlier that I intended the vote as a pressure vote on the lurking Zork and had my mind on the Prom and Shady cases. If you can't see a town player being more preoccupied with lynching the ones he believes more scummy than the one he believes to be lurking I don't know what to say.
|
@DarthPunk: Let's approach this matter differently. If you were town, who would be your two scum reads besides me?
|
EBWOP:
On August 05 2012 22:11 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 21:53 DarthPunk wrote: One thing before I leave. You say you had no way of knowing how I would respond? you knew I thought the case was weaker so you knew I would respond with something other than zork is 100% scum. Either way you were baiting out ammunition to mislynch me with. If I had stated zork is 100% town would i have looked just as bad if not worse?
Why are you saying that you are sheeping mords case? are you trying to make it seem as if it was a confirmed towns error when you mislynch me? the whole reason there is a case is from what you baited from me. Why ask for my opinion if you were confirmed in your mind that zork was 100% town? I was obviously stupid enough to have an open and transparent discussion with you over my thoughts in good faith. And you are now using that to say I was defending him (you knew i wouldn't be screaming he was scum or I would have voted for him) and now you are distancing yourself from my mislynch by saying you are sheeping a dead town.
Your excuse on missing the slip the first time is the weakest excuse ever..You had a vote on zork but you were only analysing him as if he were town? wtf? do i seem stupid to you? OK going to bed. won;t be around for 12 hours. If you had said you beleive Zork to be town 100% at least you would have taken a clear stance. And it is always more difficult for scum to take a clear stance instead of saying he could be a bad town player despite his scummy behaviour. You misunderstood me. I am by no way saying that I am sheeping Mords case. I only wanted to make it clear that as it seems that you are dismissing my case against you as a scum player who is leading a mislynch on you that there has been another player who has made a case against you even before me. And that player is undisputably town. Why I would ask for your opinion on Zork? Because I was certain of having caught a scum yet no one voted for him. Therefore I wanted to see what the reasons were for not voting him. Some reasons might be town motivation, some might be scum motivation but I need to see that clearly in order to know who to lynch next. Furthermore I need to know why in order to convince people of my case. If I don't know why they don't believe in my case, how am I supposed to change their mind?My excuse on missing the slip might be weak but at least it is honest. I explained it earlier that I intended the vote as a pressure vote on the lurking Zork and had my mind on the Prom and Shady cases. If you can't see a town player being more preoccupied with lynching the ones he believes more scummy than the one he believes to be lurking I don't know what to say.
|
@Jingle: Still playing this game?
|
On August 06 2012 05:59 Obvious.660 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 05:53 Shady Sands wrote:On August 06 2012 05:33 Ange777 wrote: @Jingle: Still playing this game? I think he ragequit. This is also the impression I got from his last post. Town Jingle never struck me as one to sit back and watch the town burn itself to the ground, so I can only say it's just more evidence against him.
I don't know, I didn't play with him previously.
|
So if you have been avidly following my conversation with DarthPunk you will probably have realized we don't really see eye to eye. Now I am going to give him another reason to disagree with me. I am proposing to lynch DarthPunk first instead of Jingle.
You might think that it does seem like an aweful OMGUS vote after I have been vividly arguing with DarthPunk but OMGUS isn't about WHO you vote, it's about HOW you vote them. A vote is only OMGUS if you're voting them BECAUSE they voted you. If you vote them for a well-thought-out reason, even if they also voted you, then it's not OMGUS.
Let's first go through the reasons why I wanted to vote him anyway: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=353315¤tpage=48#945
1. During the Zork lynch discussion DarthPunk repeatedly soft-defended Zork, pushed Mordanis as lynch candidate and proposed to lynch aRyuujin instead of Zork. 2. He switches votes very conveniently at around the same time when Zork fake claims medic. I believe that scum decided in their QT to concede to the Zork lynch.
Instead of really defending himself against my accusations DarthPunk makes a huge WIFOM explanation and decides to paint me scummy by saying I set him up with a trap. He denies me any kind of town motivation for pointing out Zork's scumslip. Yet he was happy to give Zork the benefit of doubt until last minute even though many people pointed out his scum behaviour.
