|
/in
Also, being a math student, a more correct way of presenting the lynch formula would be ((P/2)+1) rounded down, where P is players remaining. Because 6/2 rounded up is 3 not 4(in math anyway, since you don't round whole numbers).
It takes (players remaining)/2 rounded up votes to lynch somebody. ie, with 6 players in the game, it takes 4 to lynch.
Sorry, but I couldn't help myself.
Edit: Also, first game ever for me on TL(only played the sc2 custom map).
|
On August 21 2012 22:12 ghost_403 wrote:@alsn: whoops ^^ I had the same guy who wrote my thesis write my OP, and it looks like he's completely clueless, as per usual. FIX'D. Hah!
I especially like it how you modified it in order to keep rounding up, but now it is correct, so touché!
|
On August 22 2012 00:10 marvellosity wrote: Number of votes needed to lynch Alsn = marv
how's that for maths Now you're just being rude!
|
|
Alright, let's do this.
To start with, this is my first forum mafia game ever, but that's not something I will use as an excuse. I've been following a few other games in this forum so I think I at least have some clue as to what I should be doing.
Now, being in Europe this part of the day is usually my sleeping schedule, so for me I'll usually be most active during the hours approaching "whole" days(such as the 10-12 hours before voting/night deadlines).
From the games I've looked at I absolutely agree with thrawn on the lurker pressuring gig, simply on the premise that more posts = more things to try to keep straight for scum.
Also, in the last game I followed there was a lot of talk about meta and how people played in previous games. I feel that given the few amount of games people have played in this newbie game(me in particular!) this is not something that I feel people should be focusing on(too much anyway). In fact, establishing healthy pro-town conversation and forcing people to speak up seems a much more fruitful strategy to pursue.
I would also like to mention that I feel we should discourage town from any kind of day 1 trolling and consider it a scum move. Seeing as anyone who is town behaving in such a manner is likely to cast all attention on them and way too easily let scum seem all too reasonable in painting targets on them. I realize that the game I am drawing this conclusion from is a game in progress(the prior newbie mini mafia) but the way that day 1 in that game was completely derailed is not something that I look forward to or seems like healthy pro-town behaviour.
And that's it for my introductory post, toodles.
|
Ok, I hate myself, getting to bed at a somewhat normal time failed majorly and since I need to be up for when GW2 servers come up early saturday, it seems my earlier plan of sleeping needs to change, so new plan: Staying up for another 12-15 hours and then instead going to bed early tomorrow(when I'll be totally exhausted).
Anyway, from skimming through the thread I have a few things that I probably want to comment on, so that will follow shortly(or, when I've made some tea and eaten a sandwich).
|
@Lvdr I tend to agree that Shady is not deviating much from his town meta, but as I said earlier I don't think we can trust meta that much in a game like this, especially since many of us are not qualified enough to draw conclusions from it. With such a small sample size we are bound to make mistakes if we focus on it too much. In fact, I think it's too early to tell from a few hours of one-liners and newbie advice even if there was some good analysis to be had from it.
As for yourself, I would think that as an experienced player you would be able to offer better advice to the beginners than:On August 24 2012 09:20 Lvdr wrote: Get out there! Don't use your newbiness as an excuse!
Given that, I feel that the following comment deserves scrutiny:On August 24 2012 10:11 Lvdr wrote: New players what do you think of my claim on shady? This because this to me feels more like you are trying to make the new players do the work for you and then claim credit later on through "I made them do the analysis!". Especially since comparing meta is not something easily done during a stressful day 1 as a new player(I tried while observing XXIV, it's really confusing).
So Lvdr, while I have no good reason to suspect you on anything but what I right now perceive as laziness, that could change if you don't start leading by example instead of through fingerpointing.
@kushm4sta, @WeeTee: The entire point of discussion is to make people explain their thoughts and reasoning. So instead of thinking you have nothing to add, try and figure out ways to question people's motivations. Why, for example, did players call you out in the way they did? Was it to deflect? Was it to make themselves seem overly active while they in fact were not? Was there another reason such as simply trying to help you start contributing?
There is a good reason for the "lynch the lurker" policy. This because it is in the towns interest to catch scum with dubious motivations or casting blame on shaky grounds and that can only happen if we force them to speak up. Thus, the worst thing you can do right now is to stay quiet and offer yourselves up to scum casting the blame on you without themselves seeming suspicious.
