EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXV - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
kushm4sta
United States8878 Posts
What i think about your read on Lvdr is possibly you are also mafia and you are protecting him. I don't like the leadership role you took in the beginning and I think it reeks of mafia. You are playing the role of the townsperson in order to protect yourself except you are going overboard and acting as if you are the super townsperson. Fact: you are the best townsperson so far, in terms of questioning people and intiating discussion. That in itself should be suspect. Your read on alvar is essentially that he is doing the same thing as everyone else. But he is making new people write stuff so that he can accuse them. What do I think about this random complicated meta? How the hell should I know. I dont even know how to check that stuff. Oh and who agrees with his meta theories, it's you. Good cop bad cop type thing going on here. Except you're not cops your mafia. ##FOS:thrawn2112 ##FOS:lvdr And please don't think that Im mafia beaucse I'm spreading confusion or whatever. I know no one is going to agree with me but I just want to be able to say I told you so when these two guys who are clearly working together end up being the mafia. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
On August 24 2012 13:49 kushm4sta wrote: thrawn: What i think about your read on Lvdr is possibly you are also mafia and you are protecting him. I don't like the leadership role you took in the beginning and I think it reeks of mafia. You are playing the role of the townsperson in order to protect yourself except you are going overboard and acting as if you are the super townsperson. Fact: you are the best townsperson so far, in terms of questioning people and intiating discussion. That in itself should be suspect. Your read on alvar is essentially that he is doing the same thing as everyone else. But he is making new people write stuff so that he can accuse them. What do I think about this random complicated meta? How the hell should I know. I dont even know how to check that stuff. Oh and who agrees with his meta theories, it's you. Good cop bad cop type thing going on here. Except you're not cops your mafia. ##FOS:thrawn2112 ##FOS:lvdr And please don't think that Im mafia beaucse I'm spreading confusion or whatever. I know no one is going to agree with me but I just want to be able to say I told you so when these two guys who are clearly working together end up being the mafia. Wha... I don't... Your reasoning for him being scum is that he's clearly the strongest townsperson? That will never work out for him in the long run. An active scum will talk a lot but say very little. If that's what you think he's doing, then provide the evidence for it. Where's the fluff, the wishy-washiness, the subtle assertions without outright stating his reads? Saying he's the "best townsperson so far" is different than saying he's the most active person so far. And please don't think that Im mafia beaucse I'm spreading confusion or whatever. I know no one is going to agree with me but I just want to be able to say I told you so when these two guys who are clearly working together end up being the mafia. If you actually think they're both scum (which you evidently do since you've FoS'd and want to say "I told you so" when they flip red) then you have to state the reasoning that you believe they're scum before you start looking at their actions from a scum perspective. Anyone's actions in the game right now can be construed as scum motivated. You already know that, since you defend yourself in the first sentence of this quote. I've defended Thrawn; what does that do to your scum defending each other argument? | ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On August 24 2012 13:49 kushm4sta wrote: thrawn: What i think about your read on Lvdr is possibly you are also mafia and you are protecting him. So in other words, you didn't think about my read because I am guilty by association with Lvdr, who is guilty for accusing you. Guilt by association is a pretty weak accusation to make with the limited interaction that's happened so far, and calling someone guilty because they accused me is a path I went down my first D1 in a mafia game and I ended up lynching a townie. On August 24 2012 13:49 kushm4sta wrote: I don't like the leadership role you took in the beginning and I think it reeks of mafia. You are playing the role of the townsperson in order to protect yourself except you are going overboard and acting as if you are the super townsperson. Fact: you are the best townsperson so far, in terms of questioning people and intiating discussion. That in itself should be suspect. "Fact: you are the best townsperson so far, in terms of questioning people and intiating discussion" therefore I'm probably mafia? I don't see how that is the most logical explanation and I think it's confirmation bias caused by your unfair association case against me. On August 24 2012 13:49 kushm4sta wrote:Your read on alvar is essentially that he is doing the same thing as everyone else. But he is making new people write stuff so that he can accuse them. What do I think about this random complicated meta? How the hell should I know. I dont even know