Newbie Mini Mafia XXVII

Sonic Death Monkey Sweden. September 18 2012 23:10. Posts 345 PM Profile Quote #
filter

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).

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.

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).

On September 18 2012 20:56 kushm4sta wrote:
In regards to thrawn's attack on sonic for his survey:
@Sonic: Yeah that was based on mine, but I dont think to make a list and say "answer these or you're scum" is very productive. What I put up was just some suggestions for newer players to have something to talk about. I notice newbies never really know what to say d1.

@Thrawn: I don't think sonic's survey is particularly scummy. He did the same thing last game. He was scum last game, sure, but I think it's just his MO for day one, scum or town.
Also here is why I think sonic is town. I'm putting my reasoning in spoilers because admittedly it's pretty dumb:
He was scum for the last 2 games. Do you really think marv would make him scum 3rd game in a row? It's possible but just feels unlikely to me.

Now he claims the question was serious but the idea was not

I also find it weird that he claims attacking his stupid question would be a scum trait

thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 17:00. Posts 1077 PM Profile Blog Quote #
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.

rethos Romania. September 18 2012 20:17. Posts 52 PM Profile Quote #
filter
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.

Sharrant Canada. September 19 2012 05:58. Posts 8 PM Profile Quote #
filter
On September 19 2012 05:26 thrawn2112 wrote:
Show nested quote +


Well that bolded part is just a straight up lie. I don't see how drazak fits into your theory... I was the first one to call drazak out on his unreasonably defensive post and I've never defended him. So once again, is the only reason you think I'm scum because of your debears association case?

Show nested quote +


Ok Sharrant that is a ridiculous vote. You start out saying "debears isn't really the most suspicious person to me" and say his defense of me "was weird, but not a strong tell either way in my opinion."

Then you vote for him and say "there's a good chance he flips scum" and you're "not convinced he's mafia" after saying his defense of me was a null read. So, what exactly is your read on him and if you don't have a read then why are you voting for him? All I see is a bunch of "he may be scum" and "he is a null read."


That's a ridiculous vote? You pick choice words out to discredit what I said, and try to make it personal. I'm fairly convinced the two of you are mafia after that. You know who I think is most suspicious, that hasn't been a secret. This has been mentioned in every post that Kush is my number one target, but that's not going anywhere. I think you should re-read my post. Several times even. Yes, his defense of you wasn't particularly strong either way in and of itself, that's what I said. That's one moment of his play, and you jumped all over that.

Sharrant Canada. September 19 2012 03:14. Posts 8 PM Profile Quote #
filter
On September 19 2012 02:09 kushm4sta wrote:

Defense of Sharrant's case against me
Good...scumhunting...dude..
there I didn't flame.

1 You call me insincere because at first I say sorry cubu for bandwagoning him last game, then I call him out for lurking?
I am not going to make a case against him for lurking, but I think a COUPLE words saying so and so are lurking we still need a post is fine.
And yeah I will say cubu played really really bad last game. I wont apologize for saying that. I'm still sorry for lynching him.
I was not trying to start a flame war for with cubu, I was just trying to get him to post. I think encouraging lurkers to post by calling them out or asking them questions is productive. Making cases against lurkers is not productive.


It was just a couple of words, but it is all in the wording. It was the whole underlined, bolded, italicized call out of him. I agree that lurkers need a kick in the pants to start posting more. I'd like to see more posts from Cubu, Stutters, and Killing Time specifically. You've taken a few steps on the road to seeming town to me, but it's a long journey for you, I'm still sticking with my first call.



2
Show nested quote +

I "keep on about NKs" only because people are calling me out for that statement and I want to defend myself. I will stop talking about NK if you stop.
But since you brought it up again let me talk more about my stance on nks:
+ Show Spoiler +


And if you're afraid to make yourself a target, then you don't put up as much as you can. NKs provide can provide just as much information as lynches can. On the first read through of your post, I was more convinced of your townieness. But your "I only talk about NKs because you guys talk about! But I'm going to talk about it again, and then say how it was a bad idea to talk about it in the first place." that's put me in an odd spot. It sends real mixed signals to me.

3
Show nested quote +

I never reversed my stance on anything. 1 post a day is not lurking if its a long post. Lynch lurkers, yes, but 1 post a day does not make you a lurker.

