|
I just got back. I was called out right after breakfast and did have any internet access until now when I got back home. I just went through a few filters would like to throw out a few points I noticed, in case I die.
@Keirathi After going through Kei's filter, goodkarma's case on Kei made much more sense. Kei's first page in his filter since the game started has literally zero scum hunting. He dedicate most of his post passively defending targets of other people's case.
(Note: I directly copy paste text so text formatting is not preserved)
To be fair, he said he looked through 20 mafia games (which I assumed was an exaggeration, but I'll let him clarify), not that he looked through the *LAST* 20 games, or specifically looked at newbie games.
Overall, I'm leaning townie on Shady despite the case against him. He feels like a townie getting caught up in wild conspiracy/connection theories rather than a scum. I don't think scum can be quite that obvious about it, especially this early into day 1.
@goodkarma:
I mostly agree with your assessment of Mordanis. I feel like it would be a really silly play for a mafia to try to pull this early. It *WAS* a suspiciously weak case though, but mostly I feel like it was a townie trying to find something to push rather than a scum trying to start a bandwagon. I'll be keeping my eye on him though, that's for sure.
About your suspects:
aRyuujin
I don't really have much to comment about him. I feel like its too early to start qualifying people as lurkers. It is the middle of the night in US times, so I suspect a lot of people are sleeping.
MrMedic
In his longest post, he did have some good insight despite how hard the post was to follow. He noted how each point of the Mordanis case against me seemed to be trying to paint me dying in a good light. Would definitely like to hear more from him, hopefully in an easier to follow writing style next time though.
Promethelax
People have to work and sleep. I've played with Prom before, I have no doubt that he'll be active when he has time. People have to work and sleep, they can't be active 24 hours a day.
That being said, Prom has been scum in most (all?) of his previous games, so I'm definitely keeping an eye on him
I am not going to post his entire filter, look at his filter and I would be surprised if you don't agree with me.
This is the only post where I found him writing a case
I'm not sure what time I'll be able to get on tomorrow because my grandpa was put in the hospital today, so I want to lay out my cases for today preemptively so that people have time to discuss them.
Golbat (as an aside, am I the only person that has trouble typing Golbat instead of Goldbat?) :[
The only reasoning he gave for hopping on the Mordanis vote was + Show Spoiler +. Saying "that's scummy because I read it was supposed to be scummy!" isn't really making a case. Minor point, but he said + Show Spoiler +, then still voted for Mordanis before everyone has posted. I understand that the vote was in response to Mordanis' second big post, but still inconsistent. Another mintor point, since he refuted it, but in his list post, he called out Mordanis for and OMGUS vote against him, but in the same post he questions why I didn't make an OMGUS case against Mordanis for his early case on me+ Show Spoiler +, despite the fact that I defended myself both times. No convictions in his reads, giving himself an out if he is wrong + Show Spoiler + He's so wishy-washy there, even though just 2.5 hours before he had said + Show Spoiler + Along the same line of being flip-floppy, as soon as anyone questioned his vote, he immediately hopped off of the Mordanis vote and asserted that it was only because he was an over-zealous noob + Show Spoiler + Repeatedly uses being a noob to excuse his play. We are all noobs, it's not an excuse. Throwing it around like that just feels like a desperate attempt to correct your mistakes. Along the same lines, I find it scummy that he repeatedly feels the need to proclaim his townie status. EVERYONE is going to say that they are townie, so repeating it a bunch of times to sheep town into believing it doesn't necessarily make it true. I used a similar argument to nail Promethelax as scum in Newbie XIX after he kept repeating that he was townie over and over again in the thread. From his post responding to karma: + Show Spoiler + Didn't he do the same thing (cast suspicion on MrMedic) in his big list post? Yes, yes he did + Show Spoiler + Ryu pointed this out, but I just want to expand on it. Farther down in the same post, he said + Show Spoiler + So he say this can be an inconsistency? Then why has he done it not once, but TWICE? + Show Spoiler + While I don't believe that saying you're willing to change your mind in the light of new evidence is necessarily inconsistent, I don't get how you can call someone else out for doing something that you are doing yourself.
Two other people that I am minorly interested in:
goodkarma
I find repeatedly pushing to have lurkers lynched is an anti-town trait. Our goal is to lynch scum. You claim it's impossible to make solid reads on day 1, but without people making reads, our ability to get successful lynches later in the game diminishes. Repeatedly trying to sheep us back onto lurkers and away from active cases is suspicious.
Mordanis
While I don't find his initial case against me particularly suspicious (other than the fact that it was pure WIFOM) because it could reasonably have been made by either town or mafia, he hasn't full escaped my notice. He repeatedly tried to assert that I wasn't blue. What good is that information to town, and why did he feel the need to point it out? Town never has a reason to "blue hunt", but scum always does.
I really feel like Golbat is our best chance of flipping scum at the moment, so:
##Vote Golbat
Also, this post gives me a "funny" feeling:
Also aRyuujin, alan, Obvious, and Prom: you guys have overall been pretty quiet comparatively as well. At least you guys have posted cases, but you really need to step up your amount of input. EVERYONE needs to be giving reads as much as possible. Being wrong isn't a crime, but sitting back and letting others lead the discussion just means you have less "town power" and people are going to be more hesitant to listen to what you have to say when you do randomly decide to chime in.
While there is nothing wrong to urge other players to contribute, I feel uneasy when this comes from a person where his filter consist of one case against players that are already being presented, and the rest of them were mostly him passively commenting on other people's cases, I feel like there is plausible + Show Spoiler + scum motivation behind this. The many "encouraging" posts were to distance himself from the lurker crowd, and he can sit back and gauge cases made by other players, and nudge them passively to a mislynch.
Keirathi also said this:
I'm not going to make bad cases just to put pressure on people. Like I also said, making cases is what keeps the game moving, but when they are just bad cases you give the scum ammunition to push their own agendas. Are you actually discouraging discussions here? For all I know scums can push their own agendas based on these "bad" discussions as well?
@MrMedic I hope you don't miss your next vote, and since you claimed you are going to be free, (And I doubt scums would target you if you aren't one yourself), I would like to see more post from you in day 2.
Don't worry, if you are town, just post when you see someone doing something scummy, and don't wait for another person to say it first: It will almost paint you in the wrong light.
I refrained from looking at Shady Sands and Mordanis because the filters that I have been reading the entire time was theirs + Golbat's. I noticed
Weird, why didn't he mention he had a wedding to attend in any of his earlier posts in the thread? This seems like a pretty strange after-the-fact excuse for any strange patterns of activity.