how to check that stuff. Oh and who agrees with his meta theories, it's you. Good cop bad cop type thing going on here. Except you're not cops your mafia. ##FOS:thrawn2112 ##FOS:lvdr And please don't think that Im mafia beaucse I'm spreading confusion or whatever. I know no one is going to agree with me but I just want to be able to say I told you so when these two guys who are clearly working together end up being the mafia. Ok think about what lvdr said... he asked people who hadn't given a single read yet for their reads. How is this unreasonable and not a vital part of scumhunting? I see why you think he might be bullying on the new people because his post specifically called them out, but to be fair it was mostly the new people who weren't contributing at that time. Your accusation of lvdr is very similar to a bad lynch I caused for a townie in NMMXXIV so I can accept your motivation as being similar to my own during that game. I'm going to back off for now because of that, but don't expect me to allow you to make cases you are certain about without giving good reasons supporting them. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
Very pleased with the activity levels so far  Gonna read the thread in detail now. But first: @thrawn: Concerning this post of yours: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=361579¤tpage=5#88 Do you still want my answer? I can clarify what I meant np, but the topic of lurkers seems almost redundant judging by the amount of posts. Just toss me a quick yes or no. | ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On August 24 2012 14:16 Dandel Ion wrote: Alright, I'm back. Very pleased with the activity levels so far Gonna read the thread in detail now. But first: @thrawn: Concerning this post of yours: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=361579¤tpage=5#88 Do you still want my answer? I can clarify what I meant np, but the topic of lurkers seems almost redundant judging by the amount of posts. Just toss me a quick yes or no. Yeah go ahead plz, but I'd rather hear your thoughts on everything else that's happened. Just to clarify my stance on the lurker policy... I'd rather vote for a scum candidate but if there are none or we can't agree on a good one then a lurker lynch is the next best option. And yeah, the activity so far has been a lot better than my first game so I'm optimistic that hardcore lurking won't be an issue as long as we don't start slacking on pressuring people to post. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
That being said, while there has been some analysis of other posters, I would love it if we could stop focusing on kushm4sta for now. This in order to make sure people who hasn't contributed much yet are grilled about it, and that we make sure there is more than a single person being attacked. I noticed that Shady Sands also completely dodged the accusations by Spaghetticus after a post claiming he had to get some work done but has been very busy on TL for the last 2,5 hours. So, in conclusion, please stop the tunnelvisioning on kushm4sta for now and let's see if we can't find something else to talk about for a while too. After all, there's a lot of time left before lynch. | ||
|
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 24 2012 15:00 Alsn wrote: I'd just like to state the fact that among the people that have been active so far, every single one has pointed out that kushm4sta's posting quality has not been particularly stellar or helpful from town's point of view, it has sparked a lot of conversation, I also feel that we have all conveyed our feelings that in order for his posting to help town, he needs to start putting a lot more thought into his arguments. That being said, while there has been some analysis of other posters, I would love it if we could stop focusing on kushm4sta for now. This in order to make sure people who hasn't contributed much yet are grilled about it, and that we make sure there is more than a single person being attacked. I noticed that Shady Sands also completely dodged the accusations by Spaghetticus after a post claiming he had to get some work done but has been very busy on TL for the last 2,5 hours. So, in conclusion, please stop the tunnelvisioning on kushm4sta for now and let's see if we can't find something else to talk about for a while too. After all, there's a lot of time left before lynch. That was the work I was talking about. Got the email with a request to do some on the ground research about it =) | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
I'd just like to state the fact that among the people that have been active so far every single one has pointed out that kushm4sta's posting quality has not been particularly stellar or helpful from town's point of view. It has however sparked a lot of conversation. I also feel that we have all conveyed our feelings that in order for his posting to help town, he needs to start putting a lot more thought into his arguments. | ||
|
WeeTee
Australia24 Posts