I see a clear scum motivation for his behaviour:
1. Save Zork and mislynch Mordanis (or aRyuujin at least) instead 2. When there is no way to save Zork, switch the vote before Zork's claim to get a bit of town cred 3. Discredit me as I am the most active power behind his lynch and mislynch me instead
With him being called out as scum by several people DarthPunk is just flailing around desperately trying to shift the attention to someone, anyone besides himself. He didn't even give us any other reads besides me. I can only repeat it: This is no pro town play! DarthPunk, I'd really like to congratulate you for writing the best case on yourself -> your own filter!
So why lynch DarthPunk before Jingle?
After all this discussion I am even more convinced of him being scum than I am of Jingle. I made the case on Jingle because there was no town motivation for his awful play. If he isn't just simply bad he must be scum. However this case against DarthPunk is based on his clear scum motivation and not based on the lack of town motivation. To make it clear: If I am 99% convinced that Jingle is scum, than I am 100% convinced that DarthPunk is scum.
In my opinion we can not let him get away with this!
##Unvote ##Vote DarthPunk
|
Good morning. Just finished catching up.
Once again I would like to bring something to your attention. When we were all set on lynching Jingle, everyone was agreeing (besides DarthPunk). It was such an easy vote. Anything wrong with easy votes? Well, day 1 and day 2 votes were easy. What did we get? Town. Oh yeah, day 3 was really difficult. What did we get? Scum!
Although some may brush this off as WIFOM (because scum clearly could bus their own member etc), this is one more reason for me to prefer a DarthPunk lynch than a Jingle lynch.
aRyuujin made an awesome case and I agree with him that there might be a tiny chance that Jingle is not scum but DarthPunk IS SCUM and therefore has to be lynched today!
|
On August 06 2012 15:35 DarthPunk wrote: @Jingle. I have a town read on you because you are experiencing exactly what I am experiencing. If the same people that are trying to mislynch you are also trying to mislynch me. I assume you must be town. If you think there is an ulterior motive for me believing you to be town and that that is enough reason to vote for me, so be it.
That being said. I will continue to post cases and defend myself but I am sheeping shadys vote no matter what this cycle. If shady votes for me I will vote for myself etc. The reason for this is that the situation is bad at the moment. a mess really. I will sheep the vote of the confirmed town. Whilst still contributing as much as possible.
If I had to vote for someone right now it would be aRyuujin he had less than a pages worth of filter but has LEAPT into action now more than one person is considering voting for him. I mean read his filter. the contrast is obvious.
You want to just simply sheep Shady? Why give up your own reads and your right to decide whom to vote? This post just screams for more town cred.
|
Keep cool, I am still typing
|
On August 06 2012 16:00 goodkarma wrote:It appears that the Darthpunk lynch is gaining momentum. And now there's side-tangents that include alan too... I'm still against lynching Darthpunk today. Can someone kindly explain to me why he's 100% scum? Ange's arguement against him was summarized as: Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 07:10 Ange777 wrote:1. During the Zork lynch discussion DarthPunk repeatedly soft-defended Zork, pushed Mordanis as lynch candidate and proposed to lynch aRyuujin instead of Zork. 2. He switches votes very conveniently at around the same time when Zork fake claims medic. I believe that scum decided in their QT to concede to the Zork lynch.
1) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall Darthpunk's "defense" of Zork amounting to he felt Zork was some kind of lurker. And if we were to lynch solely based off that reasoning we should lynch aRyuujin. I don't recall much further "defense" than that, and that seems like a reasonable arguement if he was looking at it solely from the lurker standpoint. 2) I find Darthpunk's claim that he hadn't seen Zork's post before his post FAR MORE BELIEVABLE than that in QT scum were like "let's have Darthpunk change vote and bus Zork TWO MINUTES AFTER he incriminates himself." I'd expect a move like this to be planned out hours ahead of time so that Darthpunk could change his vote way ahead of time and avoid suspicion... Thanks aRyuujin for your most recent case post. It's a dramatic improvement from earlier . One thing on your case against Darthpunk I'd like to specifically address, though, is your implication that NK'ing Mordanis benefited Darthpunk. Any such discussion of why scum NK'ed a specific person I feel is too much WIFOM to really bring up. I could come up with other realistic reasons why they might have NK'ed Mordanis. The first that comes to mind is they wanted to get someone they were pretty sure wouldn't be medic saved... If someone could summarize a specific case point that shows Darthpunk's guilt that I haven't discussed here please let me know. I wanted to give Darthpunk a chance to defend himself, as I feel his defense is just as important as what was said in the case against him to get a good read of the situation. But after his defense, I don't feel the evidence is there to say he's a sure scum, especially compared to Jingle. Jingle has been spending his posting time calling us tunneling sheep, which is hardly a compelling arguement -_- I understand the need for town to stay united, and will coincide my vote with Shady's to secure the lynch for Darth IF IT COMES TO THAT, but I honestly hope it doesn't. I feel we're getting ahead of ourselves. Almost everyone is in agreement that Jingle is scum, so why are we now voting Darth? If there's some compelling arguement for lynching him I've overlooked, please enlighten me.
