Newbie Mini Mafia XXVII - Page 55

thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 11:44. Posts 1285 PM Profile Blog Quote #
filter
On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote:
Show nested quote +


Terrible idea? Since we prob have liek 3 different time zones.
Biggest lurker gets lynched is a better plan but still not that great.
A lot of noobs are pretty lost about what to do day 1.

Here are my suggestions for discussion topics:
1 discuss lurker policy. I know you are bored with it or whatever, thrawn, but for peopel to say how they feel about lurkers and if they want to lynch them or let them lurk (both are viable strategies imo) gives us a baseline for FOSing people that go back on their lurker policy.
Like what if a scum says lynch all lurkers, then one of the scumbuddies turns out to be the biggest lurker. That puts him in a bad position that he could avoid without lurker policy discussion.

Eh, lurker policy is a pretty obvious thing to talk about and shouldn't last longer than maybe a single statement (if that) from each player. However like you implied having something to talk about is better than having nothing but in my past games town went on and on about lurkers for like 12 hours which is obviously bad.

On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote:2 I think we should discuss a plan for how to spend time.
Here is my proposed plan: Freely making cases against anyone you think is scum in the first 24 hours of the day, then focusing on a couple of the biggest bandwagons in the second 24 hours.
Do you like this plan or do you have a better one? I would a more systematic scumhunt this game though.

Lets not get too carried away with deciding on exactly how we'll proceed... that makes it very easy for mafia to hide. Remember the list stuff in our last game? Wasn't it sonic who proposed that idea and he ended up being scum and was able to hide his reads behind it because other people were also making lists?

On September 19 2012 02:46 thrawn2112 wrote:


Ok. Every newbie game I've played in has started with tons and tons of talk about lurker policy, the term I used earlier for it was a "lurker policy circle-jerk." I didn't want this game to go down that path, so I needed to say something that would give people something to argue about instead of everyone just agreeing with each other about lurkers for the first half of D1. So I said something completely ridiculous that I thought should have been obvious to everyone that it wasn't a real suggestion...... obvious to everyone except scum, who are over eager to jump on anything in order to push a mislynch. Hence, "scum-bait." So yes, it was a serious question that I was hoping to get responses to, but it wasn't my personal choice for D1 lynch. A few posts after that I outlined my real D1 lynch ideas.

On September 19 2012 03:42 thrawn2112 wrote:
sonic: The point is not to see who disagrees with a obviously ridiculous statement, the point is to see who is eager to build a case against me because of it. Other people casually mentioned that it was a flat out awful idea but you presented the false dichotomy that either I posted it as town which you see as most unlikey, or that I posted it as scum.

About debears: I'll read his filter and point out what I think about it, but for now the thing that struck me as odd was the line:
I don't see why he is making it such a huge goal for town to establish if I am 100% town or not. Seems a little too off topic from the whole scumhunting thing.

On September 19 2012 04:20 thrawn2112 wrote:
OK so kush do you think I'm scum? Do you have reasons for that or is it just a shitty halfway into D1 association case?

I went through debear's filter and here's what I've got:

People are jumping on him for defending me, under the reasoning that either A) he's mafia trying to make safe posts or B) he and I are both mafia and he's trying to defend me. B is the vibe I'm getting from kush and sonic. But what about option C) that he's town and talking about something that everyone else is talking about? Obviously I say B is dumb excpet from the perspective of sonic who had been accusing me most of the game, but I don't see any indicator that option A or option C is more likely. To me it looks like the people who are accusing him are doing so because they already thought I looked scummy, or because they are scum themselves pushing a mislynch.

The thing in debear's filter I disagreed with was his agreement that kush is sk. I can see how it would be possible but I don't see any reason to think it's likely, especially since we don't even yet know if there's a sk or not. Debears what are your thoughts on kush beyond what you already said?

In summary: His defense of me doesn't look more town-motivated or mafia-motivated, so I'm going with a null read on the whole "defending thrawn" situation.