One thing that is important for everyone in town to start watching for now is activity patterns and posting patterns. Scum will tend to post with an identifiable ringleader and others following in their footsteps... and they will often all make excuses about IRL commitments to assuage any doubts about odd patterns in their collective posting histories. So looks like you will be FoS me too, since I have been giving "excuses about IRL commitments"? I think it is best to declare when you're available to play so when you're being called out at least people knows you won't be around to response.
That said, it's late over here so I won't be around in 8 hours, so in case I got killed, please consider my points here.
|
Awesome save!
Office work is busy today so I am not able to post until now, I will take a better look at the filters once I got home.
@On the NK or lack thereof I highly doubt Scums would risk a no-kill. Scum's goal is to get rid of townies and survive the day lynch. They would want to end the game quickly before town figure out who the scums are, especially in a 48 hour day/24 hour night cycle. Not killing would have meant giving town another 72 hours to figure out who they are.
I know it is redundant, but If it is a medic save, then the medic now have a confirmed townie, while if it is a roleblocker, the person you block is scum. Of course, there is the possibility that both roles exist, so I would advise against outing, but it is up to you to decide.
@goodkarma I think you misunderstood my advise on the "be careful with what you say". I did not suggest that we halt reads all together. There's always a chance that you get night killed and whatever you found that could be vital is forever lost. The thing that happened in my last game were a couple people posting one long case dedicated to just one player, and suggesting that we lynch them in the morning. Guess what, all of them died, and their targets subsequently mislynched.
The way to prevent this is to write what you noticed based on several targets, not just one, I might add. But enough with the night talk and lets move on to scum hunting.
@Kei + Show Spoiler +On July 30 2012 04:13 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 02:29 alan133 wrote:Keirathi also said this: I'm not going to make bad cases just to put pressure on people. Like I also said, making cases is what keeps the game moving, but when they are just bad cases you give the scum ammunition to push their own agendas. Are you actually discouraging discussions here? For all I know scums can push their own agendas based on these "bad" discussions as well? You are right, scum can push agendas from "bad" discussion. That's exactly what I said. My point was that pointing out every little thing that you find scummy isn't helping the thread find scum, because one or two little scummy blips does not a scum make. THAT'S the reason I put my scum reads all into one big post. Its much harder for scum to refute a lot of points at one time than one or two points on multiple occasions. Also, things like my reply to goodkarma ARE scum hunting in a sense. By saying that I find people townie, I am narrowing down my suspect list. The problem I have against you is that you were not standing out nor wanting to commit to a case. You argued that you don't want to make "bad cases" in case scums make use of it. While I don't totally agree: How are we supposed to scum hunt during the day without putting the pressure on based on any little evidence we found, in the night post you changed your position and suddenly encourages us people, who made cases based on one or two scumslip, to keep up with building more cases.
It seems like when you talk about not wanting to build "bad cases", you are putting yourself in a position to sit back, while encourage other players to go at against each other, and then finally build your own case based on how the discussion is going. The "refrain from building bad case" was meant to excuse yourself when people accuse you of lacking scum hunting commitment. I don't buy the "narrowing down" suspects as a form of scum hunting.
I've got to go now, I study the filter extensively once I got back.
|
@Mordanis
I have a question for alan133: How did you make sense of goodkarma's post regarding Keirathi? I'm not really able to pinpoint exactly where that case even is, so you'll need to point it out for me, please. I somehow mistaken Kei for aRyuujin. At the back of my mind Goodkarma specifically picked Kei out of the 3 lurkers in his day 1 case before switching over to Golbat, which when I looked for it found out it was actually Ryu. I apologize for my mistake and to avoid further confusion: EBWOP:
On July 30 2012 02:29 alan133 wrote: @Keirathi
After going through Kei's filter, goodkarma's case on Kei made much more sense.] Kei's first page in his filter since the game started has literally zero scum hunting. He dedicate most of his post passively defending targets of other people's case.
While I apologize for the mistake, I don't think it discredit my points raised against Kei. I would like others to look into my reasoning.
|
@Zorkmid
On July 31 2012 00:28 Zorkmid wrote: @alan133
What do you say about Obv's case against you? The post was almost two hours before yours, but you make no mention of it.
Did you just not see it? I read back and was wondering what Obvious' case, and then I saw this: + Show Spoiler +(Direct copy paste of text. Text format will be lost) First I'll take a look at alan133's posts:
Some behavior analysis: consistent in his methods for determining his best scum target. His vote on Shady Sands was not willy-nilly, and he considered the cases against Golbat and Mordanis as well before casting his vote. Solid play on this end, in my opinion, at least throughout D1.
On July 29 2012 03:55 alan133 wrote: However, loosely quoting someone: "The goal of lynching is to get scum", I am still in favor of Shady lynch instead of Golbat for I believe the former has a much higher chance to flip scum, in other words, I am keeping my vote, unless it is really necessary for me to switch to make a lynch happen, but I will probably be sleeping as the vote is tally. I urge all who has not voted (or already voted but not into the potential lynch target) to reconsider their votes aiming for a lynch.
At this point there were 5 votes for Golbat. Two possibilities for this rather well timed post: Town alan133 wants to make sure we don't get into a no-lynch scenario, as that gives us little to work with for actual information that can be 100% confirmed (a flip) or Scum alan133 is setting himself up to ensure a mislynch won't end up looking bad on him if he has to put his vote in as the one of the last people on the Golbat vote list. Of these two scenarios, I'm more easily convinced that alan133 is acting in the best interests of the town. I did want to mention this though if any suspicions arise regarding his votes or actions in the future.
I have a question for alan133: How did you make sense of goodkarma's post regarding Keirathi? I'm not really able to pinpoint exactly where that case even is, so you'll need to point it out for me, please.
I did answer his question, but I mistaken him to be Mordanis. Mordanis was the one who suggested we look at non-Golbat lyncher, so when I saw the big chunk of green and red text I naturally thought this was coming from Mordanis.
EBWOP
On July 30 2012 20:09 alan133 wrote:@ MordanisObvious Show nested quote +I have a question for alan133: How did you make sense of goodkarma's post regarding Keirathi? I'm not really able to pinpoint exactly where that case even is, so you'll need to point it out for me, please. I somehow mistaken Kei for aRyuujin. At the back of my mind Goodkarma specifically picked Kei out of the 3 lurkers in his day 1 case before switching over to Golbat, which when I looked for it found out it was actually Ryu. I apologize for my mistake and to avoid further confusion: EBWOP: Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 02:29 alan133 wrote: @Keirathi
After going through Kei's filter, goodkarma's case on Kei made much more sense.] Kei's first page in his filter since the game started has literally zero scum hunting. He dedicate most of his post passively defending targets of other people's case.
