EPTlurkers are easier to lynch
Mario Mini Mafia - Page 5
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
lurkers are easier to lynch | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
| ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
meh, marv is gone so I guess I'll actually have to try tomorrow .... T_T Oh well, see y'all then. Oh and if anyone has a case other than "he's been trolling" pls post it so I can respond to it. If you're gonna lynch me for docking around day 1 then fine do it, cause I dicked around day 1. It was fun. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 17 2012 05:06 debears wrote: I find it funny how snb made the claim, and his only scumhunting contribution rule was saying kenpachi rule on me and (zbo?), even though he said he didn't mean to claim. Anyways will be back in a few hours lies and slander even though I wasn't trying, I still did more scumhunting than this i.e: check all my posts on blazinghand | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
So here's God's honest truth: I didn't give a fuck day 1. Mostly because my last game was super-try-hard-ey; I had to think and double-think everything I said that game. I didn't really feel like putting all that much mental energy into mafia for a couple of days. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
Scum don't sit there and troll and hope they win; or if they do, they are morons and will lose. Scum try to look like they're helping town; they try to look pro-town without actually being pro-town, or sometimes they actually do try and play pro-town but just do so in a way that doesn't aim town at their teammates. But scum don't sit there and post "lol lol," unless they've established for themselves a character in other games that they think will allow them to get away with posting "lol lol". Other than "he's a troll let's kill him with fire so he can't regenerate hit points," there seem to be two arguments in favor of lynching me: that I haven't done much to help town except sit here and troll; and, alternatively, that I've been posting the way I have as part of an elaborate plot to play "outside my scum meta" The "he hasn't been helping town" argument is stupid as an argument for why to kill me. You don't want to kill people who aren't helping town, unless you think they are scum. Wasting your kill on a townie who's not trying hurts town way more than that townie ever did. "He hasn't been helping town" is also stupid as an argument for why I'm scum. I haven't been pretending to help town without actually doing it, which is what scum do. What I've been doing is posting my honest unfiltered thoughts for the thread. Scum don't do that. It's too easy to fuck up and get caught, through inconsistency, through letting loose extra information, or just through generally revealing their mindset. Scum don't sit around and just kind of grumple around in the thread. Scum will either try to follow the thread or to mislead the thread, and I was not doing either of those. Like half my posts were expressing my very real suspicions of BH, even though no one was really listening to me. Now, let's look at the other argument - "he's posting like this because of his 'scum meta'." First, this argument is wrong, for a couple of reasons. If I was really trying to "go against my scum meta" by consciously manipulating my posting, I would be trying to emulate my "town meta" rather than "just posting whatever the fuck I feel like." There may or may not be a difference between my "town meta" and my "scum meta". That difference is plain if you just look at the last scum game I played. However, the difference isn't "when I'm town I troll and when I'm scum I tryhard." I can tryhard plenty as town too; my town games have had a variety of different posting styles and argumentative styles. It would be way easier for me to fit within that spectrum if I was doing this to avoid being caught by a meta case. There's one other reason why this argument is bad. It relies on the implicit assumption that I'm functionally retarded. For me to think that "posting nothing but non-grammatical insults and generally make myself look like a huge troll who doesn't care" is the proper reaction to hearing "your posts tend to feel more constructed when you're scum" would be ridiculous. If my primary motivation really was "avoid being caught on a meta case," there are other ways of playing that would have been both (A) far more effective, and (B) much easier to fake than what I did on day 1 of this game. Like, in my two recent scum games, I've "done nothing but sheep other people's cases and try to blend in" and "try to be a town leader by claiming blue really early and pushing cases really hard and shit." There's a whole spectrum of room between those two that I could have hidden in. If you really believe that I'm scum because my posts were "intentionally constructed to seem off-the-cuff and poorly thought out", then you have to also believe that I'm stupid. I'm not stupid. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
