TL Mafia LVII

On August 27 2012 12:33 DarthPunk wrote:
Hi all. I am considering joining this game if there are spots open. But I would like to know if I am still to new and bad to play. (I have completed 2 newbie games). Any advice on the situation would be appreciated.

On August 28 2012 01:38 slOosh wrote:
I'll tentatively /in, might out depending on how my school schedule plays out.

On August 30 2012 00:06 Toadesstern wrote:

and here I thought that one bullet was for VE no matter what.

Do you need/want a specific number of people to start or is it just starting on <insert date here> ?

On September 02 2012 12:10 Lvdr wrote:
I'm talking broad strategy. Maybe its just me, but I trust people a lot more before they have role pms, and I've never played a game like this.

On September 03 2012 08:24 Ottoxlol wrote:
when do we start?

On September 04 2012 07:54 Ottoxlol wrote:


BM is my top scumread, he said



just before day post and we havent heard from him since.

On September 04 2012 07:48 Toadesstern wrote:
The meaning was that I think he's a town blue and I therefore want to kill him as quickly as possible.

Or perhaps I don't like people pointing out useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game. I guess it has but what are we supposed to talk about the 2KP change or the vig addition he mentioned.

On September 04 2012 08:37 Hapahauli wrote:


... so getting rid of a player (BM) is always a good thing even if he's town? What, is leaving him alive D1 a mafia win-condition or something?

On September 04 2012 09:16 Hapahauli wrote:


Hold up. Why would we want people with information roles to claim?

On September 04 2012 09:22 Toadesstern wrote:

need an honest answer. What do you consider worse:

a) People not thinking while posting / reading
b) People defending other people 1 hour into the game when they have no reason to do such a thing and should be happy to see as much posts from the person in question defending himself rather than stopping the discussion defending him.

On September 04 2012 09:36 Toadesstern wrote:
--snipped--

There never was a vote on him to begin with lol

On September 04 2012 07:54 Toadesstern wrote:

you say that and yet we're talking about why I think sloOsh deservers a vote and wether or not you agree with me.
Funny, isn't it?

On September 04 2012 12:17 ShiaoPi wrote:


no...that kind of defeats the purpose

On September 04 2012 07:54 Toadesstern wrote:

you say that and yet we're talking about why I think sloOsh deservers a vote and wether or not you agree with me.
Funny, isn't it?

On September 04 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote:

Well BlackMamba's recent post just shows that people can miss information. My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not. Do you think I'm scum by my first post?

On September 04 2012 08:03 Toadesstern wrote:
because of that one post? Of course not.

On September 04 2012 08:20 Toadesstern wrote:

I think your post resembles someone trying to pretend to add something to the discussion while really only pointing out stuff that everyone else should know about. Like doing votecounts inbetween to "help" people. Yes it can actually help people but you can just help people by doing normal stuff.

Obviously I'm not thinking you're mafia yet. I'm just pointing out that your post was bad without acknowledging that 50% of the posts done within the first 12hours or so are incredible bad to provoke reactions and that's what happened.

Here we are, getting some decent information about how people think about each other and why they post something rather than talking about how the vig-change might influence the game, which is an incredible easy topic to cover for mafia.

On September 04 2012 09:36 Toadesstern wrote:

well sloOshs post has done nothing so far. My post was the reason we're having this discussion instead of talk about vigs or the 2KP change, which is, as already pointed out, an incredible easy topic for mafia to cover and blend in while people who are talking about reads, even if they're minor, have to stand their ground at least somewhat.

Yes I totally see how that got to be malicious



There never was a vote on him to begin with lol

On September 04 2012 22:19 Toadesstern wrote:

1) As mentioned. I never did. I picked him because he did a terrible post but frankly 50% of all the d1 posts are terrible. Clearly I can't say that to begin with though or I'd have to check out the 101 of pressuring again.

2) No I never thought he was scum based on that post as I already pointed out. I made it look like it to see what's going to happen. Again, it's somewhat like pressure although it's technically not the same. If I tell him "I think your post is stupid but as 50% of the d1 posts are usually stupid it's probably a null" he wouldn't have answered me at all or at least not in a fashion that would have provided any information. Neither would the rest of the thread have started talking about it.

3) More than enough information? It was 3 hours into the game and you keep treating it like I was only trying to get information on sloOsh. Yeah he was the main involved guy but the other people reacting to it (like you still not understanding what actually happened) is equally interessting. Not to mention that I obviously don't talk about my complete reads to openly unless I'm certain the guy in question is a mafia.
What I pointed out is a fraction of a read. On his own not worth a damn but it's a piece worth discussing and therefore worth posting although the read isn't anywhere near "completed". If there is such a thing as a completed read.