@sharron Is there anything else you want me to address or is that it? Also please give more effort to organize your posts better. Singling out the different arguments made against me was quite hard.


I'll take this one as a misinterpretation of your wording earlier. You have the benefit of the doubt there, I retract that point from before.

I think my post was more than adequately formatted, every point I called you on was bolded, every town read you gave was underlined, each point was addressed immediately afterwards, and was followed by a concise conclusion. If you have a suggestion on how to better format my posts, do tell.

You've gained some leniency, in that I know have more of a doubt that you might just be a townie who just sort of blurts out whatever they're thinking, but my vote stays on you for now until you post your own scum reads. But I appreciate that you are remaining civil, I think it helps the town out more.

KillingTime, you're starting to come up on my radar more and more. You seem to be riding coat tails, and posting a recap, rather than analysis of events, and then you come out swinging at debears based off of very, very little.

People I would like to hear more from: debears, KillingTime, Rethos, Jacob

You're all up there because I would like to get a better read on you, or I'd like to know more about your opinions.

People I need to hear more from: Atreides, Cubu, Drazak, Remedy, Stutters

And you're all up here because you're either suspicious, or lurking.

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)

We need to operate under the impression that among ourselves is not just the mafia, but a serial killer. It changes reads on people by an incredible amount. There's too many strategies open to an idependant killer if we don't also try to address them in our scum hunting.

Sonic Death Monkey Sweden. September 19 2012 06:37. Posts 358
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?

rethos Romania. September 19 2012 16:21. Posts 62 PM Profile Quote #
filter
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?

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.

##Vote debears

Sharrant Canada. September 20 2012 01:20. Posts 24 PM Profile Quote #
filter
@Thrawn
The mod never made mention of either of you, the question did not have anything to do with either of you. It was a question of mechanics which made both of you appear less scummy to me. Make of that what you will, I think you should be able to figure it out with what I was saying earlier.

@SDM
1. Werewolf, MafiaSC2, and just regular Mafia. All of those have had some form of independent killer. Werewolf having lonewolf/witch, Mafia SC2 having MM/Arson/SK, and regular mafia having SK as well.
This is not my first rodeo.

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.

3. At that point both of them had struck me as scummy players. Killing for going after easy reads, debears for parroting. Killing had made some mention of debears being mafia and went as far as to vote for him. I saw this as an issue that would end up being a distraction when it's two scummy players against each other, so I wanted to focus it on the one I found more scummy and see more of how thrawn and debears both reacted.

4. Yes, you are right about that, I was meaning when I posted to vote him. I had a slight town read on both of them before the fact that debears was just reposting what thrawn had written crept more into my mind. So I put in my vote, based on the fact that at that point they were both scummy to me, with debears being slightly ahead. I figured only one would be mafia, I could be wrong and it could be Killing that is. At this point, I am not interested in Thrawn or debears as a lynch until I see more of what they say. 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.

5. My read on him as SK was also always backed up by the fact that it could also always be explained by just poor townie play. I picked up on him as SK or "town that just blurts things out" because he was so afraid of NKs, and the few sort of slips he did have were not real mafia slips. They looked scummy to me, but not what I would expect from a mafia, rather what I've seen from other SKs. His last few posts have made me sure he's not mafia. THere's still a small chance he could be SK, but for now I view him as town until there's proof of an SK. To me the "please don't kill me"s seemed genuine enough that I didn't believe he was mafia, but the slips also pushed me in a scummy direction. Thus that was the only step that could take.

KillingTime France. September 19 2012 15:07. Posts 64 PM Profile Quote #
filter
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.

KillingTime France. September 19 2012 22:41. Posts 64 PM Profile Quote #
filter
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.


also why are so many people already voting sharron? His play is really stupid with the roleclaim call, but stupid play doesn't make you mafia. you think first time mafia would really be so confidently retarded like that?

Isn't sharron's roleclaim call as stupid as my defense of thrawn early on? You could make the same argument for me.

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).

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.

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.

Mafia wouldn't want to aggressively pursue targets, they want to passively follow the crowd. Sharrant rode hard on debears, and has shown that he's willing to use his vote freely. I think that trying to get a role claim is a bad idea (debears will claim vanilla town no matter what role he is, this tells us nothing) but I don't see what's scummy about that. He's actively scumhunting, and both of his ideas (kush being SK, pressuring on debears) are original.

