EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXVI - Page 3
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
| ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
For the remaining 24h of D2, I think it would be good if everyone could focus on 1-2, maybe 3 targets that they consider possible voting targets. Then we can get a minor grounp or players, maybe 3-4 or them who would be main suspects. Kinda like we did D1. Obviously we didnt really do it on purpose, but I think it was good we mostly focused on about 5 players D1 (WeeTee, Drazak, Kville, Cubu, Stutters). We can then let them defend themselves and choose a voting target appropriately. Feel free to share other suspicions (I've shared mine of Xatalos for example), but try to focus on your main targets. Im not gonna push for a vote on Xatalos even though Im kinda suspicious of him. I am however gonna push for a vote on Kville. I think all those accusations going on last 24h has given him too much breathing room. To me he still acted 100% anti-town D1, he still hasnt answered a lot of questions about his behaviour, nor has he attempted to explain why he considered his behavious to be advantageous for the town. Kville is also a low-risk/low-reward vote, which I consider a good thing. Should he flip town, we really havent lost anyone who is helping us, and it will increase of chances on hitting a mafia on D3. Lynching a more high-risk target will put us in a seriously bad spot going into D3 should we mislynch. We also run the risk of losing both the mislynch plus another good contributor N2, like we lost Thrawn. We will obviously be forced into a high-risk lynch anyway on D3 should Kville flip town, but at least theres a chance of not having to go there if we start with a low-risk lynch today and hit home. I really didnt plan to start my serious case Kville as early as this. I would have like to wait until closer to the deadline to try and find more clues. Main reason Im already voting now is that I wanna get a bit of focus back to people, get people voting, reacting to votes and only discussion the most relevant, say, 3-5 targets. To make it clear: Im voting on Kville in the voting thread now. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 07:39 kushm4sta wrote: Who are you talking to? Can you try harder to make your posts understandable? Like if you are replying to something make it clear what you are replying to. Agreed. Use the quote button to show who you are talking to or specifically state it. Makes it much more understandable. Noticed the same thing in this post: + Show Spoiler + On September 05 2012 19:22 JacobStrangelove wrote: I HAVE looked through those filters and because if it I want more people to do the same. It's obvious I am the big one going at killing at least so I am in a spot if he is lynched and flips town. Despite almost nobody thinking he is scum (after his list post day one people all thought he was town{not going to start the lists are easy to hide behind stuff again}) Also I don't think I am latching on to other peoples reads if I am going for killing and Xato. (xato maybe but you must realise almost everyone has been accused so almost everyone thinking the same could be a bandwagon move). The reason I am putting the pressure on Killing and Xato so much is so they explain what is going on. Assuming you are not mafia the likelyhood of one of them being one is high. So I agree we should put the heat on him that is what I have been trying to do. I haven’t commited to Xato as I am waiting for a response. Your and thrawns stutters read does make sense... motivation over activity. Whose analysis was I latching onto there? The only analysis part I latched onto was the first line. From kush going for Xatalos onwards that was all mine. (With exception to the wagon when tired up part) I am confirming parts of other people’s analysis that makes sense. Also the case against kush isn’t strong, as I said before you (not bad wagoning I promise...) It leaves more reason to Drazak being scum than Kush. I probably should point out that part of the reason I had a town read for WeeTee is that I happen to know his style (see his first post where he mentions it’s good to see me) and it reeks of town. With this (although he may have fooled me) I thought Xatatos read of WeeTee when Stutters was available strange. Also with killing he is sceptical of “meta” reads Sure but its more information, that can only be helpful. If WeeTee fits his meta (he does) and he fits the meta I know he is unlikely to be scum. This and the fact that he had to leave due to time problems(although that may have been after my time line is a little messed up) then surely stutters were a better lynch. For this reason I have been thinking that killing is mafia sudo protecting stutters. Since the focus is on me now I need to say The Killing /xatalos thing was simply a hypothesis I was using to draw them out. (It was based on someone else’s analysis yes) It drew out Killing and he responded well. (although it was list like) So I am simply waiting for Xatalos to reenter the thread. If he reenters the thread and doesn’t post good responses I will turn the dogs in my head towards him. At that point it was kinda clear you werent talking to Sonis, but not without actually checking back on what was written before, which shouldnt be needed. But still no reason not to do it. As kush said this time though Im not really 100% sure on who you're talking to. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 08:03 kushm4sta wrote: For instance if I had to pick three it would be drazak, killing, and xatalos. I'm going to try to get my reasoning in for drazak and killing before the 24 hour mark. I'll chime in that my main three targets would be Kville, Stutters, Xatalos. Nothing which has changed last 24h really, but might be a good idea to make it clear once more, | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 08:01 kushm4sta wrote: I agree we should limit our discussion to three people for the last 24 hours. But the last 24 hours haven't started yet so I think it's ok for people to still basically give suggests as to who those three people should be. For us in EU, it pretty much has :p When I wake up it will be 18h left or so. So I preferred getting the info out now rather than then, especially since I'll be at work 8h tomorrow. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
Kush: I agree with you drazak isnt an amazing poster overall. But that why you can take his accusations more lightly. I dont think anyone jumped onto Drazaks wagon on you Kush, did they? You should be feeling pretty safe given the opinions people post about you. You're also making conditional accusations. "If Xatalos is scum, Drazak might be trying to cover for his buddy". While its a possibility, theres absolutely not reason to ever go for Drazak in that case. Your focus should be on Xatalos and getting a mafia flip on him, which then would confirm your suspicions. Drazak: No offense, but you havent posted the most contributing posts. And your case on Kush to me is a weak case. As far as I can remember now, there hasnt been much support for your case, actually rather the opposite with people claiming townreads on Kush. I'd advice you to drop your case, if nothing else for the purpose of getting a more focused discussion since theres pretty much no chance there will be a Kush lynch D2. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 08:53 kushm4sta wrote: He is a semi-lurker and all around bad poster. So losing him would not mean losing good town, unlike a lynch on xatalos. I have a hard time seeing how that argument isnt best used on Kville. He is the definition of a not good town (if he is town). Also, people gave you towncred for your kinda unjustified attack on me. To me, drazaks attack on you is similar. I understand it might not look the same from the point of view as the attacked person. But just as people thought you had honest (but miguided) intentions on your attack on me, I definitely think drazak also has honest and misguided intentions with the attack on you. You're not having much more reason to turn things back onto drazak than I did have to turn things nack onto you. But I never did that. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
Page 14 if you wanna re-read. What had happened before was: Thrawn had made a case on Drazak. Drazak had responded with a bunch on replies. I pointed out Drazaks defense being lackluster. The drazak pointed out this: On September 03 2012 20:43 drazak wrote: I only mention a no-lynch in direct reply to what kushm4sta said, reread his post. Sorry if I'm being defensive, not sure how that's a senseless claim considering what kushm4sta said. Everything I've said has made me infinitely more useful on D2 compared to someone like kville, I have a lot to analyze, and you'll have more info. lynch me now and your future lynches get harder. See what Im getting at? Probably not. The key thing to me is this: Sorry if I'm being defensive That really had me thinking. Let me explain. That little phrase expresses the feeling of guilt. First of all, there is absolutely no reason for a mafia to feel genuine guilt at this point. He is being attack from one front (thrawn) and then has his defense kind of destroyed from another front (me). What is the feeling you get as mafia then? Desperation? Maybe. Resignation? Maybe. Anger? Maybe. Guilt? Hell no. For this to be a mafia-move, it has to be a planted feeling. A purposedly planted feeling to fool us. So, it it possible it was? To me, no. Because purposedly placing a feeling on guilt there is a pretty damn crafty move. And had drazak been a crafty mafia, he would never have put himself in that situation to begin with. He would never have replied so badly to Thrawns accusations had he been a crafty mafia. So whats more likely? A) He got taken by surprise by thrawns accusations, immediately tried to defend himself, but upon seeing my post kinda talk down on his defense feelt guilt and the need to excuse himself. B) Purposedly responded badly to thrawns accusation. Then upon seeing my comment gladly noticed that "hey, now is the perfect time to apologize for my bad defense, surely someone will make a read on me thats its genuine guilt and i'll look townish". Am I over-anazyling things? Maybe. But to me drazak is looking town at least. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 09:47 kushm4sta wrote: My attack on you was not unjustified and not misguided. Your post was a piece of shit and very suspicious and I wanted you to post more. You're going pretty off topic so I'll reply in spoilers. On topic: Dont you agree Kville is the definition of a not good town? + Show Spoiler + My post was two sentences agreeing on stuff like 3 people already agreed on. Then another 1 sentence of what I would do later (which for some reason several players auto-assumed I would not fulfill. I was accused of not fulfilling a commitment before there was even time to fulfill it). Thrawn also said it was unjustified, others pointed it out to, though maybe with with that wording. Stop using that aggressive tone. Calm down. You are making it only harder for yourself to focus and for the rest of us too. I dont want this to start into a dicussion about what happened 10h into D1. Thats over | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