@goodkarma:
What you quoted is not my entire case. It is the behaviour which made him scummy but the reason why I want to vote him is the scum motivation behind it.
On August 06 2012 07:10 Ange777 wrote: I see a clear scum motivation for his behaviour:
1. Save Zork and mislynch Mordanis (or aRyuujin at least) instead 2. When there is no way to save Zork, switch the vote before Zork's claim to get a bit of town cred 3. Discredit me as I am the most active power behind his lynch and mislynch me
Even if you give DarthPunk the benefit of doubt that he really did believe Zork was a lurker I really don't see why he would put Zork and aRyuujin in one category. To me, aRyuujin seems like a bored town who can't bother himself to post more active. His most recent activity fits that perfectly. Which is why I will not vote for aRyuujin.
Scum doesn't always show themselves with some damning piece of evidence. (And even if they do as in Zork's slip not everyone accepts it ... ) You have to instead think about why someone would do this or that and whether it is scum motivated or if there is a town motivation for it. Therefore I'd like you to weigh once more whether you really think that there might be a town motivation for DarthPunk's behaviour or whether a scum DarthPunk would make so much more sense.
|
EBWOP:
Why is aRyuujin now your strongest scum read DarthPunk? I thought that's me? What changed? You could not get the bandwagon on me to start and now you're trying again with the one player who should be the easiest to get a lynch on because of his previous lack of activity?
|
On August 06 2012 07:31 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 07:10 Ange777 wrote:So if you have been avidly following my conversation with DarthPunk you will probably have realized we don't really see eye to eye. Now I am going to give him another reason to disagree with me. I am proposing to lynch DarthPunk first instead of Jingle.You might think that it does seem like an aweful OMGUS vote after I have been vividly arguing with DarthPunk but OMGUS isn't about WHO you vote, it's about HOW you vote them. A vote is only OMGUS if you're voting them BECAUSE they voted you. If you vote them for a well-thought-out reason, even if they also voted you, then it's not OMGUS.
Let's first go through the reasons why I wanted to vote him anyway: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=353315¤tpage=48#9451. During the Zork lynch discussion DarthPunk repeatedly soft-defended Zork, pushed Mordanis as lynch candidate and proposed to lynch aRyuujin instead of Zork. 2. He switches votes very conveniently at around the same time when Zork fake claims medic. I believe that scum decided in their QT to concede to the Zork lynch. Instead of really defending himself against my accusations DarthPunk makes a huge WIFOM explanation and decides to paint me scummy by saying I set him up with a trap. He denies me any kind of town motivation for pointing out Zork's scumslip. Yet he was happy to give Zork the benefit of doubt until last minute even though many people pointed out his scum behaviour. I see a clear scum motivation for his behaviour: 1. Save Zork and mislynch Mordanis (or aRyuujin at least) instead 2. When there is no way to save Zork, switch the vote before Zork's claim to get a bit of town cred 3. Discredit me as I am the most active power behind his lynch and mislynch me insteadWith him being called out as scum by several people DarthPunk is just flailing around desperately trying to shift the attention to someone, anyone besides himself. He didn't even give us any other reads besides me. I can only repeat it: This is no pro town play! DarthPunk, I'd really like to congratulate you for writing the best case on yourself -> your own filter!So why lynch DarthPunk before Jingle? After all this discussion I am even more convinced of him being scum than I am of Jingle. I made the case on Jingle because there was no town motivation for his awful play. If he isn't just simply bad he must be scum. However this case against DarthPunk is based on his clear scum motivation and not based on the lack of town motivation. To make it clear: If I am 99% convinced that Jingle is scum, than I am 100% convinced that DarthPunk is scum.In my opinion we can not let him get away with this! ##Unvote ##Vote DarthPunk OK all 3 of those points I have covered already. If you are refusing to see the reasoning behind it. Now you are saying that because I did not present cases that you asked for I am scum? I said I would be out of the thread for 12 hours as I was sleeping. So you ask me a question after i have said that and use my lack of response that you were aware of as I said I was sleeping
I did not make this case because you were away which I had seen. Stop making up bad excuses to discredit me.