Instead, what we presumably want to encourage are lots of backs and forths in order to have a history on who everyone suspected and when, and for what reason(the filter button on the right side of people's posts are good for seeing this). As long as you carefully think about your arguments, no self-respecting townie should have any problem with starting discussion. Things to start discussions about can be: Who seems to be promoting the town agenda? Who are the people that look the most suspicious to you? And why! Is there someone who you feel are using bad or dodgy reasons as basis for their arguments?
Looking at the thread there have been a few posts since I started writing this, will read and post more in a while.
|
On August 24 2012 11:02 kushm4sta wrote: Also thrawn...this dude is just appointing himself town leader with his epically long posts with quotes etc, also intiating all topics of discussion. It seems like he is trying to make himself essential so no one will suspect him. Why would anyone care as much about the minutiae of lurker policy as thrawn? Because his scum strategy is to not be a lurker and provide justication to lynch any innocents that might be lurking. (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:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 09:03 Lvdr wrote: Shady this is like the third game I've played with you in the last few days. If you don't know my lurker policy you must be thick as a brick.
Policy: LYNCH LURKERS. Hopefully there are no lurkers and we can vote scumreads. 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. Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 08:55 Spaghetticus wrote: @Thrawn If the worst outcome of lurking is to not get lynched, I don't see how town can possibly eventuate victorious. Lurking is an aspect of scum behaviour, or of poor play, and should be treated as such. You seem to propose it as some sort of tie breaking mechanism, but I believe this to be an over-simplification.
In day 1, there will be extremely little information to go by. Lurking will almost certainly be the biggest tell as to the value/alignment of a player. 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. Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 09:27 Shady Sands wrote:On August 24 2012 09:25 Lvdr wrote: Wait has everyone posted already? I think so. Right now I'm concerned about Kush. His post at the very best is completely useless to town. 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
|
Oh, one more thing, if anyone does not understand any abbreviations, I found the following link to be very helpful: Mafiascum Wiki
Someone provided it during the early stages of XXIV and so here it is in this one too.
|
On August 24 2012 11:27 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 11:13 Alsn wrote: This because this to me feels more like you are trying to make the new players do the work for you and then claim credit later on through "I made them do the analysis!" I think what lvdr was doing was what you explained here: Show nested quote +@kushm4sta, @WeeTee: The entire point of discussion is to make people explain their thoughts and reasoning. So instead of thinking you have nothing to add, try and figure out ways to question people's motivations. I don't see it as anything more than trying to get discussion going and to get reads from players who haven't given any. Lvdr, Shady, and I have been doing it all game. (questioning people and asking for reads) If it was not clear from my post, that's what I think too. However, looking at his filter it consists more or less entirely of oneliners. Admittedly they are all somewhat pro-town oneliners. We're also only a few hours into the game, but I called him out because he could probably have done a better job of encouraging that discussion.
My point, if I did not make it clear enough was the following post:On August 24 2012 10:11 Lvdr wrote: New players what do you think of my claim on shady? The claim that he is referring to is that he thinks Shady Sands is acting like he was in his previous game. This is something that I feel is not a good way to encourage someone new to join the discussion since as I pointed out, I do not feel that comparing meta is particularly easy. In fact, with only a game or two to go off, it's particularly informative or revealing either. Sure, if someone experienced really wants to take the time to compare metas, then don't let me stop you.
I stand by my argument however that it's not a good starting point for a beginner.
|
On August 24 2012 11:45 kushm4sta wrote:Wow you sounded really smart about lvdr he seems fishy how he constantly shifts the focus to those he knows aren't mafia. And he does it in a very non constructive way. However you suspect me for some reason which is just wrong. If I were mafia I would be super nice and would not be aggressive or defensive in any way actually. It's because im town that I'm not afraid to act like this because I have nothing to hide. Basically I think you are mistaking "bad play" for guilt. Lvdr is 85 percent mafia in my mind though. We should lynch him.
I've already warned you, this is not a game based on gut feeling and emotion. A statement such as "85% mafia" is something which needs a lot more evidence than a few one-liners this early into the game. You are providing a lot of controversy with very little thoughtful analysis. I ask that if you are truly town to take a good look at yourself and think. You most certainly do not have to blame someone else in order for yourself to look like less of a target. In fact, baseless accusation only lets scum attack you for being incoherent while in one fell swoop make themselves look like town-heroes. This with town having only to agree that you were playing very weirdly.