Pre Edit: just saw that he posted some stuff about rethos, so my current read on him is that he's done nothing that I see as scummy and he has participated in discussion and brought some original ideas into the mix. So overall I'm saying he's looking town. His defense of me was a little to lengthy and aggressive to be normal but I don't know why he'd do that as town or mafia.

On September 19 2012 05:47 thrawn2112 wrote:
I already answered you but I'll go more in depth.

He says that he thinks I am town and asks if anyone has evidence otherwise. So my interpretation of it is that he's aggressively trying to convince people that I'm town. So what would the motivations be behind that? There's the one that he's town trying to convince people he's right, and there's the possibility that he's scum and is "dickriding" like kush said. But I don't see either being more likely than the other. That's why it doesn't factor into my overall read on him. So in summary, it's weird, but gives me nothing to make a read off of.

On September 19 2012 01:16 thrawn2112 wrote:


##Fos KillingTime

Nice contribution to the thread. Do you really think that's something worth talking about when there are already lots of other discussions going on?

On September 19 2012 06:39 thrawn2112 wrote:


Here's why him defending me doesn't have to be only a scummy move. At that time a huge amount of discussion was between sonic and I and we were going at each other pretty hard. You say I wasn't in any real danger which is true but the argument between sonic and I was the most talked about thing at the time. So debears goes into the thread and gives his read on the most popular topic at the moment, and his read happens to be that I'm town. It seems like a lot of people in here are of the mindset that if player a assigns player b a town read, then by golly player a must be scum. It is not bad at all to talk about town reads, it's only bad if that's the only thing you're doing which isn't what debears has done.

And confirming a townie is extremely useful... it gives you one less target to be suspicious of at least for the time being. You keep going back to that quote from debears I brought up. It does strike me as overzealous but nothing beyond that, especially since he hasn't slacked on scumhunting. In regards to why would he make such a strong statement if he is town, well I do not know. Hence my null read on that particular statement.

On September 20 2012 04:51 thrawn2112 wrote:
{b]stutters: so your point about cubu is that no matter what he flips he is so anti-town he needs to be lynched? I can see that logic... especially since he hasn't even voted. (same for drazak- no vote yet). However I stand by my lurker policy of lynching the lurker with the largest amount of scummy content which is killing.

I still say that sharrant is scummy enough to override lurker policy

On September 20 2012 04:12 thrawn2112 wrote:
If a lurker lynch is the only possible outcome then I prefer killing over cubu. For those of you that played in XXVI it's for the same reasons I wanted to lynch stutters instead of cubu. Yes I know they both ending up flipping green but I'd rather vote for the scummy looking lurker instead of the null read lurker. Killing's post count is a little higher than cubu's of course... but the fact that his post count is a little higher AND that he comes across as scummy makes him a better lurker lynch. If you wanna see cases against killing just go through my filter and ctrl+f "killing"

Cubu why did you sign up for this game when you can only make like 3 posts every 48 hours? Or.... are you mafia?

@Remedy:

The thing about kush's motives is that in the 2 games I played with him, his town meta in both games was to look scummy. Not intentionally of course but IMO he posts a lot of stuff without thinking about it. So while I do think there's been some scummy things he's said this game, because of his meta I'm going to overlook them until a little later (D2) into the game when I can actually look at the direct consequences of his actions.

I still think sharrant has said blatantly scummy things, and I've thought through possible "plans" he could've had and I don't see any that make sense so I think he's lying about that.

On September 20 2012 06:57 thrawn2112 wrote:
So, I don't know if I should trust this mason claim or not, but what does everyone think about this plan:

So maybe we should lynch cubu, and if cubu flips mason well then at least we have a confirmed town player (sharrant) and we haven't lost a useful poster. If Cubu doesn't flip mason then we atuo lynch sharrant D2.

In the outcome that cubu is mason, then like others have said about him earlier we aren't losing a player who is willing to scumhunt or contribute or say anything at all. And yeah mafia will have a good target for their nightkills (sharrant) but if there's a medic or a jailkeeper, and I think it's likely that there will be at least one of those, then they can save sharrant from nk's at their own discretion.