Someone mentioned the possibility of debears+thrawn being masons, which is something I didn't think of. The bromance between the two is pretty apparent since the beginning. Both have said that they believe the other is town, and they've used FOS (against sonic) and vote (against Sharrant) in unison. Thoughts?

I don't see a strong case for both debears and Sharrant right now. I'd be more inclined to vote for KillingTime if anything.

On September 20 2012 06:41 Atreides- wrote:
Oh man, what an interesting situation. Some possible outcomes:

1) We decide to lynch Sharrant, he then outs the other mason. Pretty bad outcome as the mason will simply die.

2) Sharrant outs a mason, he confirms, and we lynch cubu or killing. At this point it's very unlikely for both Sharrant and his ally to be mafia, and more likely for both to be masons. Relatively strong outcome.

3) We lynch Sharrant without him revealing the mason. If he was bluffing and flips red, this is a huge win, but it's a stretch. If he flips mason, we're in trouble.

4) Sharrant doesn't reveal the mason and we lynch cubu or killing. This seems like rolling the dice, as we wouldn't have any idea if Sharrant is lying or not, and it's very possible for us to lynch a townie on top of that.

I'm leaning towards 2) as an option right now unless something changes.

From the description it sounds like masons come in pairs, and it'd be extremely unlikely for there to be more than 2 masons in any case. If I'm wrong on any of the game mechanics here please correct me.

I feel that both Killing and Stutters are slightly scummy/lurky but cubu sounds like a strong vote as well. I was hoping for him to post by now.

##unvote
##vote cubu

Atreides- United States. September 20 2012 09:16. Posts 72 PM Profile Quote #
filter
On September 20 2012 09:09 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
Show nested quote +


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?


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.

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.

On September 20 2012 22:31 thrawn2112 wrote:




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

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

On September 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 +

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.

On September 20 2012 16:02 debears wrote:


Where do you get that this was the consensus. There is a reason why they showed up as targets. Although they posted, their posts did not contain much. They voted for other players without stating their own reasons.

One thing has just now came to my mind.



Is that why you wanted a no lynch?



The problem with this logic is that you could have said the same for drazak if you don't look at the situation with hindsight. Drazak and Killing did similar things. In fact, any lynching can be due to mafia. Who do you feel is the most mafia right now?

Also, mafia can essentially bandwagon on a no lynch also. A no lynch makes it alright for everyone to prevent taking sides on arguments "because no one has strong feelings one way or another". The mafia can hide behind it.

On September 20 2012 06:08 Stutters695 wrote:
Sorry, not sure why that submitted when I hadn't pressed enter or used my mouse.

Reread the rules, this is plurality voting not majority. Even if you hold a majority you won't die until the day ends.

Also when you unvote you don't say a name after.

Just would like a clarification for future reference since the rules don't mention it one way or another; Are we allowed to vote no lynch?

Now moving on to this trainwreck:




Who is your mason partner and why haven't they backed you up? Where are your breadcrumbs? Quite frankly I don't believe you. If you really are a mason you should say your partners name and they should speak up as well. Should one of you die, that leaves the other as a confirmed town. If you really are a mason you shouldn't have claimed but since you have you need to make the most out of it.

##unvote
##vote Sharrant

On September 21 2012 04:11 KillingTime wrote:
I have had an awful irl afternoon so I haven't had a chance to read much in detail in this thread except the mason confirms.
ofc that means Sharrant is effectivley a confirmed towny (and the new guy too I guess). Scumhunting I want/need to look closely tonight/tomorrow at debears's posting from before and after flip and see if my scumread on him still holds.RemedySC's
play has also been super lurky from what I can see and has dropped off the radar. His play reminds me of imcasey in the last game, making a single weak case and then shutting up. Hopefully we don't lose two players overnight.

On September 21 2012 14:34 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Ok this was my kush case from last night (the one that I was unsure about) I will post it in a spoiler so you can see what I was thinking.

+ Show Spoiler +


Ok this is where I left off my kush thoughts however now I will continue from a point I can analise just before the mason claim. Before the mason claim you write this.




