Newbie Mini Mafia XXII

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.

if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir.

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.

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).

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.

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 + 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 +
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 + 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 +
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] +

On July 27 2012 13:06 Golbat wrote:


You are REALLY fixated on asserting that Keir is trying to make others think he is. It seems to be that a lot of us disagree with you. For the life of me I can't understand why you're trying to get him lynched for attempting to teach whoever the Town RB is (if there even is one) how to play the role. It's an important thing to know, and might have prevented the Town RB from accidentally blocking the cop from using his power on one of the most important night phases of the game.

This IS a newbie mafia after all, would you be doing the same thing if he told the vigilante not to shoot someone on night one?

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.

On July 27 2012 12:51 Shady Sands wrote:


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.



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.



Nothing to argue against here, but when combined with the next part of Mordanis' post, it gets troubling:



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:





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?

On July 27 2012 20:33 Shady Sands wrote:


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 "…] +

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:


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] +

On July 27 2012 21:22 Shady Sands wrote:


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.

Also, this is a good point to address the misconception that 'lying=mafia,' which is clearly not the case. I lie all the time as town, and much more rarely as mafia. Some may condemn this as inferior play, but lying, among other 'anti-town plays,' lets you open new routes of play that are ordinarily inaccessible if you behave as a 'perfect townie.' Most of the time you have to take a risk if you want to win. Of course the execution is everything, as lying for no gain is just going to make it harder for the town to do anything. And of course, many town players will lie on accident, without reason, or for some bizarre reason or another that you have no way of knowing. A point that will be emphasized continuously is the necessity to differentiate between mafia and bad townie play. You can't just lynch people and when they pop green excuse yourself by saying 'oh they were anti-town anyways.' The goal is to kill mafia, period.

The key part about lying is to analyze whether their lie helps the mafia and what motivation could've been made. In this case it doesn't matter if Pandain got the ninja role counts mixed up because that could be an honest mistake or a mafia mistake and you have no way of knowing. But that is really irrelevant because mafia would almost never have claimed ninja in the first place.

On July 28 2012 22:23 Shady Sands wrote:


Ah, ok. I just found it a little wierd that you wouldn't mention at all the huge debate surrounding golbat or mordanis, instead only talking about aRyujin's haikus and my one-liner post.

I'm going to write a defense post now--hope it addresses your concerns (and the concerns of anyone else who shares your line of thinking.)

On July 29 2012 03:23 Shady Sands wrote:


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.

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.

Hopefully i'll be able to get back and read/contribute more in the morning, as i'll be at work when the deadline hits and won't be home for three or four hours after that.

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:



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 +

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:



@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?



I am curious because in your next post you state:



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?



@goodkarma:



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.



Exactly. So why are you talking about lynching a lurker and totally ignoring existing cases? Scum?



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 ...



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!

On July 29 2012 00:01 Ange777 wrote:
@Obvious:



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:


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:



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 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?



I am curious because in your next post you state:



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?



@goodkarma:



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.



Exactly. So why are you talking about lynching a lurker and totally ignoring existing cases? Scum?



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 ...



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!

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.


Follows it up with an immediate about face when he learns about the no-lynch option


He leaves hoping for more from others

and after that comes back with a question and than dissapears


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.

On July 27 2012 07:18 Promethelax wrote:
Okay Ghost, will do.

On July 27 2012 07:26 Promethelax wrote:


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.

On July 27 2012 21:49 Promethelax wrote:


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 +

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
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


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...



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:
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:


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, 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.

On July 31 2012 17:33 Promethelax wrote:


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.

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.

On July 27 2012 16:22 alan133 wrote:
This is my read on Mordanis

@Mordanis
My argument for Mordanis is that he is the first person who throws out a case. Loosely quoting someone else in my previous game:

It would not make sense for scum Mordanis to trigger the scum hunt while putting himself in the spot light.

That said, the problem I had with Mordanis is he is reluctant to give up on his case against Kei despite how other people has pointed out how weak it was. (Refer to his second case) It seems like he is trying to start a bandwagon on a random townie based on their first post.

This part caught my attention:

Why would you want to find out who is blue or not? That is not the priority here. Are you suggesting it is okay to lynch Kei because he is not blue? What do townie possibly gain from trying to find out who is "not blue"?

TL:DR
Townie Mordanis characteristics

• Starts the scum hunting process
  

Scum Mordanis characteristics

• More interested on "Kei is not blue" more than "Player X could be scum".
  