All that being said I still don't know if I believe the mason claim or not..... like how the hell am I supposed to get any kind of mason-with-sharrant read on cubu's filter? My instincts tell me that he's lying because of my past suspicions of him and the wtf-ness of the last few pages.

drazak United States. September 20 2012 05:39. Posts 140
filter

Super busy today, read most the posts, willing to ##VOTE Sherrant I'll try to post more tonighnt

drazak United States. September 20 2012 05:54. Posts 140
filter

It's scummy to reply on my phone and have a busy day? it takes me forever to write a post. sorry I have a life, some days are like that.

On September 20 2012 07:30 thrawn2112 wrote:
I would go with drazak. Previously my lurker lynch back up was killing but drazak made that retarted vote. I've also had earlier supicions of him maily because of his first post, where he goes out of his way to defend accusations against him that haven't even happend yet.

So killing/drazak but I say drazak.

vote count?

On September 20 2012 01:26 mkfuba07 wrote:
Fuba's Fantastic Vote Count!!
kushm4sta (1) - Sharrant, RemedySC
debears (3) - KillingTime, Sharrant, kushm4sta, rethos
Sharrant (4) - Sonic Death Monkey, thrawn2112, debears, JacobStrangelove, JacobStrangelove
Stutters695 (1) - JacobStrangelove, Sharrant

Currently Sharrant is set to be lynched with 4 votes! 7 hours, 40 minutes remain in Day 1!
drazak, Stutters695, Atreides, and Cubu have yet to vote!

On September 20 2012 07:59 thrawn2112 wrote:
One thing that seems very very strange is how nobody has voted for killing this entire game, yet lots of people have said he's very scummy and he was even a proposed lynch candidate a few times. . There could possibly be some derailment going on everytime a killing lynch is mentioned.

If you've got insight into the drazak/killing/cubu/sharrant choice now is the time to speak up.

On September 20 2012 22:31 thrawn2112 wrote:




Atreides, I'm not satisfied about the context of your 1-minute-after-deadline post. In that post you said a no-lynch would have been the best choice, and later when asked about the no-lynch thing you said you didn't know about it until a mod confirmed it as real in the thread. Which means that before you made that after-deadline post, you had been following the thread closely enough to see when marv confirmed no-lynch.

Marv's post happened at this time. However 14 minutes after marv's post Keirathi posted a vote count and specified the exact lynch time in big bold blue text. People had also been talking about lynch time because there was some confusion about it. So to me it looks like you really weren't reading the thread. You have also said that "weren't around after my last post" which reads as you saying you weren't reading the thread. Clarify the context of all that please.

On September 21 2012 02:15 thrawn2112 wrote:
sweet jumping jesus on a pogo stick

Debears: First off I like your posts about atreides. But on to a momre striking observation, I think the only single thing that you have said different from me were 1) the rethos stuff and 2) when you voted for killing where I voted for drazak. (but even that's something I said I would have done) Now that the pattern has continued for so long I'm really starting to see how strange your posting looks. You seem to like coming into the thread after I've given a read and giving the same exact read. I'd been dismissing it so far because I can't really blame someone for having the same read I do especially just during D1, but now that you come in all over atreides after I have just done the same thing really points to you not wanting to come up with original ideas so FOS debears.

On September 21 2012 04:15 thrawn2112 wrote:
Remedy why was your vote so uselessly parked on kush? You were another one of the poeple who jumped in after the mislynch expressing how horrible it was, yet you weren't around during the final clusterfuck. At the beginning of the game you said you have the lynch day off work and you'll be around a lot during that, what happened to that?

Going through your filter right now and this looks spretty scummy:



No offense to kush but kush's scumteam theory was completely awful. What I see is you coming in and sheeping onto an insubstantial case in order to get a mislynch on me, drazak and (maybe) debears. That scumteam idea is such a weak argument I find it hard to believe a town player would honestly use it. Which leads me to wonder why kush brough it up in the first place, but I'm still unsure of kush because I have a hard time serparating crazy scum things he could have said with crazy town things he always said in previous games.

On September 21 2012 06:15 thrawn2112 wrote:
People that aren't around during a very confusing and hotly debated mislynch and come in immediately after the mislynch talking about how dissappointed they are look scummy. That's the main reason I looked at his filter to begin with.