so now there is no motivation for jingles play? you have said that there was scum motivation for jingles play for the past 2 days and now there is no motivation? You realise that was my issue with the jingle case right?
Jingle has played so badly that I fail to see any kind of town motivation. There are two options: He really just IS that bad or he must be scum. You on the other hand have played clearly with scum motivation. Therefore naturally I prefer to lynch you.
If that was your issue with the case on Jingle than congrats, I am agreeing with you on this point.
1. if not for you baiting me. I would NEVER have said anything in order to 'save zork' 2. I did not see zorks claim. I was simply fulfilling my promise to stop a no lynch. 3. I know I am town. So if as town I am put into a situation where I was clearly trapped. Then I am obviously going to come after that person.
addendum: So now that I know what you are up to I will say this. TOWN: when I flip green can you please do something about this guy. I don't mind dying as long as it helps us win the game.
For the last time, I did not bait you. What is wrong with asking someone for the reasons why they don't want to vote for a case? And why would you obviously come after me? Town should not be afraid of dying because they are town, not scum. You don't need to be afraid if one person comes after you instead you should continue to hunt scum. That is a town indicator. So what did you do? You first came after me when I accused you, than after aRyuujin accused you you switched to him. You are indeed flailing around and throwing mud at all your accusers. Scum.
|
On August 06 2012 16:57 DarthPunk wrote: Is there anything else? i fail to see a blatant revelation that explains your position. seems like a weak case to go with the other weak cases to join an increasingly easy bandwagon
You are getting sulky. The easy bandwagon would have been Jingle. When we had the consensus to lynch him, there was no posting at all from town for the entire first half of day 3.
|
@Shady and goodkarma:
Please reconsider your vote. At the moment neither aRyuujin nor I am willing to concede in a Jingle lynch as we believe that DarthPunk is a more sure scum lynch than a Jingle lynch is.
@Jingle:
If you really want to show your "town side", than play! Give us another read except for DarthPunk, preferably one that includes a solid case and not just a one-liner vote and snippy comments.
|
EBWOP:
@alan: Where are you?
|
@Jingle: I am wearing those hypothetical 1% town Jingle goggles, that's why I am asking you for your reads ... stop complaining about what happened and build a case if you want me to give you a chance.
|
|
|
I only saw your summary at the very end but still thanks :D
|
|
GG DarthPunk. May I keep the plushie? Obviously the one without the bomb
|
With DarthPunk repeatedly defending Jingle while it seemed like 100% sure that the day 3 lynch would be Jingle, I have to accept that Jingle's explanation might be true indeed.
On August 07 2012 00:18 JingleHell wrote: And here's a WIFOM filled hypothetical for you, since you like those. Think about this. If I flipped red, which I know I won't, DP would be tomorrow's lynch for attempting to defend me. At least according to precedent. If I flip green, which I will, DP has foreknowledge of how I'll flip and is trying to make people who target me look scummy, which is scum behavior.
I am reconsidering my read for the last scum. Re-reading filters.
|
Re-reading the entire game at 2 am is not recommendable. I'm going to bed now. Just want to note that right now alan is my only scum read and if nothing changes I will be making a case against him by tomorrow.
|
I don't think that we have a town RB. But scum having RB and not using it for two nights (especially night 2!) after medic got a save in night 1 makes no sense to me as well.
|
On August 08 2012 03:30 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2012 03:13 Ange777 wrote: I don't think that we have a town RB. But scum having RB and not using it for two nights (especially night 2!) after medic got a save in night 1 makes no sense to me as well. Scum having an RB and using it on JingleHell makes zero sense either. He's not playing like a medic at all.