Then when he realises another bandwagon is needed he says



He dropped his killing idea entirely he said it was because he didn’t have time to read killings filter but assuming he didn’t leave there is a hour gap at least before the vote. Killings filter isn’t that large. and if he thought he was scummy before surely he wouldn't need to read that much filter to catch up...

Also he says this


When just before he mentioned Drazak maybe? There must be some reason for this... He probably made a hint at a bandwagon and then pretended he jumped on it 100% bandwagon style because he “had no say in the matter” He didn’t jump on the bandwagon he planted the seed... He said to go for drazak over killing, The only mention I could find before this was sharrent saying he would go for drazak but then saying killing or drazak.

So my theory is kush sees this jumps on drazak with the one line instead of killing (why?) Are they both scum? Who knows but in anycase it worked sonic went on drazak and sharrent went on drazak.

Sharrent was on him already but he is almost 100% confirmed town now, sonic is confirmed town and kush looks to be the one who jumped in on the flow of things.

On September 22 2012 07:50 Atreides- wrote:
@thrawn: It's stutters right now but I'm waiting to see his reply to everything that has been going on. And yeah agree with your above comment, I had that typed up but I take so long to post you beat me to it.

I don't think the association argument is very strong, more of an observation that I wanted to point out and observe how it carries forward. I do have some suspicion on debears / thrawn (I believe that one of the two are likely to be mafia) but this is just my feeling atm and I'll try to elaborate on it.

Debears simply mentioned stutters in a list of lurkers. Nothing substantial at all. What I meant by mentioning stutters would be something similar to this:

Will be back in 2-3 hours

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)

On September 21 2012 01:35 debears wrote:
@sharrant

The evidence backing the mason claim is good, as pointed out by thrawn and sonic, and with sharky's confirm.




I stated early in the morning that I would not be there for the lynch due to practice (and I play for a D1 baseball team, I don't really have a choice for scheduling. I also stated that I had classes until 5 (the last one was a physics lab in which I have to be active).



I had to do a quick in and out because I was in a rush and there was a lot to read.

@Atreides

Unfortunately, there were a lot of us absent at the time of the lynch.

One person does stand out from the crowd of us absentees, Atreides

+ Show Spoiler +

At that point, there wasn't anything concrete, so your judgement passed. Now, for his next post related to sharrant

+ Show Spoiler +

You fail to mention any of the stuff between that and the mason claim. Sharrant had 6 votes, and had said things that didn't make any sense until the claim. Next, you don't post anything until 1 minute after the deadline, citing the preference for a no lynch.

+ Show Spoiler +

I find it odd that you happen to just "mix up the deadline" and yet check and post at 9:01 about the no lynch even though the thread was "blowing up". That means you must have been looking at the thread. And that means you must have known about the deadline's correct time.

+ Show Spoiler +

Yet again, you cite that there weren't any strong cases again. You are indecisive. You were purposely lurking at lynch deadline.



Do you really expect every lynch to be easy, with laid out proof and someone screaming out "I'm mafia"?...c'mon man

Dandel Ion Austria. September 21 2012 22:57. Posts 1813 PM Profile Quote #
filter
Yeah, I know rethos looked a bit scummy, but I do think that prior to the whole "I don't give a shit h4h4h4h4"-debacle, he was 100% following the bad-newbie-town semi-lurker path.

Also, some LOGIC about the roleblock and nightkill to start things off:
On September 21 2012 13:10 thrawn2112 wrote:
Show nested quote +


If the reasoning behind that is that he is trying to save his strongest town read then it would have gone to either of the 2 confirmed masons. Anyway there are tons of possible explanations of the roleblock and no reason to believe any of more than any other so I'd rather not speculate about it.

SDM probably roleblocked you.
In fact, IF you have been roleblocked, it was SDM.

Reasoning: It was redundant for him to roleblock one of the masons.
You all treat the masons as confirmed town, but they really are not. As long as none of them flip, there will remain some doubt.
And it could possibly surface at a very bad time for town. It would be incredibly stupid for scum to shoot one mason, and leave the other in the game. During Night 1, that is.

I wouldn't exactly call it stupid. Having 2 masons who can privately communicate in the game are more powerful than you think. For instance, although Sharky is not posting much, it is possible him and Sharant are building up a huge case on their own. That is also most likely why SDM would have protected them if he did.