Xatalos has been receiving quite a lot of suspicions lately. His defense has largely been that he's busy and unable to post. Now thats not a defense you immediately trust exactly, but the thing it that it is a defense. He is actually trying to get off the hook and post reasons for his behavior. He is also aware of his Cubu vote not being convincing. Now, none of those comment mean he is town, but he is trying to appear town at least, which every town should do. Kville, on the other hand, is.... not.... trying! There is little reason you would want to not try as mafia, but theres even less reason if your town. Why would you not want to even give the crappiest defense against accusation? He could have posted one sentence about being busy. He could have posted some weak theory why self-voting and not contributing as good for town (even if he knows the theory is terrible, posting a theory at least gives the impression that he's trying). But he has posted absolutely nothing. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 17:28 drazak wrote: Alright, I was afk most of the day. First I'd like to point something out about Kush's posting behavior, he tries to downplay my accusations, and say that my case is bad, deciding that there is almost no case against him in his first responding post. Kush goes on to make /4/ posts responding to my accusation and then accusing me. In his posts, he either delays replying to me, which if my argument is weak, makes no sense, it should be simple to pick apart. In the meantime, I've been afk and have made 0. This seems like a bit over an overreaction if he's innocent and my accusation is weak. + Show Spoiler +
You sir, have made a big slip, every time you're accused you throw it right back at your accuser, this is the weakest of the defenses, espescially when your case is weak. I urge the rest of the town to actually look at my arguments, instead of dismissing them as a weak case, look through kush's filter, and the posts I've described and linked, he's made a large scumslip here, at first my accusations were fairly tenative due to having only moderate evidence, but instead of his defense making my case weaker, he's made it stronger. P.S. sorry for taking so long to post, was going to hours ago and then had dinner with a friend, when I got home I had other stuff to do on my other pc, and then fell asleep for a little after I got my laptop out. I'd urge you to post your voting candidates, if you have any beyond kush. Obviously you are suspicious of Kush, but whats your other possible targets? If you're gonna go through with a kush-vote, that might not be wrong if you're totally convinced he is mafia, but at least be aware that the chances of getting a kush lynch is slim at very best. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 17:32 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: However, Kreb, I disagree with a couple of things. Your read on drazak being "sorry" is thoughtful and has merit, but it seems like you're putting too much weight into it. Also, I don't think drazak's case against Kush is very similar to Kush's early attack against you. Kush's early attack was kind of a spazz move at a time we had not much to go on, drazak's case just seems poorly reasoned at a time we got a lot of info to work with. This could both be done by a careless townie or a scum pushing an ulterior motive. I don't see what Kush's ulterior motive would've been. Fair enough, maybe I'm giving Drazak too much towncred. I was just kind of annoyed with how they kept going on each other. Drazaks attack came out of nowhere to me, and then Kush snapped back unnecessarily. What troubled me was that the longer that would have gone on, the happier the mafia would be. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
You did explain your reasoning of Cubu. And that was a very easy target to jump on, and its quite clear that both mafia and townies jumped on the wagon once it got rolling. So that is a 100% null-read. During D2, you have provided two posts worth mentioning: 1st) Discussing the meta of Kville. Once again, this is the most likely target jump on given his behaviour. Could obviously be geniune suspicion, but you have to agree that should you be mafia, jumping on those two targets is a very easy thing to do. 2) Defense against KillingTime's accusation. While also adding a FoS back on him. What you HAVE NOT done: - Responded in any way to the accusations on you by thrawn back on D1 and N1. Here, let me refresh your memory: + Show Spoiler + On September 04 2012 21:44 thrawn2112 wrote: I'm not exactly sure what you want