While I apologize for the mistake, I don't think it discredit my points raised against Kei. I would like others to look into my reasoning. I've mistaken two players twice, and in one of them I am EBWOP-ing for mistaken a player for another. I apologize for playing this poorly, I will be more careful next time.
Now onto the "Alan could be a scum trying to distant himself from a mislynch". This is all based on Mordanis' "I think scum could be trying to distant himself from the mislynch". I did not vote for Golbat because his play was strikingly similar to mine in my last game, which coincidently I am also a VIG. Of course, there is no way to tell, and people who voted for Golbat has decent arguments. However, I voted for Shady because I believe he is much likely to flip scum compared to Golbat. There is no reason to not go with my read, especially when it does not risk a no-lynch.
Also, I agree on Mordanis' logic. Looking back at Golbat's post, his later characteristics such as "unsure who to vote" could be easily interpreted as scummy. One scum could have easily start the bandwagon on him, and the remaining ones could have easily hide. I believe it is highly possible that there is at least one scum hiding among the non-golbat vote crowd.
Following this line of logic I also realized MrMedic failed to vote, so is he in the "not on Golbat's bus" group? While I don't think this automatically qualifies him as scum, I absolutely hate players who missed a vote; there is no commitment made for us to judge such players.
@Keir Seems like Keir has not replied, I noticed he is sleeping, so while I eagerly wait for his response:
When I read about your night post urging other people to make cases, my impression on you is that you were scummy to try to wait for other players to chip in their cases, which allow you to judge who to go after that could have benefit scum. I went through the day 1 post up to Golbat's lynch focusing on your posts and found you it matches what I thought: your filter reveals while you were posting a lot, you did not make any hard stance against any players. You made one case which leads to your vote on Golbat, and spent most other time deflecting cases against you, and other times defending players, or trying to befriend new players.
I moved over looking at your day 2 posts and found out you actually did some scum hunting on your own, which partially negate my claim that you were "not aligning early towards any scum reads". However, I am not a big fan of your "small talk" with Promethelax about a past game you guys were in. Please focus on this game only, unless you meant to mention how Promethelax plays in the past to build a case. Also, I found this: + Show Spoiler +On July 30 2012 16:32 Keirathi wrote:Holy cow. Nice case. This is the the kind of analysis that takes really careful combing through filters and picking up on extremely subtle patterns. I'm eagerly awaiting a response from Ange now. While some may not find this post scummy at all, it fits into my reads on you, that you "did not make a stance", "Wait for other players to talk", and then "push accordingly". I guess you did indeed imply that you agree with Mordanis' case when you say it is a nice case, but these were not very committing stance that can always be dismissed when needed.
TL:DR I am not a big fan of Kei's "passive" scum hunt play that allows him to sit back and judge the direction townies headed, while possibly moulding his own stance to get the best out of scum. I would like to see Kei's response.
@Shady Sands While I agree with Mordanis' logic, it feels kind of weird that Shady Sands suddenly switch from "Mordanis is very red" to "we are best friends eva!!!" + Show Spoiler +They knew how whichever candidate was up would flip, so they had the ability to determine where in the vote they would go to minimize their chance to get lynched D2.
I think Mordanis hits the nail right on the head here--this is the main lens through which we should be analyzing every single D1 post. Voting order is very important here. Who joined the Golbat train, and when? Also, we all are familiar with Shady's "If Golbat is town Mordanis is very red" talk. Shady seems to forget that he is one of the main force behind Golbat lynch when he is actively selling that idea. Shady was very firm about his conviction even when other players were trying to point out why it is flawed.
Somehow, all this made sense to him immediately after Mordanis' post. While I am not a big fan of accusing someone when he/she actually "changed" according to what other people have told him/her to, I argue that Mordanis' later posts is very townie and even Shady could not continue to pursuit a Mordanis lynch. This seems like "an easy way out" for Shady.
One other thing I noted is that Shady Sands is not included in the "not on Golbat train" list. This smells to me like he is trying to exclude himself from the "to watch" list to shift the focus away from himself.
Also, remember the "active scum" thing he mentioned? [It is late here (3:00am, started writing on 12:00am) I have to end this post ASAP, but if you need any details or quotes please ask me], it seems like he is selling himself as an plausible "active scum" (he is very active) to avoid a day 1 lynch. Also, compare his post's content of day 1 and day 2, and you see a massive drop in actual content posted.
TL:DR Shady Sands looks very scummy - I believe he will flip red
I am off to bed now, cheers.
|
@Keirathi + Show Spoiler +On July 31 2012 10:47 Keirathi wrote:@GK: Can I get a response to this? Show nested quote +Keirathi wrote: He said he didn't want to post his reads at night, and would wait until today. How could you be so sure you weren't going to die and never get those reads out for people to see? Posting them at the end of the night would have been ideal if you actually are townie.
For reference, heres the post I got that from: + Show Spoiler +On July 30 2012 02:18 goodkarma wrote: Just a small update:
I've finished reading through all the filters again, and have some new thoughts on who is scum. I have decided to follow the advice posted by alan and postpone discussion of those thoughts until day 2 begins in a few hours here. It seems everyone else is doing the same...
I would, however, like to make a few comments on the Golbat debacle. While Golbat certainly is to blame for not sticking up for himself, so is the town for voting him.
Very obvious, but one of the bigger issues I have with some people's current scum-hunting tactics is they think that scum just have to present in one or two very particular ways. And I will confess I have been guilty of this too...
Things like: Scum are sneaky. They hate to make coherant arguements against players. They love to slip up on statistics that don't really have much bearing on their arguements. They can only sit back and lurk (yeah, I was guilty of this one...).