I have read through the current content, and every ones filters. It seems to me that everyone has taken a disliking to kushm4sta's quote "Lvdr is 85 percent mafia in my mind though. We should lynch him." Even for a newbie like me I was like .... But I think that a real scum wouldn't reveal information in this clumsy manner and I know i'm not directing any suspicion there as kush is too easy of a target to pick off. I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down. On August 24 2012 11:33 Alsn wrote: (Emphasis mine) I like that you are starting to contribute to the discussion. I don't, however, agree with your conclusion. If you look at the following post(long, so spoilered it): + Show Spoiler + On August 24 2012 09:34 thrawn2112 wrote: If it comes down to voting for a strong scumread and one of several lurkers, I'd rather go with the scumread. Being too focused on lurkers caused me to play poorly in my last game. If I make a strong case against a player I am definitely going to vote for them. Excluding that, lynching a lurker is the backup plan. Your experience of how mafia players lurk during newbie games is something I don't have so I don't share your commitment to a flat out "only lynch a lurker during D1" plan. I don't think that "worst outcome of lurking is to not get lynched" but I don't think that D1 is the time to do it. Of course there are always exceptions...such as the player who has 4 posts at the end of D1, he's sheeping the popular cases, and never offers any original reasoning for his votes. But yeah, hopefully lurking won't be an issue. I expect all this talk about lurker policy will help achieve that. And this disagreement isn't that big of an issue to me, because if I have a case worth lynching someone over then it should be a strong enough case to convince everyone else. That post also caught my eye and I suggested that he comment on the current discussion but so far there's been nothing. Kush it's not too big a deal this early on but the longer you wait the worse it's going to look. In this post thrawn argues with Lvdr about the lyrker lynch policy and makes clear and concise arguments and in fact comes to the conclusion that the policy post did it's job in that it put focus on starting discussion. Something which is good for town. You then immediately jump to the conclusion that he must be scum that wants to look like town. I feel this is overly aggressive on your part and while it's entirely possible that you are just feeling attacked right now and reacting a bit emotionally, please understand that things are not personal. If you are in fact a townie trying to cast blame on someone you suspect as scum, you should use clearly articulated points with a clear explanation of the basis of your argument. So until you prove to me otherwise, I feel I must suspect you for being overly defensive about your posting. FoS kushm4sta I will put a FoS on Alsn for this But it is undeniable that kushm4sta is rubbing everyone the wrong way. Let me know what you think about Alsn Fos-ing Kush, Does Alsn see an easy opportunity to take someone out? and why is he the only one that chirped up for the obvious? | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
On August 24 2012 15:04 Shady Sands wrote:That was the work I was talking about. Got the email with a request to do some on the ground research about it =) Haha, ok, I forgive you. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
On August 24 2012 15:06 WeeTee wrote: First I would like to point out that I have not been the only one to criticize kush as you claim, several people jumped on the bandwagon(for good reason, I might add) when he first started accusing people.I will put a FoS on Alsn for this But it is undeniable that kushm4sta is rubbing everyone the wrong way. Let me know what you think about Alsn Fos-ing Kush, Does Alsn see an easy opportunity to take someone out? and why is he the only one that chirped up for the obvious? I would also like you to see my latest post where I explicitly say that we should stop worrying about kush for now as I think it's taking up too much of our attention. I have every intention of forgiving kush's mistakes, if he can start acting like that's what they are, instead of coming up with convoluted explanations as to why he feels the way he does. If you do not consider my latest post on kush to satisfy your suspicions against me, could you explain to me why that is? | ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On August 24 2012 15:06 WeeTee wrote: Hi all, sorry for not regularly posting I have Uni commitments and such. I have read through the current content, and every ones filters. It seems to me that everyone has taken a disliking to kushm4sta's quote "Lvdr is 85 percent mafia in my mind though. We should lynch him." Even for a newbie like me I was like .... But I think that a real scum wouldn't reveal information in this clumsy manner and I know i'm not directing any suspicion there as kush is too easy of a target to pick off. I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down. I will put a FoS on Alsn for this But it is undeniable that kushm4sta is rubbing everyone the wrong way. Let me know what you think about Alsn Fos-ing Kush, Does Alsn see an easy opportunity to take someone out? and why is he the only one that chirped up for the obvious? Why did you pick Alsn out of the people who were supsicious of kush? lvdr put a FOS on kush after Alsn did, and lvdr's case against kush was only composed of: On August 24 2012 12:54 Lvdr wrote: Kush is my #1 scum read right now based