I know. RBed or not, at the moment it does not change my read on Jingle or my last remaining scum.
|
EBWOP:
On August 08 2012 03:30 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2012 03:13 Ange777 wrote: I don't think that we have a town RB. But scum having RB and not using it for two nights (especially night 2!) after medic got a save in night 1 makes no sense to me as well. Scum having an RB and using it on JingleHell makes zero sense either. He's not playing like a medic at all.
I know. RBed or not, at the moment it does not change my read on Jingle or my last remaining scum therefore I am ignoring it right now.
|
Actually I already finished mine and can't wait to post it :D
|
I know I know ... it's just night time get's kind of boring due to the long wait at this stage :D
|
Another night in which I am not sure whether I'll survive or not. Now here is my candidate for the day 4 lynch. You might have guessed, it's Alan. Originally flying very very low under the radar, I was not really paying attention to him. Naive me! Eventually with all my other scum reads flipping scum or getting town cred he is the only one left from my original list.
Read through his filter please. Even compared with aRyuujin's filter it is rather sparse, especially when you look for any kind of clear stances and opinions. Alan has been sheeping town and only giving us few content posts. DarthPunk is not even once mentioned by Alan until late day 3. I don't know why he would not address DarthPunk in his posts except for being scum. Not to mention that he also didn't talk to/about Zork (besides replying to a "Why haven't you answered yet post") before the case against Zork gained momentum. Go and look at Jingle's case on Alan which points to a few of those suspicious posts from Alan: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=353315¤tpage=46#908
This alone would not be damning enough in my eyes if it wasn't for his wishy-washy stance regarding the DarthPunk lynch. He claimed that he is 100% convinced that Jingle is scum but still would be lynching his only second best scum read DarthPunk. I don't know how he went from not mentioning DarthPunk even once to him being his second best scum read. Such a sad thing that scum has not learned how to bus right?
On August 05 2012 18:26 alan133 wrote:@AngeYes, I am leaning towards a scum Jingle for the same reasons. His shift his FOS towards me seems like a desperation move to shift the focus away from himself. I think even a townie Jingle would be more careful when he suggest a new lynch, as the town's goal is to lynch scum, not just to survive. -snip- @DarthPunkThe conclusion I made above convinced me DarthPunk is the potential last scum, given that no bussing occurred. I went through his huge filter and was hoping to find one slip that can nail him, and have yet to find anything substantial. His blatant defences on Zorkmid is definitely scum motivated, and I know I also "defended" zorkmid, I hope you all see that I have been consistent with defending people who I thought was being called out for the wrong reasons. I would like to put my vote on VOTE## JingleHell, and FOS## DarthPunk. I believe we got this in the bag
On August 07 2012 00:10 alan133 wrote: @Shady I started writing my case not long ago. But if you want to make the final decision, I will keep my vote on JH, but is fine with changing it to DP. Both are the scums in my eyes and it does not matter who gets lynched first.
On August 07 2012 00:27 alan133 wrote:I am back from a long day. I thought Jingle is certainly getting lynched the last time I post, so I did not sneak out to check on this thread during work today. In my eyes, he is as close as to scum as it can get without flipping.-snip- @JingleHis recent post has somewhat improved; he stopped the tunnelling thing and moved on to OMGUS town. (lol) There are no follow up to my case, and no follow up to Good Karma’s either. However, his reaction to DP’s scum slip seems very believable, and the counter-vote seems to give him huge townie points. It could be another attempt to “seems pro town” by “catching” DP, as DP has gained quite a lot of FOS-momentum at that point. [spoiler]WIFOM: Could it be scums trying to sacrifice another scummate so the last one can gain a more advantages spot? I think this is very unlikely, but no entirely impossible.[/spoiler]Also, he refused to defend attacks, and disregard all of them as WIFOM and since then only passively comment on cases, after the DP vote.@DarthPunkI said I could not find any scummy things to penalize him in his huge filter, how eager is he to prove me wrong. I am sure many has caught and mentioned his scum slip ever since he started defending himself.(Oh the irony) Even Jingle himself talks about his “slip”. I would like to know, why Jingle gives you a townie vibe, other than that you yourself is getting tunnelled right now? I would also like to add that that was posted before you were tunnelled, so any other reasons? No? Also, this:
If shady votes for me I will vote for myself etc Well, in this case, if you are a town, you are allowing town to mislynch you-an anti-town play. If you are a scum, then LOL. Please tell me this is not a slip? If you intend to buy “townie points” with this, then you failed miserably. Town wants to lynch scum, not martyr himself to prove he is town. I am fine with voting any of these two players, but I will keep my vote on Jingle for the moment. I think we got both scums.