I do believe that you are simply responding in a knee-jerk fashion to our attacks against you. Take a deep breath, take a look at what you have said, and think about if you really had good reason to say the things you did. If not, simply tell us.
But if you truly suspect someone, you absolutely must provide better evidence than "waaah, he called me bad!", otherwise the rest of us can't make any sense of your suspicions.
|
Also, I would like to point out that kushm4sta has at least been right in one thing so far and it needs mentioning again. Spaghetticus has produced no content of his own whatsoever. This could of course be due to having daytime responsibilities(him being aussie and all) but I would like to see him take part in the discussions at some point soon.
|
EBWOP: Hah, scratch that then. Gonna read what you've said.
|
On August 24 2012 12:09 Spaghetticus wrote:Oh and I apologise for the quoting format of that last post, I'll need to play around with the forum tools in order to make it more easily readable. Both of my quotes were of Shady's quote criticisms, so I have pasted in the quote he was criticising, then added his response underneath in both cases. Once again, my apologies No worries!
Actually I find some of your analysis intriguing and while I'm not as eager to suspect Shady Sands had any other intention than spur on some healthy conversation I would like to make it known that I'm backing you up on wanting an explanation.
|
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.
|
EBWOP: My first paragraph is very jumbled, please consider the comma after "conversation" a period. Or read this: + Show Spoiler +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.
|
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.
|
On August 24 2012 15:06 WeeTee wrote: 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? 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 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?
|
On August 24 2012 15:22 WeeTee wrote: @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. 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.
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.
|
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.
|
EBWOP: Just to clarify, by "their posts" I meant Shady posting at 12:02 and Spaghetticus posting at 12:03 with a FoS towards Shady.
|
On August 24 2012 15:35 WeeTee wrote:Still I find it amazing how instead of just answering a question we need to nit pick. Super encouraging. WeeTee, I think you are misunderstanding a major point here. Pointing out inconsistencies in arguments is the name of the game(or one of the names anyway). Without being allowed to do so, noone can be held accountable for anything. It is your own responsibility that your posts be clear, clean and unambigous such that there are no misunderstandings. More importantly, it is in the towns best interest that you take great care that your arguments are strong and valid. Without it, you will only spread confusion which is most definitely good for scum.
So just like I tried to articulate towards kush, you need to start considering your words better, without that being an excuse to post less. Without everyone trying their damndest to form clear and concise arguments, it will be very easy for scum to blend in.
|
Just woke up a little earlier, will be posting something within an hour or so.
|
So, right now I get the feeling that the feud between Shady and Lvdr is what is most likely to yield fruitful results, seeing as kush has been told several times over about what the situation is and what he should be doing.
With that in mind, I feel I must take Lvdr's side in this. I had had a long running suspicion against Lvdr since before I went to bed and was planning on making a case against him when I woke up, this was mostly because of his general lack of content in his posts. Upon closer inspection of his filter however, while he has a lot of very short posts, to me they all seem to lead in the proper direction, often mirroring my own thoughts on the matter.
Not so with Shady, the last thing he wrote of substance before I went to bed was the following:+ Show Spoiler +On August 24 2012 15:43 Shady Sands wrote:Oh :S my bad then. I'm going to say we should just do one of two things:
1) We collectively decide he's town and ignore him as a major target for the remainder of D1, move the discussion onto other folks 2) We lynch him first and get him out of the way
Let's figure this out fast, before we use up the rest of D1 just talking about him. At first, I thought this was a sound argument, but upon closer inspection I get the feeling that he just wanted to be able to later on get a wagon going against kush and I'll explain why.
The first option of ignoring him completely just seems too extreme. Why is this the only other option? This sounds to me as if he is trying to force everyone to conclude that only the second option is worthwhile. Also, this statement is similar to other statements made by myself and others(Shady included) earlier in the thread that we should focus on other people instead of tunneling kush, but with a subtle difference. It suggests to ignore him completely! Then he tries to stress us into making a decision fast. The argument can be made for stressing the point being a town motivated idea to spur on conversation and getting out hopeful scumslips, but he completely abandons the idea later when it does not take hold.