Everyone plays scum a little differently, making finding them not a science but an art form. Looking back at the Golbat lynching, I couldn't help but notice that while he played badly, he did it consistently. There wasn't one "scumslip," or one particular bandwagon he was willing to ride. He was like, "I want to ride every bandwagon that presents any semblance of a case." I mentioned this too in passing, that he was either a bad town (for bandwagoning without thinking) or a bad mafia (for being so out in the open). But he wasn't afraid to change his mind. Repeatedly. And he did stick his neck out in getting behind cases, being only the second person to do so in something like 3 different spots... Mafia could do all these things, but I find it highly unlikely that they would, especially in a newbie game where I figure first-time Mafia would prefer to play more cautiously to avoid being exposed than to jump into the spotlight like that. In retrospec, and I know it doesn't mean much, but looking at how he was consistent in his terrible play and was completely unafraid to change his mind I don't see how he could have been anything but really bad town.
I encourage everyone, as they're making their new cases, to not have their "scum check-list." Try to show some empathy and really assess if a town could make the posts your suspect has made.
Anyway, my 2 cents. I'll catch up here in a few hours, once day 2 has begun. It doesn't make any sense for a townie to claim that he has reads and not share them before the night ends. If you had died, you never would have gotten to post them, and you would have completely wasted your time and hurt the thread overall. Were you completely unafraid of dying? Also, you said you would post them before the night ended in your previous post + Show Spoiler +On July 29 2012 07:57 goodkarma wrote: With the day passed, and our first flip, I plan on making a rather lengthy analysis thread on top suspects. I promise to have it before night ends, but don't expect to see it for several hours. . I don't particularly like that you promised something and didn't deliver. Let me answer that for you. In my night post I advise that we should be careful of what we post because scums can kill you off and make use of what you say, and twist your words without you there to clarify it. You can find multiple example in my previous game.
I put my summary of my last game in a spoiler as it relates very little to this game: + Show Spoiler +We got 2 scums in first day and night. You got it right. TWO. And we lost. Everyone became so confident they go super batman mode posting wild cases and there is always this one person who post one long case against one person in the middle of the night, and they got killed. There is no way that person can defend himself against someone who is dead, and I am not gonna lie, there is always this guilt of "what if the dead guy is right?", and then you proceed to lynch that person, later, you secretly put the blame on the dead guy who posted the case when their target flip town.
However, I believe by posting factual finds on multiple targets, for example, "player x votes for player y without giving his reasoning, player z jumps votes", you can prevent scums to twist it any further than that, as in, compare to "A does B, I think this is because he is scum and I think this implies C is town".
While I am not saying Goodkarma must be town, I want to clarify because he is getting pressured for following my advise (although misunderstood its intent).
As far as changing my position and suddenly encouraging people to make cases based on one or two scumslips after the night post, can you point out exactly where I did that. I looked back through my filter and I don't see me saying that at all, so I'd specifically like to know what post you misunderstood. Reading back I realized it is a bit of speculation, but it is this post: + Show Spoiler +MrMedic, Zorkmid: Where are you guys?
We need everyone to be contributing. Can you comment on the current cases please?
Also aRyuujin, alan, Obvious, and Prom: you guys have overall been pretty quiet comparatively as well. At least you guys have posted cases, but you really need to step up your amount of input. EVERYONE needs to be giving reads as much as possible. Being wrong isn't a crime, but sitting back and letting others lead the discussion just means you have less "town power" and people are going to be more hesitant to listen to what you have to say when you do randomly decide to chime in. First, you separated yourself from the crowd who stood out and post cases. When people points that out, you simply say you don't want to make cases based on one or two silly slips. I assume you are saying those who already made case were acting in this regards. You also said it might potentially lead to a bad case, which scums can make use of, so you're trying to avoid it. I saw this as a criticism against people who already made cases. When you call for other people to make case, it occurs to me; didn't you disagree with that method of scum hunting that you're avoiding from? Why are you asking for them to post now? It occurs to me that what you said about scum making use of "bad cases" is just an excuse for you to stay passive.
I re-read your filter and realize I might be locked on you around conformation bias. I do notice your cases on a few people when I wrote my case on you, but I read you were merely rehashing what other people has done and you were very non-committal. Upon closer inspection the cases were actually based on cold hard facts instead of WIFOM, and you did indicate if these actions by other players were scummy or not. Your argument about compiling all evidence into one post starts to make sense and I do see townie motivation now.
I would like to drop my case on you for now.
|
Votes are extremely sparse, and it is supposed to be 4 hours until lynch time? I was going through Zorkmid's and Goodkarma's filter since they seems to be the other lynch candidates.
@Zorkmid I personally am not a big fan of his sudden disappearance. He later reappears twice: once to post one case on Golbat and Mordanis each using arguments that were mostly already laid out by other players, another one is to vote Golbat. His day 2 post were much better. There are more reads, but he rarely follows up.
His "hostile" reaction when pressured reminded me too much of a mislynch that I am partially responsible for. Someone reacted hostilely towards a case against me that include personal attacks. I recognize this as a scum trait and posted another case on him because of it later- then he flipped town. I am incline to think this is somehow a townie trait: Dismissing WIFOM, I assume scum would be more cautious about his/her case and would want to maintain a "healthy" relations towards other players.
TL:DR I am not a big fan of lynching Zork right now, but I will keep tab on him
@Goodkarma My impression on him was that he has a stance on lurkers and seems like he plays to get rid of them. I don't see his posts as "trying to create noise for town". He did state his policy clearly and it does not betray the way he approaches the game in day 1.
I have a null read on day 2. That is because he is mostly defending himself against people who build cases on him based on his publicly announced lynch policy. While I personally disagree with focusing on lurkers when there are already candidates out there, his case on Promethelax was not only based on his policy, but has shifted to actual scum hunting play.
However, I am vary of "friendly" posts like these: + Show Spoiler +@alan:
Thanks so much for this advice! This is exactly the kind I needed to hear. My concern with giving multiple suspects was more along the lines of what if one of those people is guilty and the other two are innocent? The guilty party has the strongest scum read. Wouldn't giving multiple suspects just make it easier for the mafia to get behind one of the two innocent lynch targets, than if you stuck with the person you consider most suspicious? But you suggest from actual in-game experience that only giving one player may be even more damaging when you have multiple scum reads... I can follow your line of reasoning, and can agree with it. I understand that Prox is looking for more transparency from me, and I feel that presenting an arguement like alan's would have been more helpful than tossing his vote. The reason for keeping my suspects "mysterious" is this fear that the mafia can use that list against town. While I don't think I played poorly other than messing up names twice and have poor grammar/general language skills, and last time I check I am not a 100% confirmed townie, and only scums know a person's alignment. I am not pushing a case based on one silly speculation, but If you're town sided, letting your guard down does not help.