• Reluctant to back down from a well refuted case
  

I originally had a slight town read on Mordanis, but now I am inclining to think Mordanis is possible scum.

##FoS Mordanis

However, I am still reluctant to jump on the bandwagon, mainly because I haven't gone through everyone else's filters, and there a handful people that have yet to produce anything of significance for any analysis whatsoever. I will do so when I'm off work a few hours later.

On July 27 2012 19:44 alan133 wrote:

@Mordanis
You said:-
+ Show Spoiler +



Refer to the quote below. When I think you were slightly town it was before you posted your second case.I know that was posted AFTER your second case, but in all honesty I did not read it as I click on "post". I did another evaluation on you so you can see from my quote below.




Also, unless I missed it, you have not address my accusation against you, correct? Especially this part:
+ Show Spoiler +
Can you explain a possible town motivation for this?

Also, the reason why you were getting more and more suspicious to me. You wrote a counter-case against Golbet, and went so far as to counter-vote him. I thought it was actually decent if you were town. However, you failed to follow through, you did not apply any pressure on your target whatsoever. So yea, if you're asking what makes me think you're scum the more I reread the filter, there you have it.

@Ange777
Mind you I am a paranoid person when it comes to playing Mafia, so if you're asking me what do I think, I would say Mordanis appears to be more scummy to me, but I also read Golbat's play as slightly scummy. However I did not go after Golbat lynch because Mordanis is after Golbat, and I don't see both Mordanis and Golbat being scums together. Hence I logically assume Golbat's is a townie playing badly. (Ignoring WIFOM/bussing)

Since someone else (you) flashed Golbat out, I would also like take the opportunity pressure Golbat clearing my doubts.

@Golbat
As of now, I am letting you slide. I am not building a case on you, merely wanting you to convince me why Mordanis isn't what I think he is.

I am heading home now, will be back within an hour.

On July 27 2012 23:46 alan133 wrote:
I am back online.
@Shady
I skimmed through Shady's filter since other people has rise suspicion, and I found this:

I honestly dislike this. It seems like he is pushing to lynch Golbat if Mordanis flips town. Is there something I missed? How are you convinced that scum must be in one of them? For all I know it is possible that both could flip town.

I have came out with 2 explanation:

A town Shady could have just simply overlooked this possibility, while a scum Shady could be trying to get 2 mislynch knowing both are town.I think both scenarios are equally plausible.

It also seems like he is advertising "lynching the other player if one flips town" all over his post. However, it also make me thinks that it is too careless for a scum Shady to do this.

TL;DR I am indifferent about Shady's alignment

---

@Golbat
The thing that raised my brows is his sudden backing off Mordanis without a satisfying reason. He do stated that he stood back and realized he is rushing towards things. However, this does not automatically discredit the scummy traits we caught on Mordanis. That said, I believe that he is being honest about his feelings and it is reasonable for him to back off.

TL;DR I am not comfortable with lynching Golbat

---

@Mordanis
I think you misunderstood me. I was asking why do you need to mention if someone is blue or not. I am not saying you're trying to lynch a "blue". I am suspicious of you because you actually care who is blue. I see this as mainly scum motivated.

Also, this is a list of things I based my suspicion on you.

• Your refusal to back down on a weak case (which you somehow did quietly?)
  
• The fact that you state "Keir is not blue".
  Possible motivation behind this:
  • Townie PoV: suggesting it is "safe" to lynch this person.
    
  • Scum PoV: force a reaction/ blue hunt,
    
• Play "nice" with your lynch target.

Like I mentioned, your first post actually gives me a slight town read on you despite it is based on a far fetched reason, and being the first to make a case that's actually a town favoured trait.

However, your later posts shows that you are not ready to back down from your weak case, and go so far as to say something like "Kei must not be Blue", why would you even care if Kei is blue or not? Even in the Townie PoV I suggested in my list, you are trying to say it is okay to lynch Kei, which is anti-town at best. We lynch people because he acted scummy and is possible scum, not because you think it is "okay" to lynch him. You also mentioned you never wanted to lynch Kei. That totally took out the "Townie PoV" I suggested, which means you are trying to hunt for blue roles, unless you can provide me with another reason why Townie would want to go "Player X is not a Blue". I personally thinks it is a scum slip on your part.

TL;DR I think Mordanis is the best lynch candidate right now

---

Also, I would like to call out MrMedic, Obvs and aRyuujin. While I am not saying these three people must be scum, I hope they contribute more so we can hear more from them.

