/in
Newbie Mini Mafia XXVII
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
/in | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 16 2012 04:16 kushm4sta wrote: Not really a good attitude to have beacuse you are both probably going to be on the same team.. I thought it was obvious I was just joking. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 10:48 kushm4sta wrote: I am so fucking sick of lurkers from last game. #1 They make the game shittier regardless of if they are scum. #2 They are 100% null reads all game long. You ask them a question and of course they aren't going to responsd because they post like 1 thing a day and dont even read the thread. #3 It gives scum safe people to accuse. Most of the time they aren't mafia but in the 2 games I played both of them had semi-lurker mafia. Lurker Policy: LYNCH ALL LURKERS, semilurkers at the top of the lynch list if we don't have a very strong scumread to bandwagon. Lurkers last game were super annoying and kind of ruined the game, although it can easily be argued they helped my scum team. Best straetgy is to go hard on lurkers because that forces people to post. Also, if you're a total newbie town and don't know what to do, staying active is your best way to help town (but don't post random nonsense). That's how the rest of us can clear you as town. If you're a total newbie and mostly lurk, it's a sign of you being an uncomfortable scum and I will personally make sure to lynch your ass. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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? Is this question serious? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote: 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. 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. 3 Give an introduction of yourself. How experienced are you? Are you a total noob or have you obsed some games? Very important IMO is will you be around for lynch time? That's 9 pm normal time btw if you are new. How active do you plan on being. Honestly I think once a day is okay IF your posts are good. An intro for myself is coming. 1. We put pressure on lurkers and if nothing better comes up, we lynch the most suspicious one. We don't need a more detailed policy than that and further discussion will just derail the thread. 2. I will push the most scummy cases I can find, I suggest others to do the same. When it's clear we got a few other wagons rolling and it's clear a new one would just derail the discussion, you can wait with your case to later. 3. I will make a survey for this. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
1. Will you be around for lynch time? 2. How active do you plan on being? 3. How many games have you obsed? 4. Is this your first game playing? 5. If not, how many games have you played? 6. Is this your first time playing as scum? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 12:36 thrawn2112 wrote: So you agree with his point about lurkers. There isn't much room for argument when it comes down to the reasoning behind lurker policy, there is no sane player that will say "lurkers are pro-town." So him having that anti-lurker opinion is not anything that would be a strong tell in either the town or mafia direction. He would have it as town, and he would "pretend" to have it as mafia. I don't see his post as anything indicative of him as scum trying to blend in by saying normal things. He did give a reasonable response to my post... but kush I'd like to ask you, how would you feel about specifically me only posting once per cycle? A good policy, however, is to not answer questions intended for someone else. Whether accusations are valid or not they may induce interesting reactions, so please stop defending other players. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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. It was a joke (and most questions are based on kush's post). I'm glad it gets some reactions though because we need this thread to move past the "omg what abuot dem lurkes" posts. And it seems like you didn't follow XXVI very closely (I can expand on that if you find it relevant to this thread). Back to my question to you: | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 16:07 thrawn2112 wrote: stop telling me what to do I didn't answer a question that wasn't directed at me. I was participating in the current discussion. You were answering accusations towards Kush. You don't see why that is a bad idea? On September 18 2012 16:07 thrawn2112 wrote: And no I don't want you to explain what happened during xxvi because unlike you claimed, I was paying attention that game because I played in it lol. You were onbaord with the list idea, in fact I think you were the one who suggested it in the first place. Then I immediately pointed out was a bad idea and something that scum could use to blend in without having to commit to reads, and hey, surprise, you ended up flipping scum. Now you are here in a new game, once again suggesting some useless idea that will do nothing but spam up the thread with stuff that's almost impossible to base reads off of. You want to accuse me, but you still don't want me to explain? You're not giving my argument a fair representation. I still think lists is a good idea if they're limited to your ~3 top suspects AND include your reasoning. That way it's easy to follow a player's thought process through the thread wrt to his key reads (instead of reads being blended into a wall of text, hi there Jacob). That's what I suggested. And you're suggesting I was hiding behind lists. I never made any long ass lists, which a lot of other players did. Again, we don't need a list discussion. Just post your suspects along with your reasoning in any way you like. But make sure to make those posts clear. Yep. [/QUOTE] So this was serious? It's a mind numbingly stupid idea. Unless you're scum and suggest it for an easy d1 town lynch. It's very easy to coordinate your scum team not to be the last one in the thread and you get away with an easy lynch. Since you don't seem mind numbingly stupid and it was a serious idea, it's scummy. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 16:24 rethos wrote: @Sonic Death Monkey do you have past games in which you have been town? Could you link me? 2 or 3 would be great. I've played only one game on TL (scum). I've only played one other game, about 3 years ago (also scum). | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 17:00 thrawn2112 wrote: I can see how it is bad to answer questions but I'm just not liking how much you like to tell people exactly what to do. Being "thread-cop" bascially. It's not necessarily scummy I just don't like it lol. If you think it's annoying that I point out anti-town behaviour I think you just need to get used to it. On September 18 2012 17:00 thrawn2112 wrote: All I wanna say about lists/survey is this: you suggested list making in xxvi and I thought it was a scummy idea and you ended up being scum that game. Now you are suggesting another idea that I think is scummy and to me it's very similar to the xxvi situation. If the 6th question didn't make it clear it wasn't a completely serious survey I don't know what to tell you. On September 18 2012 17:00 thrawn2112 wrote: Yeah it was a serious question and no of course I don't think it's a good idea. I was trying to move the discussion past the mostly useless lurker policy talk circlejerk while providing easy bait for scum to jump at. I kinda failed in the first aspect but you seem to have jumped at the bait stronger than anyone else. fos sonic Why would scum in particular jump at you? It was a stupid post and you got your reactions. Everyone seems to think it's stupid, what's your next step? Please explain. Other than that you're just copying my answer as to why I made my survey post. It's also funny how you pose a stupid question about lurking in order to bring the discussion past lurking. Explain how that was supposed to work. Seems to me it's only going to bring more stupid discussions about lurking, which is exactly what happened. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 20:17 rethos wrote: People what are your opinions on the case against SDM? We need to get some discussions going. From the lack of activity i guess this might be night-time for US but i am sure we have other people except me that are not from US. My opinion: from looking on SDM's filter in the last game he seems to like doing everything organized. That is ofcourse used by him as scum to make it like he's contributing. It does seem though to be a different type of "lists". I do agree that the survey is preatty much useless even though i answered it just to at least keep some conversation going. It does depend on the reason why SDM made the survey in the first place. I have multiple answers in mind for this and some are scummy some are not (in my opinion). I will ofcourse not discolse them untill he answers the question. @SDM what was your reason / thought process on creating the said survey? As for thrawn2112 idea that SDM jumped too hard on his proposal, that seems a bit of a weak point to me seing that i also was jumping on it but a bit more tactful by asking you first to clarify it. It just looks like too weird an idea to just leave it alone. We need to not let the game die, please people post some thoughts. It was a joke inspired by this: + Show Spoiler + Aside from it being a joke and getting the discussion moving, we also gain some information. Knowing how many will be around for EODs is useful. Not for determining who to lynch as implied by thrawn, but for knowing how many votes will be permanent ahead of time. Getting to know the experience of players will also change how I will view some responses. Sure, I could research everyone's maffia history on TL, but I don't really have the time for that. Now I didn't really make the post because I thought this information was super important, I just made a joke of the series of question in Kush's post (he basically posed all the same questions). | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 20:59 JacobStrangelove wrote: Ok I have time for a quick post. *facepalm* ok kush... the only reason you would get night killed is if you contribute to the thread in a meaningful way. Being scared of an Nk will only make you not contribute meaningfully and end up useless. There isn’t much by way of reads to go on yet but because of what’s happened I can list the top suspicions I have. Sonic is here because he is a freaking genius and the whole list thing is always a strange topic. I also can’t help but notice he side mentions me in his post in reply to thrawn. While I haven’t seen your town meta I notice you did this all of last game (side mentioning people and not making it obvious you were going at them) and ended up scum. On the flip side (yes I am doing this again) I doubt you would draw this much attention to yourself early considering what happened last game concerning lists. Also the survey while I did it was mostly pointless... unless it was purely designed to trap scum with that last question. (Which while it would be hilarious if it worked is unlikely) Thrawn, Lynch the last person in the thread are you serious? That’s like.... stupid.... even as a way to encourage discussion the likelihood if hitting scum in that scenario would be really low compared to finding people based on reads or even inactivity. It would only create discussion that would be as effective as just picking a random person. As for Drazak and Kush I am still unsure. They OMGUS each other so much it’s insane. (Almost as much as I do...) Admittedly it could be an attempt by kush to stir up trouble so I will have to watch these two closely. (Also I don’t think drazak was a trash town last game I mostly thought he was town until he cracked under pressure) Everyone else I am meh on at the moment. Not enough to go on as most don’t have a meta or have said anything of use. Me mentioning you here had nothing to do with this game, it was wrt your play especially in the first part of last game. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 23:37 debears wrote: First of all, kush already requested that information. + Show Spoiler + kushm4sta United States. September 18 2012 11:18. Posts 302 PM Profile Quote # filter 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? 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. 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. 