When reading the above quotes it makes you really wonder how much more wishy-washy and flip flop a post can get. A summary of the above quotes would look like this:
- Alan thinks Jingle is scum -> Vote Jingle - Alan thinks DarthPunk might be scum -> FoS Jingle - Alan thinks both are scum and would vote both but keeps his vote on Jingle - Alan thinks Jingle is the most scummy player - Alan thinks Jingle's posting has improved but WIFOMs it - Alan confronts DarthPunk about his slips and anti-town play and wants explanations - Alan is fine with voting both players but keeps his vote on Jingle
Not once in these posts does he take a clear stance. Instead in one single post he first claims Jingle to be the scummiest, than proceeds to praise his improved townie posting and soft-defends him, than goes on to WIFOM about scum motivation and ends in confirming his vote on Jingle. Seriously?
This looks a lot like a desperate scum trying to to balance to many things at once:
1. Pushing for a mislynch while soft-defending the lynch candidate. 2. Subtly implying that his scum buddy is not as scummy as the other lynch candidate and therefore should not be voted first. 3. Bussing his scum buddy when all hopes are lost to survive the next lynch himself.
So I hope this can convince you of Alan's scum-alignment. How else would you explain the flip flop play in the last hours before a lynch of his scum buddy? Alan is scum! Don't get uncertain by his defense because if he had believed what he wrote, he would have actually voted DarthPunk as he claimed that in his eyes Jingle got a bit of town cred. *Yes, this scenario is based on the town Jingle theory which I think should be the most probable right now.
|
Shady, please reconsider to lynch Alan first. He is my only remaining scum read (with Jingle only being slighty scummy but should be town)! I have town reads on every other player in this game except for Alan.
|
|
Have you already finished my case on Alan, Shady?
|
My guess is scum is afraid to have his nightkill saved if he tries to go for one of the more expected kills.
|
Shady, I don't understand why you still believe Jingle to be scummier than alan after the way the lynch yesterday went. I don't think you can just brush off DarthPunk's defense of Jingle to be WIFOM.
DarthPunk started and continued to defend Jingle throughout the entire time starting at the moment that Jingle made himself suspicious. He even defended Jingle when it was almost sure that we were going to lynch him.
Now why would a scum DarthPunk do that? There are two possibilites:
1. Jingle is scum. DarthPunk would be trying to save his scum buddy. But why bother trying when all other players have unanimously voted for Jingle? Bussing should be the correct move, especially when there is no chance that he could save scum Jingle? I believe they did not bus Zork because at that time Zork's case didn't gained momentum but Jingle basically had one foot in the grave already.
2. Jingle is town. DarthPunk would be trying to gain town cred by repeatedly defending town Jingle as afterwards he could just point back at the discussion and say: I was right, Ange pushed for the Jingle mislynch and therefore should be lynched next. Scum know the alignments which fits the fact that DarthPunk was really stubborn in the defense but yet could not give us any good explanation for why he had a town read on Jingle.
Please think about both scenarios. While the first one is indeed possible, it would be more than just supotimal. It would be suicidal. Being the only one to defend a scum when the entire town wants to lynch him will absolutely make you the next lynch target. On the contrary, the second one is far more probable and fits perfectly.
Jingle's chances of being scum are like 0,00000000001% now.
|
@Shady: For the 0,0000000001% chance that Alan flips green I'd be fine with lynching Jingle next.
@alan:
On August 08 2012 10:36 alan133 wrote: Hey there, looks like I am going to post some defences.