TL;DR I don't find goodkarma as scummy as some of you has paint him in, and I don't fancy lynching him
@Shady Sands I saw your post about your brother. I hope everything's fine. I would like you to look at my case against you, and post a defence when you are available. However, you can ignore the argument where I said you were lurking in day 2 as it seems like you have a legit reason.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=353315¤tpage=27#525
That said, I believe Shady Sands is still scummy based on his day 1 play.
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
|
This is fairly depressing. I thought we nailed one scum here. I was not able to be around yesterday until 5 hours before lynch time, noticed he is the most popular candidate and I took a long hard look at Promethelax's filter. I spent 2 hours analyzing his post wrote up my case on him and made up my mind to lynch him instead of Shady. I thought the lack of votes and the wide array of targets was a sign that his scumbuddies were reluctant into lynching him, but it seems like I am proven wrong. I also thought there is a possibility that voting Shady instead could risk a no-lynch (assuming scums has not voted yet), which in my eyes is a huge waste of daytime - the only time where townies have most power.
@JingleHell Welcome to the game. I saw your play in NMM XXI and I am a big fan of it. I hope your replacement will fire up the town's activity and can provide a new perspective to town, that is if you are a part of us, which I hope you are.
@Shady Sands Unless I missed it and he has not addressed my accusation on him. I know that he have his brother issue and all for missing out entirely on Day 2, so I am reserving judgement until he posted more.
I won't be around for the rest of the 12 hours or more. There is a certificate exam I need to take soon and I need to study for it. If I failed I would have around 100 USD subtracted from my monthly pay because employees have to pay for the examination fees if they failed. That is a huge amount if you're living in Malaysia. I will try to chip in my thoughts before the day 3 post.
|
GG Kei. @Shady Sands Shady is confirmed Mason. His "Kei's Will" post is minutes after the day post, so I doubt he could write all that up while molding it to fit Kei's post history in that short time.
@goodkarma I'll lightly comment on my vote on Promethelax over Shady day 2: I backed off Shady after I am convinced that Promethelax is scum. My biggest problem with Shady is his non-existence Day 2 presence and his sudden change of view of Mordanis. Later he came back with a (I assume valid) reason that I have little doubts of, which took away some of the weight in my case.
I did not pay much attention on Promethelax until that one post. I spent a long time writing his case and it convinced me he was scummier. Look at my case on him for clarification. Mind you it took around 2 hours for me to come out with all those, and lynch time is extremely close, so I made no mention of why he is the better lynch target in there.
Current Situation It sucks when everyone I have a read on flips town, or is a confirmed townie. I will need to reset my reads and do a reassessment of everyone based on what we have now. I believe we have enough information so it should be much easier to pin point a scum today.
|
It seems like I have to do a little defending: @Mordanis Your argument about me "soft-defending" people The only person I recall myself soft-defending was Golbat. I believe he was the less scummy among all 3 first-day lynch candidate. I explicitly said that he plays similar to my previous game, and was inclined to not lynch him. I don't recall myself calling him scummy, other than maybe this :"I agree that his play was anti-town". Remember, we are lynching scum, not bad townies.
About "X is scummy but Y is scummier so vote Y" If you are referring to my Promethelax vote over Shady's, I don't see a problem with that. Why would you vote for someone that is less scummy? I know my late vote on Promethelax made me looks a lot like a scum bandwagon, but I started writing my case on Promethelax a few hours ago. I was finishing my Zorkmid, Goodkarma and Shady post and I intended to vote Shady, but when I refreshed the page I saw 3 votes on Promethelax, there when I spent another 2 hours to analyse and wrote my analysis on him. There's where you found my "contradiction". I started with very little impression on Promethelax and ended up thinking he is more scummy. I suggest you read into my reasoning in between my case on him. That was over a few hour span, believe it or not, and time was short.
Also, I apologize if you feel like my day 2/night 2 activity is not up to standard. I was indeed very busy over the weekdays. Meetings to attend, certificates to take, but enough excuses. I have just passed my certificate examination and have tonnes of time for the game now. However, due to my typing speed, it will take a long time for me to write a post.
Believe it or not, the above text took me 1 hour and a half to complete.
I need to drive a friend somewhere, so I won't be back in 2 hours. But I will do this in the future: I will write a Summary and my intention so people knows when I started my post.
I am working on a post, and this is my agenda
- I intend to push a case on Mordanis
- Why I thought he was cleared starting day 2
- Non existence presence in day 2 when no one pressures him
- His case on Promethelax
- His case on me. Before accusing me of OMGUS, I believe there are enough scummy things to warrant a vote from me
- Other misc things that I noticed.
Also, ##vote: Mordanis
- I intend to point out Obvious's scummy behaviour
- I intend to point out Zorkmid's scummy behaviour
- I intend to point out aRyu's scummy behaviour
And thats another 30 minutes.
I will be back.
|
Just came back and on my way working on the Mordanis case.
On August 02 2012 20:58 Ange777 wrote: @alan: Did you see my post about Zork's scumslip?
Yes, I saw it right after I finished writing my defence against Mordanis, but I did not comment on it as I don't follow the logic, and I am in a rush out. Do you mind explaining where the slip is?
I read that as:- "Saying something like that is scummy. No green or blue will say this. I won't say it because it is so scummy to say it."
While I am not a big fan of the over-exaggeration on the "scumminess" of just one phrase, I don't see the slip. Why would town want to say something that he thinks is "scummy"?
|
My Case on Mordanis
Why I thought he was “cleared” on day 2 This is based on his day 1 play. He was the first person who started the scum hunting, albeit with an extremely weak case on Keir, I dismissed that as I thought scum would not want to stand out like that in the spot light, while starting up what would benefit town greatly. + Show Spoiler + 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
Also, he went so far to check on Shady Sand’s claim about finding the rate of successful Day 1 lynches. At that time I thought it was an indication of a hardworking townie, and I don’t see any scum motivation in this. Scum would want to distract us from facts, deny us information, or generally, create distortion, so I thought.
Other than that, reading his filters strikes me as him trying to be as transparent as possible; posting every single thought that pop up to his mind, and the advices given was generally good.
What made me change my mind? It started from here in a case he has written against me:
The whole case is here in case you are interested. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=353315¤tpage=37#724
While I responded to his post, I did a quick look at his filter and my impression is that all his advises for scumhunting is directly opposite to what he has done in the past.
The first seems like he's just trying to jump on the bandwagon, the second and third contradicting seem like a way to try to make himself sound like he was more sure of his case than he really was. Obviously admitting that you think a case is weak hasn't worked out too well for me, but to me this seems like he was just trying to avoid pressure once Prom flips by trying to make a solid case.