I go through my filter and look at stuff. On November 13 2012 10:01 strongandbig wrote: if zb was scum he would have made a much longer post ##vote: hapahauli im down with that iamperfection thinkamajig this post makes me look bad. this would be a good argument for me being scum. scum love to vote for their buddies early. In reality, I just thought iamperfection's argument seemed kinda good about the weirdness of Hapahauli's first vote/minicase/whatever-thing. On November 13 2012 10:02 strongandbig wrote: also fuck you zboson i wanted to fakeclaim miller as vt since then people couldn't say "oh he's fakeclaiming miller must mean he's scum" when i fakeclaim miller as scum but now if i did that people would be like "two millers what are the odds" and then probably lynch you so no good on that one Ahhh, the infamous "accidental claim" post. Seriously if you guys think this was a good idea for a scum player to post, you are not very good scum players. I'm not a very good scum player either, but I'm better than that. The post itself contains the entirety of my motivation. There was one time when I fakeclaimed miller as scum (actually I was traitor, but I showed up as scum to detectives), and ever since then I've been looking for an opportunity to fakeclaim miller as town. I want to be able to claim miller more often as scum, but since the odds are so small of any single player ever actually being a miller, I would first have to establish a background of claiming miller as both alignments. I've actually thought a lot about this, there are some good arguments in favor of fakeclaiming miller as town if you have a lot of time to spend on a game and you think you can make your towniness clear through your actions. It would give town a focus of discussion early on day 1 when they're often aimless, and it would remove you from the list of people that DTs need to think about checking, making their lives easier. The reason I post all those thoughts is to give you some idea where I was coming from. I've thought a lot about the "miller" part, so when I saw zboson claim miller, it triggered me to think along those lines again. The "VT" part really didn't come into it at all. I had no idea at first what debears was talking about when he said I'd claimed something. One other thing I did a lot day 1 was to point out what I thought were bad arguments. I like doing this as town for a couple of reasons - mostly that it's fun, but I also think that criticizing bad arguments and trying to get them pushed out of the town discourse is helpful. It avoids people starting to build cases and reads on bad foundations, and it stops people from building up a "position" that they can refer back to later unless they have something that's actually worth saying. Here's one example. On November 13 2012 11:04 strongandbig wrote: lol i didnt attempt to explain anything about my reads in a post that consisted entirely of "this is stupid" am i explaining my reads in this post bro? Here's another example. On November 14 2012 03:53 strongandbig wrote: oh yeah I meant to quote this post that's some great logic right there - vote for me or vote with me. normally i'd find that super scummy but coming from bh it's only mildly scummy There's another one. On November 14 2012 22:57 strongandbig wrote: you idiot I already explained this TL uses military time it was 12 hours and 30 minutes And again. This one I had to do twice. There's a reason why it's important to tell people when their arguments are bad. As well as fun. On November 14 2012 22:43 strongandbig wrote: I can get behind this part (bolding by me) man though when will people start to realize - "you were inconsistent" is not sufficient to establish that someone is scum. You either have to show that their inconsistency has a scum motivation or you have to show that from a particular player, being inconsistent is a scum tell based on their meta. Townies change their mind too! Just saying "scum like to be inconsistent" is not sufficient! Scum motivations for being inconsistent are things like (-) going along with whatever the thread sentiment is at the time (-) buddying whoever has thread control (-) appearing to contribute without having to take strong positions (-) switching off of scum buddies or onto strong townies when a bandwagon goes further than they expected You can't just say "lol an inconsistency! Scum!" You have to do quite a bit more work than that. this is better - at least it's actually a real argument for him being scum. It's fundamentally a meta case, and therefore it would be better with quotes from other games by darthpunk or at least a guide for what other people should look for in his filter in specific games of his, but darthpunk is usually kind of a character so the case is easier to make here. Bolding by me - these are the central points of this case. This one was sort of an extreme example, because I actually explained why the argument was stupid and bad. It takes a lot of the fun out if I have to explain it. [KENPACHI RULE EDITED OUT] On November 13 2012 21:57 strongandbig wrote: yo marv you're gonna have to edit out that post about the kenpachi rule debears is scum tho in other developments: seriously, I wasn't really thinking too hard about what I posted last night. Believe me or not, I didn't intend to "claim VT" when I made the post in question. I'm going in to work in a couple hours, I'll read over the thread more carefully. However, here's my unfiltered thoughts atm marv: i hate trying to read marv, apparently someone caught him on meta analysis a game or two ago so I'll have to look that up but it's so much easier just radfielding him bh: thinks i'm town therefore my first reaction is to think he's town lol. i like his case on zboson though. hapa: scummiest of the actual good players in the thread atm more reading time here's another post that makes me look bad for a real reason. Randomly throwing suspicion on hapa without providing any reasons. Looks like I'm setting myself up for good distancing in case he flips before me, but doesn't actually create any danger for