@Ange
1. Pushing for a mislynch while soft-defending the lynch candidate. There is no defences for this, I indeed pushed for a mislynch on Promethelax and Mordanis, and that's it. My soft-defending "lynch candidates" were those in my eyes were bad case, or cases that I do not agree with. For instances, Mordanis' early cases for voting Kei, Jingle's tunneling on you and so on/fourth.
2. Subtly implying that his scum buddy is not as scummy as the other lynch candidate and therefore should not be voted first. And many others when there is a list of lynch candidates. I have explained this before.
3. Bussing his scum buddy when all hopes are lost to survive the next lynch himself. If you think my stance on DarthPunk was wish-washy, I do hope you actually followed my case against him WAY before the one that I said I will keep my vote on Jingle. I logically deduced DarthPunk must be scum, based on one single post on aRyujin's filter: he was kicking MrMedic out way early in the cycle, and the other Mordanis vote was either me or DarthPunk. I don't know saying: "Jingle and DarthPunk are the two scum. Lynch either of them is fine by me." @Shady I don't know what is with the claim medic thing or die, because I am not. If you want to waste a lynch on me, it is fine, but the game does not end there.
I will be busy for the day, will be replying to any more cases against me much later, and add my own. I am not, but if you all are set to lynch me, please look at the other scenarios where I am not the scum. The game will go on after I flip.
Your defense is poor. First of all, the three points you quoted were all in regard to the DarthPunk lynch situation. So I was talking about you trying to push the Jingle lynch while stating that DarthPunk should be scum but is not more scummy than Jingle. About you giving Jingle some town cred and accusing DarthPunk in the same post as confirming that your vote stays on Jingle. You (intentionally?) misunderstood this in my accusations and gave some general excuses.
You claim that through logical conclusion you deduced that DarthPunk had to be the last scum. Please tell me how? Why had it to be DarthPunk? I did a Crtl+F search through your filter and could not find anything of you on DarthPunk prior to that post. What made you think he is suspicious in the first place? Why not goodkarma or Obvious (who was still alive at the time of your post)? No, this is not you deducing who is scum, this is a poor try at last minute bussing.
|
@alan:
You say you don't want to spend too much time defending yourself but in the end this huge post only contains defensive explanation and lacks a case. If you yourself can't think of another scum candidate except for yourself then your entire defense just falls apart.
Could we have the flip earlier? Of course only if everyone agrees! Like today at 09:00 GMT (+00:00) instead of tomorrow.
|
Funny, it never occured to me that your awesome play saved us and will win us this game. If you can't talk to us without being sore than please just shut up.
|
Jingle, you don't have any bit of town cred. It's the fact that you and DarthPunk would not have fitted as a scum team that has saved your ass from being lynched today. So I don't think that you calling him out did anything to tip the votes in DarthPunk's favor.
|
What exactly is self-delusional in my post? If you ask any player in this game right now about how much town cred they'd give you from a scale from 1-10 I would be really surprised if you would get more than 3.
|
I CLAIM GIRL ... oh no that was the wrong one >_< ...
I CLAIM MEDIC!
Night 1:
On July 30 2012 05:41 Ange777 wrote: So I only got back now and read through the thread. Apparently people still don't see the need to be more active in this game. Voting your strongest scum read and then abstain from further discussion is not exactly pro town behaviour. Especially if there was so much worth of discussion and several people just did not care to comment on other scum candidates expect for Golbat.
Keep in mind please that I am not satisfied with goodkarma's (non-existent) response to my accusation. Entering the thread and shifting the discussion from scum hunting to policy lynches ... this is not town play! I still have goodkarma marked as my strongest scum read.
SAVE KEI
Night 2:
On August 02 2012 05:49 Ange777 wrote: Seeing as night is ending and no one else wants to join this discussion is so frustrating. As townie you should really be playing with your win-con in mind. Valid RL excuses are kind of acceptable but you should have known what you signed up for. Even if you just subbed in there has been plenty of time to form an opinion on everybody by now, not stating your reads is anti town play.
Going to bed in a couple of minutes (Have to see the doc tomorrow). Keep posting guys.
SAVE GK
Night 3:
On August 05 2012 05:58 Ange777 wrote: So I guess there is a pretty decent chance that I might be shot tonight. As I already stated I am convinced that we have nailed the second scum in Jingle. Veto the case as much as you want Jingle, there is no way you can wriggle yourself out of this. Extremely obvious scum play like this can't be ignored.