On September 21 2012 17:16 thrawn2112 wrote:
Lol jacob I'm here if you're feeling lonely.

Like debears said we've got the same set of people going back and forth and kinda just making the same arguments over and over because lots of people aren't giving fresh input... so there's not tooo much to talk about atm until we get more reads from everyone else. I'm pretty confident in my remedy read but I don't wanna let that give people an excuse to keep lurking. Unfortunately there's not a good way to get lurkers to post because by their nature they for whatever reason don't like posting or are unable to post. So all you lurkers: just remember that you guys are who we're gonna look at if our reads fall flat so you need to change that by getting in here and saying what you're thinking.

On September 21 2012 18:36 thrawn2112 wrote:
In your final post you say that you lied about having a lurking plan and that you quit because you were bored. I already made a post about your D1 posts and how I don't see boredom in those, so now here's what I think about this one. I'm going to bold all the things that look like you aren't bored and have an interest in continuing the game.



First why make such a long post if you were bored? The first 2 bolded statements show emotion which suggests interest in the game. The third one (as well as the whole post) shows that you have an interest in pressuring lurkers which suggests an interest in future game developments.

Am I reading too much into this? There might be some confirmation bias going on but after looking at his entire filter I do not get the impression that he was bored from any of his posts.

On September 22 2012 06:06 thrawn2112 wrote:


I've said pretty much all I have to say about remedy during N1. I started looking into his filter because of this post. Go and look at the craziness that went down in the last few hours of D1. Rethos wasn't around for the most crucial part but then he comes in 6 minutes after the lynch saying the the mislynch didn't go well. He later said he did that because he was lurking in the thread 30-40 minutes before the deadline but he didn't feel like he had anything useful to say. Then he made some (imo and apparently yours too) weak and poorly thought out accusations against me and this was right after kush had made a massive FOS on me. (btw kush that statement is not a suspicion of you it's a suspicion of remedy) Before the rethos thing happened he was my top scumread. Another weird thing happened with him since all that was is he came into the thread and made this post:



That's all he has to say about a topic that has caused votes for a player this early on in D1?

On September 22 2012 11:05 thrawn2112 wrote:
My vote is staying on rethos because I just don't see how I can trust someone who lies several times and then admits to the lies and then says something just about equally unbelievable for his final excuse.

I could switch to remedy. I've been thinking over the fact that my #1 scumread (rethos) is most suspicious of my #2 (remedy) scumread but I don't really know what to make of it, at least until 1 of them flips.

And kush I don't think stutters would be a bad choice (lurker policy in effect here) but don't see myself voting for him unless the vote count ends up being super spread out among lots of candidates or something similarly controversial. My stutters vote would be because of the post timing I pointed out and because of lurker policy. However you yourself said your case against him was weak, I'm assuming at some point you're going to try and make a vote based on a stronger case? Lurker policy has its place but I don't see why it should be put into effect with so much time left before deadline.

On September 22 2012 13:53 thrawn2112 wrote:
I've been looking at the final vote count. I think it's very very safe to assume that at least 1 mafia voted for drazak. The people who voted for drazak are: Sharrant, Sonic Death Monkey, kushm4sta, thrawn2112, Stutters695. So then I removed sharrant, sonic, and myself, which leaves kush and stutters. Out of those two I think it's more likely stutters is scum. And when I look at their votes, kush made that retarded "ok looks like drazzak is the bandwagon then" vote. Originally it looked suspicious but consider this... why the fuck would a mafia player bandwagon onto a townie lynch and then use such a terrible phrase? Especially to even include the word bandwagon? That imo, is a colossal error that I don't think anyone would be capable of. (well maybe yourharry would find some way to rationalize it) So, that leaves stutters who already looks suspicious, both for lurking, and because of how he stops lurking to pop in the thread once someone calls him out.