Later on he accuses Lvdr and puts a FoS on him. That was something that I was in full agreement with before I went to bed but as the thread continued on, I no longer agree. Lvdr having a town agenda makes sense to me from the posts he has made. Letting up on kush when we all agree that it's not leading anywhere could be seen as a scum move due to everyone already having come to the same conclusion, but on the other hand doubling down on kush makes very little sense to me.
The issue of the roleclaim is something I want kush to defend himself against, but until such a thing happens and we get closer to having to come to a consensus(I'll be awake from now until lynch time), I don't think kush is someone we should be focusing too much on. He absolutely must start partaking in dicussion without knee-jerk responses though!
Because of this, I'm changing my read on kushm4sta to a null read, while declaring a: FoS Shady Sands
This is all with the caveat that I cannot deny Shady's last point about wanting input from Weetee, myself and Spaghetticus, and I'm not entirely happy with kush's, mkfuba's and Dandel Ion's contributions so far either.
|
EBWOP: Just wanted to clarify a statement. Later on he accuses Lvdr and puts a FoS on him. That was something that I was in full agreement with before I went to bed but as the thread continued on, I no longer agree. Lvdr having a town agenda makes sense to me from the posts he has made. Letting up on kush when we all agree that it's not leading anywhere could be seen as a scum move due to everyone already having come to the same conclusion, but on the other hand Shady doubling down on kush makes much less sense to me.
|
On August 25 2012 08:28 kushm4sta wrote: @Shady Sands maybe you can explain this to me. If you are a townsperson why would you vote for me? Won't it become clear if I'm really the JK or mafia after the first night? I will say I'm going to roleblock someone then I'm going to do it. Why would the real JK, if it weren't me, roleblock the same person I say I'm going to roleblock? They would roleblock someone else to show the town my guilt. If you are mafia why would you vote for me? Now this is clear. It's so you don't have to kill me during the night (because you know I'm JK). You get the town to lynch me so you can kill a better player in the nighttime. That is your motivation for voting for me. I would like to point out that this kind of reasoning will not help your case. While I find Shady's reasons for voting you suspicious, you can argue however much you want about your ability to roleblock during the night. At this point noone but scum can believe anything you say about your supposed JK role, which leads all argumentation about it to be useless.
You should immediately abandon using it as a way to prove your innocence and take everyone's advice that we have given you several times throughout the thread, try to prove your innocence through discussion that helps town. This because even if it turns out you really are a JK, noone disputing that fact can really be held accountable for calling you out on it.
|
On August 25 2012 09:07 Dandel Ion wrote: @Lvdr: @Shady: It really seems to me like you are carrying over an existing argument/exchange from another ongoing mafia game.
I guess it's pretty hard to do (and coincidentially the reason I won't sign up for multiple games, ever), but please try to seperate this game from the other one. Ok, now this make me all confused... I guess it doesn't invalidate my concerns about Shady, but one the reasons I initially suspected him was because I didn't consider Lvdr scummy enough but he did.
That being said, I think I would like to let my current argumentation stand until we get some clarification from either of them.
|
On August 25 2012 12:13 Shady Sands wrote:You FoS'd me early D1 too. No need to FoS me again. I would just like to point out that this statement is incorrect. The only suspicion I have directed your way earlier than my FoS just a few hours ago was agreeing that Spaghetticus' arguments against you had some merit, but that I didn't find them enough to suspect you of anything sinister.
Lots of information posted in a very short interval now, will read and see if I have anything to comment on.
|
Ok, I would like to take a step back and see where we are right now and what our options are.
As I see it, we have 2 people pushing for actual votes. thrawn and Shady. I'm inclined to believe either story but I do find both of you to be a bit premature in your conclusions. Maybe you are just waiting for more information and just want to get the voting started, which I suppose is a fair point.
Both of the proposed lynchees are being pushed due to the fact that they are playing as "bad townies". Let's disregard for the moment if they are doing so under pretenses or if they were genuinely put off balance by attacks during the early part of the day.
I will state for the record that given the choice of only kush or WeeTee, I would prefer to lynch WT. Simply because the JK claim is something we should be able to confirm later on in the game.
Dandel Ion, mkfuba, Lvdr and Spaghetticus. What are your feelings on this subject? Should town be ok with just picking either WeeTee or kush to lynch, or is there something else of substance to go on?