On July 28 2012 20:42 alan133 wrote:
Goodkarma
I disagree that we should focus on lynching lurkers at this point of time. We have better lynch targets out there, so I suggest we focus on them. The problem with lynching lurkers day 1 is that it is much harder to make the correct call this early on. Later into the game, townies get more information so we can make a better decision when it comes to low content poster.

Also, when it comes to lurking, there are two types of them: 1) Those that post very little, and 2) those that post a lot of junk post. I suggest we drop the lynch lurker discussion and go on scumhunting. It is fine if you want to call out a lurker but with better evidence other than "he lurks". The first successful lynch we got in my last game was a lurker, and despite having very little post count they are all really scummy.

The reason you voted aRyuujin also fits in a few other players, MrMedic, Keirathi and Zorkmid to name a few. You addressed one more point why you intend to lynch him instead of the others:

• Other people are defending them.

That's flawed reasoning here. When other people defend someone it doesn't automatically mean they are scum buddies. Why wouldn't a townie defend another person who he thinks is townie, too?

I don't think you should pursue a aRyuujin lynch as of now, a few players have argue that they are not in favor of a lurker lynch (That includes me). I skimmed through his post and the scummy thing I got off him is his poems, which he stopped doing.

---

Current Situation
That said, I am feeling very uncomfortable with how the game is progressing. Compare to my first game, the activity level is really poor, and the "active posts" were mostly about Mordanis, Golbat and Shady, based on what has been brought up since 24 hours ago. Also, I did not count, but the impression I got was that is set to be lynched. I feel discouraged because I read Golbat is the least scummy one, of all 3.

So I did a re-read on all their filters.

Shady
I went through Shady's post. Skimming through his filter reminded me of this eerie feeling when I read about his policies and advices, which a few other players have highlighted, so I am not going to repeat after them. There are also one other post in his filter that I am not a big fan of:

Like I said, our focus is to lynch a scum, not what happens if player x flips scum. This is the kind of post that got Scum killed in my first game. However, the severity aren't as bad as the one since it is not a list of "what if we kill this player".

Also, although my last game has a successful day 1 lynch, I thought Shady just missed it since there are so many games out there. However, Mordanis' did a list of day 1 lynch and from there I saw day 1 scum lynch is not as uncommon as stated. I originally think Shady's willingness to do his research on other games is a townie trait, and I did not put my pressure on him because of this. However, with this new information, I believe Shady lied.

TL:DR I am slightly inclined to believe he is Scum.

Golbat
After re-reading Golbat's filter, my stance on Golbat is townie remain unchanged. Here is my defence for him.

Golbat reminds me of my first game. I basically was wishy-washy because I believe we shouldn't jump to conclusions and town is going after me because of that. I spent most of my entire day 1 defending myself. Someone mentioned Golbat spent most of his time explaining why he is town. I say this is a normal newbie townie reaction when people is after you.

Golbat's pulling out of Mordanis' case is his biggest scum tell. However, follow this logic:

Assuming scum Golbat. Why would he pull out? There are 3 more players after Mordanis if I am not wrong. Assuming Mordanis is town, he could have easily gotten a mislynch. Also, if Golbat is red, pulling out means he would not want to associate himself for pushing for a mislynch. Why would he blatantly say that? So that all of you would jump on him? Town sided Golbat would fit in this behaviour.

However

I maintain my position that our focus is to lynch a scum, nothing else. However, reading through this thread I found quite a few players doing it, and obviously they all can't be scum. I suggest focus on scum hunting with what information we have now, instead of thinking what information we could get if we lynch the person

TL:DR I am against lynching Golbat.

Mordanis
His post has improved after the ones that accuse Kei for being not blue. Also, he went so far as to check on other games just to find out if Shady is lying, suggested that he is willing to go through the trouble to scum hunt someone for what he said. There is also scum sided explanation: he could be a scum over-committed to twist every word to get a mislynch. However, I think the later is less plausible.

With him being the first one to start the scum hunt game, I am willing to overlook the part where he "cares about who is not blue".

TL:DR I am swayed to believe Mordanis is less of a scum, I am not a big fan of lynching him right now

---

As the dead line is approaching, I suggest we narrow down the lynch targets. I believe we need at least 7 votes to lynch. I am strongly against no-lynch.

That said, I would like to commit my vote to:
##vote: Shady_Sands
based on the reasoning above.

I will look at Promethelax's filter because it seems like he is set to be lynched.