3 Give an introduction of yourself. How experienced are you? Are you a total noob or have you obsed some games? Very important IMO is will you be around for lynch time? That's 9 pm normal time btw if you are new. How active do you plan on being. Honestly I think once a day is okay IF your posts are good. + Show Spoiler + I didn't really make the post because I thought this information was super important, I just made a joke of the series of question in Kush's post (he basically posed all the same questions). Here you state yourself that the post was basically worthless. It accomplished the same thing kush's questions did. It's repetition. Yes. This is just rehashing what I stated in my last post. It was mostly just a joke and it was meant to be taken as a joke. On September 18 2012 23:37 debears wrote: The list did generate some discussion, as did thrawn's lynch the last poster idea by the way Oddly, you want to accuse thrawn for posting something stupid that started discussion, yet you go on and do the same. FOS Sonic This is kind of a valid question. My first response to thrawn's post was: The reason I asked was because it was so stupid I thought it probably wasn't*. If it was serious however, I wanted him to confirm it before I attacked it, because otherwise he could've said "it was obviously not serious I just wanted to get the thread moving". Now he claims the question was serious but the idea was not, which I find kind of weird, but I guess my first question could've been more specific. I also find it weird that he claims attacking his stupid question would be a scum trait. To me it seems like it's a serious breakdown in logic so I'd want him to explain his reasoning. *I expected most people to have the same reactions to my survey post, in my mind it was an obvious joke | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 18 2012 22:42 debears wrote: To me, thrawn is giving a town read at this point. + Show Spoiler + + Show Spoiler + thrawn2112 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 A couple of you (SDM for instance) are concentrating at how stupid an idea lynching the last person is. Let's look at motivations for this: 1) Thrawn as town - prevent the lurker discussion from going overboard. Present an idea that should provoke an "you're an idiot" response from town members (with a long shot of some mafia jumping on him about the idea). 2) Thrawn as mafia - Put up an idea that a thinking town would take seriously, make himself look suspcicious. Possibly lynch the most inactive player if it works. The idea has far superior town motives. remember that Thrawn didn't linger on the idea. He dropped it after the responses were pretty clear on it. SDM did + Show Spoiler + Sonic Death Monkey Sweden. September 18 2012 15:12. Is this question serious? I think Thrawn has sufficiently answered the question. I also believe that thrawn's defense of kush earlier was not indicative of scum. + Show Spoiler + thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 12:36. Posts 1077 So him having that anti-lurker opinion is not anything that would be a strong tell in either the town or mafia direction The argument that Remedy was more of a shot in the dark, seeing as all of us hate lurkers. Thrawn dismissed a possibly dumb argument before a giant flame war started (kush did give warning earlier). I also support thrawn's logic with drazak: + Show Spoiler + thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 14:45. Posts 1077 On September 18 2012 13:49 drazak wrote: I'm already accused of being trashy town? Really Kush? Man, you're prejudiced right off the bat. I know you can post while you're at work and stuff, but I can't post in class and I can't post when I'm tutoring people. If you'd like I can sleep-post and it'll be really bad. Sorry if my posts last game weren't up to your posting standard kush. For the record, I might not post consistently at different times, and maybe I'll push agressively against someone, my reasons will usually be good. I'd ask that people use their own logic after reading my posts, look at the evidence provided and use your logic. Last game we had a lot of people not thinking for themselves, I'll be going to bed soon so don't expect another post from me. I'll probably post in the morning, and I think I'll post before tutoring, but I don't think I'll be posting until maybe this time tomorrow again after that. My thoughts while reading this: "man this guy is going out of his way to defend himself when there's no need to" Thrawn is currently not timid about calling people out within reason. To add to the argument, drazak's post also sounds indecisive. might, maybe, probably, think. While that alone is not anywhere near enough to condemn someone, it does raise suspicion on drazak. I think thrawn is town. Anyone with evidence pointing otherwise, please present. Your hardcore defense of thrawn is suspicious and it seems to lack logic. Making a strong town read, especially this early on, is really stupid and anti-town because it makes this person more comfortable, whereas asking more questions will induce more information (information is always good, as it can be used for scum and town reading). You're going thru all thrawn's posts and try to rationalize them from a town perspective. Having played as scum in my last two games and now experiencing the confusion that is townie, this looks like someone having full information. I can't believe someone without extra information would be willing to actually draw this conclusion based on a handful of early d1 posts. Cockriding one of the most respected player in the field (especially if thrawn = town) is a very convenient scum strategy, as it makes you less likely to be suspected and is an easy way to blend in. On September 18 2012 22:42 debears wrote: A couple of you (SDM for instance) are concentrating at how stupid an idea lynching the last person is. Let's look at motivations for this: 1) Thrawn as town - prevent the lurker discussion from going overboard. Present an idea that should provoke an "you're an idiot" response from town members (with a long shot of some mafia jumping on him about the idea). 2) Thrawn as mafia - Put up an idea that a thinking town would take seriously, make himself look suspcicious. Possibly lynch the most inactive player if it works. The idea has far superior town motives. About 1), how is asking a question about lurking going to prevent lurker discussions? How is people calling him an idiot going to gain information? About 2), the same argument can be made about my post, but I'm not going to make it because it's not very reliable. On September 18 2012 22:42 debears wrote: I think Thrawn has sufficiently answered the question. He said that it was bait for scum. I don't get how that "argument" convinced you. On September 18 2012 22:42 debears wrote: I also believe that thrawn's defense of kush earlier was not indicative of scum. + Show Spoiler + thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 12:36. Posts 1077 So him having that anti-lurker opinion is not anything that would be a strong tell in either the town or mafia direction The argument that Remedy was more of a shot in the dark, seeing as all of us hate lurkers. Thrawn dismissed a possibly dumb argument before a giant flame war started (kush did give warning earlier). Do you think stifling discussion and questionings is good for town? Shots in the dark is what gets this game going d1. Unless someone stumbles into the thread with a total scum slip, that's all we got and that's from where we need to build. On September 18 2012 22:42 debears wrote: I also support thrawn's logic with drazak: + Show Spoiler + thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 14:45. Posts 1077 On September 18 2012 13:49 drazak wrote: I'm already accused of being trashy town? Really Kush? Man, you're prejudiced right off the bat. I know you can post while you're at work and stuff, but I can't post in class and I can't post when I'm tutoring people. If you'd like I can sleep-post and it'll be really bad. Sorry if my posts last game weren't up to your posting standard kush. For the record, I might not post consistently at different times, and maybe I'll push agressively against someone, my reasons will usually be good. I'd ask that people use their own logic after reading my posts, look at the evidence provided and use your logic. Last game we had a lot of people not thinking for themselves, I'll be going to bed soon so don't expect another post from me. I'll probably post in the morning, and I think I'll post before tutoring, but I don't think I'll be posting until maybe this time tomorrow again after that. My thoughts while reading this: "man this guy is going out of his way to defend himself when there's no need to" Thrawn is currently not timid about calling people out within reason. To add to the argument, drazak's post also sounds indecisive. might, maybe, probably, think. While that alone is not anywhere near enough to condemn someone, it does raise suspicion on drazak. Drazak comes across as overly defensive, true. I'll await for his answers before posting any more thoughts atm. On September 18 2012 22:42 debears wrote: I think thrawn is town. Anyone with evidence pointing otherwise, please present. No kidding. The question is why you'd want to make such a lengthy town defense this early. In what way do you think this will benefit town? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 19 2012 00:44 debears wrote: To me, you are cherrypicking the wording and making it a bigger deal than it is. His intention was to gauge others' reactions to the post for a possible scum lead. Although the idea of actually lynching the last person is stupid, the idea of looking at everyone's reactions to the last poster lynch has some town merit. I'm questioning his motives. In the last game thrawn seemed like logical poster and his reasonings here makes no sense to me. This game isn't about telling eachother about how awesome they are, it's about pushing for information. Even IF something thrawn has said makes me think he might be town (not saying that he has), that's not what I'm going to bring up at this point. It's counter productive. On September 19 2012 00:44 debears wrote: Are you talking about me or thrawn here? Thrawn. On September 19 2012 00:44 debears wrote: This explanation confirmed what I thought he was doing in the first place. As you said, it seemed like a breakdown in logic to you, Sonic. I can see why since it wasn't an in depth look. However, if you look at the motivations from a townie and mafia perspective, it doesn't make sense as a mafia post. There's little reward for the risk as mafia. Here's what I showed earlier. 1) Thrawn as town - prevent the lurker discussion from going overboard. Present an idea that should provoke an "you're an idiot" response from town members (with a long shot of some mafia jumping on him about the idea). 2) Thrawn as mafia - Put up an idea that a thinking town would "not" take seriously, make himself look suspcicious. Possibly lynch the most inactive player if it works. btw i added in not in quotations. typo on my part from earlier. Addressed in my last post. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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. I still don't get how the 6th question doesn't make it totally obvious. I'll concede that the "not answering will make you look scummy" risks making it look serious, at least in a newbie game where lots of people are confused and totally don't want look scummy (regardless of allignment). On September 19 2012 02:02 thrawn2112 wrote: 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. I never said that. I thought it was unlikely to be genuine. However, if it was genuine it would've been scummy, especially coming from a player I percieve to be logical. That's why I asked the probing question, which should've been made a bit more specific because it kind of left the definition of a "serious question" to be subjective. On September 19 2012 02:02 thrawn2112 wrote: 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'm pretty sure I stated in the aftermath to XXVI that my maffia game is purely based on posting stuff I would've posted as town. All suggestions on lists and actions wrt the vigilante was suggestions I would've made as town. You may still disagree with me on whether my suggestions were good, but my intent behind those posts wasn't scummy. On September 19 2012 02:02 thrawn2112 wrote: 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. I don't really agree with your approach. I wanted to pressure you on the off chance it was serious. Pressuring you gave me the explanation that it was "scum bait", which still doesn't make sense to me. Pressuring someone can give you more information that might be more useful than the original one. And I still want you to explained your rationale behind your post being "scum bait". | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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. Well, I think this rationale is bad. First, newbie townies will jump on the opportunity to contribute and question someone to establish their towniness. I, as a slightly more experienced player, questioned you to force more information. I don't see what type of player that wouldn't bring it up in any way. Anyway, what I find even weirder is that Debears actually seems to find this argument both intuitive and convincing. Debears? On September 19 2012 02:48 thrawn2112 wrote: EBWOP sorry sonic didn't see your post before i posted my response No worries, should've thought about it earlier. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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. I can see your point more clearly now. If someone actually would've tried to push for a lynch based on that post alone it would've been weird. Not sure if it would've been particularly scummy though. Why would scum want to draw attention by going balls out early d1 lynching wagon with poor reasoning? It's kind of what Kush did as town last game. Your reasoning makes some kind of sense though, which is the most important part for me at this point. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 19 2012 03:30 debears wrote: Sonic, First, you say i had a "hardcore defense" and "strong town read" of thrawn. I never used the word strong. "I think thrawn is town". It is not I know thrawn is town or thrawn is confirmed town. I'm "taking a shot in the dark" for now and and saying he is town to me. Also, most of my "defense" of him was trying to explain to you the possible logic behind his post. You said it was a "breakdown of logic" and that you found it "weird", making you sound as though you were more confused, which from what I've seen, is a scum tell. That's basically an argument of semantics. What I was question is why you felt it would be productive to make a long ass post about thrawn's innocence. I don't see why any town would reach this conclusion. Taking shots in the dark in order to establish innocence induces little to no information. Like I've argued ealrier, it might even have the opposite effect. Being confused is not a scum trait. If anything, having perfect information (as scum) makes you too confident in your "reads". Last game I made a small scum slip stating I was "almost dead sure" Kush was town (he was town). That's a result of me being too confident because I had full information and didn't know how I would've viewed the situation with imperfect information (as town). Imcasey made an even worse scum slip like that and Kreb kind of picked up on it. Imcasey said he was sure Xatalos was scum (he was). Then, you say it is "stupid and anti town" to say that I think someone is town. At the very least, my statements put me and thrawn under a microscope and ignites good discussion. Also, since I think thrawn is town, I can focus on some one else, like you, and analyze what you're saying. You can focus on me without making unfounded town reads on thrawn. Next, you say I look through all his posts and try to rationalize them from a townie perspective. That is wrong. I look at it from both perspectives. You never stated why you would think that mafia would do that. With my posts, you could say that you are rationalizing them all from a mafia's perspective. What I found weird is how you analyze ALL his posts and conclude EVERYTHING is townie. A townie is likely to have doubts. However, as scum it's easy to think you need a strong opion on everything, not realizing that as town you wouldn't have a strong opinion. In terms of preventing lurker discussions, it prevents us from saying, ok which lurker candidate should we lynch? It's a specific phrase: let's lynch the last poster in the thread. Since it's specific, we can say, "oh thats dumb" or "i agree". Then, that can lead us to wondering, "thrawn seems kinda scummy" (you) or "he seems good to me". It puts attention on a specific player, leading to higher quality discussion. Then, you say the argument "convinced me". First, thrawns initial statement was a one liner at the beginning of the game. Then, you come along and bring it back up and make a big deal out of it. It didn't need a huge 3 paragraph answer to explain, although you seem to need it. I said it confirmed what I thought it was. As I looked at it, I thought, "wow thats dumb" also. But thinking as to why he would post it as mafia or town, I decided that it was a townie move. Well, here I disagree. I think it needed an explanation. I didn't see his intentions as clear. And in regards to stifling accusations, it can be good if it prevents dumb arguments that clutter up the thread, allowing mafia to hide. I didn't want to read through kush's warned, you suck because you accused me posts since he already warned about it. Not to mention, if we had accused kush in that situation, then you accuse everyone else who said lynch the lurkers. If the accusations are stupid Kush could've dismantled them himself and in the process we would've gained information on Kush. To emphasize why I made the defense post, I did it to prevent repeating what everyone else was saying and bring a new discussion topic into the thread (and it has succeeded). Also, I did it to try to narrow down the list of possible mafia to concentrate our efforts. Repeat what exactly? It's good to narrow down the list of suspects, but not this early and with this limited information. And the only new topic you introduced seems to have been your own allignment and putting yourself up as a potential lynch target. That's not something to be proud of if you're actually town. The post in thrawn's defense is already helping the town by presenting a discussion about my alignment. We are now making specific accusations. We can look at bandwagons as we get closer to lynch now. However, Sonic, I am still having trouble understanding why there isn't any logic in what thrawn and I do. Reading thrawn's explanations and looking back at Debears filter it's possible he understood thrawn's plan and I was just being fucking stupid. His comments makes sense for someone understanding thrawn's stated intentions. I still find the defense of thrawn suspicious for the reasons I stated. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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. Not at all. That's why I posted this: On September 19 2012 01:21 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: Your hardcore defense of thrawn is suspicious and it seems to lack logic. Making a strong town read, especially this early on, is really stupid and anti-town because it makes this person more comfortable, whereas asking more questions will induce more information (information is always good, as it can be used for scum and town reading). You're going thru all thrawn's posts and try to rationalize them from a town perspective. Having played as scum in my last two games and now experiencing the confusion that is townie, this looks like someone having full information. I can't believe someone without extra information would be willing to actually draw this conclusion based on a handful of early d1 posts. Cockriding one of the most respected player in the field (especially if thrawn = town) is a very convenient scum strategy, as it makes you less likely to be suspected and is an easy way to blend in. If Debears is scum, I think you are more likely to be townie. That's not some kind of definite read or attempt to association. I view you separetely and think any combination of t/t, t/s and s/s is possible, I just think the apparent cockriding would be a bit less likely for s/s (too apparent for a scum strat, unless it's levelling). | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
You make a case against Kush, a very easy and obvious target Stutters had been attacking before. This is not necessarily scummy, but it's certainly not very townie. The arguments against Kush are mainly: 1) Flip-flopping on whether posting one post per day is good enough. 2) Insincere wrt his apology to Cubu. 3) Skeptic about his rationale for wanting to avoid being NKd. 1) Kush's "one post per day is good enough" was silly, but it had been attacked before. It thus becomes an easy target for scum and it's and doesn't require original thinking (original thinking as scum, when you know who's town and not, is suprisingly difficult). 2) It's possible his apology was insincere, but how does that make him scum? 3) Again, this was a silly statement by Kush, but it had already been attacked by Stutters and is an easy target. What really came off as weird though, was how he not only implied Kush was scum, but that he even was SK. Seriously, that read is so specific it's ridiculous. To be claiming reads on SK this early, a 1 in 13 shot assuming there's even one in the game, is really weird. Spotting a SK hasn't even been in my range of thinking this early into d1. It's interesting though, because the players likely to be thinking about a SK this early in the game is scum. Just consider the information they've got. They know all townies and all maffia, figuring out if there's a SK is their only "black box" aside from blue roles (which he also mentions in his post). It's not at all weird for scum to think about SK at this point, but I do find it weird for townies. Ask yourselves, before his post, had any of you guys even been you guys been even considering a SK read? Now to what I find to be the strongest part of the case, thrawn just pointed out a classic scum slip: voting for someone you don't think is the most likely scum. He thinks lynching him to resolve "a distraction" and for information on thrawns allignment. Other than that his read has been that he's town and no additional reasoning is given. I'll admit, while playing XXVI I didn't really know this was a scum slip. Kush did it and I just found it weird. However, after I had gotten lynched, I was having a conversation with one of the coaches (Hapahauli). He said he was 99% sure Kush was the final scum because of those scum slips. He was absolutely amazed that he was not. It's documented in the Obs QT and I could quote some PMs as well, but I'm not sure I'm allowed. Anyway, the Obs QT is here and the main post I'm referencing is post #46. In it, two of the reasons given for a Kush being scum is because he: 1) Saying "cubu is probably town" and voting him anyway. 2) Wanting to lynch Cubu to determine Thrawn's allignment. Sounds familiar? I know Kush turned out to be town, but a coach considering this to be such a strong read and coupled with my other suspicions, I think it's a good case. I'm willing to hear you out, but for now my I'm going with... ##vote Sharrant | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
Also, I guess the official voting is in this thread this time around and I just used incorrect formating: ##Vote: Sharrant | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 19 2012 19:46 kushm4sta wrote: bringing up the nk shit again....ok. i think its bad play to make yourself a nk target because you are worthless if you are this super strong townie d1, then get nk n1. I think thrawn is a good player but he definitely fell into this trap last game. he made himself a target and his death told us nothing. I only bring this up again to save stutters the task of reading through my filter. This is just wrong. You're basically saying that not making good contributions is a good thing because otherwise you'll end up getting NKd. The problem is that with that strategy we end up without any good contributions and we can't solve the game. The obvious and correct strategy is for EVERYONE to make good contributions. That way it doesn't matter who gets NKd because there are others making good contributions to cover for the loss. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
The thrawn and Debear association: + Show Spoiler + In short, it's a silly case, but here's why. When a game starts and from my point of view as town, there's a 25% chance a random player is scum, so at the start of the game a d1 mislynch is pretty likely. We want to lynch someone with preferably >>25% chance of being scum. Making a pure association read is silly (which is what rethos is making), because the chance of two random people both being scum is only ~5%. In other words, you need a really good reason to support an association, because the default is so unlikely. Let's look at his reasonings. On September 19 2012 16:21 rethos wrote: Ok i have looked back through thrawn2112 and debears filters. There is one thing that is very odd. They are always on the same page they are always agreeing. BUT they never talk. How can two people be always on the same page without ever interacting? This is really not that weird. I basically never respond to someone making a town read on me. Why would I? Also, if I make a town read on someone, it rarely ends up with me having a discussion with this person. Why? Simply because if my read is town I don't think he's suspect and I don't have question to ask about suspect behaviour. On September 19 2012 16:21 rethos wrote: They are always in sync they always think the same. thrawn2112 agrees with what debears is doing, finds nothing suspicious all is ok. debears is certain on his thrawn2112 town read and he follows thrawn2112 in voting for Sharrant. He ofcourse says that they have "beaten him to the punch" meaning that he had a case on him but the others were faster. He never presents said case even though it would be useful for everybody. (You need to clarify what you meant by that post debears - see I am not asking questions ) Everybody has noticed the interaction everybody is mentioning it but nobody is mentioning the fact that they don't communicate at all. thrawn2112 has preatty much talked to everybody that was willing to answer back but not debears. They never answer eachothers posts, always answer to posts made by other players about the other on of them. This all screams to me that there is out of thread interaction. I am happy with either one of them going. Seeing that there is a greater possibility that debears gets lynched than thrawn2112, my vote is on him. From my experience, I would find it unlikely that the d1 conversation in the Maffia QT was thrawn saying something along the lines of: "Day 1 we should agree with eachother. Debear, you start riding my dick to establish an association between us. Agree with everything I say". In XXVI me and Xatalos had the exactly opposite conversation. We wanted to create some distance between eachother, attack eachother's reasonings etc. This is way more easy to do d1 rather than later on. I'm not saying this is proof of a non-association, I'm just saying the association read is weak. Fwiw I still think your way of analyzing is good. Lack of interaction can indeed be scummy and might imply out of thread conversations. I just don't think it