EPT/in
Edit: Wait no, in fact, DIAF would be too nice for your epic transgression against my honour. Here, this link is more apt: + Show Spoiler +
Newbie Mini Mafia XXIX
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
/in Edit: Wait no, in fact, DIAF would be too nice for your epic transgression against my honour. Here, this link is more apt: + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
 | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
On October 12 2012 10:56 Dandel Ion wrote: This comment in particular stands out to me. This is an obvious attempt at derailing the thread, adding absolutely nothing of substance. It reeks of OMGUS.Why are you calling Alan by his name then? So inconsitent.... Scum imo. I'm calling for a vigi shot on Dandel. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
| ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
| ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
| ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
I'm Alsn and I've played in two mafias here on TL as well as a bunch of times using the SC2 custom map. My filters for those games can be found here(first game) and here(second game). I was an active observer in XXVII and the obs QT for that can be found here. With that out of the way, gl hf! | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
With regards to other policy, what would that be, exactly? I'm all in favour of logical policy lynching. If an argument can be made that town benefits from it I'm all for it(see my thoughts on kush from my first few posts last game if you're interested in an example of why I think so). There's no player in this game that warrants such a lynch though, unless we are talking behavioural policy, but I'm not really familiar with any example of that so I would have to address such policy on a case by case basis. A few things stood out to me when I skimmed through the thread earlier today and I'll be posting some of my comments on what has actually happened so far over the course of the evening. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
On October 26 2012 01:45 Dandel Ion wrote: It goes even deeper than that. It's not that people go into a game planning to lurk and hope people don't notice. It's that scum would like to get away without taking any positions at all. Forcing everyone to at least say something then gives us the option of holding them to what they have said. The idea being that together town should be able to figure out who are fake-contributing versus those who are genuinely trying to help.You don't get it. You establish a lurker-lynch policy early. Potential lurkers see it and go all "oh shit if I lurk I'm gonna die" So they don't lurk. If you say "nah I'm completely against lynching lurkers" or "We should lynch the most active people" What do lurkers do when they see that? They'll tell themselves "cool, I'm set" And then they lurk. I'd like to say that so far, I agree that Roco seems suspicious, but more than anything else, he just makes no sense. More than anything else that's a null read to me, especially with how early in the game we are. However, if his play doesn't change dramatically I would say he is at risk for getting a vote from me simply due to being unhelpful to town. @Roco specifically, lynching people who talk too much just for talking is anti-town. We want people to talk a lot as that gives us material to base our opinions on them on. Take yourself right now for example, no one other than mafia have any idea about what to make of you right now, thus resulting in your participation amounting to one thing and one thing only: Confusion. So far, I'm getting a slight town vibe from debears, although I think his arguments are a lot weaker than last game, and his conclusions seem a bit convoluted(particularly with regards to Rad. I didn't think Rad's posting seemed all that suspicious so debears jumping on it so hard is weird to me). That being said, putting himself "out there" as much as he has done so far feels pro-town. Djod on the other hand actually comes across as somewhat scummy to me. I'll have time to post a case on it soonish. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
The problem I have with it so far is that you keep asking people to answer you, yet your own statements so far amount to picking on the people who are being lurky(Ini, Roco) while at the same time criticising Rad for supporting lurker policy lynch?! This makes no sense to me. This in combination with the slip leads me to believe that you are trying to make yourself look good by being active. I can definitely see the possibility of there being town motivations for your actions so far, but I'd just like to point out that I have my eye on you. So, with that in mind, FoS Djodref. I'll see if I can't take a look at some of the other things said so far before I go to bed but if not, I'll do it first thing tomorrow as I will have a lot more time then. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
First impressions are that Djodref seemed way more defensive than he needed to be towards my accusation. It was merely meant as a prod(which he probably realized) yet he felt the need to resort to insulting me as a way to discredit my points. If nothing else, it has sparked a ton of discussion, so I'm happy about that. To clarify, Djod does still feel slightly scummy to me, yet I'm still not convinced about him being town or scum as his actions can definitely be explained from both perspectives if one tries to. His main redeeming action to me is his willingness to stick to his guns and pressure Inig even though he was under pressure himself. I see that as a more townie move than a scum move, yet with all the other things brought up against him I don't feel that it's enough to clear his name. That being said, my reads so far amount to mostly very slight reads in one way or the other. I think my strongest reads so far are Rad/debears who are looking both pretty towny, simply due to how willing they are to put themselves out there. If nothing else they have given us a lot of things to put into context once people start to flip, which is very good for town. Right now I'd be in favour of lynching a lurker, simply due to the fact that I don't consider Djodref to be a strong enough of a read to me at this point. To sum up, I feel the benefits of getting rid of a non-contributor such as Roco currently outweighs the chance of Djodref flipping scum. Although Roco if you are still following the thread and haven't given up, posting your own feelings about the topics in the thread so far would go a long way towards eliminating suspicion against you. I'll take a look at Inig's points regarding Dandel, but unless I missed something extremely incriminating when I read through it the first time I'd still be in favour of lynching a lurker. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