on his 85% sure post. There is no real evidence and so it only spreads suspicion without anything to back it up. Please make better reads and use evidence. ##FOS:Kushm4sta whereas Alsn's case was much more thorough: On August 24 2012 11:33 Alsn wrote: In this post thrawn argues with Lvdr about the lyrker lynch policy and makes clear and concise arguments and in fact comes to the conclusion that the policy post did it's job in that it put focus on starting discussion. Something which is good for town. You then immediately jump to the conclusion that he must be scum that wants to look like town. I feel this is overly aggressive on your part and while it's entirely possible that you are just feeling attacked right now and reacting a bit emotionally, please understand that things are not personal. If you are in fact a townie trying to cast blame on someone you suspect as scum, you should use clearly articulated points with a clear explanation of the basis of your argument. So until you prove to me otherwise, I feel I must suspect you for being overly defensive about your posting. FoS kushm4sta What is your read on lvdr? | ||
|
WeeTee
Australia24 Posts
I like you response verrry smooth. I must have started writing before you posted so sorry for that. Are you willing to say that kush is in the clear then? or do you think there is something underlying still? I guess throwing around FoS can mean next to nothing, especially if you change your mind so fast. I wonder now you have stopped leading the bandwagon if someone will pick it up again. Kush is an easy target. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
@trawn: I did NOT try to suggest we just pick a random lurker and lynch him for the hell of it I DID suggest that somebody that is scummy AND lurky should imo take higher lynch-priority than somebody who's "just" scummy. This is of course within the bounds of reason: If somebody is really really active, but makes several scumslips, I'm not gonna propose we lynch a kinda-scummy lurker. As stated, we probably won't have a lurker issue (most likely thanks to the small 9-person setup), so this is kinda obsolete. @Alsn: On August 24 2012 15:00 Alsn wrote: I noticed that Shady Sands also completely dodged the accusations by Spaghetticus after a post claiming he had to get some work done but has been very busy on TL for the last 2,5 hours. I think it's not generally well-recieved in mafia to argue by using a players activity in the rest of TL. Afair it's not explicitly forbidden in this very game, but it's still a bad argument, and you shouldn't use it. @WeeTee On August 24 2012 15:06 WeeTee wrote: Hi all, sorry for not regularly posting I have Uni commitments and such. I have read through the current content, and every ones filters. It seems to me that everyone has taken a disliking to kushm4sta's quote "Lvdr is 85 percent mafia in my mind though. We should lynch him." Even for a newbie like me I was like .... But I think that a real scum wouldn't reveal information in this clumsy manner and I know i'm not directing any suspicion there as kush is too easy of a target to pick off. I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down. [...] I will put a FoS on Alsn for this But it is undeniable that kushm4sta is rubbing everyone the wrong way. Let me know what you think about Alsn Fos-ing Kush, Does Alsn see an easy opportunity to take someone out? and why is he the only one that chirped up for the obvious? You say you read the thread and everyone's filters. Then you state that Alsn is the only one that called out kush? You clearly have either: A) not read the thread B) not understood what's happening. Both are not good signs. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
On August 24 2012 15:22 WeeTee wrote: I do not mean that my suspicion against kush has gone away, I am still not satisfied with his defense against my concerns about his posting.@Alsn I like you response verrry smooth. I must have started writing before you posted so sorry for that. Are you willing to say that kush is in the clear then? or do you think there is something underlying still? I guess throwing around FoS can mean next to nothing, especially if you change your mind so fast. I wonder now you have stopped leading the bandwagon if someone will pick it up again. Kush is an easy target. What I mean is that it is harmful for town if we keep arguing back and forth about kush and do not discuss anyone else. This because if it turns out that noone else is scummy, and we lynch him and he turns out to be town and just wasnt defending himself very well, we will be back at square one, except with 5 town against 2 scum(scum will undoubtely kill a townie during night 1). If at that point the only thing we have done is attack someone that had a hard time defending himself, we would have almost no usable information at all to try and find out who is scum and who isnt. Thus, I just want us to all agree that kush needs to get his act together but that we need to start talking about something/someone else too. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