makes for a strong case here. Thrawn and Debear are both masons: + Show Spoiler + This is an even stronger and worse attempt at an association read. Yet again, I don't see why masons would go out early d1 and make their connection super apparent. It's not a good argument. Not only that, but we really should be discussing blue roles, that's fucking stupid since it'll help maffia. I realize masons aren't technically blue, but the roles are helpful for town. That's all I've got to say. Thrawn by himself as scum: + Show Spoiler + People seem to have think I had strong suspicions against thrawn. I never had. His post was just a decent entry point for me to get more information. My approach is like this: push for information -> form an opinion. Me questioning someone doesn't have to mean I'm suspecting him, but it might. The information I got out of it finally didn't turn out to be very useful, at least not good enough to push a case against anyone. At this point my read is slight town: he's active, analytical, asks questions and seems to be making pro town posts in general. Debear by himself as scum: + Show Spoiler + Debear on the other hand was someone I actually suspected and thought I would be able to build a case against. It seemed to me that he had more information than I had, because his conclusions wrt thrawn was something I couldn't understand him making. But oh, the awkward moment when I think I'm about to make a solid case against him, just to realize that any way I look at it, the reason it seemed like he had more information wasn't (necessarily) because he did, but because he had processed the available information much more efficiently. What was left of my case was loose accusations of him dick riding thrawn to blend in. This alone doesn't make up much of a case. I will say though, that I still think his actions are kind of suspicious. Some of those actions can be rationalized from a town perspective, like thrawn has explained. His lengthy defense of thrawn and him jumping the Sharrant bandwagon immediately after two of the most active posters had present it is still kind of suspicious, just not nearly as suspicious as I originally thought. Kush, I went through your filter to find some good arguments against Debears, but all I could find was you copying my read. Could you expand on why you think Debears is suspicious? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
I will be back for questions to Sharrant and hopefully questions to other players as well. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On September 19 2012 11:55 Atreides- wrote: In defense of Sharrant - He's in a similar position to debears - bad decisions do not necessarily mean scum. Think about it - what could a mafia hope to gain by this? Getting a lynch is far too ambitious, and a role claim isn't worth getting so much attention to yourself Note that in my case against Sharrant, nothing is based on him simply playing bad. I don't think he's playing bad in the most commonly used sense of the word: he doesn't appear like a confused newbie who has no idea what he's doing. However, there's 1) an odd call out of Kush as SK and 2) a scum slip. On September 19 2012 11:55 Atreides- wrote: He's actively scumhunting, and both of his ideas (kush being SK, pressuring on debears) are original. The Kush being SK read I've already commented on. His target is not original and I think calling out SK is weird. The Debears read is most certainly not original, since he's adding basically nothing to my case. He also made after he had already gotten accused. I also mentioned a feel read yesterday that I didn't commented on. Being a feel read it's possible it's weak, but I might as well spell it out as well as I can to see how others view it: + Show Spoiler + Sharrant's is posting not like confused newbie. It's apparent he's got a reasonably good understanding of the game and how it works. If you look at his first posts they are kind of fluffy and don't add much. It's also apparent he's using what I would call a cold, calculating and logical style. Looking back at XXVI, his style is very reminiscent of Xatalos and I would also argue rather similar to mine. This is a style that makes sense for a logical and reasonably good player playing as scum. However, aside from Xatalos and me, there wasn't really anyone using it in XXVI. It seems to me it's not a very common town style, because as town you're usually going to be more confused whether you like it or not. To add to the read, look at his way of responding to accusations. It's textbook maffia. It says in the maffia guide to just keep calm when faced with accusations and that's how Sharrant has reacted. Again, looking back at XXVI, that's also exactly how Xatalos and myself reacted, but basically no one else. For example, when drazak came under fire he became very apologetic and Stutters shot back with his own accusations. Like I've said before, one big problem as scum is that you don't know how you would've reacted as town. I found myself pretty much emotionless when someone accused me and kind of like a sociopath asked myself, "how am I supposed to feel here". This is where discrepancy between scum and town might shine through. When I voted for Sharrant, his response was that he was "glad to see another person is voting". That's really not the way I would react to me getting wagoned as town and probably not how you should react. The reason I think you're likely to feel emotionless and cold as scum is because knowing the allignment of basically everyone in the game, a lot of the excitement is gone. When you make a case on someone, you're just doing it to survive. In contrast, I felt excited making a case against Sharrant because I was having the feeling I was solving a mystery. As scum you're never solving a mystery. I will make a separate post in response to his answers and about why I'm still not entirely convinced. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
1. I want to know your actual experience level. How many games have you played outside of TL? Where did you play games with a SK? 2. Do you have any information on the XXVI game (or other TL newbie games)? If so, how did you get this information? On September 19 2012 03:14 Sharrant wrote: People I would like to hear more from: debears, KillingTime, Rethos, Jacob ... My current suspicions are Kush (SK, possibly blue or self important green), KillingTime/debears (One of these two is mafia I think, more likely KT), Stutters (Maf, low content, low posts) It seems to me this is the time you mention Killing and Debears. Your read on one of them being scum seems to be completely out of the blue. Killing jumped the Debear wagon because of my case, Debear hadn't really engaged with Killing. On September 19 2012 05:07 Sharrant wrote: This whole KillingTime versus debears is interesting though. I believe at most one of them is mafia. I'm really split on this one though. I don't get this. 3. What about "KillingTime versus debears"? How is the few interaction between them been suspicious? How did you arrive to one of them being scum? What makes their situation something that needs to be "resolved"? On September 19 2012 06:52 Sharrant wrote: Everyone keeps saying I had no read on debears, and I'm not sure why. I hope that my last post cleared that up, but if you look back you'll see that I made no mention of him being town. I only made mentions of slight or medium scum tells, or reads that are up in the air when they're on their own. That's just not true: + Show Spoiler + On September 18 2012 23:54 Sharrant wrote: Other reads I have right now aren't too strong, I have a weak idea that Thrawn and debears are town, and I'm bouncing back and forth between weak town and weak scum on SDM. I'd like to think he's town because so far he's amused me. Drazak is still undecided in my mind until he posts more. 4. How did your read on Debears change from slightly town to most suspicious scum? Your claim that Debears seems slightly town came more than an hour after Debears defence of thrawn. On September 19 2012 07:45 Sharrant wrote: I've stated several times that I think Kush is SK, or town. Not mafia. My read was either that he was a townie who just wrote everything that came to mind, or he was the SK. The way he played did not strike me as mafia, it was too independent and too loud. 5. Let me get this straight. Your read of Kush being SK is based on that you think he stumbled into the thread basically saying "I will conciously make bad posts in order not to get NKd"? And the reason he said that is because he's SK and don't want to get NKd? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 01:20 Sharrant wrote: 2. No, I haven't read through any of the games on this forum in detail. I've read through a number of games at mafiascum though. Have you used any reads from other games when playing this game? If so, how did you get this info? On September 20 2012 01:20 Sharrant wrote: When I looked at what they said, I had an incorrect grasp of the roles, their abilities, and their possibilities in this game, looking at it with new information it strikes me as very possible that they are both town. How was your grasp of the roles was incorrect and how that have changed your view? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 00:16 Sharrant wrote: And if that happened, you guys would auto lynch me and the guy who came in with the lurker vote. It'd be suicide. Killing one townie (even a blue) is not worth one mafia, let alone 2. KT definitely has been lurking, he only just made a few posts with no substance. So if I'm mafia, my plan is akin to gamethrowing. I'd be killing two mafia to kill a single person that 3 other people agree is suspicious enough to warrant a vote. THAT MAKES NO SENSE. I'll gladly tell you after my plan fails or succeeds what it was. Hell, at this point it's almost worth dropping just because it's going to get me lynched at this pace. To be fair, you're not exactly in the sense maknig industry yourself: On September 19 2012 23:53 Sharrant wrote: Good morning, everyone. Yes, SDM, I like staying calm. It doesn't really help if I suddenly flip off the handles at being accused. I stay calm because I know I'm town, and I want to win. If you can't stay calm, and think cooly, you can't set traps for scum. I was happy that you voted for me, just because everyone in this game sits on their hands when it comes to voting, I said before, it's a tool not a weapon. I wasn't happy being under that much pressure right away, I'm still not happy about the amount of pressure I'm under. But it brought more activity and has made people use their votes more. I know I'm innocent, so I know I'll be fine. I'm used to mafia games where I have more information about the set up of the game, and in those situations using a logical analysis makes for very easy wins. Now here is where I run into a problem. We're 2 votes away from the point I set out to get debears to. I still want to force a claim on him, no matter how scummy you think that is, it just doesn't make sense from a mafia perspective. Nor an SK perspective. But I have a plan, and I am sticking to that plan. I won't say it's the best plan ever, in fact there's a huge chance that it fails. Yes, I'm sorry, but your plan is about to fail miserably. Your stoic calmness is not something I'd expect from a townie trying to save his ass. At this it should be apparent you getting lynched is a very real possibility. A townie wouldn't say: "I know I'm innocent, so I know I'll be fine". There's not much pointing in that direction right now. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
I'm getting a deja vu from XXVI where we had a Stutters vs Cubu wagon. Both were town and d2 was basically just a restart of d1 with two fewer townies. I'm definitely not set only lynching a lurker aorn. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