From the last few posts here, I'm feeling relatively sure about thrawn being town, mostly due to the material he has produced, but also for following through on WT with what I would say is great success for his case. It should be noted however from looking at his filter, that most of his posting has been on the policy discussion early on, as well as defending people when it was highly non-controversial to do so(shady and lvdr early on, and me when WT attacked me).
Shady, I'm still not entirely satisfied with your reasons for going so hard on kush, but I can't entirely disagree with your reasoning.
I would like it if Lvdr came back to defend himself more against the things pointed out against him by you and others. Because while I agree with the following quote: On August 25 2012 04:21 Lvdr wrote: @shady My initial 'town call' on shady was mostly in order to stimulate discussion. Yes, he did match his meta for the most part, but it was extremely early to decide that someone was already town. At this point I am pretty suspicious that he decided kush's JK claim is scummy enough to insta-vote him. Seems like textbook play from a mafia jumping on the mistakes of a newbie.
##FOS Shady
And you,Lvdr, could make yourself a lot clearer on a lot of topics, Shady's criticism of you has not been entirely without merit and while I think he jumped the gun, it would help the rest of us if you could elaborate. Especially your backtrack on mkfuba who I also feel needs to get his stuff together and write something of substance.
|
EBWOP: That last segment came out kind of weirdly. the part before the quote and after the quote are supposed to be part of the same paragraph and, so just consider the "And you," to be a continuation of the sentence prior to the quote.
|
Ok, had to take a nap for a few hours in order to be able to stay awake at lynch time, but now I'm back.
Boy did things happen in those few hours! First, I would generally like to agree with spag about kush/WT as I made clear in my earlier post that I only really wanted to lynch WT if there was no other option.
That being said, if I am to exclude them both as lynch targets today the cases presented so far are against Shady Sands, Lvdr and Dandel Ion. Seeing as I have already placed suspicion of my own against Shady, I absolutely understand where Spag is coming from. However, right now I'm more inclined to believe that he is overzealous, especially considering the fact that if we (mis)lynch someone else, he is one of the players that we have the most material on for analysis as outlined by Lvdr.
I would like to return to the discussion we had early about lurker lynching. From what we have gathered so far, the "lurkiest"(descending from most lurky) seem to be: Dandel Ion, mkfuba, WT, kush and arguably Lvdr and Spag. I feel that Lvdr and Spag has at least provided enough thoughts of their own that they can be considered non-lurky, and mkfuba to some degree has done this as well. You all know my opinion of WT/kush resembles that of Spag. This leaves Dandel Ion as a lurky player that we don't know very much about.
For this reason, I'm inclined to agree with Lvdr that Dandel Ion is a lynch that town should be able to get behind. I realize that mkfuba accusing Lvdr has merit, and I will address his concerns, but first.
##Vote Dandel Ion
@mkfuba: I entirely agree with your concerns regarding Lvdr, but I find his arguments for lynching Dandel Ion compelling. I also think that a (supposed) scum Lvdr has gotten away with posting way too little motivations for his reasoning. I called him out on more than one occasion for exactly that reason. I do believe that asking him to shape up during N1/D2 would reveal his intentions however. Also, while your case against Lvdr has some merit, I feel that your own motivations could easily be seen as scummy, for these resons I cannot get behind your case just yet.
@Spag: I agree with you that if you are wearing scum-tinted glasses, looking at Shady's behavior can easily be seen as scum, I need look no further than my own FoS to see that and your own case surely doesn't help me lose that suspicion. Like I said earlier in this post, I do believe we need to give him the benefit of the doubt as well however.
@everyone I urge you all to listen to Spag's argument regarding WT/kush, please instead get behind one of the other cases and tell us your reasons for doing so. I would like to repeat my earlier sentiment that if the only choice we have is between kushm4sta and WeeTee, my vote will go on WeeTee. I would however like to see us come to some kind of consensus at least an hour before lynch time. 2:40 to go.
|
Just would like to point out that I will be reading this thread for all of the remainder of the day, so rest assured that if someone has something to say, I will read it.
|
##unvote ##Vote WeeTee
My net has been down for about 30 minutes, but it seems like WeeTee is the agreed lynch. Changing my vote so there's no last minute switching funny business.
|
On August 27 2012 02:58 Shady Sands wrote:He claims he has been busy FOSing people to prevent lurkers, but somehow he missed Alsn, who skipped out hours prior to nightpost and didn't even show up for the lynch. Wait, what? I most certainly did show up for the lynch. I changed my vote before the deadline too. Gonna write up my thoughts on the pre-lynch debacle sometime before end of the night, I've just been really busy today so far.
|
Ok, so. To recap, what happened before lynch was that me, Spag and others all mostly agreed that kush/WT were either bad townies, or bad scum and that either way lynching them would be an "if noone else pops up"-option.