So if all the follwoing is true, Stutters has to be scum

1: At least 1 mafia voted for drazak
2: There are no holes we've overlooked in sharrant's mason claim
3: My reasoning about kush's vote is extremely likely to be correct
(4: and an additional one for people other than myself would be that thrawn is town)

For me of course 4 is 100 true. 2 is so close to 100 percent true it may as well be 100 percent. Then I think 3 is the next most likely and 1 is probably the part of the theory I have the most hesitations about. However I think 1 and 3 are solid enough.

So in other words I think stutters is a pretty damn good lynch option. Not only for all the reasons just mentioned but also because he's a huge lurker.

On September 22 2012 12:37 thrawn2112 wrote:
Atreides the timezone explanation is not the one I was looking for that would set aside my doubts about your coming into the thread right as the deadline happened but it's believable. Also, the fact that marv posted about the no-lynch idea right after you posted your last post before deadline makes me accept that your no-lynch comment probably wasn't some sort of lie that you made up on the spot and had no prior knowledge of. The one thing that I'm stuck on is why you would think a no lynch would be better than lynching killing who you had previously said was an acceptable lynch. But anyways those were the main points of my N1 case against you. Apart from those points you've said some questionable things but quality =/= indication of alignment especially in a newbie game so you're down to a null-read. Wanna see you post more as that improves the quality of the read I can make on you.

I don't think atreides should be a lynch candidate. The stuff I just posted is enough for me to not have a scumread on him anymore. He has been lurking but if we have to go for a lurker stutters is a much better choice.

On September 23 2012 03:09 thrawn2112 wrote:
For the people who think dandel's posting is scummy, consider this:

A lot of the stuff he has said looks scummy, but it only looks scummy if you already think rethos is scum. He's being accused of trying to deflect attention onto remedy, but lets look at the motivations behind that. Yes, he could do it if he is scum, but would he be so obvious about it? Also if he was trying to deflect onto remedy then wouldn't the other mafia try to pitch in and help deflect? Now if he is town, then of course he will be super aggressive about trying to get other people to comment on his reads. That's pretty much a townie's primary objective if they think that they are gonna be mislynched. If they know they will die then the most helpful thing they could possibly to is to try and get people discussion their reads so that when they flip green then town will have a lot to look at.

Like I said I've thought dandel's posting was scummy but that scum read is only based off of me thinking that rethos was scum. And one thing I haven't considered about rethos is that if he was lying about being bored he could still be town. Also it is somewhat accepted that you are supposed to give replacements a decent amount of time to play before you lynch them. So for all of those reasons I don't like the idea of lynching dandel today. I think more time is needed to get a read on him.

Therefore, ##Unvote

So now I want to lynch either remedy or stutters. I think both are very good options. I've talked a lot about remedy but basically nobody outside of the people who share reads on everything have shared their reads on him.

On September 24 2012 06:23 thrawn2112 wrote:
Here's a lurker nobody talks about much:

I'm reading atreides filter and I want to reopen the case against him

During day 1 he makes posts saying how he would be ok with lynching killing, but he never goes in depth into his killing read. He just says how killing is a possible lynch candidate. Then he makes a post after the vote deadline, but before the night post. So at this point if he's town he should not know the alignment of drazak. He says he would have preferred a no-lynch over drazak... does he already know that drazak will flip green? And why a no-lynch over killing, who he had mentioned several times as a lynch candidate? He just doesn't want to lynch lurkers? Atreides why do you think lurker lynching is bad? It allows lurkers to stay in the thread and gives mafia a free nightkill and no risk of any of them being lynched for lurking.

He also said that "it's obvious now that the mafia had a strong hand" in the drazak vote. That is a very bold claim to make. Not only is it extremely confident in its own accuracy, but it also suggests that there are potentially a good amount of mafia voting for drazak. Well kush would be the only possibility from my perspective (and kush I would be the only possibility from your perspective if you're town) so I do not see how he could be so sure of that claim if he is town.

He does make a case against me. His first accusation is that I hopped on the sharrant bandwagon. I've tunneled sharrant the hardest out of anyone and atreides even admits that I was suspicious of sharrant before I "hopped on" sonic's bandwagon. Another part of his case is that my posting has been "ineffectual" compared to my posting from previous games. I've had huge filters in all my previous games but I can't really remember a previous game where I was extremely accurate with my reads... I don't know where this claim comes from. Atreided how were my votes/reads in previous games so much better than in this game that you think I'm scum?