Yes. You've contributed with absolutely nothing productive when it comes to scum hunting. Your only kind of significant post is a defense of Sharrant. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 19 2012 00:35 KillingTime wrote: I don't understand the point of FoS'ing on day 1 - no-one has a huge list of strong scum reads and you can change your vote at any time. If you think someone is scum then you should vote for them, if you are not sure or looking to pressure than a vote is also a much better way to do that than a FOS which at best is just going to cause scum to play more carefully. Useless fluff 100% trademark. On September 19 2012 01:56 KillingTime wrote: Thrawn - I don't think it is a major point, it is a short post - if someone thinks that FOS's are valuable day one, then please tell me why. I thought the discussions about Sonic's "survey" and Thrawns " lynch question" were dumb, which were the main things in the thread at that time. I think the other things that are on this page are more worth discussing though: I agree that Kush's statements about not wanting to die were dumb and anti-town. I haven't voted him yet though because a) I think the serial killer case, while I can follow the logic, is a huge overreach when we don't even know whether we have a serial killer. It would be equally plausible to argue that kush was trying to attract attention to himself with that kind of remark. b) Kush made a significant number of dumb comments at the start of XXVI and turned out to be town. That doesn't excuse these comments, but they are not enough on their own to make me think he is scum. I like sonic's last post on Debears though - For now my feeling is that Debears is mafia trying to blend into the thread. Debears who do you think is scum? For now: ##Vote:debears Again useless fluff. Just bandwagoning my Debears case*. Extra useless points for the question to Debears. It might be designed to look like a good contribution while it's really not. *I've had the feeling when making my Debears case that it seemed to be a retard magnet. A lot of people seemed to be jumping it for no good reasons, which made me kind of paranoid. I got extra paranoid when I realized my case wasn't very good. On September 19 2012 15:07 KillingTime wrote: Ok - well I think the best thing for me to do Is go through the questions drazak asked me last night: Players I want to see more from - There are lots of players in this category: 1. RemedySC - Not much interesting in his posts, nothing scummy but nothing strong 2. Drazak - Again, he made fair points about me and I am answering his questions - he has said he will also try to post more today. If there is one thing that I learnt from XXVI it is that associational cases are bad though. So leave off this how is he connected to X&Y on D1. 3. Stutters 4.Cubu!!! - I am quite happy to policy lynch cubu every game I play with him if he is not posting more. Cubu post more or I will vote for you. Two strongest town reads: (though town reads are kind of dubious atm, because strong mafia probably look like town now -d1 we are more trying to catch a weaker mafia I think) 1. Thrawn - I don't put much stock in the idea that him & Debears are necessarily linked in some way - but his posting has been strong all day 2. Sonic - Solid town posts, less high up for me though, just because I have the experience of playing with him in XXVI and know he is a strong player who fooled me for large parts of that game. When I went to bed, I thought Sharrant was towny - he was following the same train of logic that I did and he was . Now I just don't know - others have totally fought with him on asking debears to roleclaim and that was a bad idea, I don't think he is a good d1 lynch, there is too much chance he flips bad town, but he is definitely a player I want to look at more closely as the game progresses And the most important part - scum: 1.Debears - my scum read on him from yesterday has not changed that much, his hugely defensive posting since then is a bad, and I agree with Kush's attack on his last post. I sort of like that he is attacking rethos - but rethos is an easy target, a lurker who has only posted questions so far. I await to see what he has to say about Sharrant. 2.Atreidies - 3 posts, all bad , random setup speculation. You can pretty much sum up everything he has said so far as "I'm not convinced" - That is not at all scummy per se - but you need to combine that attitude with efforts to scumhunt yourself and contribute actively. Because he hasn't, it looks scummy to me. "Players I want to see more from". The easiest way to fill a post and try to make it look useful is to simply state which posters haven't been active. Obviously it's not useful. Again it's the same old Debear read that he didn't contribute anything to. The town reads are just fluff. The only new valid point he brings up is about Atreides. I agree with him, but again, pointing out someone isn't posting isn't good scum hunting. On September 19 2012 22:41 KillingTime wrote: I don't think "having assignments due" makes Cubu any less scummy. Last game we gave a pass D1/2 to weetee who had to get replaced and let Xatalos off the hook because he was at the army - they were still scum and that was a mistake. As far as "My" case (not really "my" case - but my vote) on Debears goes I still prefer him slightly over sharrant. see Debears as more scummy than sharrant because he led with stupid play and then tried to explain it away, whereas on my reading the Sharrant case seems more "bad towny" than a strong scum read, he started trying to help town and then made a dumb mistake. So for me it is kind of similar - but yours looks worse. That said, this game still has too many lurkers - I am not sure at the moment whether debears is strong enough to justify not shooting one of them, hopefully I won't need to make that decision because they will all come in with plenty of useful posts (fat chance). I think thrawn covered this bad town vs scummy town. Makes little sense. On September 20 2012 00:30 KillingTime wrote: I am here at the moment (around for a half hour or so) - if you want to ask me anything then you can. Other than the fact I was away last night (and therefore "lurky" to you) - why else do you think I am scum? This is probably his most scummy post. Note that he hasn't asked anyone a single decent question indicative of scum hunting, while wanting people to question him. That's a sign of him knowing there's no hunting out there for him, because he's the hunted. He wants to try to clear himself (scum thinking) instead of scum hunt (town thinking). On September 20 2012 01:40 KillingTime wrote: I'm going out to dinner. I will happily support a lurker lynch. Stutters or Cubu - both should know better from XXVI. Not commenting on Sharrant atm until I have thought about his new posts more. Umm yeah, thanks for your input. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 04:37 Stutters695 wrote: Killing or any other lurker is a better lynch than Sharrant at this point for two main reasons (IMO): 1) Sharrant is active. If he is scum it will reveal itself over time, while if we go into lategame with a bunch of lurkers we're boned in lylo. 2)You guys are painting the SK idea as way too scummy imo. Look at Kush's early posts. Self-survival is usually indicative of a power-role or scum. If he's a blue he wouldn't have so obviously painted a target on himself. If he's scum it seems to reason he wouldn't paint such a big target on himself. Given the option between SK and VT, SK makes a hell of a lot more sense. I don't necessarily agree with that conclusion but it makes sense and he's putting himself out there on that read and gives us even more of substance to hold him accountable for. Looking at the lurkers: Drazak: Would like to see some more from him before the lynch. Nowhere near the least active and he has at least thrown out questions. Wouldn't be our best lynch target imo. KillingTime has been actively lurking. He has 11 posts during D1. He has only one post with any real content. This is similar to his town play in XXVI but his reads in this have all been agreeing with other people while in XXVI his reads were more based on his observations. Really I'd like to see a lynch on Cubu. Regardless of if Cubu is scum or town, Cubu needs to die. For anyone who didn't play in NMMXXVI check his filter there (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=363923&user=153930). 9 posts before he was lynched on day 2. We let him live Day 1 with the hopes his play would improve and it didn't as VT. After we wasted a lynch on him D2 we put ourselves in mylo. We shouldn't let that happen again when we can easily avoid it. Our day 2 lynch candidate will be a much stronger one than our D1 if we're lynching someone active and Cubu has shown no intentions of actually playing. ##Vote Cubu Would reading my post on Killing make you reconsider? It's not a super strong case, but I agree with him not bringing up own reads, while in XXVI he did. The complete lack of scum hunting coupled with him trying to clear himself makes it look like he's feeling dirty and wants to wash himself clean (scum), rather than attacking others (town). Anyway, I'm with you on Cubu. I've played with him in two games and over 90 hours he's contributed with NOTHING. If he's got an extra 90 hours in NMMXXVI without contributing that makes it even worse. I'm still considering my voting options. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
After his wagon started, he responded to all accusations quickly and with long posts. First, it's really hard as scum to respond quickly and in detail to accusations, because it's so easy to slip up if you don't go back and think things through. Second, he does it without any obvious contradictions. The few contradictions can quite easily be explained by slightly weird phrasing or misunderstanding. Third, all his answers made logical sense. The only thing that left me confused was "the plan". I didn't figure it out for being what he now claims and I need to go back and think about this. I realize this isn't a strong indications, but for me it provided some counter weight to the existing case. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 06:25 KillingTime wrote: Ok I only skimmed the last page and managed to miss that roleclaim bfore my last post. Obvious follow up question to Sharrant then -I assume you discussed this roleclaim idea with your mason partner? why did your partner not tell you to drop this dumb roleclaim idea and explain to you how the game worked, or did you confuse them too? This is a good question. Sharrant's mason claim hinges on the fact that not only was he unaware of the rules, but also his mason partner. It just seems unlikely. Respond to this, Sharrant. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 06:44 Sharrant wrote: Welp, I guess I may as well. It'll save him in the long run, if enough of you had believed me about being Mason without confirming him, you probably would have killed him for lurking anyways. Actually, I've changed my mind about this. If I out him most likely only one of us dies tonight, a confirmed townie will survive, and best of all, it will possibly save a blue's life. So here's the part where you guys either instantly decide I'm guilty by assosciation, or whether I just am the mason with the shittiest luck ever. My mason buddy... is (drum roll please)... CUBU The current post count in our QT is 10, 8 posts by me, 2 by Marvel! Hooray! Well, that would explain why you didn't have anyone to explain the rules for you. And why you've for some weird reason left Cubu out of the "lynch lurkers" discussion. My take on this right now: This is either some super sofisticated level or he's being honest. I think one interesting thing to note is how he brought this up rather early. At a point where it seems like he could've gotten away by other means. Him setting up a super advanced level in and of itself seems unlikely. Him setting up a super advanced level way ahead of time just seems even more unlikely. I still need time to process this. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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. Well, for the reasons I just mentioned I tend to believe him. This has to be some kind of super advanced elaborate plot. Like I said, he hasn't really mentioned Cubu in terms of lurker lynching. This is also something he would've had to think of ahead of in order to pull this off. A scum wouldn't blatantly leave out the biggest lurker from his suspect lurker list, unless it was for this specific purpose. The problem with keeping both of them alive is that if we get a mislynch tonight, what will happen tomorrow? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
I've been looking at the meta of players in XXVI and compared it to this game. In XXVI he responded to accusations against based on his lack of posting by being very apologetic. This is not at all how he's been acting in this game wrt the exact same accusations. Now he's benig super defensive. That's a clear difference from his town meta. Then just a moment ago when he made his suspicious voting post it added to my suspicion. That post was a clear lie. He can't possibly have been reading up on the entire thread and claim not to have the tmie to post any reasoning. He just jumped the most convenient wagon and that's scummy. I wouldn't be opposed to lynching him. We need more players to chime in though. I don't even know how many are around and able to change their vote. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 07:19 KillingTime wrote: I need to go to bed. I can't process this stuff properly right now. Back to basics = hunting scum - so I am going back to voting my strongest scumread before all this nonsense - which was debears. I think that puts him and cubu on 2 votes each. You guys who are awake get to decide who to lynch I guess. ##unvote ##vote debears Now this is being suspicious as well. Claiming having to leave when a very tough decision is being made is scummy. This is a spot where quick decisions needs to be made and it's easy to make mistakes as scum. Just not engaging in the discussion at all, putting out a random fucking vote and then leave is scummy as hell. Anyone who was active right before Sharrant's claim and then goes poof gets massive scum points from me. I've been around when shit hit the fan as scum before and my reaction was to pull the plug (this wasn't in XXVI). | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 07:28 drazak wrote: Hey SDM, voting without explanation, apparently that's scummy right? Care to give one? I mean, that's why you're voting for me right? I posted my reasoning like two minutes ago. + Show Spoiler + On September 20 2012 07:21 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I guess this is a time where I can bring up something I noticed in the was drazak was posting. I didn't think it was worth mentioning before because it seemed way off topic and it's just a small thing I noted. I've been looking at the meta of players in XXVI and compared it to this game. In XXVI he responded to accusations against based on his lack of posting by being very apologetic. This is not at all how he's been acting in this game wrt the exact same accusations. Now he's benig super defensive. That's a clear difference from his town meta. Then just a moment ago when he made his suspicious voting post it added to my suspicion. That post was a clear lie. He can't possibly have been reading up on the entire thread and claim not to have the tmie to post any reasoning. He just jumped the most convenient wagon and that's scummy. I wouldn't be opposed to lynching him. We need more players to chime in though. I don't even know how many are around and able to change their vote. On September 20 2012 07:26 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: Now this is being suspicious as well. Claiming having to leave when a very tough decision is being made is scummy. This is a spot where quick decisions needs to be made and it's easy to make mistakes as scum. Just not engaging in the discussion at all, putting out a random fucking vote and then leave is scummy as hell. Anyone who was active right before Sharrant's claim and then goes poof gets massive scum points from me. I've been around when shit hit the fan as scum before and my reaction was to pull the plug (this wasn't in XXVI). | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