That being said, especially in context with my stance on lynching a lurker, I'm getting the distinct feeling that there's a good chance Roco won't even be voting. With that in mind, I'll vote him or one of the other no-shows only if they show up to vote really late just to save their own skins with no other contributions. I'd prefer to see what happens with them once the day changes rather than lynch one of them and hope they randomly flip scum. For that reason, I'm going to go with my strongest scum read so far, Djodref. Like I said though, I don't really feel like we have particularly good odds on him(only slightly better than random), but at the very least people have actually committed to taking stances on him and been forced to explain why. We would gain nothing by lynching a possible modkill who has said basically nothing, as no one could really be blamed for wanting them gone. I say this with the caveat that I haven't yet had time to look into everyone, sylver for example is someone I haven't yet looked at very closely. Same with Inig, CC and da0ud. I've read the thread of course, but I haven't had time to try and put their motivations in perspective so far. If someone can make a better case than what I feel we have right now, I'd be open to looking it over as a possibility. I regret my lack of time so far, as I feel right now I'm voting without a clear picture of where I have everyone. ##Vote: Djodref Will be looking over the other cases made so far to see if maybe there are better reasons than my own to be found, but for now I'm not yet convinced by anyone. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
In fact, Dandel states that he finds Inig's play worrying due to him not taking any stances on anything but when Inig finally does(shares a lot of his reads, some town and with Dandel as his main scum read) Dandel goes around and votes him right away. I'm hesitant to call this anything else than an emotional knee-jerk response, but in any case I don't find it a particularly compelling argument as to why I should vote for Inig. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
Seeing as you've said very little so far, I'd appreciate it if you could tell us what you think with regards to the current lynch candidates. If nothing else, It would give the rest of us some insight into what you think. If you have a different case to make that is fine too, but we all have very little information as to what you think right now. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
| ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
| ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
I'm not sure if you're purposefully trying to distract the issue or if you genuinely misunderstood my criticism of you but I'm inclined to let my vote stay for now. However, I will definitely be checking the thread for the next 5-6 hours to see if there's any reason for me to change it. I'd just like to remind everyone that I can not be here for lynch like I stated during pre-game. Exam starts tomorrow at 8:30 local time and lynch is at 02:00. At the very latest I'll be here until ~3 hours before lynch. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
On October 27 2012 00:07 Djodref wrote: Ok that makes a little more sense. I'm thinking I might have misread your intentions for attacking them. My vote still stands but expect me to gather my thoughts on this matter in the coming hours.@Alsn I didn't attack them for lurking, I have attacked them because - Roco was posting nonsense - Inig was not showing any scumhunting in his posts, only fluff I didn't find something as suspicious as that in other players posts. Maybe the role-fishing question from sylver but that's all. Nevertheless, I understand your criticism better now. I would have appreciated if you have made this post before. And there is a difference between applying a policy and trying to find what is scummy. Even in lurker's posts. | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
I'm inclined to agree with kush wrt to da0ud. I definitely reacted much in a similar way when I read the 90% town comment but more than that I feel like he is too concerned with pointing out to people that he "cares" about the town. Such as here where he feels the need to point out that it's worrying that we are already one less town. On October 26 2012 23:07 da0ud wrote: One thing worries me and seems to have caught no ones attention. Clarity has been modkilled!! We are already one less town!! And he was posting actual content. Or here where he feels the need to point out that he was "right" to criticise the whole confidence deal. On October 26 2012 22:33 da0ud wrote: As I was expecting in the beginning we are having a hard time finding with "confidence" scum. Both posts are screaming of "posting for the sake of seeming active and helpful" more than actually being helpful. In summary, I feel that even on the off chance that Djod is scum, so far he has at the very least helped town in that he has pressured players into participating, which at the very least is good for the town atmosphere. There's of course the risk that he's deliberately pressuring townies into seeming suspicious, but for now I think that's a chance I'm willing to take. ##Unvote ##Vote: da0ud | ||
|
Alsn
Sweden995 Posts
I simply didn't realise that you had made a case against Djod(in my mind I probably attributed that long post of yours to someone else when I initially read it). I was using the votes to find out which filters to look at and your filter simply wasn't on my radar due to that. I'll look into the cases right now. | ||
| ||