me to chime in on but I'll talk about scumhunting priorities that you and stutters seem to be arguing about. In XXIV, there was a massive shit-flinging fight between shady and I. There were people who thought shady was being completely illogical, and there were people who though I was being completely illogical. The vote was closely split between shady and I and shady ended up getting lynched. But the people who voted for either of us voted on the premise that illogical posting = scum. There weren't any good scum-motive explanations for either shady or my actions and the votes were completely based on "well this guy says dumb stuff." Then D2 I got lynched and flipped vigilante, and once again nobody was voting based off scum-motive suspicions. The case against me was that my vig claim was unbelievable, and there was an association case against me because another player and I had made extremely similar posts at the exact same time which made people think that we were in conversation with each other as scum. Meanwhile there was a player who had been saying extremely illogical stuff, but most people gave him a town read because they thought there'd be no way that a scum would be so illogical. His actual actions/votes were so extremely scummy throughout the whole game. However, people ignored that because they were spending too much time trying to make reads based on the quality of his posts, when instead they should have been looking at his motives behind the posts. The point is motives>quality of posts in terms of importance to making reads. That was the reason I favored lynching stutters over cubu. They both were heavy lurkers without much actual contribution in the few posts they had made. The people who voted for cubu did it because the quality (reasoning, writing style, and relevance to the thread) of stutter's posts was much higher than cubu's. So in their eyes, having low quality posts (see my earlier definition of quality) makes you look scummy. I didn't think that was a good assumption to make, and I preferred voting stutters because stutters had done less scumhunting than cubu. At the time of deciding between the two, the only scumhunting stutters had done was the very last paragraph of this post. Cubu of course hadn't done as much scumhunting as most poeple, but his contributions towards finding scum were more than what stutters gave. It was a vote based on motives instead of quality... somebody who doesn't scumhunt (ask questions, state what you find scummy, accuse people with FOS and such) is not a town player. - Shared any townreads throughout the whole game. - Shared any scumreads except for right now against KillingTime. - Explained your (relatively) low activity. - Scumhunted. Thats stuff you have NOT done. To me, you're trying to create a Stutters vs KillingTime situation similar to Kush vs Drazak in attempt to create confusion. You. Are. Still. Not. Contributing. Though. Show us some reads and do it well. Actually, I'd argue this might be a good time for you to create a list (yay, list discussion!) with your complete reads on everyone. As for my opinion of Stutters. He is 2nd on my vote list, well ahead of everyone except Kville. Those two stand out big time to me. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 19:42 Stutters695 wrote: Townreads are worthless. I'd rather suspect everyone who isn't confirmed rather than risk having a "town feel" on someone and completely overlook a scumslip because they're townie to me. It also gives the scum a grasp on where they sit in relation to everyone else. Very good time to reveal your disdain for townreads I must say. But very well. I could argue about your claims being bad, but I cant really argue about whether you truly believe what you say or make it up. So this didnt put you in a worse spot to me. Not better either though, as it was a very standard reply from what you'd expect. On September 06 2012 19:42 Stutters695 wrote: I work 30-40 hours a week and am a full time student in my Junior year. Trying to explain why I'm not here isn't really relevant when if you believe that is determined by if you believe I'm town or not. Same here really. Cant double check what you do IRL. Standard reply. Neither putting you in a better nor worse light. On September 06 2012 19:42 Stutters695 wrote: There really isn't much to respond to on Thrawn's case. He felt I was more scummy than Cubu, obviously I know I'm not. I'm giving you my best reads right now, there isn't much more I can do than that. This, however, does put you in worse light. There is much to respond? Why on earth would a townie not feel the need to respond to accusation?!?! And you are not giving me your best reads, you're giving us a read on KillingTime. Singular. And yes, there is certainly more things you could do. Overall score: -1 to your towncred for the last part good Sir. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