I'm also suspicious of debear. Particularly in the light of me thinking Sharrant not being scum. I think we're better off focusing on Killing and drazak though. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
I think Killing is at least as suspect as drazak. Those are the two alternatives imo. Killing's reaction to Sharrant's claim is weird. I can't believe that a townie wouldn't be excited trying to solve this or at very least be willing to chime in. This is a very pressured situation for scum. At least drazak is here and he showed up before his wagon started. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
Sorry for being all over the place with my posts. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
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. Fair point. From experience, creating such derailment is really hard though. What I think is possible however, is scum putting him as a lynch candidate without actually voting for him. I did this for the entire XXVI wrt Xatalos and imcasey/WeeTee. It's kind of a fake to create distance between yourself and your scum partner. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:01 debears wrote: ##unvote ##Vote: KillingTime @Sharrant The mason claim makes sense with Cubu as your partner. In light of this, it wouldn't make sense as mafia for you to give up your partner openly. Thus, I will not vote for either of you. @everyone else I would like to be here for the last hour or two to contribute, but as a reminder I will be gone at practice. Right now, based on drazak pulling a KillingTime and voted without putting reason, it is hard for me to decide between the two. Since drazak is here to defend himself currently and has the most votes if I count right, I will put my vote on KillingTime. I had specified in an earlier post to Sharrant kt's scummy, unhelpful posting. Although you can say the same for Drazak. I feel like KillingTime, although he said he would not be awake during the lynch, would have stayed awake to sort out the aftermath of the mason claim rather than voting and leaving. Even if you can't process it 100%, you could at least wake up after an hour nap and be there to help out. Gotta go. See you all Late tonight This comes off as scummy. It looks like he's been observing the thread in order to take his time to figure out how to handle a pressured situation (I've done this several times as scum when shit hit the fan). Then you just leave one post, trying to look active, while actually not wanting to engage in any discussion. None of his reasonings are original, it's all been brought up before. The only original part is voting for Killing instead of drazak. I'm not going to analyze this right now though. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:19 drazak wrote: Obviously, I have many many many hours to devote to things related to mafia, the posts say 1-2 hours a day, I give more like 3-4,and obviously if I had time to read through filters and be less circumspect I would. I have a family life and other things going on, so I can't before deadline. Therefore I'm left with one option which is to say I will post about it D2 morning. I'm willing to look at Killing if other people have stopped on the whole idea of killing a lurker to prove a town. TBH killing a lurker to prove a town is one of the best things that can happen D1, as we have a town to work with D2. That's just my thought on the matter, I haven't really looked at killingtime, and I don't know what his IRL situation is at the moment, so going to bed might be because he has to be up in 4 hours already, staying up another 2-3 would be crazy. It's not "killing a lurker to prove a town", it's killing a town to prove a town. We would be at d3 without both masons and with either 1 or 2 extra townies dead (depending on how successful our d2 lynch is). Best case scenario is d3 with one scum lynched, 2 masons dead and 1 VT night killed. That's bad. The worst case scenario is fucking horrible. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 08:51 thrawn2112 wrote: Actually the best case scenario is that if sharrant is lying both he and cubu could be mafia which gives us 2 scum kills. But like you said the worst case scenario in which they are actually masons and there is no jk would leave us with 2 blue roles killed. The best case and worst case scenarios are so extreme making it a pretty big risk, which is why waiting on that issue is a pretty safe route. True, didn't think that through properly. For me the most important part is that this is unlikely to be a scum plot by Sharrant. And now it's too late to change. Oh, the suspense... | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 09:01 Atreides- wrote: God damn this thread blew up fast. I would've went with a no lynch over Drazak but it doesn't matter now. What is this? You don't post ANYTHINBG productive for 48 hours and then you conveniently drop by 1 minutes after deadline to chime in you think drazak is a mislynch. Is this hunting for cheap townie points before drazak is flipping green? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
##FOS Captain Hindsight | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 09:16 Atreides- wrote: I wasn't around after my last post, and I mixed up the voting deadline by an hour (thought it would be an hour from now, my bad). Your last sentence is a pretty moot point since it'd look equally bad for me if he flipped red. The instant bandwagon against him is pretty interesting, and it's obvious now that the mafia had a strong hand in it. It was a rethorical question. It's obvious mafia had a strong hand in it? Jesus fucking Christ, you haven't even followed the thread and now you drop in with random accusations. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 09:33 kushm4sta wrote: sighhh... yes that post was before i saw the flip. i was in the process of looking through killing's filter to try to figure out if i would rather vote for him. Cubu was the biggest lurker and i think it's obvious after sharrant's roleclaim that we shouldn't lynch him anymore. who is the next biggest lurker? no one comes to mind really and i didn't have time to find out esp not on my cell phone. drazak seemed like the only option at the time. Why would you say that? Basically everyone made it clear they were open for voting on Killing. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 09:53 kushm4sta wrote: No! When i voted for drazak everyone made it clear they wanted to vote for drazak... page 21... sharrant, CONFIRMED TOWN, as far as I am concerned at this point, says then sdm votes drazzak. drazak says some scummy shit. this was the stuff i read at the time, not his filter. then thrawn says then i say He was #1 on most lists, but everyone had Killing as an option. I even posted that in bold letters to make sure that people didn't think I made a vote I considered final. I still stand behind my drazak vote though. It's always easy to use ex-post reasoning when after he flipped green, but at the time I thought they were both good candidates. Anyway, I think we all need a break right now. At least I do. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 10:00 thrawn2112 wrote: kush it's not a good idea to go to bed angry, you will just wake up with the same poopy pants you wore to bed I should feel bad because I pushed for a lynch on a player that I thought was scummy all game and then later lied to try and cover it up? Why do you think his mason status is such a sure thing? Your last post is pretty much just an omgus accusation. I need to go back to take a really close look at his filter. But when you say this, what are you referring to? That you thought he was lying at the time? That you still think he's lying? Or is there anything you think he's said that is a confirmed lie at this point? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 10:45 thrawn2112 wrote: Also, the Cubu mason claim just looks way too convienient... all throughout the last half of D1 he is asking us to trust him abhout things we have no possible way of confirming and if he's mafia then cubu is the safest townie to lie about. At the point when he dropped the cubu claim I didn't think and I don't think anyone else thought that cubu was going to ever post again. I was thinking about this at the time, but it kind of felt far fetched because Cubu hadn't cast his vote and it seemed weird that he would assumed Cubu wouldn't be back to the thread at least for voting. And if Cubu is in on it, he's basically given up 2 scum. I think looking closer at the exact timing of the various claims he's made may be important. The "outing" of Cubu came late, although it seemed to me the set-up of Cubu as his fake mason buddy would've to have been planned in advance. I will get back on this. Him dropping you and debears from his scum reads is indeed very weird. Him even having you as a scum team read in the first place is weird. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 12:40 debears wrote: I have a couple of thoughts from reading through all this craziness. First, this jumped out at me. Why would you want a no lynch? Even though the mason claim caused confusion, there were two reasonable candidates in drazak and KillingTime who had been lurking with scummy tells. All a no lynch would have done is keep lurkers around. @SDM + Show Spoiler + Sonic Death Monkey Sweden. September 20 2012 11:20. Posts 403 PM Profile Quote # filter On September 20 2012 10:45 thrawn2112 wrote: Also, the Cubu mason claim just looks way too convienient... all throughout the last half of D1 he is asking us to trust him abhout things we have no possible way of confirming and if he's mafia then cubu is the safest townie to lie about. At the point when he dropped the cubu claim I didn't think and I don't think anyone else thought that cubu was going to ever post again. I was thinking about this at the time, but it kind of felt far fetched because Cubu hadn't cast his vote and it seemed weird that he would assumed Cubu wouldn't be back to the thread at least for voting. And if Cubu is in on it, he's basically given up 2 scum. I think looking closer at the exact timing of the various claims he's made may be important. The "outing" of Cubu came late, although it seemed to me the set-up of Cubu as his fake mason buddy would've to have been planned in advance. I will get back on this. His timing can be explained by town and mafia motivations. Town - He waited until the final hour (if i am correct) when he had 6 votes on himself. His back was against the wall and if he is mason it preserves an important part of us. Mafia - By waiting until the end, he sent us into some confusion. We were stuck in a situation where our biggest bandwagons were gone, as Kush said. And, it ended up pushing our focus on lurkers and a mislynch. I have not been able to go through any filters yet to look at everyone's reasoning for their votes. From a first glance, there was good reasoning for most of us for voting who we voted for. Still, I will check more in depth. I would kindly ask everyone to not try to make up reasons for Sharrant at this point. Just wait until he responds to the accusations. If you want to you can prepare an analysis, but wait with posting it until after Sharrant has responded. Thrawn's question is very valid and we don't want to give him any information right now. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 12:40 debears wrote: I have a couple of thoughts from reading through all this craziness. First, this jumped out at me. Why would you want a no lynch? Even though the mason claim caused confusion, there were two reasonable candidates in drazak and KillingTime who had been lurking with scummy tells. All a no lynch would have done is keep lurkers around. Btw, it seems to me a non vote would've been impossible anyway. We would've needed everyone to non vote, which wouldn't have been possible. Even if it was possible, I'm not sure it would've been a great option. But yes, ##FOS Atreides. His complete lack of constructive posting was suspocious already made him suspicious. His posts in connection to today's lynch just strengthens those suspicions. He's either scummy or an incredibly bad player. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 13:54 thrawn2112 wrote: After posting this near lynch deadline Sharrent was also willing to vote for killing[/QUOTE] Almost made that same post, but I felt my Captain Hindsight reference was getting old. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 14:04 JacobStrangelove wrote: Yeah but drazak seemed more town than killing, when I was refering to the killing being less that the lukers I was talking about stutters/cubu the two main lurkers under fire at the time. Really? On September 20 2012 06:15 JacobStrangelove wrote: Switching over to killing case I can see how he fits lurker scum but also I don’t think he is more scum than stutters or drazak. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 15:05 JacobStrangelove wrote: Also yeah that is my read on sharrent. I still need to proccess the fact that he called out who he says is his mason partner. but you have to realise cubu isn't in the thread to verify this. He could have been betting on cubu being mod killed to avoid retrubution or he could have simply called it out to trade one mafia for town instead of one mafia for nobody. No. On September 20 2012 04:48 kushm4sta wrote: if someone makes 2 posts but doesn't vote do they get modkilled? On September 20 2012 04:59 marvellosity wrote: I'd either give a warning or start looking for a replacement, depending on how I look at it. I will make a detailed post on the mason claim once Sharrant responds. I have it typed out already, but I don't want to comment on it. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 15:10 Atreides- wrote: I didn't actually know about the no-lynch until the mod posted about it. If I had, I would've suggested it quite a while ago. I'm assuming that voting for a no-lynch works the same way as voting for a lynch, in that we just need a majority of votes (and not every vote like you said). Maybe I'm wrong on this. There weren't any exceptionally strong arguments against killer / drazak. The consensus was "eh, he's kinda scummy, and kinda lurking, and he's kinda the best option, let's kill him and see what happens". The problem with choosing between killer and drazak is that, like I meant earlier, mafia has a lot of power here. If killer turns out to be mafia, his team can go for a drazak vote and the bandwagon easily follows because nobody has strong feelings one way or the other. The time constraint and confusion was really perfect for something like this. So yeah, as a principle I'd support no-lynching (on day one only) versus doing a half-assed lynch on someone else. I'm mostly waiting for Cubu / his replacement to comment about the mason thing, as that's the key factor to Sharrant's innocence. When he made the claim he had no idea whether or not Cubu would end up posting and voting, which makes lying an amazingly ballsy play. Will be around again tomorrow afternoon. So you're seriously entering the thread starting to discuss lurker policy 30 hours into the game? After having made no productive contributions at all? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 15:39 Cubu wrote: Guys im sorry but i don't think i can play. My assignment is taking way way longer than i would expect. Are you mason? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
Brilliant, don't bother quoting the post from a different page that you're responding to. You were saying that you supported a lynch of a lurker (Cubu in specific), yet when a lynch of a lurker happens you're saying "it's obvious now that the mafia had a strong hand in it". What's your reasoning behind that? | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 16:15 KillingTime wrote: I obviously know that lynching me would have been a mislynch aswell. For me, I left the thread with 2 votes on debears, and several people who had previously felt that he looked scummy... and instead drazak got lynched. Herp derp - before I think too much about the endgame hour though I think we need to sort out this cubu/sharrant mason thing asap given that some are still not convinced. Obviously Cubu is not going to help. Is it allowed to ask Sharrant to post a link to the mason quicktopic to prove his claim? I am asking the mods first because I feel like it might not be, but it wasn't clear in the rules (it says you can post your role pm and the sample role pm makes no mention of not being able to post the quicktopic link to the thread if you choose) In his defense he probably doesn't even know if he's town of mafia. I'm eager to post my wall-o-text analysis of the mason situation, but I kind of want a response from Sharrant first. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 19:21 kushm4sta wrote: just woke up. I have a test today but after I will try to sort through this clusterfuck of a thread. for now just 1 thing. @sonic you keep saying that you want to wait for a response from sharrant before you post this epic wall of text case. What exactly do you want him to address. Maybe you said it before but this thread recently has blown up. Is there a secific question you want him to answer or an issue you want him to address? All this sharrant doubt seems really stupid to me. The only way sharrant is scum is if cubu is also scum. Therefore if sharrant was scum, a blue could identify one of them and boom we would have 2 scum. It makes no sense for scum to roleclaim mason like that. He could possibly have claimed Cubu (as town) hoping he wouldn't show up in the thread, at least before lynch. There's also a risk it's an epic super level and both are scum. Like I've said I find it both unlikely. The question to address is thrawn's. Why he dropped the reads on thrawn and debear after getting to know the correct mechanics of the game. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
This is why the thread got so fucking empty all of a sudden. I know you, Killing, Jacob and Kush went poof when the heat got turned up, but there were probably more than that I haven't had the timecheck. Obviously it's likely some players had legitimate reasons for disappearing, but it's no coincidence so many players pulled the plug. Townies had no reason to leave the thread at that point, but scum had. That's why disappearing from the thread was scummy. This brings me to you. Just 1 minute after deadline you show up with a claim. You're not just saying something like "it's possible that the mafia had a hand in it", but "it's obvious now that the mafia had a strong hand in it". This is really weird. How is this even possible if you hadn't followed the thread? If you followed the thread as town, I would've expected you to contribute at least something. Instead you wait, claim to have knowledge and make a strong claim just 1 minute after deadline that it was a bad lynch. It strikes me as scummy. *That's not to say it was a good position for town, but it's not a tough spot because mafia is able to easily manipulating the situation. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 20:48 JacobStrangelove wrote: @sonic When did I go poof? If it was before the lynch then there is an obvious reason. I listed even before any of this happened I have classes on this day at this time (I can bring up a time table if you really want...) If it was after the lynch I don’t have a reason apart from being really tired. Also Chaos can be an opportunity for scum to exercise great power as well... You seem to forget they could arrange/create the Chaos in the QT and then put it into action when the time comes. (preemptive strike)It wouldn’t be easy but not as hard as you probably think. While it can and is at times really useful for town to role call late (although don’t do it right after I leave the thread kinda rubs me the wrong way{in regards to actually backing up the role claim that is}) but mafia can also be the ones creating it thus in some form of control. However I do see the difference from role calling a few hours from the thread and 1 minute.... I will probably re-read the whole thread in the light of the lynch and considering I am not as tired now however considering it is night (in game) I might try and work on getting both my assignments done tonight(irl) and have more time tomorrow. That said I will still post tonight. I know you've claimed those reasonings way earlier. Killing and Art disappearing was more fishy. There are more, rethos seems to pull out as well. It's quite possible there was scum lurking while the shit storm started and then decided to continue doing so and of course I'm not claiming everyone who stayed is clean. Singling out player for this alone certainly isn't fair, but with the circumstances around Art in particular I think there's reason to question what he was doing. And I agree about your second point. I was about to mention it but didn't, since it's very closely connected to Sharrant's mason claim, which I plan to post about later. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
I don't envy the position you're jumping into here, but Sharrant just claimed ~2 hours before the d1 lynch that the two of you are masons. He did it to save his own ass. You have to confirm or deny this, but I'll give you some time to catch up on the thread for you to realize for yourself. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
Long post about Sharrant's mason claim: First something I'd like to point out. These posts were made simultaneously in the sense that I hadn't read his post before posting mine. We make the exact same argument independently, which at the time made me feel more comfortable in believe what he said was true. His reasoning matched mine and thus in my mind it made sense. + Show Spoiler + On September 20 2012 06:51 Sharrant wrote: I honestly wish I was trolling. I know, I know. Atreides defended me earlier, would've been great to have as a mason buddy. SDM? Would've been great as a mason buddy, he seems to know his shit and I think he's town. Thrawn? That'd be baller too. You'll notice how the only time I ever acknowledged Cubu about lurking is once when I said "We should go after the scummy lurker instead of the afk lurker" That's because Cubu is my partner. And has not said a single thing to me yet. Hopefully he shows up in this thread to confirm me. More like he will show up in this thread at 7:55 and I'll die because no one will be there to notice. On September 20 2012 06:54 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: Well, that would explain why you didn't have anyone to explain the rules for you. And why you've for some weird reason left Cubu out of the "lynch lurkers" discussion. My take on this right now: This is either some super sofisticated level or he's being honest. I think one interesting thing to note is how he brought this up rather early. At a point where it seems like he could've gotten away by other means. Him setting up a super advanced level in and of itself seems unlikely. Him setting up a super advanced level way ahead of time just seems even more unlikely. I still need time to process this. A rough read through of Sharrant's filter seems to make it clear that his plan must've been set up from the point he was first accused. His first hint on wanting Debears to "claim" came immediately after thrawn questioning his motives for voting debear. At that point no one had suspected him previously, he had no votes and more that 24h to deadline. I pointed this out during the shit storm, but it seems weird to set up such an elaborate plan at that point since he had no real reason to feel threatened. Besides, he replies to thrawn's accusation with a long post within 30min. Is he supposed to have come up with this plan and typed out this post within 30min? Or is it a plan he's been working on for a long time? Maybe since Debears started cock riding thrawn? It just seems way too far fetched. The other option is that it wasn't his original plan, but that he used this "forcing debear to claim" reasoning later to form his mason plan. This would require an insane ability to make up complicated plans on the fly. Basically all the puzzle pieces fell into place, it's highly unlikely this would happen unless he actually had a plan when first trying to "forcing debear to claim". Timeline of events: 1) 9 hours to deadline: This is Sharrant's first mention of the most suspected lurkers: + Show Spoiler + On September 19 2012 23:53 Sharrant wrote: Here is how it stands for me. In order of most to least scummiest: debears, Thrawn, KillingTime/Stutters, Kush, everyone else, SDM. Scummiest lurkers to me are: KillingTime, and Stutters. For some reason he didn't include Cubu at all in this post. This is weird because imo Cubu has been the #1 lurker of the game. But it's also worth noting he didn't mention Atreides or drazak. While not being as hardcore lurkers as Cubu, they were solid non-contributors. 2) 8 hours to deadline: Sharrant acknowledges that he had completely forgot Atreides, but still prefers Stutters: + Show Spoiler + On September 20 2012 00:38 Sharrant wrote: Hm. I had missed a post of yours before. That's why. Your Filter thing on the front page isn't working properly, so I had to scan through everything, and I missed at least one post. My apologies. I still think you came off a little scummy when you first entered the game, but I hadn't thought about Atreides posts before that. I'm now less suspicious of you, and a little more of Atreides, but not enough that you two are my preffered lurker lynch. That spot now goes solely to Stutters. 