On to the third scum. Bsed on the theory Shady already mentioned with scum actively trying to counter bandwagon the Zork case there is one more player I think we need to analyze closely. Very much unsuspected by most of the players ... DarthPunk. I believe only goodkarma called him out. Originally I had a town read on him, he came across as a thoughtful poster who analyzed the play of others first before jumping on any kind of bandwagon. Under normal circumstances I probably still wouldn't have noticed him but the recent situation with Zork made me reconsider. See for yourselves:
SAVE OBVIOUS
Night 4:
On August 08 2012 05:59 Ange777 wrote:Another night in which I am not sure whether I'll survive or not. Now here is my candidate for the day 4 lynch. You might have guessed, it's Alan. Originally flying very very low under the radar, I was not really paying attention to him. Naive me! Eventually with all my other scum reads flipping scum or getting town cred he is the only one left from my original list. Read through his filter please. Even compared with aRyuujin's filter it is rather sparse, especially when you look for any kind of clear stances and opinions. Alan has been sheeping town and only giving us few content posts. DarthPunk is not even once mentioned by Alan until late day 3. I don't know why he would not address DarthPunk in his posts except for being scum. Not to mention that he also didn't talk to/about Zork (besides replying to a "Why haven't you answered yet post") before the case against Zork gained momentum. Go and look at Jingle's case on Alan which points to a few of those suspicious posts from Alan: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=353315¤tpage=46#908 This alone would not be damning enough in my eyes if it wasn't for his wishy-washy stance regarding the DarthPunk lynch. He claimed that he is 100% convinced that Jingle is scum but still would be lynching his only second best scum read DarthPunk. I don't know how he went from not mentioning DarthPunk even once to him being his second best scum read. Such a sad thing that scum has not learned how to bus right ?-snip- So I hope this can convince you of Alan's scum-alignment. How else would you explain the flip flop play in the last hours before a lynch of his scum buddy? Alan is scum! Don't get uncertain by his defense because if he had believed what he wrote, he would have actually voted DarthPunk as he claimed that in his eyes Jingle got a bit of town cred. * Yes, this scenario is based on the town Jingle theory which I think should be the most probable right now.
ANYONE READING THIS? At the beginning I was even afraid of it being to obvious ....
SHADY
Man, those words with V were really giving me headaches
|
I am still reading through all the QTs .... thanks for your praise guys
@Shady: Do you know what really frustrated me? Everytime I made a case the confirmed townie just didn't agree with me :D You were always for lynching someone else first ... ^^
|
Thanks everyone for the amazing game. I really enjoyed playing it (most of the time @Marv: Hell yeah was I frustrated! >_< )
I was really excited to roll my first blue roll I thought about bread crumbing my role but decided to go for the nightsaves instead. I was kind of scared that they would be too obvious and be spotted by scum ^^ Are there any other good ways to bread crumb blue roles?
After the day 1 lynch I actually only had one town read I was confident enough and that was Kei. Maybe it was good that the Vig was dead because previous to the day 1 flip I was afraid that I might save the wrong guys (who might even be targetted by the Vig).
Night 2 I could not save Kei again so I went with my second best town read goodkarma.
Night 3 Shady was already confirmed town. I was not that impressed by his play at that point as he was just often inactive and I felt that he didn't contribute that much. Considering the fact that scum might think that the medic will save Shady, I went for my next best town read Obvious.
Night 4 I thought for sure that they are going to nightkill Shady or me. It would be suicidal to try to get to LYLO with both of us. So I saved Shady.
I really wanted to get another night save but was always outwitted :D
I think if it had not been for that "Zorktanic" we really would have had a hard time to win this game. In the beginning I also had a slight town read on DarthPunk but after all the discussion it got pretty obvious to me. I must say that I was really impressed by DarthPunk for trying to talk himself out of his lynch. He tried and tried and never gave up.
One thing I'd like to ask the others: What did you think of Jingle's case against me? I felt like no one understood my frustration with a case that was basically pressuring me for answers that were all in my filter. Or was I just biased?
Going to read the Scum QT now
|
|
|
|