So you openly admit you aren’t sure about a Promethelax lynch, but you voted for him anyway, arguing there are no other stronger reads than him. You get called out for it. Now you suggest doing the opposite is equally scummy. I find my reasoning for voting Promethelax is reasonably solid. My “contradiction” isn’t “contradiction” at all given that I have written one of them before I read the filter, and another one, after. If you think otherwise, why don’t you attack my arguments instead?
Another similar case can be found here: + Show Spoiler + Ok, so hopefully you guys aren't so sure I'm scummy you'll hear me out. Part of the reason that I was having trouble coming up with reads D2 is that I had no solid read on what strategy the scum were trying to use. Obviously they were trying to win which includes forcing mislynches and using their kp, but there is so much more to scum strategy. They could be trying to snipe blues, stall scum lynches as long as possible, force a few mislynches before having one blatant scum slip that destroys all lines of discussion, in hopes of "starting anew", bussing, etc. The playstyle for each would be different, so what traits would the scum exhibit? In this way the lack of a KP N1 actually harmed my analysis, as I couldn't think what scum traits to hunt for. Then they kill Keir. As I had mentioned earlier, I don't think Keir's play matched that of a blue, so the scum weren't trying to blue-snipe. Keir had no really solid outstanding cases, so they weren't looking to take pressure off themselves. Keir was, however, an even tempered and logical townie. Scum seem to be trying to destabilize town, either to put themselves in "mayor" position, or to simply eliminate a player whom few seemed to be suspicious of. The more everyone is suspicious of everyone, the less obvious scum slips are. Alternately, Keir may have been a random kp designed to simply keep town from getting more information. Traits that should be looked for then are people who are trying to gain a position of confidence, or active scum, or hardcore-lurking scum.
I don't really think anyone is in a position of trust except for SS. It would have been hypothetically possible for scum to have a "will" written out beforehand, with just the name needing to be changed. The will was posted 12 minutes after the flip, and it contains the people whom he mistrusted, and some other things. If scum were to fake one of these, it would require only one "will" written per night. Assuming the broken link (when I click on the link that was provided in the will, I get a fun TL broken link message) actually provides pretty good evidence, SS is pretty much cleared.
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.
This leaves inactive scum. I am most sure there will be at least one inactive scum 1.) because inactivity by its nature contributes no content, and scum have been trying to deprive us of content, and 2.) there's been basically no pressure on lurkers except for the votes on Aryuu. The main thing I find scummy about GK's play (his timing for policy-talking about lurkers when there was an active scum-hunting conversation happening) has already been discussed, so I'll move on to my other reads. This huge chunk of text can be summarized here: + Show Spoiler +I hope you listen to me. Scum kills Kier. Kier is clam and logical and does not seem blue. Scums’ goal seems to be getting rid of strong townie reads. We can safely assume scums were the active posters trying to lead town, or the lurking scum letting town kill each other. BTW Shady is cleared. However, besides Jingle, ME and everyone else who were active cannot be Analytical-Active scum, since we are playing badly and did not really post a case. (what?) This leaves inactive scum. Inactive scums were the ones who post no content, therefore I find Goodkarma pushing on lurker scummy. I wrote a case on him so I won’t repeat. Notice how he maneuver around his analysis suggesting he cannot be scum? Also, re-reading the night 1 analysis he posted: + Show Spoiler + Anyways, I've been enlisted to do a ton of work and I don't have time to do much analyzing, but I have had more time away from the computer to think. The main goals of the mafia for the D1 lynch were to force a mislynch (unless they are really bad at bussing :D), and put themselves in a position where they can relatively easily avoid a D2 lynch. They knew how whichever candidate was up would flip, so they had the ability to determine where in the vote they would go to minimize their chance to get lynched D2. The people who didn't vote for Golbat are DarthP, Alan, Obvious, Promethelax, and Golbat himself. Darth was tunelling me all day, Alan defended Golbat, Obvious posted two real posts, and Promethelax's play is confusing me too much right now. Right now, Alan, Obvious, and Promethelax are the people I'll be looking at the most. Obvious has the perfect excuses in line (I was away and I voted for Shady), Alan's soft defenses strike me as suspicious (This player seems kind of scummy, but this player seems much more scummy, so vote for him), and I really need to figure out what Promethelax has been trying to accomplish. Sorry again for the brevity, I hope someone else will be able to use this if I die tonight :C
This is basically him saying “look at people who did not vote for Golbat, I am pretty sure scum is in there.” While I agree on the circumstances and the logic of his post, I also noticed he voted for Golbat himself. I did not suspect much when I first saw this, but now it seems to me Mordanis is deliberately trying to take attention away from himself.
Mordanis' tips and/or analysis hides subtle suggestions that he himself is not a scum.
His general inactivity in day 2 contrast greatly with his active day 1 posts. There are people going after him for these reasons, but I would like to add: + Show Spoiler +Speculation: This could due to the no-kill in night 1. From this post In this way the lack of a KP N1 actually harmed my analysis, we can see he is trying to justify his inactivity by stating there is a no kill.
Can't believe that all took 3 hours
I won't be able to post more. Its almost 3 am and I really need some shut-eyes. These arguments I wrote, I believe, was not covered, but please refer to other people's case on him for:
Also, I am not able to comment on, perhaps lightly:
I intend to point out Obvious's scummy behaviour -emphasizing on his non-vote on Promethelax -His OMGUS against pressure
I intend to point out Zorkmid's scummy behaviour -Lurkiness in day 1 -His cases based on one liners
I intend to point out aRyu's scummy behaviour -(What do you call those again?) Poems writing in day 1. -Disappeared throughout day 2 and not voting -Disappears again after posting one case in day 3
All those took 15 minutes, that's without re-checking filters for confirmation, and impression based on the back of my mind.
|
You missed my vote on Mordanis
Also, ##vote: Mordanis
|
I just came back from working after hours.
@Mordanis I am disappointed. No one ever look at any case I wrote. Are they that bad? Am I being ignored? No. Not even Mordanis feels he needs to waste his energy posting a defence. Do you think it suck so bad it does not even matter, or you are just ignoring it, like how you have been ignoring other people's case on you, for being widely inactive, and over-apologetic. Why was MY post never taken seriously all the time? Do I suck that bad?
