EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXIX - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
| ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 25 2012 16:21 debears wrote: Read the line in red again "I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker......How in the fuck is that not a scum tell. Why in the hell would a townie say that???????? And Rad, the sentence after has no affect on the scumminess of that statement at all. You just said that you did no see reason in pushing a d1 scum lynch over a lurker. Now, if the following sentence had said "If there is no good candidate for a scum lynch, then we should lynch a lurker", it would make sense...You didn't bring up that scenario. You just said whatever is best for town in that scenario. Well, the best thing for town in that scenario is a scum lynch....duh. Obvious contradiction? Let's think of the benefits of pushing a d1 scum lynch 1) We lynch a scum 2) refer to 1) 3) We scramble the scum team and make them make a decision on who to vote Case coming up on rad My point, which is completely consistent with what I've said time and time again in this thread, and which is clarified in the sentence after the one you bolded red, is that I see no good logical reason to "have confidence" that we'll necessarily find a scum on d1. If we find a scum on d1, wonderful! I think we should definitely try our hardest to, and if you have a good read on someone, naturally you should be confident and follow through. If we don't, and we have no better option, then lynch a lurker. I also totally get pushing newbies to "be more confident" but both you and djo were pushing this confidence theme as if suddenly just being confident will make town get a lynch on d1. This seemed extremely suspicious to me and is why I started asking questions. To summarize: "GO TEAM! BE CONFIDENT!" - I get, though this isn't what you two were talking about at first "Finding a scum d1 will be easy! All you have to do is be confident!" - makes absolutely no sense to me On October 25 2012 10:26 debears wrote: What are you saying here exactly? Policy lynches are by no means a necessity. If we are confident and push reads, like dp did last game, then the scum will show. Why do you lack the confidence of catching scum d1? FOS dandel Oh, that easy is it? AND a FOS just because "he's not confident"? On October 25 2012 12:58 Djodref wrote: I don't think it's going to be difficult to find a scum D1. It's better for us to be confident about this because I think it's quite easy to reveal scum newbies when you put pressure on them. Plus, if you are town and you are not confident, people are going to feel it through your posts and are going to become suspicious about you. We have to be assertive and for this, we have to be confident in our ability to find scum. I know it looks difficult at first but don't forget that scum players are likely to be as inexperienced as you in this game. Oh, that easy is it? Now, the one thing I can't really wrap my head around is if both debears and djo are mafia, why would they be pushing this confidence thing to help save a lurker? Reasons that make sense to me: 1. Maybe that's the plan. 1 of the mafia sit back and lurk (maybe they're new and scared, or some other reason) while debears and djo stay really active. If they can look town enough AND prevent a lurker lynch, perfect! 2. Maybe getting people hyped for a d1 lynch that isn't a lurker is a good strategy? If they can get town to lynch another town, that's even better than a pure lurker, because then on the next day we'll be going "HMM that guy's still lurking, we've got to do something about that." (assuming multiple lurkers, at which point mafia lurker comes out of hiding a bit, or likely at the end of d1 before we start to think about this) Ok, off to respond to debear's "case" against me. I'm going to have to stay fairly inactive throughout the day until tonight though, as per the reasons I stated previously (work work...) | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: Here Rad comes into the thread, unsure on something like lurker policy, which is pretty obvious if you've seen a TL mafia game, which he stated he has. I read some of the last newbie mafia game. Other than that, and reading a couple guides, I have absolutely no mafia experience. You say it's "pretty obvious" but I hadn't put 1 moment of thought into it until Dan asked. I just thought about it briefly and threw out what seemed reasonable to me. I actually had no idea that this might turn into some huge debate or that my answer was anything more than just something to get us talking about something. Coincidentally, now that I know it's important, I agree with my original thought on the matter. On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: He goes and defends another player over a simple question that I asked that player when that player hasn't responded first. Mafia tend to due this since they KNOW someone is town. What's a better way to get townie points? Then the part on what confidence has to do with any d1 lynch scenario. WHAT D1 LYNCH IS BASED ON SUCH HARD EVIDENCE THAT YOU CAN BE COMPLETELY CONFIDENT ON IT AS TOWN? None. It takes fucking balls to stand up with your accusations, even in the chance that they might be wrong. You said to Dan "Policy lynches are by no means a necessity.", but that was in response to Dan saying "That is why policy lynches day 1 can end up being a necessity." To me, not as a mafia player, but as a reasonable person, this screams bs. You twisted his words into something most people would agree with, even though most people would probably agree with his original statement. 