4) The bolded part was a joke as he said the very same thing himself and I got myself a note in my sheet as well about it saying:
So as I had it down as a null I figured setting the score back to normal by doing the exact same thing with swapped names might work :p

On September 04 2012 23:42 Ottoxlol wrote:


My bad, I missed that scum has no way of tracking. FML
Although he thought that millers are selfaware. He claimed and asked for others to claim, he can be a tracker, track everyone who claims.

+ Show Spoiler +


What? So Hapahauli thinks its not scum play, then sloOsh suggest that one of BC or Matt is scum (based on that BC is forcing 1-1 with Matt and he's lying so he is the scum) then immediately switches vote to Matt when votes started piling up on him.

On September 05 2012 09:28 Hapahauli wrote:
@ BM24

Does Ottoxlol's defense of Mattchew make him likely-mafia? While I consider his arguments insane (at best), I'd imagine that mafia are in full-bus mode on Mattchew no? I just don't see the mafia motive in going against the entire town to defend a guy who's basically confirmed scum.

Regarding MiltonKram - I think the key difference between his case and your case in DN Mini (tunneling you for that long was a horrible play on my part) is the presence of misleading evidence. In the DN Mini, your case wasn't good (D1 Caveats of course) but it wasn't misleading. MiltonKram not only tried to point out a third party, but used false evidence. I think there's a high chance he's mafia.

Now he could be a townie who made a bad play, but I find it unlikely given the content and timing of his suspicions. I also find it amusing that every time someone calls him out, he seems to fly into the thread, but is hush-hush otherwise.

On September 05 2012 12:52 Hapahauli wrote:


http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=361826&currentpage=29#570
What about Gravan? There's certainly some doubt in that post.

On September 05 2012 13:00 Z-BosoN wrote:


Yep, that's the main problem I would have with him.
Also, from your filter, you were pretty focused on Toad. Do you still find him suspicious??

On September 05 2012 13:30 Gravan wrote:



This is my fault for wording this sentence poorly. Although I am still leaning towards Matt being an assassin, he certainly looks all kinds of scummy as well. There isn't enough information at this point to lynch someone else - this lynch will, at worst, be neutral. I feel that, unless someone who has better evidence against them comes up (unlikely) we are better off to make this lynch and gain the information (Matt's flip) than sit idle. I am just asserting that I personally think he is an assassin. I'm done on the whole Matt issue now; still working on making my posts more constructive and less parrot-y.

If Matt flips scum, Ottox and Toad really need to be looked at. Ottox has been making his bizarre crusade about the potential innocence of Matt, as everyone knows. To me, Toad's last few posts have seemed a little aimless and very personally aggressive with little content. He spends a considerable amount of time shutting down and pointing at Ottox (who is looking obviously scummy or very misguided) in a well written post, then shifts to personal attacks and negligent remarks.

Sleep time for me now; I'll actually have some rest by tomorrow and won't be travelling.

On September 06 2012 03:57 Ottoxlol wrote:


At least I am not that retarded to attack someone on the ground of their first post that was clearly a joke.
I already explained my motivation two post ago. If you need some help understanding it you can ask for it nicely

On September 04 2012 18:22 Shady Sands wrote:


whoa what? Just got back into this thread. I'll read through it later (when I wake up) but for now,

##Vote Mattchew

On September 05 2012 05:20 Shady Sands wrote:

Why are you piling on Miltonkram? AFAIK you didn't even offer a single post on the entire Mattchew debacle and now you're trying to chainsaw defend Hapa by drawing associative scumtells?

On September 06 2012 15:39 BlackMamba24 wrote:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=329128&user=124671&currentpage=2

I see a clear attempt to be helpful and constructive here, at least over the first couple pages. Not belligerent, listening to other players, pressuring people, making a real effort to help the town. Seems very different to me.

On September 06 2012 09:42 Toadesstern wrote:
btw random observation that might be worth sharing as I'm not sure what to make of it yet but it's interessting:



Important part of the quote in red. Nothing else changed. That's it for today for me

On September 07 2012 11:37 Hapahauli wrote:
Before I go to bed for the night:

BroodKingEXE

He has two very suspicious posts regarding two confirmed players: Mattchew and Ottoxlol.

---

A bit before Mattchew is scum-confirmed (right around when a few players start voting for Mattchew), Broodking posts this unbelievably wishy-washy opinion on Mattchew.


Look at the logic - he first thinks its a great idea, then there are "too many holes."
He doesn't want to lynch him because his "roleclaim isn't verifiable until he is lynched" - the hell?
He said he's town originally, then says "its a coinflip"
Then he says "Fakeclaims aren't good basis for a lynch" and wants to wait until "mattchew sounds scummy". Again, the fakeclaim is the entire reason everyone voted for him.

But wait! Two pages after the fakeclaim (and before Mattchew posted anything in the interim):


After stating earlier that the fakeclaim wasn't enough to lynch Mattchew, he votes Mattchew for that very reasoning.