@Promethelax
I don't have a deep impression on him. Back in my mind he posted a lot of fluffs but I didn't pay much attention to him since he seems to agree with my reads (at least about Shady)

The people he has a scum read in two in-game days is Shady and Goodkarma. That's about 5-6 post spent in about

He stays away from Mordanis and Golbat's cases dismissing them as "two player OMGUSing each other". I have to admit Golbat's play was not the best, what makes him so sure about their alignment?

I find Promethelax a bit "too trusting". Ryu was posting in haik.. poems. I did not comment on it as he stopped pretty soon. I believe scums could easily twist town Ryu's words while scum Ryu can twist around his own words to cover his slips. Promethelax seems to be okay with it.

Also, I couldn't help but notice his buddying up Keir. He claims he has an explanation for that and will post it before the end of night 2. I don't buy it. As far as I know he was the one who was after Goodkarma hiding his "mystery suspect". I know this is in different context, but I believe having a "mystery reason" to be "revealed" after the day lynch (so don't lynch me) is just as bad.

I know other players has mentioned it, but the "town ring" thing he posted seemed very suggestive. He went so far as to dismiss it as a joke, which I strongly dislike. I believe making jokes are bad, it leaves up a lot of room for interpretation, and a scum player can always claim they were joking about something that said which is scummy.

I deem Promethelax's passive lurking, non committal cases, friendly attitude and general bad play to be very scummy, in fact, reminds me a lot of the last scum that we never caught in my last game.

##vote: Promethelax

On August 02 2012 11:21 Zorkmid wrote:
Hey guys, just home from the golf course, 72.

I'm going to start off by answering questions I've seen and will try and post some analysis either tonight or tomorrow morning. Gf having laser eye surgery tomorrow, playing in this on the weekend.



I did forget about him, early on in the game I found it hard to differentiate among the players. Not sure what else I can say about it.



About Golbat, I did find his play scummy, especially his on again-off again Mordanis suspicions. I didn't vote for him to avoid a no-lynch, I actually have no problem whatsoever with a no-lynch that early in the game. I believe that now we're getting to the point in the game where a no-lynch hurts more than it did earlier in the game, Scum is getting closer to a win. Barring a lucky save, we're going to lose 2 more townies in the next two nights.

That said, another mis-lynch is even worse.

About why the possibility of no-lynching appealed to me early game, was that it would give us more time to make a better informed lynch, reducing the chance of a mis-lynch of a town lurker on day 2. We all what happened there. However, at this critical juncture in the game, I think it more likely that a lurker would flip red than a lurker earlier in the game.

On July 31 2012 23:53 Zorkmid wrote:




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)

Darthpunk's attack on you doesn't hold any weight if your posting history is free from a green claim post like that. But it does now.



Add to this that you're now doing the same thing and sounds like you're probably planning on claiming Mason, given your upcoming explanation.



I hope that it's a good one. Let's see your "spreadsheet".

If you're claiming Mason, there are going to have to be some other claims to back this up.

##VOTE: Promethelax

On July 30 2012 09:14 Zorkmid wrote:
Since we've been told that:


All that we really know is that we have a roleblocker(medic or otherwise), and that that roleblocker saved a kill. (I don't buy the idea that mafia didn't use a KP, especially not in a newbie game).

From this I can infer that the same person viewed as most dangerous by mafia, was viewed as the most valuable townie by the roleblocker.

I'm too tired to do any analysis. And frankly from the tone about my posting, I don't have much desire to.

I'll answer some questions:


It does seem to be a fairly arbitrary reason to vote for Golbat, I agree. I'll be honest that at the time of my vote, I hadn't been following the game very closely, and Golbat was just the player I thought most likely to be scum as of the time of (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15625737).

When I said "town vibe" (refering to Mordanis' case) I just believed he was just trying to get a conversation going, and the reasons he gave for it being a weak case rang true to me.


Just saw this question as I was working on my post:

Because why risk killing a townie without a good reason. If we lynch MrMedic (as an example of a lurker) and he flips green, what was the point?

About Golbat, my reasons for voting for him are re-iterated in this post. I feel a little funny defending my vote to lynch a guy to someone who voted the same guy.

Why'd YOU vote for him? Oh right, he played scummy as fuck.

Rantddendum:


Not so much a fluff post, but I'm sick of being called out for inactivity on a fridaynight/saturday. I was busy, handle it.



Same goes for this shit, stop it. You too Keir. I've heard it from several people already.

I'm busy, SHUT THE (expunged) UP.

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 Keirathi
I actually got atown 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:



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 Mordanis

His unvote seems to coincide with Mordanis's making a case on him. He claims he backed off the vote because:

+ Show Spoiler +
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.