I want to comment on the following, as this is the event that sticks out the most to me in the hours before lynch.On August 26 2012 20:59 Shady Sands wrote:Again, Kush isn't listening to others or making a good case. My case on Lvdr is not in how many people he was accusing but the way in which he was doing it. He was FoSing and voting people without giving them a chance to respond, in the last 12 hours before the lynch. And he was rapidly switching his targets as he did so. This is a classic scum technique to find out who is AFK/busy so they can set up a mislynch wagon, especially given that most of the town was undecided at that point. Shady, you claim that Lvdr was throwing blame around all over the place in a supposed textbook mafia move. Except, your argument simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Firstly, the target switching. You claim that he rapidly switched targets as a way to find out who were able to defend themselves in order to launch a mislynch wagon. Yet his only switch was from WeeTee, to Dandel Ion. This with an actual proper case to support his switch.
Second, it's true that WeeTee didn't show up to defend himself, but if your statement had been based in reality that's who Lvdr would have tried to wagon and not someone else who actually showed up to defend himself. Instead Lvdr stuck to his guns and actually argued with Dandel Ion who was very much here to defend himself.
Lastly, in the end it was you, Shady, who made everyone switch to the mislynch, largely together with mkfuba thanks to the following post: + Show Spoiler +On August 26 2012 05:44 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 05:29 mkfuba07 wrote: ##Unvote
Naturally, I'm currently looking at Dandel lon or WeeTee. As far as Dandel lon goes, I'm ignoring the fact that he's voting for WeeTee, because that is basically his only viable option. WeeTee's vote, on the other hand, I find to be one of his most suspicious actions. He votes for kush for the same reasoning that he uses to defend himself. Also, though I know there's a lot of speculation as to whether or not the JK claim was real, saying "I'd rather lynch him and know if he was JK than keep wondering" (paraphrased) is scummy. Whether or not you believe kush's role claim, WeeTee's reason for voting for him is anti-town.
For Dandel lon, his main defense against the accusations is that the main point of Lvdr's argument is that he's experienced and should be posting better. I don't think that that's the strongest aspect of Lvdr's case. The fact that until just recently everything Dandel lon's said was policy (acceptable to a point), comments that appear to be contributing (slightly suspicious), and wishy-washy reads (suspicious) with about 17 hours of lurking following it, is the heart of the matter for me. It's not just the lurking, it's the active lurking before that.
##vote Dandel lon Okay. Mkfuba, you hold the hammer. I don't get how you can view WeeTee's actual vote and KushM4sta-level anti-town play as being less worth a vote than Dandel's "active lurking." Furthermore, if Dandel is as experienced as people suggest, it is better to have him around than a terrible poster who won't contribute to scumhunt. Unless your read on Dandel is 100% scum, you should be voting WeeTee. As has been pointed out by others, your reasoning here seems very flawed. Why other than your own suspicion of Lvdr did you feel that the cases outlined against WeeTee were stronger than Dandel Ion's lurking? Because he absolutely was lurking. He only really started defending himself once he was accused. Before that point Lvdr was right on the money as Dandel together with mkfuba was one of the players with the least amount of content/posts.
In conclusion, I'm absolutely siding with Lvdr against Shady and as such, I would think the cop(if there is one? not sure on whether it's guaranteed that there is one looking at the rules) should investigate either one of them to clear things up. I'm not entirely sure who would be the best target however, but as of right now I would have to go with Shady. Lvdr's behaviour leading up to lynch seemed a lot more in tune with a townie desperately trying to get people to generate a "productive" lynch, something we IMHO didn't get. Shady on the other hand had a lot of inconsistensies in his arguments, some of which I pointed out myself here.
|
|
|
|