3) 3 hours to deadline: Sharrant's next interesting mention is this: + Show Spoiler + On September 20 2012 05:47 Sharrant wrote: @SDM, @debears I'm going to have to agree with you two at this point. At this point my vote is going to be going to killer, Stutters' recent posts have put him on good footing, and Cubu is still just an unkown quantity. ... @Drazak ... You honestly had time to got hrough every single post and then voted me with a single sentence completely lacking any justification AND you did it in such a way that you look like you're only suggesting that you might be voting for me. AND you commited the cardinal sin of putting someone at L-1 without giving them warning. You just reached my number one spot. ##unvote KillingTime ##vote Drazak You're scum, and you just had the most obvious bandwagonning in the world. For some reason his main focus was Killing and Stutters when it comes to scummy lurkers. He also just labeled Cubu an "unknown quantity". This is also the first time he finds drazak scummy, due to his weird voting post. 4) 2h and 15m to deadline: Sharrant officially outs Cubu as his mason buddy. + Show Spoiler + On September 20 2012 06:44 Sharrant wrote: Welp, I guess I may as well. It'll save him in the long run, if enough of you had believed me about being Mason without confirming him, you probably would have killed him for lurking anyways. Actually, I've changed my mind about this. If I out him most likely only one of us dies tonight, a confirmed townie will survive, and best of all, it will possibly save a blue's life. So here's the part where you guys either instantly decide I'm guilty by assosciation, or whether I just am the mason with the shittiest luck ever. My mason buddy... is (drum roll please)... CUBU The current post count in our QT is 10, 8 posts by me, 2 by Marvel! Hooray! So why did he never suspect Cubu despite his lurking? I can see three reasons: a) Sharrant is telling the truth, Cubu is his mason buddy (if Sharrant gets lynched, this will also help Cubu to claim mason later) b) Sharrant is scum and is making an elaborate mason plan (Cubu could possibly be either scum or townie, this scenario is unlikely imo for reasons explained above) c) Sharrant is scum and is protecting his scum buddy with no other motives in mind (ime at least including Cubu as a suspect is something a scum would do, not calling him an "unknown entity" when it's obvious Cubu is a hardcore lurker) I will also ahead of time type out what I find to be the only fully satisfying answer Sharrant can give to thrawn's new accusations: about Sharrant dropping the scum reads on thrawn and debears because he misunderstood the game mechanics: Sharrant never particularly suspected thrawn or debears. He was using his vote as a tool, because IF they happened to both be scum, they might fall for the trap. It's a long shot, but if it succeeds, he's trapped two scum. It also would make sense with all his actions imo (I've still only made a rough read through, but that's how it appears to me). When he realized his trap wouldn't work because of game mechanics, he didn't have to keep his mostly artificial scum reads of thrawn and debear anymore because his plan couldn't any longer succeed. He dropped his accusations. I kind of like this approach to the game in general. I don't think you need to have strong suspicions to throw out accusations and force reactions. However, I don't really like doing it by voting, at least not in TL newbie games. People will demand a reasoning for his vote and since Sharrant didn't have solid reasoning, he'll easily end up in the situation he did. However, it's possible that in the games he's used to play in, voting is used as such a tool. Others have mentioned this before, some players tend to use ##Vote instead of ##FOS. I honestly had a hard time to even understand the 50/50 sentence. Is he saying it had a 50/50 chance of working before he realized he had misunderstood the mechanics? If so, how does that make sense? This is something I still need him to clarify. (Of course, for you to believe this, you have to trust there's no sonic/sharrant scum team. That is entirely up to you to decide) | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 20 2012 22:46 Sharrant wrote: @Thrawn The part where the 50/50 comes in is because of the altered Mason mechanics. You could have claimed Mason, and I would've been liked "Fuck yeah, mafia" in the standard I'm used to (All Masons know each other). However, that post came out after I found out about the different Mason mechanics. So if you had claimed Mason all I could've done is gone "Fuck yeah, those guys actually could be Masons because they haven't really had a 3rd buddy, or they might be mafia together with a lurker" suddenly you claiming Mason was not the be all end all of catching you. So suddenly you guys seemed a lot less scummy because it was actually possible you were both masons. I said before, I still wasn't sure about both of you. The fact that neither of you took the easy claim could have left you both as mafia that didn't want to take an easy out, or that only one of you is mafia so the claim is stupid and unsafe, or that neither of you are and the claim is unneeded. This isn't the exact reasoning I was looking for in order for it to fully make sense. The first paragraph is, but the second paragraph isn't. In the second paragraph you state that you were actually suspicious of thrawn and debears because of what I think is a silly association read. The reason you dropped those accusations is because he actually thought there was a decent possibility there were two pairs of masons in the game. I simply think this is bad reasoning. The association read is really weak and having 4 masons in a set-up with 13 players is highly unlikely. On the other hand, the association read goes hand in hand with his overly specific SK read on Kush. Maybe making overly specific reads is just something he does. I find that way more likely than his mason claim being a super sofisticated scum plot. The QT text certainly helps as well. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 21 2012 01:30 Sonic Death Monkey wrote: I'll take a break from this thread to clear my mind. I'll be back in ~12h. Whacking me while I'm on vacation is so fucking rude. Town, avenge me death please. /obs ***********dead************ | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 26 2012 15:06 thrawn2112 wrote: lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases I think this is pretty spot on. I almost JK you n1. You were townie to me, so good job on that. I still think JK anyone except for Sharrant would be pretty bad. At first I thought Dandel made a decent point for JK thrawn, but now I'm pretty decided it was a weak argument. Still not decided on who the best n1 NK was from scum's perspective. I was pretty sure they'd kill thrawn, Sharrant or me though. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 26 2012 19:56 Dandel Ion wrote: Hm, I said that before I knew Sharrant was JK'd, when thrawn was the only one that claimed. But I still think that usually, it would be bad play to JK a mason in that situation. I guess it didn't matter since you can't JK yourself, but I think my logic is solid: Scum won't kill just 1/2 of the masons if there is still a JK/medic in the game. He will camp the confirmed town, forcing scum to shoot relatively blindly for the JK/medic instead of the confirmed town, all the while leaving a confirmed town in the game. Which would usually spell disaster for the scumteam, but the confirmed town this game was Sharky, so in the end, I guess it really didn't matter. But there was no real way for you to know sharky would be useless. I think your decision was wrong. It practically did not matter, because scum shot you (bad luck there), but it COULD have mattered and I stand by my opinion that you did not play your nightaction as well as you could have. Eh, as I said, not really applicable in THIS very game, but remember for the next time you roll JK I think the problem with your argument is that I would be camping Sharrant anyway. Your argument would only be valid if there was a decent risk that the mason claim was false. If there was a decent risk, I agree confirming the mason claim by killing Sharrant would be bad. However, if you go back in the thread, you can see basically no one had doubts regarding the mason claim by the end of n1. Going by your argument, do you also think I should've pushed a Cubu (later Sharky) lynch d1? That would've guaranteed the outcome you want, a confirmed mason Sharrant that I could've protected. I was considering this briefly, but I thought the mason claim was likely enough to be legitimate in order for me to want to keep both in the game and I also felt confident I would be able to convince other players of this. If both are alive I can still guarantee the protection of Sharrant for as many nights I stay alive (which unfortunately turned out to be 0 :p). | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 26 2012 20:41 Dandel Ion wrote: It was okay in THIS game, because there were no townier townies. I'm saying usually scum would avoid hitting just one of the masons (unless they have 2 KP to kill both or something), and if both masons are even approx. equally useful, there's no knowing which one will get hit. I'd have thought that's pretty logical, but apparantly not... Even so, I still have a 50% success rate protecting the "correct" mason (the mason about to get NKd), which is great. Even if I don't succeed, I end up in the situation you want: having one confirmed townie to protect for the rest of the game. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 26 2012 21:22 marvellosity wrote: no, pushing for a Cubu lynch would have been totally incorrect (it was suggested a few times in thread to my horror) I basically played all d1 not remembering I was JK. I think this idea was first suggested by thrawn and I went "ah, that might be a decent strategy if we have a JK... oh fuck, that's me". Anyway, given I was confident the claim was legitimate, I didn't give it too much thought. I was still close to JK thrawn, which in hindsight baffles my mind. I'm not even going to try to explain that thought process. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 26 2012 21:49 marvellosity wrote: why? thrawn doesn't seem like that much of an out there jail to make I think I severely overestimated my town read on thrawn, but maybe that's just me using the benefit of hindsight. My basic reasoning was this: If both thrawn and Sharrant are townies, I think scum will think they need to NK both of them at some point. They will start with thrawn because he's more active and a bigger threat. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 26 2012 22:04 iamperfection wrote: he basically was the most pro town player. the 2nd part is just wifom. Yes I agree, which is why I think protecting Sharrant was the best option. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
1. Assumption: Scum will always NK thraw if town/town Both town: 70% thrawn scum, sharrant town: 25% thrawn town, sharrant scum: 5% Save thrawn success: 75% Save Sharrant success: 25% 2. Assumption: Scum will NK thrawn 67% if town/town, sharrant otherwise Both town: 70% thrawn scum, sharrant town: 25% thrawn town, sharrant scum: 5% Save thrawn success: 52% Save Sharrant success: 48% It's obvious that even under the most optimistic assumptions (case 1), I need to be close to 50% confident thrawn is town for him to be the best JK candidate. I think both the main assumption and me being 50% sure thrawn is town are false. However, I also need to consider how valuable thrawn and Sharrant are later in the game. If thrawn will be a better scum hunter, that gives some more weight behind the idea of JK him. I think these are more reasonable assumptions, but still pretty optimistic: 3. Assumption: Scum will NK thrawn 70% if town/town, sharrant otherwise Both town: 45% thrawn scum, sharrant town: 50% thrawn town, sharrant scum: 5% Save thrawn success: 36.5% Save Sharrant success: 63.5% As we can see I think a Sharrant JK will be successful almost twice as often. Thrawn needs to be one hell of a scum hunter to make up for that difference. In the end I decided against a thrawn JK not because I realized my assumptions sucked, but because 1) if I'm able to protect a confirmed townie until late game that'll give additional benefits (for example: limiting our lynching options through process of elimination) and 2) thrawn came under fire late n1, regardless if it was townies or scum attacking him it makes him a less likely NK target because scum can be setting up a later mislynch. EDIT: Save thrawn success = prob(thrawn = town and NK target) | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
On September 26 2012 23:07 thrawn2112 wrote: I haven't read your post yet but I see that it's based on assumptions... I was expecting pure maths That's basically impossible in a game of incomplete information. Unless you want me to assign everyone the probabilities given at the start of the game, which would make my analysis meaningless anyway. | ||
Sonic Death Monkey
Sweden991 Posts
| ||
| ||