In D2 his comments on the main lynch candidates (stutters remedy dandel) are:




From what I can see his reads are pretty much null on the three main candidates.

Read sonic's filter during N1. He spends a huge amount of time going after atreides. I think it's most likely that it was the mafia who nk'd sonic (at least 2 roleblocks are already accounted for so I doubt the specific mafia who did the nk was roleblocked) So what I'm seeing is the person who mafia decided it was important to kil was someone who was strongly going after atreides.

FOS Atreides-

On September 13 2012 12:42 thrawn2112 wrote:
ugh i wish i could (/in) but i only get internet for like 2 minutes a day at most lol

On September 14 2012 07:26 thrawn2112 wrote:


west texas

i do have internet, i just have to walk/ride a long ass time to get it.

On September 15 2012 07:18 thrawn2112 wrote:
ok i can't resist

at the risk of being lynched based on meta, i'm /in

hi kush

On September 18 2012 11:00 thrawn2112 wrote:
Yeah I agree, there's not much else to add other than that lurkers are assholes and they are going to lurk whether there is strong support of a lurker lynch policy or not... especially in these newbie games.

So on to more important matters, here's an idea:

last person in the thread gets lynched

discuss?

On September 18 2012 15:37 thrawn2112 wrote:


Ok sonic this is even scummier than your "hey everyone should be making lists" tactics in XXVI. Some of those questions (1 and 2) you cant reasonably expect people to give solid/infallible predictions about, or at least not predictions accurate enough for you to lynch them later based on a discrepency between the prediction and their actual activity level, and the other questions you don't need people to answer them in order to get the information you want. 6 is just silly.

I don't see the point at all of that survey other than to appear useful which imo it isn't.. and that's the same thing you were doing with the lists in xxvi.

On September 18 2012 16:07 thrawn2112 wrote:




Yep.

On September 19 2012 02:02 thrawn2112 wrote:
Sonic the reason why I don't buy that your survey was you as town making a joke is becuase of the line "not answering will make you look scummy." That looks like you were seriously expecting a response from everyone and that you didn't want the survey to be taken lightly. It's been pointed out that we are kinda doing the same thing (accusing each other because of us presenting bad ideas for town to respond to) however the situations aren't that similar. You yourself have pointed out that my idea was so extremly dumb that it couldn't have been a genuine question. My explanation of that question is that it was scum bait... do you really think that it's more likely that I threw it out as scum trying to get town to agree to it? And your survey as I've already said didn't look like a joke and it fit your past scum actions of presenting fluffly ideas for town to follow so you could appear like a useful townie.

I will give you a little bit of slack because I did lead you on by answering that it was in fact a serious question, so I can see why you as town would think that I was either giving an extremely terrible idea as town which isn't likely, or that I was saying something dumb as scum which I guess you could've seen as more likely. However seeing the lengths you went to to use that post against me, when it was obviously a really dumb idea regardless of my alignment, I still think you were attacking me with scum motives.

In one of your recent posts you attacked someone for defending me, which makes sense if you are town and seeing debears post as a scum trying to protect their fellow scum partner. So overall, your position on my scum-o-meter is a little lower than it was but you're still up there.

On September 19 2012 04:20 thrawn2112 wrote:


Pre Edit: just saw that he posted some stuff about rethos, so my current read on him is that he's done nothing that I see as scummy and he has participated in discussion and brought some original ideas into the mix. So overall I'm saying he's looking town. His defense of me was a little to lengthy and aggressive to be normal but I don't know why he'd do that as town or mafia.

On September 19 2012 05:09 thrawn2112 wrote:


It's odd but not odd enough to influence my read on him in either direction. Basically it this point it tells me nothing other than that it tells me nothing. Still going with town. You say I'm a player who is willing to go after suspicious stuff... well yeah, that's the point of the game. But then when I give a town read, all the sudden that automatically makes myself and that player a team? That's your prerogative but it's an extremely weak case. Is there anything other than that about me which you find suspicious? Because if not then that's a very weak FOS.