1. Policy lynches on day 1 can end up being a necessity. 2. Policy lynches are by no means a necessity. Both are true statements, but because yours was in response to his, you make yourself come off as the "winner" here, even though your statement actually had nothing to do with his. This was really sketchy to me. Then, you suddenly got really confusing: On October 25 2012 11:39 debears wrote: I might be. But, consider this. How did that slip from kush come about? Darthpunks heavy pressure.....duh. policy lynches, on the other hand, are usually caused by passivity or something like a claim. Besides, its fairly easy to discuss policy lynches. Its not easy to be confident. I learned my mistake last game. I didn't stick to a read til the SDM case. I basically said screw it and went with it. Where did that confidence get me? You never answered my question to this. What does your previous confidence have to do with any potential scenario for a d1 lynch I'll answer this for you. Your previous confidence has nothing to do with a d1 lynch in this game and just clogs up the thread with confusing garbage. I really have stuff I need to be doing, so I'm going to try to make my answers to your case quicker from here on. If anyone is unsatisfied with any explanation I give, please point it out specifically and I'll try to get a chance to respond in greater detail. On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: Yet again, he talks of scum reads like they are 100% foolproof. That is wrong. The best townies on TL are wrong on cases all the time. Don't give me that, we must make sure he's 100% scum before voting, bullshit. No way. Cases don't start that way. Lynches don't start that way. I never once said I'll only vote on a scum if I'm 100% sure. I'm not sure if 100% is even possible. Of course I'll vote on someone I'm not 100% sure of if the case for them convinces me enough and/or I feel that is the right move to make. On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: Now he makes up some bullshit statement that my lynch of SDM had nothing to do with confidence. Really? I was at threat of being lynched. And instead of fighting for not being lynched, I sacked myself and went all out on the most townie looking player at that point (at least in my eyes). Do you really think that doesn't take any confidence? And how are you suddenly an expert on last game when you didn't even know what I was refering to with my SDM case before??????? Your previous game doesn't matter here except for having additional "meta" information on how you play the game. Your confidence there has nothing to do with finding a scum here, IMO. I feel like you talking about your previous game and how much your confidence helped you is just clouding up discussion here. I don't feel like I'm an expert of your last game because I only watched a bit of it (3-4 days worth I guess? meaning real days, not mafia days, so like 2 mafia days and 2 mafia nights at most) On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: So here he wants newbies to suddenly hide in their holes, citing what has been previously said on confidence as "artificial". This is a forced argument. He ignores the fact that confidence = increased posting and scumhunting. Not sure why you're saying I want newbies to hide in their holes. I didn't say or suggest that. When you say confidence, I read it literally. I do not equate it to increased posting and scumhunting. If confidence is some term in this game that really means increased posting and scumhunting, then we've been arguing about different things. I feel like it's "artificial confidence" to just straight up say "we can get a scum on d1!" Instead, I think we should try to find a scum on d1, and IF at that point we're confident in a case, we can vote for it then. That's the point where I think confidence matters, not before. On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: Wow. Isn't this OMGUS? I've tried explaining how confidence = increased posting and scumreads. And then how increased posting = less room for mafia to hide. He doesn't get simple logic like that????? Then he tries to play it off like I'm doing something wrong. "I give you plenty of chances to clear it up". Last time I checked, I'm the one wanting you to clear your view up. And a weak FOS to back it. To be honest, I considered FOSing you minutes before you FOS'd me, but I wasn't sure if that would be appropriate. I felt pushed to do it after reading more from you and the fact that you suddenly were voting for me. So I guess in a sense