Why are you ignoring my defence on your case against me? Did you just randomly pick two players and attack them? Once one of them sparked a Zorkmid bandwagon you totally forgotten about me? Do I still deserve my FOS or not? Did my defence cleared myself out of doubt or not?
Why are you playing in such a way? You started the first ever case, and lingers on it despite you're calling yourself "trying to spark the scumhunt?" Why do you switch to Golbat, Shady and Golbat again? Are you desperate to hunt scum, or are you desperate to lead spark a mislynch?
@Ange Yes. I saw your case on Zork. I don't see the OBVIOUS SCUM SLIP. Your arguments on him was that he is wishy-washy, never built a real case himself, which yourself suggested that it satisfies a whole lot of players in this particular game.
Then you jumped to OMG I MISSED SCUM SLIP.
I failed to understand how speaking from a thrid-person's PoV imply you aren't part of that person's circle? SO you are also suggesting Mordanis must not be scum because he is speaking from a thrid-person's PoV every single time he talk about scum's possible motivation? + Show Spoiler +I can't believe I missed that TOWN SLIP!
@Zorkmid What the heck is your game? Where the fuck did you go? Why did you go out and posted that "SCUM SLIP"? Why are you making such a big deal about a stupid relief post? Why do reading your filter makes me want to vote for you so bloody much?
Why did you sheep? Why were your cases a rehash of everyone else's case? Where is your own reads? You and all the lurkers are all hurting town, or is being INCREDIBLY LAZY SCUMS.
@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 example1 over a thousand times?
|
It did not make much sense... Let me fix that for you.
ActIvity seeMs woefully slow. I guess that Most of you Are on diFferent clocks that I Am.
Done.
##Unvote: Mordanis ##Vote: Zorkmid
|
Just woke up, good job getting scum!
@Jingle Why did I not vote for Zork Because Mordanis has not answered my case against him, and I don't think it is entirely OMGUS and has some valid point in it. Disagree if you want, but at that moment I think Mordanis is than Zork.
On August 04 2012 07:41 JingleHell wrote: Also, look through Zorkmid's filter. If you'll notice, there's one person who swapped even later than I did, who even I suspect, who Zorkmid NEVER seemed to be interested in, despite this player being in the game the whole time. That's Alan. Zork was never really interested in anyone except for maybe GoodKarma, if I was not wrong? Zork's "breadcrumb". Judging from the content of the breadcrumb and the location of the post he quoted for the breadcrumb, it is obvious to me this is a scum trying to take down a blue with him.
Alan starts by wanting to discuss tons of policy. Link If you noticed that was my first post, and it was fairly early in the game with little scum hunting going on.
Huge WIFOM, no commitment. Link I said him starting the scum hunting is a huge townie trait for him, suggest it could be WIFOMed into saying it has scum motivation, but I did not use them in my argument.
Wishy Washy on Golbat, creates distance from a mislynch. Link I defended Golbat and push for Shady lynch. I believe Shady is scum while Golbat is playing badly as a newbie town, so I am pushing for a Shady lynch. The "creating distance" is another fantasy of yours.
Defends Zork lightly. Link I thought Zork's angry reaction was a town trait. I made my stance on him based on that.
Kisses up a little, and references a game where out of several cases made, I only had a 50% scum lynch record. Link I was following that game because I missed it, and my impression was you caught the first scum. Scum was in a fairly strong position right now and I was hoping you to tip the balance.
I don't think this is entirely OMGUS. My case on him was not based on my own speculation or fantasies. It is based on reading his filter in general, and the small things that I picked up along the way.
How about stating a townie motivation for:
|
@Ange I am in the middle of writing a defence on Mordanis, in fact I started an hour ago, gimme a sec.
|
@Mordanis + Show Spoiler +On August 04 2012 19:36 Mordanis wrote:GOGOGOGOGO Town!! @SS Before I begin, I want to question how you can praise Ange (when she even took inspiration from GK, so if you're looking for the first suspicion D3 against Zork, its GK) for her case + call her confirmed townie and condemn me for "leading a hit squad that almost forced a no-lynch"? You're making me sad TT... Also, the fact that so many people are convinced that scum wouldn't bus one of their one at this point means that it was probably the best play for them, regardless of what really happened. I'm not willing to dismiss any sort of bussing yet. Moving on, I come to back to my case against Alan. Once again, Alan does one of his massive posts where he soft-defends two players and "pushes" the third. The third in this case was Prom. Interestingly, Alan picks up the "emotion" post that I said seemed contrived and used it as a way to meta-soft-defend Zork. Keir picked up on this post too, and he's flipped town, so this isn't a definite case, but the anecdote from the previous game is exactly the kind of non-stated psychological manipulations I've been looking for in scum. It isn't anything you can argue with, but it's something that begs to be sympathized with. Also, scum who contrive posts to exude "good townie frustration" would likely want their scumbuddies to follow through and say that frustration is a townie trait, but this is getting into the realm of WIFOM. I see this as motivated by scum goals, as it isn't anything that can come back to bite him in the ass until Zork flips, defends scum, and it doesn't help hunt scum. Another thing that struck me as scummy about his play is his attempt to simultaneously jump on my bandwagon and OMGUS me. He claims that it was not purely an OMGUS, but he voted me before posting any analysis. He sticks to his vote for me based on my not defending myself from his case, + Show Spoiler [I digress] +Just as an aside, If I had defended myself by picking apart every line of every accusation posted against me, I'd never have done anything but defend myself, which wouldn't have helped town. Instead I defended myself against the two main cases, and since there were basically no counter-arguments, and then hunted and found scum. and lashing out against my ignoring of his case while ignoring my defenses. It seems like an attempt to start a bandwagon on me as early as possible. His case against me is basically that my play changed D2. There's also a thing about how I assume in my posts that I'm not scum. I have no idea how he can be so certain that I'll flip red based on such small reads. He never even said why my change in play D2/N2 was scummy, just took it to be assumed. Which brings me to Alan's next post. + Show Spoiler +On August 03 2012 23:35 alan133 wrote:I just came back from working after hours. @MordanisI am disappointed. No one ever look at any case I wrote. Are they that bad? Am I being ignored? No. Not even Mordanis feels he needs to waste his energy posting a defence. Do you think it suck so bad it does not even matter, or you are just ignoring it, like how you have been ignoring other people's case on you, for being widely inactive, and over-apologetic. Why was MY post never taken seriously all the time? Do I suck that bad? Why are you ignoring my defence on your case against me? Did you just randomly pick two players and attack them? Once one of them sparked a Zorkmid bandwagon you totally forgotten about