On September 20 2012 07:30 thrawn2112 wrote:
I would go with drazak. Previously my lurker lynch back up was killing but drazak made that retarted vote. I've also had earlier supicions of him maily because of his first post, where he goes out of his way to defend accusations against him that haven't even happend yet.

So killing/drazak but I say drazak.

vote count?

On September 20 2012 07:59 thrawn2112 wrote:
One thing that seems very very strange is how nobody has voted for killing this entire game, yet lots of people have said he's very scummy and he was even a proposed lynch candidate a few times. . There could possibly be some derailment going on everytime a killing lynch is mentioned.

If you've got insight into the drazak/killing/cubu/sharrant choice now is the time to speak up.

On September 21 2012 07:46 thrawn2112 wrote:
Kush those points againt me are either meaningless or huge misrepresentations of what actually happened. I'll post my response in a bit. You either haven't grasped the logic of a lot of my cases (specifically the remedy which till now you'e ignored my request for you to give a read on him) or you're scum.

Uh, saying that drazak and I defended each other is a lie. In fact it's the exact opposite of the truth.

On September 21 2012 18:16 thrawn2112 wrote:


Lol which one of your mason buddies in the qt told you to write this post?

My vote today was going to be remedy but this series of posts from rethos makes me consider lynching him regardless of him asking for a replacement.

If it came from a town player it was because they thought I was scum, or they were a jk thinking I was town. If it came from mafia, I think they suspect me of being one of the more powerful blue roles and they were trying to stop me from performing an action based upon the reads I was making during N1.

On September 22 2012 03:19 thrawn2112 wrote:


Here's what happened:

First he lies about having a lurking plan:

"Believe it or not I was actually making a test to see how much leniancy lurkers get in this game"

(not a plan a townie with any sense would use)

and then he lies about the lie:

"To be clear my defense against lurking is not "hey I did it on purpose", it's "hey I will not be lurking anymore now""

(saying "I will not be lurking anymore" ..... how does that = boredom?)

then he goes back to saying the first lie was true:

"So basically there is a problem with this game (all newbie games? I don't know) that is that people are not pressuring lurkers at all. Mainly they are giving them little slaps on the hand like (hey you have not posted in a while). I wanted to actually attract attention to that. And I think I actually succedded."

then he says all the previous lies actually were lies and that instead he's bored

"Actually no.. I am sorry to all of you. But it really seems that playing mafia is really not for me. I got bored and did not want to post any more. Now I am trying to catch up and can't get bring myself to it. Yes I lied about having this weird plan of lurking intentionally. I lurked because I did not have motivation to do anything."

How does that more sense than coming out and being truthful about being bored right off the bat?

On September 22 2012 13:53 thrawn2112 wrote:
I've been looking at the final vote count. I think it's very very safe to assume that at least 1 mafia voted for drazak. The people who voted for drazak are: Sharrant, Sonic Death Monkey, kushm4sta, thrawn2112, Stutters695. So then I removed sharrant, sonic, and myself, which leaves kush and stutters. Out of those two I think it's more likely stutters is scum. And when I look at their votes, kush made that retarded "ok looks like drazzak is the bandwagon then" vote. Originally it looked suspicious but consider this... why the fuck would a mafia player bandwagon onto a townie lynch and then use such a terrible phrase? Especially to even include the word bandwagon? That imo, is a colossal error that I don't think anyone would be capable of. (well maybe yourharry would find some way to rationalize it) So, that leaves stutters who already looks suspicious, both for lurking, and because of how he stops lurking to pop in the thread once someone calls him out.

So if all the follwoing is true, Stutters has to be scum

1: At least 1 mafia voted for drazak
2: There are no holes we've overlooked in sharrant's mason claim
3: My reasoning about kush's vote is extremely likely to be correct
(4: and an additional one for people other than myself would be that thrawn is town)

For me of course 4 is 100 true. 2 is so close to 100 percent true it may as well be 100 percent. Then I think 3 is the next most likely and 1 is probably the part of the theory I have the most hesitations about. However I think 1 and 3 are solid enough.