Now the thing is, scum got lucky and hit the jailkeeper, which means they could possibly kill Sharrant and Sharky during the next 2 nightphases.

On September 19 2012 14:05 debears wrote:


I will be able to post an argument on you and Kush tomorrow, most likely in the morning.

In the lurkers, there is one that still has my attention, Rethos.



This was his last post. Although he is posting, his posts are not beneficial. Most of the latest ones contain questions. He hasn't directed accusations at anyone.



This is just a sample of what he does. Three questions in a row that he did not post an answer for himself.

Most of his other posts follow a similar format. He just directs the question at someone. I understand the difference in time zones affecting the amount of posts. However, the quality is poor. He isn't taking a stand on anything.

Looks like he is trying to look active without provoking anyone.

On September 22 2012 03:43 Dandel Ion wrote:
Also, please don't just vote me and go brainafk.
Even if I did replace a scum (which I did not blablabla), there's still more scum in this and just going "yep lynch this guy, see you in two days" will not help.
Just saying.
If you want to lynch rethos (aka me), go on ahead, but don't be idiots about it. That's all I will say about the whole rethos matter.

Dandel Ion Austria. September 22 2012 20:00. Posts 1815 PM Profile Quote #
filter
On September 22 2012 10:12 debears wrote:
Now for the serious part. Your play has come off weird at the start.
Show nested quote +


What part of the debacle are you talking about? Site a specific post please so I know where your reference post begins.

I mean the part where he stops being just bad, and starts being a retard.
Open his filter and start with this post http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=367548&currentpage=33#641
Shouldn't be too hard to find.

So a bad scum I don't know in a newbie game I didn't play in said something about Vigs during the game.
Now clearly, the most logical thing for you to do is to jump on me (the "easy target") with a horrible association case that you base off a random guy?
Oh wow, if you really think that's scumhunting, then good luck.

What are you trying to say here, hmm?
That rethos behaved just as Remedy did, but for some reason you think Remedy is town(?) and rethos is scum, or what?
It doesn't make sense for you to use this argument, because if you were honest about it, you should have had a town read on rethos too.
Double standard much?

On September 21 2012 06:43 debears wrote:
This is really annoying....There are so many questions right now and a bunch of lurkers/semi-lurkers not around to answer.

@KillingTime

+ Show Spoiler +

This post came off odd to me. Here you state you have a "scumread" on remedy. Yet, your reasons for your scumread are behaviors that you have exhibited this game. You have dropped off the radar other than 1 post after night saying that you hope we don't lost anyone. Also, the only "cases" you have made are against cubu and me. Cubu's case wasn't anything new. He was lurking hardcore. Not much to add. Then, in your case against me, you gave weak reasons, voted for me with weak reasons, and even said this:



So you haven't actually made a case against me. And the one against Cubu had nothing to explain behind it. Do you have a genuine read to contribute to us?

I am looking into remedy. And I happened to find you on him along with jacob and thrawn. Still, your post came before thrawn sent out his 2 larger ones with the case against remedy. However, that does not excuse your justification for your suspicion

The "town(?)" was intentionally selected as an expression because you seemed to imply that you think Remedy is town, in contrast to rethos.
Pls answer my question: Do you think Remedy is scum?

I NEVER, even remotely called for a vig shot on anyone.
The ONLY thing I said was that it's a valid strategy for lurkers to be dispatched by Vigs.
I even said, in the same post, that it doesn't apply to this particular game, because everyone and their mother lurks here.

You are making up points and putting words in my mouth. You are blatantly lying.
Keep it up, you gonna look real good for doing that in a few hours.

But at least I can give you the good news! Remedy is no longer my top scumread! It's you! You win! Yaaaaay!

##vote debears

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


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

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

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

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

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

On September 19 2012 02:46 thrawn2112 wrote:


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On September 19 2012 01:16 thrawn2112 wrote:


##Fos KillingTime

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

On September 19 2012 06:39 thrawn2112 wrote:


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

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

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

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

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

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

@Remedy:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So killing/drazak but I say drazak.

vote count?

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

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

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

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

On September 20 2012 22:31 thrawn2112 wrote:




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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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



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

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

On September 22 2012 06:06 thrawn2112 wrote:


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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Therefore, ##Unvote

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




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

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

FOS Atreides-