me? Do I still deserve my FOS or not? Did my defence cleared myself out of doubt or not? Why are you playing in such a way? You started the first ever case, and lingers on it despite you're calling yourself "trying to spark the scumhunt?" Why do you switch to Golbat, Shady and Golbat again? Are you desperate to hunt scum, or are you desperate to lead spark a mislynch? @AngeYes. I saw your case on Zork. I don't see the OBVIOUS SCUM SLIP. Your arguments on him was that he is wishy-washy, never built a real case himself, which yourself suggested that it satisfies a whole lot of players in this particular game. Then you jumped to OMG I MISSED SCUM SLIP. I failed to understand how speaking from a thrid-person's PoV imply you aren't part of that person's circle? SO you are also suggesting Mordanis must not be scum because he is speaking from a thrid-person's PoV every single time he talk about scum's possible motivation? + Show Spoiler +I can't believe I missed that TOWN SLIP! @ZorkmidWhat the heck is your game? Where the fuck did you go? Why did you go out and posted that "SCUM SLIP"? Why are you making such a big deal about a stupid relief post? Why do reading your filter makes me want to vote for you so bloody much?Why did you sheep? Why were your cases a rehash of everyone else's case? Where is your own reads? You and all the lurkers are all hurting town, or is being INCREDIBLY LAZY SCUMS. @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? Note the part on Zork. Why would a townie be angry at another player for scum-slipping? Why would a townie be angry about any player being scummy? Finding scummy things are good for town, that's how we determine whom to lynch. This post implies that you're really against Zork dying, which you should only be if you are convinced that player is town. And yet his only mention of Zork since N1 was his soft-defense post. How "I'm not a fan of Zork's play, but his style is similar to my own one time..." turns into apparent conviction that Zork is town and is being bandwagoned for bad townie play is beyond me. The anger in this would be sort of justified if they had played together in the past, or even known each other, but this is not the case, unless Alan is a smurf. Alan: Why were you angry at Zork for playing scummily?
I will address a few points: Why I am angry at Zork Before that, I was coming back from a bad day, so it might affect to the tone of that post. I got mad because the post I took hours of effort to write up, ended up being ignored. I was generally mad in that post, and not only to Zork. I was also generally referring to other lurkers, instead of just Zork.
I was not mad of Zork's for posting the "scum slip", but rather, my intentions is to pressure Zork to explain his "making a big fuss out of a stupid post". I still believe Mordanis was scum and I thought he was capitalizing on Zork's bad play to get away from yet, another lynch. All I could say is I am wrong.
However, re-reading that part myself, it seems like it could be interpreted to "scum alan getting mad at his scum buddy Zork for playing badly." This certainly looks like it fits scum motive, but I certainly hope you look past that. I can only say I was fairly certain of my own reads, which is unfortunately, wrong.
Why I voted you before writing a case My post writing is slow. I am usually free 6 hours before the deadline, and then it takes me 2-3 hours just to write one case, which always ended up short with all the spoilers. Someone mentioned "post a FOS as early as you can so we know your intentions". I agreed, and posted the "summary" there based on my impression at that time, accompanied by my vote.
Why the bring out 3 case, defend the other 2, vote for one. Most of the 3 case I brought up was people being discussed. I weight their "townieness" and "scumminess" accordingly and make the best vote.
No contribution in Scumhunt That is depressing. As much as I want to say something about it, all my targets flipped townie, or is confirmed townie, or is "kinda" confirmed townie, and I even defended one scum. All I can say is that I am either unlucky, or my scumhunting ability is just bad. I am relying my reads on the previous game, but unfortunately it does not help here. I know where these FoS are coming from, so all I can now do for town is to avoid a mislynch on myself.
2nd and 3rd scum @aRyu I went through aRyu's filter and found out there is not much to draw conclusion from, other than missing out day 2 entirely.
Promethelax seems to like him:
aR reminds me of some really great townie players who have given themselves posting limitations (Foolishness in Aperature and Mattchew in the first MTG) if he can convey his reads and everything else in Haiku more power to him. His play thus far is slightly green to me but not far from null.
However, the posting limitation he put himself is a bit "too much".
He votes for Golbat day 1 and Mordanis switch Zork day 3. Where Golbat and Mordanis votes accompanied with a case.
@Jingle Jingle doesn't exist until night 2. Before that there is MrMedic, and other than his post-lynch analysis/vote, there is I can't do a read on.
We all knows about Jingle's tunnelling on Ange. I am not going to repeat the case here, many people has made a case based on that already.
However, as annoying as his tunnelling is, it fits his meta from XXI, where he is a townie.
That is, unfortunately, all I am able to gather from these two other potential day-4 lynch, at least for now.
It is 1 am here, spent hours writing this. I highly doubt I will get NK'ed, so I will respond tomorrow if any more case on me.
|
EBWOP:
@Jingle Jingle doesn't exist until night 2. Before that there is MrMedic, and other than his post-lynch analysis/vote, there is I can't do a read on. nothing much there that I can draw a significant read
@Ange Yes, that is how long it takes me to write a post. Unfortunately it was a defence post with minimum scum hunting.
I am going to bed now, night.
|
EBWOP-2:
@Jingle Jingle doesn't exist until night 2. Before that there is MrMedic, and other than his post-lynch analysis/vote, there is I can't do a read on. nothing else.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Accidentally closed the page I was writing a post on, and had to rewrite everything.
@Ange
On August 05 2012 02:30 Ange777 wrote: 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. I will answer in Jingle's case below.
@Jingle I hope Obvious can justify my claim about Jingle. He was in the NMM XXI, where Jingle threw him out there and ended up getting mislynched, as a blue. However, later Jingle used the same tunnelling technique and caught a scum in day 2, and is subsequently killed and flipped town.
Here is his filter in that game if you want to verify it yourself. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398&user=159089
I saw and replied Jingle's post against me. I feel like it is a summary of my entire filter and quote one or two phrase I wrote and append a scummy motivated explanation on it. I can say both townie or scum Jingle would want to convince Town to not vote him, however, blatantly throw out someone else so they shift their focus on that person instead? I am leaning it to be [red]scum motivated.
If he is trying to say "If you guys trail me based on these arguments, Alan fits in more". I don't think that is entirely correct. I don't know what others think about my cases, but I made them based on reading filters and my own impression. I don't think they are full of WIFOM (Perhaps a little) but I thought they were logically sound.[/b]
|
|
|
|