So in other words I think stutters is a pretty damn good lynch option. Not only for all the reasons just mentioned but also because he's a huge lurker.

On September 23 2012 01:21 thrawn2112 wrote:


Who would you rather the wagon be? I see you come into the thread with a scumread that other people thought was scummy at the time, (most especially myself) debears attacks you and you immediately go after him even to the point of voting for him. Then two people go for stutters and it's time to change your vote to stutters? Is debears still your top read? Don't you even want to try to see if you can push your case?

On September 23 2012 09:07 thrawn2112 wrote:

LOL

On September 23 2012 09:13 thrawn2112 wrote:
Also according to my logic case kush is scum, or the mason claim is false, or no scum voted drazak, or I hallucinated while reading my role pm

On September 23 2012 10:48 thrawn2112 wrote:
I don't know why a scum kush would have tried so hard to change everyone's vote to stutters(green). Remedy(green) was already looking very likely to be lynched yet kush fought hard to change people's votes.

On September 23 2012 16:15 thrawn2112 wrote:
First, kush's case against jacob and whatever I think while reading his filter:

The first accusation you make is that he's an active lurker (a weird phrase but I know what you mean) and that he doesn't take stances. So I'm gonna talk about some of his reads.

Here's the first read he makes: (here) It comes in at a time when sonic and I were going at it pretty strongly and his opinion on the issue is, well I don't really know. He doesn't give it. He does sorta talk about the issue but does not come out and say if he thinks either sonic or I look more scummy, and in his next post he has this to say about the issue: "I am going to stay mostly away from the thrawn kush sonic debacle for the moment it’s not as clear as it should be." Jacob what was so unclear about it that caused you to not want to discuss it? Later in that same post he talks about the debears/thrawn issue and ends up saying this: "Both are plausible I will need more time to work out which is which" but he doesn't end up posting that read. Those are the two most dramatic issues of the start of the game but he doesn't want to talk about them or he needs more time to work them out but ends up not doing so. What I remember most from jacob's posting was the rethos stuff. So, rethos comes into the thread saying that he had a lurking plan. Jacob asks him this:"Wait you were lurking on purpose? That is your entire reason for lurking? "Hey guys don't lynch me I was lurking on purpose" Why would you do that? What do you gain from it? (apart from a social life) Please elaborate". He does question rethos but if there is any suspicion contained in those questions it is very faint. Then after rethos responds jacob makes this post and he never commits too strongly to believing or disbelieving rethos. It's a bunch of sentences and each contain very slight reads that are in contradiction with the read of the other sentences. He finally commits to a scum read on rethos in this post:



He points out that rethos lied several times. This was something that I pointed out first, and something that jacob did not even seem to think was happening before I posted about it. And at the end of the post there's the "if's he's town" part where he could be leaving himself an out.

Here are some posts that are representative of what I'm talking about when I say his posts don't contain reads:



So.... did what stutters did make him suspicious or not?

Another similar post:



Once again I by the time I finish reading the post I have no idea what his final read was.

Go read his filter and a lot of it's similar to the two above quotes. After reading a jacob post you are left with a often weak and sometimes dizzying notion of what jacob's actual read is. When he gives reads a lot of times he'll throw in one of these: (but here's something that could make my read the opposite of what it is)

Another one of your points about him is that it's not the same jacob from last game. I went through his filter from that game and he does ramble on a lot but he does no where near the amount of providing himself outs for his reads.

So yeah I'd say jacob looks scummy.

On September 23 2012 19:31 thrawn2112 wrote:
That case does influence my read of jacob to be more townish than I previously thought. Not because of the quality of the arguments (i'll let you know what I think about the actual case when I finish reading it) but because of the sheer amount of work he put into it and how he is actually very clear with his accusations which was my (and kush's) problem with his previous posting.

I'm starting to think that the interactions and accusations between me/jacob/kush (all varying degrees of the more active posters in the thread) suggests that there could be a large portion of mafia among the lurkers.

On September 24 2012 07:34 thrawn2112 wrote:
Can you post the mason qt again? I don't doubt you're mason but at this point I want to consider every possibility. So please post it as soon as you humanly can.