---

His viewpoints on Ottoxlol are the nail in the coffin:

Goes from top scumread:


Then proceeds to push cases against Miltonkram, Shadysands, and Gravan while Ottox is his top scumread:

Then says strange things about potentially townie Ottox while keeping a scumread on him.


Then SOFT DEFENDS OTTOX when talking to DrH

---

BroodKingEXE is scum!

##Vote BroodKingEXE

On September 08 2012 03:33 Hapahauli wrote:


1: That's pretty clearly a misrepresentation of your post.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=361826&currentpage=21#412
Firstly, you weren't even thinking about the mod confirmation. Your quote below proves this:

You explicitly state that his roleclaim isn't viable unless he dies. You very clearly weren't thinking of mod-confirmation.

2: Misrepresentation again. Palmar confirmed the lie 5.5 hours before your ##Vote post. You're telling me that you only gave Mattchew 5.5 hours to address his fakeclaim before you were convinced he was scum? You played off the entire thing as a mega-scumslip. Also, you explicitly mentioned that you weren't going to vote him based on the fakeclaim, and only if his posting was scummy.



In what way does 5.5 hours of Mattchew's silence describe this complete 180? It doesn't.

On September 07 2012 22:05 Maverick32x wrote:


Because you're posting. And that's atleast an indication of some kind of engagement.

BKE has fluffy posts, defends Matt a bit, and then just kinda floats around....however, I'm sticking with my lurking instincts and just going to take ShiaoPi out.

On September 08 2012 02:19 Maverick32x wrote:
Wow. Sorry for my awful grammar .. on the phone on a train....

I'll switch to BKE... But I agree there are a lot of good cases existing...

On September 08 2012 04:38 Maverick32x wrote:
Is the vote deadline at 5pm cst?

I'm really struggling with a BKE lynch the more its discussed... Anyone else have thoughts?

I really think Hap is town- but I'm just not sure on his read... I'm in a training so just trying to post on breaks...

On September 09 2012 00:26 austinmcc wrote:
Right. Either he's a watcher OR he chose a fakeclaim so bad it could be disproven pretty much by flips alone. And it wasn't a pressure claim, he was getting called out all yesterday, then claimed while nobody was doing anything.

I'm currently believing the claim since it seems like a giant risk to take when you're already down 2. Heck, why go with a terrible fake claim when you could name anything?

---

BM, where you at? We discussed scum having/not having some sort of leader earlier. I'd like to hear your updated thoughts.

Ottoxlol flipped town, so it's not a case where mattchew/ottox/gravan all messed up and looked scummy D1. 2 vets died, so they're not options as some sort of mafia general, commanding the troops.

Now we've got this BKE claim. Do you believe that claim? Are there players you could see saying, "hey you, go make a terrible fakeclaim that's so bad people will have trouble thinking it's from scum"? I don't see BKE, if scum, going that route, because you don't really gain anything compared to a better fake claim.

On September 06 2012 15:56 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Lurker albeit but what he has posted is scummy as fuck.

Votes for Mattchew...



Ravages Grush for voting for Mattchew?! As far as I can see, you put in as much input on the Mattchew debacle as him, considering you talked to him about it(clicky). At that point it didn't even matter cause he got caught with a scummy fakeclaim.

Other than that he's supported lynching lurkers and publicly announcing blue actions.

On September 09 2012 01:54 Gravan wrote:
I still want to hear BKE's best guess at what happened on N1, regardless any suspicion against him.

On September 09 2012 04:01 Forumite wrote:
Caught up. Still think scum held a killpower in order to get another night to find blues before they need to worry about the blues finding them.

I like the lynch we have and am keeping my vote on BKE, he´s too quiet for a player up for the lynch.

I have a read as "useless troll that needs to die" on grush. Seriously, what was that 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 song about?

On September 09 2012 04:11 Forumite wrote:
Yeah, and while you were here you´ve made cases on Maverick, Shady and Z-boson and a few one-liners, but since your claim you haven´t talked about yourself. You have loads of votes on you, but you focus on pointing out scummier targets instead of defending yourself.

On September 09 2012 04:34 Z-BosoN wrote:
No one has commented on your cases because you yourself don't give them traction!! How do you expect to convince people to vote for someone else if you yourself can't give better reasons and don't support your own claims??

On September 09 2012 04:53 Kreb wrote:
Ok, spent last 1.5h reading through last days pages (what better way to spend a saturday evening, ey?). Im not sure it even matter since BKE seems to be going out anyway, but the case on him seems like the best one so far. Voting for BKE.

On September 09 2012 06:23 Z-BosoN wrote:


95% scum.
5% retard.

On September 09 2012 06:45 mkfuba07 wrote:
I'm here. I meant to be through the thread already, but I didn't sleep last night, and subsequently fell asleep today while I was making my way through the thread. I quickly scanned through the last few pages, but since I've still missed much of the discussion I can't informedly place my vote. I'm going to have to bandwagon today.

On September 24 2012 07:20 DarthPunk wrote:


This.