This, however, does put you in worse light. There isnt much to respond to? | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 20:07 Stutters695 wrote: Please explain what is great about giving townreads? Putting the answer in spoilers again because I consider the benefit/drawback discussion of townreads to be kinda off topic for the purpose of scumhunting. Especially with limited time left until D2 lynch. + Show Spoiler + -By giving townreads you show that you actively think about who is town and mafia, which mafia obviously doesnt have to do because they already know everything. -Its also a committal, by sharing your reads you show that you are willing to share your opinions of other and that you are open to people questioning these reads. A mafia would love to be able to sit silent and not commit to any (or as few as possible) reads. -Not to mention the fact that as a townie you wanna confirm as many other townies as possible. Both because then you know you can trust these players' motives and trust their opinions to be genuine, and also of course because instead of having to guess the mafia players among all active players, you can eliminate a few a and focus on the remaining when scumhunting. -It might help people if you die. If I die but people use my reads to finish the game in favor of town, thats awesome. Feel free to reply to any of these points. I'd prefer if you did it in spoilers to not turn it into a discussion. No matter if you reply to this or not, I wont reply to it more. My take on townreads shouldnt really be a matter of discussion when we're in it for the scumhunting. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 06 2012 20:50 imcasey wrote: Seriously ? I feel i have a solid case here, and not a single one of you have replied to anything of what i wrote. I encourage everyone to read my post again, is it only me that think iv got a pretty solid case here ? I am sure Xatalos is mafia and he will be my vote. You do have a point he used a phrase which he previously said he considered scummy. However, a point doesnt equal a good case. To me, you're drawing way too big conclusions based off a small point. Cases are made with throughout reasoning and multiple points. You're putting too much weight on this one read. Your wording also supports this. You say you are "sure Xatalos is mafia". And you only offer one point before you come to the conclusion. Thats not really critical thinking. I could probably find similar miss-steps in writing among most players here if I really wanted. Hell, I've offered quite extensive cases and I'm doubtful if I'd go as far as to say Im "sure" of anything. In short: Make your cases more extensive. Theres nothing wrong with your point (actually, I do agree its with the point, its a bit wierd he used something he said himself is scummy), but overall I wouldnt call your case strong at all. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 07 2012 01:10 JacobStrangelove wrote: He did say this about you though. Your motives for voting Imcasey were horrible (at the time at least, and imo still are) and he pointed it out. I too thought the just cause vig shot would be a very stupid idea. The vote on kville is a policy lynch (not without merit I might add) but you have been very flippent with your voting. Where did you lose your town read or is it still just a policy lynch? If it is a policy lynch and you don't think he is mafia you know where this would put us right? (well I understand bandwagoing to stay alive I guess) This is annoying because it looks like nobody is going to agree with my thoughts on killing so I set an alarm to wake me up 2 hours before the deadline. This should give me time to read the thread and make a decision. I've read your case on Killing. Killing to me is one of those I dont think I have a read on. He hasnt been standing out neither by being overly agressive nor passive, neither by being very contributory nor by lacking contribution. Hes a solid neutral read to me. As such, theres a big "wait and see" sign on him. Givem the alternatives around, I wont vote on him. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
| ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On September 07 2012 03:53 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: Yeah, that's a good observation. I still have no idea what to make of the motivations behind that though. Both townies and scums should be motivated to defend themselves. That's what Xatalos has going for him and why I lean towards a Kville vote atm. Xatalos seems interested in the game and at least it seems like he wants to contribute. And he did contribute quite a good amount at the start of the game, during the weekend. So keeping him for another day there's good chance we'll be seeing more posts over the weekend. I agree lynching Kville gives us very limited information, we just get rid of player who doesn't contribute. The question is what we get out of lynching Xatalos. One thing seems pretty sure, if Xatalos flips red, it clears Kville. Otherwise, why would Xatalos promote vig killing Kville? However, if Kville flips red, it seems highly unlikely Xatalos is scum. Xatalos has more posts and votes too analyze if he flips red, but that's just because Kville contributes NOTHING. Not a great reason to keep him around. Could you expand on what information you expect to gain from Xatalos flipping red? I wouldnt count out bussing attempts at all with Kville flipping red. Actually, should he flip red, it almost seems like it was on purpose to sacrifice him. If I was mafia I doubt I would get into a defending position of Kville with his behaviour, that would seem very risky. Also, Xatalos flipping green is the worst thing which can happen atm. | ||
| ||