On August 02 2012 11:21 Zorkmid wrote:
Hey guys, just home from the golf course, 72.

I'm going to start off by answering questions I've seen and will try and post some analysis either tonight or tomorrow morning. Gf having laser eye surgery tomorrow, playing in this on the weekend.



I did forget about him, early on in the game I found it hard to differentiate among the players. Not sure what else I can say about it.



About Golbat, I did find his play scummy, especially his on again-off again Mordanis suspicions. I didn't vote for him to avoid a no-lynch, I actually have no problem whatsoever with a no-lynch that early in the game. I believe that now we're getting to the point in the game where a no-lynch hurts more than it did earlier in the game, Scum is getting closer to a win. Barring a lucky save, we're going to lose 2 more townies in the next two nights.

That said, another mis-lynch is even worse.

About why the possibility of no-lynching appealed to me early game, was that it would give us more time to make a better informed lynch, reducing the chance of a mis-lynch of a town lurker on day 2. We all what happened there. However, at this critical juncture in the game, I think it more likely that a lurker would flip red than a lurker earlier in the game.

On May 01 2012 16:00 Mordanis wrote:
Yes, sir, mister Golden, sir
First things first, I just realized that nreekay = Enrique...
Yeah...
Anyways
Nreekay has only really posted three things which can be evaluated, and of course I can analyze his vote. I'll begin with his first analytical post.

+ Show Spoiler [first post] +
+ Show Spoiler [Second Post (O Lord,What have I begun?)] +

+ Show Spoiler [The Dark Descent] +
+ Show Spoiler [Final Thoughts] +

On August 02 2012 10:49 DarthPunk wrote:
Hey guys. Just woke up and am going to dive into some Mafia!

First of all I am all but convinced that Shady Sands is Mason. The slip is there, and he would have had to fabricate that day 1 with almost nothing to go off. So 99% certain that SS is green. I am going to go back through each of Keirathi and SS filters and see if they were onto anything. I do know however, that both have been suspicious of Obvious. I already had my eye on him and I am going to look through his filter very closely.

@goodkarma, There is a post in my filter that addresses my position on Mordanis.

At the point I posted that many people had stated they had small town reads on him and no one was contributing or commenting on my case against him. Whilst I did (and still do) have a scum read on mordanis the fact that my case was generating zero discussion and a fear that I was victim of confirmation bias. I felt that I was being unproductive by focusing on him too much.

That being said, I have been following mordanis closely and there continue to be unresolved questions around him.
Off the Top of my head I will state a few things that are wrong with mordanis.

Day one he lead 3 cases against 3 now confirmed townies. He pursued them very aggresively but none of his cases had much merit. The first one he admitted to being dishonest with (didn't really believe there was a case on keir) and was based purely on WIFOM.

+ Show Spoiler +
The case on golbat was a reaction to him casting a vote on mordanis, and he pushed that case throughout the majority of day. But then he jumped on shady sands with an explanation for leaving his previous 'Best scum read' as reading Obvious' filter from the previous game. So he jumped onto another case after leading a mislynch hard throughout day one. contributed very little to it. Tried to manufacture a scenario in which Shady 'lied' and spent several posts muddling the conversation with his case about shady's day 1 lynch scenario, that I personally felt was retarded.

So after I pressure him on jumping the ship he built and keirathi somewhat defends shady, he jumps back on to the mislynch he created. The net effect of this play? leads a mislynch whilst sufficiently distancing himself from it through his SS tangent.
He then accuses Ange777 of doing something extremely similar.

After day 1 his posting whilst improving in clarity and making cases based on something other than WIFOM, have dramatically altered in style and frequency, yet still contain the internal contradictions I first took issue with.

His case on prom
+ Show Spoiler +


He states many reasons why he thinks prom is scummy, yet the conclusion of the post doesn't really say anything and is incredibly wishy-washy.

His next post

+ Show Spoiler +

He doesn't want to commit to anyone without having as much information as possible. To me this is very scummy.


+ Show Spoiler +


The half of the post in which he actually votes for someone Is actually spent being wishy-washy and distancing himself from a mis-lynch.





He doesn't give any good reasons for jumping on the promethelax vote at the last minute. Doesn't state why he feels like it is a bad choice. doesn't really say anything. His play from the Golbat lynch onwards has been like night and day, there is a Dramatic shift in style and he is spending a lot of time trying to lay low, make wishy-washy conclusions mitigate damage etc.
I have always found Mordanis to be suspicious. I continue to find him suspicious. I have watched him and will continue to watch him.