On August 24 2012 15:24 Dandel Ion wrote:I think it's not generally well-recieved in mafia to argue by using a players activity in the rest of TL. Afair it's not explicitly forbidden in this very game, but it's still a bad argument, and you shouldn't use it. Alright, point taken, I'll refrain from it in the future. I just found the timing of their postings to be a bit weird as their posts were within a few minutes of each other. In retrospect and checking out that other thread I now realize he wasn't intentionally saying nothing here, he was simply not reading.My point however wasn't so much the inactivity as the fact that I would still like to see him respond to Spaghetticus. | ||
|
WeeTee
Australia24 Posts
@dandel I'm not interested in your negativity. I'm simply making my point. My first quote had my message "I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down." I see my mistake in saying "the only one that chirped up", which thrawn just pointed out. please disregard that comment. Still I find it amazing how instead of just answering a question we need to nit pick. Super encouraging. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
| ||
|
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 24 2012 12:34 Spaghetticus wrote: ... I do however, disagree with Lvdr's assessment of Shady Sands. He has been very critical so far, but nothing he has said comes to mind as particularly proactive (I'll eat my word if he can give me a counter-example). In particular, his critique of Lvdr's comment: filter On August 24 2012 08:54 Lvdr wrote: He said: This seems like empty criticism, as he almost seems to deliberately misinterpret the statement in order to give himself something to say. If Lvdr thinks we should lynch lurkers, but not give up actively scumhunting in order to do this, then it does not at all seem that he is suggesting these two things are mutually exclusive. Yet this is what Shady seems to suggest. Furthermore, Lvdr has played with Shady before, and claims that Shady should by now have an idea of Lvdr's policy preference. Soon afterwards, he had the following criticism of Fubu's post: On August 24 2012 06:30 mkfuba07 wrote: He wrote: This is an accurate criticism, but not particularly useful. IMO (and fubu feel free to step in and correct me) Fubu's post was poorly written and he mistakenly made his both a descriptive and prescriptive assertion: that we will all look for scum during the day and the night and that we should all look for scum in the day and the night. If my interpretation is correct, then this is a completely understandable mistake and speaks extremely little of some scummy motivation he may or may not have. So far I have shown you two examples of what I believe are needlessly critical posts, that is: posts that are needlessly skeptical of things that will not help us catch scum. Now, as WeeTe has already mentioned, posting lots is generally attributed to town behaviour. However, posting lots of unproductive criticism seems like the sort of thing a scum would do to look like town but not contribute to the lynching of scum. FoS Shady Sands I would like to note that I am the first person to my knowledge that is acting against Shady, and IMO I am the first person to put up a decent reason to actually suspect anyone. I'm gonna get back to study, and I'll likely be unable to post for the next 11 hours, at which point I'll go through a read and post before heading to bed. On accusing Lvdr: I saw a policy disagreement developing in the thread--between leaning towards lurker lynching versus scumhunting--and I wanted to make sure Lvdr wasn't trying to unfairly equivocate on it. basically, in questions of policy, if someone posts on it, the post should have a clear preference one way or another so that we can judge their later play against their policy prefs--or combine them in such a way to have a clear lean in terms of policy, again, so we can judge their later play against their earlier view on policy. Lvdr's post didn't do that--it just balanced between the two while also saying they were different. I personally feel the two should be balanced but combined, so I wanted to see if Lvdr wanted to keep the two parts separate. On Fuba: most of my doubts on Fuba have gone away by now, but at the time, I thought that Fuba's emphasis on night activity itself is scummy. Scum have greater power to use and abuse the thread than town does at night, so encouraging heavy activity at night without saying daytime activity is more important hands an edge to scum. But given that was his first post I didn't want to push him too hard on it. Now, moving to Kush: Kush is running the classic "bad townie" defense. It's an argument where the poster says: 1) I am a bad townie 2) People are just targeting me because I'm a bad townie, and hence easy to lynch 3) Those people must be targeting me because I'm easy, and not because they actually think I'm scum 4) Because those people aren't targeting me because I'm scum, then they must be trying to trick town 5) They must be scum. This is a really bad defense because every links 1-2, 2-3, and 3-4 are all not 100% airtight. Hence Kush's entire defense, to me, is a wash--it neither makes him look scummier, nor makes him look like more of a townie. If Kush keeps posting like this, though, then I'm probably going to vote him because my initial read will be unchanged. But if Kush decides to start posting coherent, long cases backed by logic instead of OMGUS, then I might change my mind. | ||
| ||