I OMGUS'd you, but it was more like straw that broke the camel's back than "OMG why is this guy voting for me". I said I gave you plenty of chances to clear it up because I asked you questions that you never answered, or at best side stepped. You weren't the one wanting me to clear up my view point until I put pressure on you. That to me seems scummy. On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: So now you're trying to discredit my statements instead of accurately explaining your own. "he's trying to put up an obvious statement to cover up what I really meant". I'm not covering up anything. I'm showing everyone an obvious scumslip that you said. It's a contradicting statment in a mafia-oriented way. See my post to da0ud about it. Your defense of my scumread on you is that "the context backs it up". Bullshit. bullshit. bullshit. I feel context DOES matter. My statement makes sense when you put it next to the rest of the context, meaning my previous posts and even the sentences around it. My stance is clear. If you take the statement out of context, it sounds like a scumslip. If you take it in context, it has clear meaning. I have explained it before and will explain it again if someone requests. On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote: Ah. Now you're restating what you said. Your best defense is that I'm trying to make it seem like you said "I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker" Finally, my final part of my case is the lack of scumhunting that Rad has actually done. His sole focus is on me and "artificail confidence". His only scumhunting is a weak FOS on me. And he is more concerned on defending himself than finding scum. Rad you are pretty damn scummy in my eyes. My vote will stand with you unless I see a person who is more scummy. I've been scumhunting both you and djo. The fact that you point out that I've just been scumhunting you seems very suspicious of you. That's a clear lie. All you have to do is read my previous posts and see that I was putting the exact same pressure on djo. In fact, in my mind, you both seemed like you were working together, which suggested you were both mafia to me. The fact that this is your final point should scream to everyone that you are BS because I absolutely, 100%, clearly was going after djo as well (and for the same "confidence" thing). Ok, I'll try to respond lightly for the next 6 or so hours but probably cannot do a huge post like this any more until later tonight. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 00:48 debears wrote: Ok. So Rad now thinks Djo and I are a scumteam Ok boys. This is bullshit. Let me explain why 1) This is an association case. They are dogshit d1 without any information 2) This is a case built on WIFOM. How in the fuck do you know what scum would or wouldn't do? You can't think like that. Djo did that shit last game to me and it pissed me the fuck off. I never said we are lynching a non lurker no matter what. I want to push cases, and if we have something good, then we lynch that person. Lurkers are a last resort. There are most likely 3 mafia. A lynch wasted on a lurker is suboptimal as town if there are people posting some really scummy things. Right now, you are scummy as shit. And this post by you doesn't help. I'm pissed when someone tries to build a pure WIFOM case, which you have done, let alone a WIFOM ASSOCIATION CASE EARLY D1. This guy be scum yo If I'm making scum reads based on bad logic, that would make me a bad player. No worries though, I don't think I'm a good or bad player yet, because this is my first game. You both just seemed to be trying to make the same bad "confidence" point, together in unison. I realize that there are other cases, such as "djo sees debears making a terrible point but it would be best for him to go along with it", in which case djo is mafia and you are town. Of course there are other cases. I haven't done anything except point out that both you and djo are looking scummy to me. I don't know if I'd actually vote for either of you at this point. I don't believe you're necessarily a scumteam, I'm just saying that was my initial take and it made sense to me. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
| ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
2) This is a case built on WIFOM. How in the fuck do you know what scum would or wouldn't do? You can't think like that. Djo did that shit last game to me and it pissed me the fuck off. Just wanted to point that out as without this, it's not clear why I'm making the statement. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 01:14 debears wrote: Are you scumhunting us because we are scummy individually, or because you think we are a scumteam? Individually, but since you were both giving the same extremely odd (IMO) stance on confidence, it made me wonder... | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 01:21 debears wrote: Ok. But what individually makes us stand out as scum? I'm going to reread the thread a couple of times tonight and figure this all out. ##Unvote This is some of what I've got from you and/or djo 1. Pushed the confidence theme hard, as if to make it seem like we NEED to have a scum lynch d1 rather than a policy lurker lynch. 2. Acted overconfident as if it was easy to make a scum read on d1 (is it? doesn't seem like it, and that's not due to lack of confidence, it's due to lack of information). 3. Twisted people's statements, either responding with something that had nothing to do with the original statement, or focusing heavily on a particular statement as if to give it more importance than it really should have. All of these things feel scummy to me. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 01:31 Djodref wrote: I'm still feeling bad for tunneling until death last game  I even didn't have the balls to state that I had changed my mind about you at the end. As I feel some townie vibes from you in this game, I thought I could at least defend you this one time. debears <3 Also debears it's stuff like this (which he's done before in this thread, if I remember correctly) that just make me raise an eyebrow and give thoughts that you're both scum. He's so confident you're town already?! Because you're being super active and aggressive? Maybe I'm just paranoid but I'm finding it really hard to believe anyone is town so far. @Djo, you're coming across, to me at least, as very "happy go lucky". Like, you've figured it all out as town last newbie game, and you're back now as town again but 100% more confident and ready to take down scum! Let's do this my friend debears, who is clearly also town! That's the vibe I'm getting from you and it feels really fake. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 01:36 debears wrote: @Rad Ah alright. One more question. Are 1,2 and 3 necessarily only mafia motivated? I don't see it. 1) Town - Create an ideal town atmosphere Mafia - Appear to be a town doing so 2) Town - Try to lead the town by being a figure who knows what he's doing Mafia - Try to be town doing that 3) Town - Confirmation Bias Mafia - Mafia Bias???? (lol idk what to call it) I'm going to reread the thread tonight. I do feel that it my case has confirmation bias at this point. No one has tried to actually break up the argument or put any real input into it. Mafia tend to love letting two townies go at it and not interfering. I'll reconsider my judgment Fair enough, for #1 and #2, you could have just been overconfident for real, so I'll try to avoid it as a read one way or the other (for now, I'll look back over it again later). For #3 though, I dunno, it's really hard to put a town spin on it. Like I said, I don't feel like I'm convinced enough to vote you or djo for it right now, but it leaves a sour taste in my mouth. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 08:13 Djodref wrote: dandel has a stance about policy lynching and I have another one. We both have arguments to support our stances, his are good and mine are good (I would say that they are better). I guess it's our different experience which is really defining our opinion about it. I can't think of any good reason a townie would have to be completely unopen to changing their opinion on something regardless of the arguments presented. Worst case scenario for a townie is you're just not convinced by the argument so you keep your original opinion, then someone's not happy that they couldn't convince you. Seems like a scummy stance. The scummy reasoning would go something like "I need to be consistent, and if someone changes my opinion on something, I'll look inconsistent, so I'm going to just make it clear that I'm not going to change my mind on this so it's dropped." That's what you sound like with that statement djo. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 08:29 Djodref wrote: @Rad I don't care, it's an argument about policy lynch. I don't even understand why you are putting such an interest in this. I'm not saying that I'm not going to change my mind about a player or a lynch or something important... What do you think about Inig's posts by the way ? You said "I won't change my opinion." I pointed out that I can't think of any good reason a townie would be opposed to changing their opinion if an argument is good. It sounds like a scummy sort of move, for the reasons I laid out. That's why I have an interest in it, because if you're a townie it doesn't add up, thus you come across as scum. I'm completely open to some reasonable argument for why a townie would ever have that sort of mind set. I don't know why you're so interested in getting people's opinions on inig's post. It seems like you're just trying to divert attention. I would prefer that you finalized a subject before jumping to the next, otherwise it seems like dodging. Regardless, I'll answer your question. I don't like that he won't have much time until sunday-monday. That's a lot of lurking and I don't feel comfortable with it. I feel like it puts him on the list of people to be suspicious about, but not currently something I'm too concerned about. If it comes down to it and we decide to policy lynch, he'd be on the list if he stays mostly inactive. I do not get a scum or town read from him yet, he's pretty neutral to me at the moment. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 09:20 Djodref wrote: From what exactly am I trying to divert attention ? On October 26 2012 08:25 Djodref wrote: @Alsn I would expect more from you than an half-assed FoS on me  What do you think about Inig ? You get FoS'd, and then try to discredit it just by claiming it's half-assed instead of mounting an argument against it. That's either scummy play, or useless townie play. You pick. Then, without being of any use to town, you divert attention to Inig. On October 26 2012 08:29 Djodref wrote: @Rad I don't care, it's an argument about policy lynch. I don't even understand why you are putting such an interest in this. I'm not saying that I'm not going to change my mind about a player or a lynch or something important... What do you think about Inig's posts by the way ? "I don't care" isn't a good argument. It's either a scummy response, or again, a useless townie response. You don't respond directly to my concerns (if you were town, you should want to clarify things for other town members), but instead, divert to Inig. Not looking good Djo. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 09:23 Djodref wrote: @Rad by the way, His argument is good by my argument is better. Not going to change my mind. Are you satisfied ? It doesn't matter how you want to word it now. What matters is your statement from before and the fact that it wouldn't make any sense coming from a townie. As I've already pointed out, the floor is open to you to make some sense of it and clear this up. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
No they haven't been addressed. Please see my concerns: On October 26 2012 08:22 Rad wrote: I can't think of any good reason a townie would have to be completely unopen to changing their opinion on something regardless of the arguments presented. Worst case scenario for a townie is you're just not convinced by the argument so you keep your original opinion, then someone's not happy that they couldn't convince you. Seems like a scummy stance. The scummy reasoning would go something like "I need to be consistent, and if someone changes my opinion on something, I'll look inconsistent, so I'm going to just make it clear that I'm not going to change my mind on this so it's dropped." That's what you sound like with that statement djo. And the restating of my concerns: On October 26 2012 08:43 Rad wrote: You said "I won't change my opinion." I pointed out that I can't think of any good reason a townie would be opposed to changing their opinion if an argument is good. It sounds like a scummy sort of move, for the reasons I laid out. That's why I have an interest in it, because if you're a townie it doesn't add up, thus you come across as scum. I'm completely open to some reasonable argument for why a townie would ever have that sort of mind set. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 09:49 Clarity_nl wrote: Wait why are you talking about Alsn now? He's responding to my post 2 above his where I quoted Alsn and his response to Alsn. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 09:45 Djodref wrote: @Rad I know Alsn town's play and I find him not fitting his meta. I intend to get some strong response to my post. I'm provoking him on purpose. The more useful move there, for town, is to clear your name by shutting down his FoS. Shrugging it off as half-assed doesn't do that. If anything, it looks like you had no defense, which makes you look worse. We have a claim from Alsn, and nothing from you. Why would anyone want to side with you if you have no defense? If you're town, help the rest of town out by confronting the issue rather than trying out some secretive trap that only makes sense to you. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
What did you not understand in this post ? On October 26 2012 09:41 Rad wrote: It doesn't matter how you want to word it now. What matters is your statement from before and the fact that it wouldn't make any sense coming from a townie. As I've already pointed out, the floor is open to you to make some sense of it and clear this up. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 10:15 Djodref wrote: Honestly, I don't really care if Alsn has a FoS on me if it is for the reasons he has stated in his post. I know he is totally able to come at me with something more consistent if he really thinks I'm scum. Right now, I think his reasons are poor and I'm more interested in his opinion about Ini. This seems extremely suspicious to me, like scumslip suspicious, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Maybe someone else can jump in on it? I'll think about it more in the meantime... | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 26 2012 10:26 Djodref wrote: I understand that you have made up your mind. I'm done discussing this with you, we are both losing time... Done discussing? You mean you're not going to answer the questions I've tried to give you a chance to answer over and over? Yeah, you sound reeeeeally scummy at this point. FoS Djodref | ||
| ||