him. The actual reasoning that led me to write that line was pretty simple. Hapa's posting just wasn't very good. There was the early thing iamperfection caught, and the stupid post of Hapa's attacking me for "not sharing any information about my reads" or whatever (it's above in the section where I call things stupid). And in general, I expect Hapa to be pretty aggressive and frequently wrong, but to do so in a headstrong and confident way with fewer obvious logical flaws. However, I kind of let up on him later when he started emulating his town posting better, like the following post: On November 14 2012 03:56 strongandbig wrote: this is much more like what i expect out of hapahauli, i guess it just took a little while for him to get into character. that said his case is pretty bad for reasons i explained above One last thing: On November 14 2012 03:52 strongandbig wrote: but look at the reasoning for his town read, it was also terrible. it was a visceral (no eyes) reaction, the first thing to come out of his gut, just like "oh i guess zboson is town" was the first thing to come out of my gut when he posted it. So he changes from a weak, gut-reaction-based townread to a scum read. It's not like he was hard defending zboson or even really thinking about it in a way that we should be super concerned about, he was just pooping ideas out onto the thread. this is where I explain why hapahauli's case was bad. it was the same case, it was still bad. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 17 2012 06:02 Hopeless1der wrote: I don't think your stupid SnB. I would like you to start helping us catch the remaining scum and/or SK. Do you still want to pursue BH or is his fake-fake-fakeclaim believable? tricky. I think the reasons that people have been giving for not lynching him are bad, and I don't like that he keeps telling us how townie he is. I also think that his nighttime shenanigans were pretty much inevitable. Regardless of whether or not he was fakeclaiming, he had to do something either to "try to let him use his role" or to actually try to let him use his role. It's just like the original claim, it doesn't tell us anything about his alignment. So atm I still want to go after him, yeah. I want to look a little further into some other stuff though. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
I'm ... pretty unsure about it happening at all. We don't have an open setup, so what would it tell us? Like, we wouldn't really be able to rule anyone in or out as potential scum based on it. Like, what would a "mass claim" really be except all of town asking "anyone who's blue and hasn't claim yet please do so now"? I definitely don't think we should do a mass claim right now. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 13 2012 17:03 Blazinghand wrote: cause he's town. it's not my job to defend the man, just to point out the scum on his wagon. read his filter and tell me that's scum S&B seriously dude On November 13 2012 17:16 Blazinghand wrote: K I think S&B is town and you guys voting him are voting him for carless, free posting that isn't at all how he played as scum a few days ago in Whose Line Mafia when he was posting shit like this on the first day + Show Spoiler + On November 02 2012 00:32 strongandbig wrote: Blazinghand, I am not saying you are violating the "mafia rules" or being "immoral" as the mafia community would see it. Churlish is a better adjective to describe your behavior than "cheating" would be. Dastardly, you're not being. Essentially, I think that "we joined this game to have fun with minigames in a mafia context, and just ignoring them isn't in the spirit of the game." For sure, you're well within your rights and the game rules to do what you've been doing, but I think the game would be more fun all around if we were all trying to follow the minigame rules and I hope the incentives to do so are stronger next time around. Going on to Adam. His posts this game "sound weirder" or "sound less genuine" to me than anyone else's except perhaps crossfire, who's playing the mad poet or something like that. It's hard to say whether that's because he's having a hard time posting naturally within the context of the minigame, or if it's because he is uncomfortable being scum or because he's not "being genuine" (I think that's how Sandroba described his scumhunting in some recent game I was following, reading people's posts and looking for people not being genuine etc). Just read through his filter a couple of times, it's not very long. K, here's one thing - he starts off with his "meta argument" on BKE, but then drops the read for no reason when he moves on to mementoss. Later, he says "BKE isn't scum to him," I would very much like to know what in BKE's filter gave him that impression because (as I outlined in my previous post) BKE's filter looks pretty terrible to me, and the worst parts are the parts that came after Adam's "meta read". Mementoss case, I find pretty unpersuasive, I think that comparing pre-game and in-game enthusiasm levels is a valid tactic. "Not posting much of value" or "not having strong opinions" can be a decent case to make if it's clear and pronounced but it's hardly unique to Mementoss at the moment, I would contend that BKE, Djagulingu, maybe hopeless also fall into that category. Oh, something else - he promises very early on to be like super active, but he is far less active than many other people. Putting the shoe on the other foot, however, his claims about the meta component to your case are pretty compelling. Qualifying that - I know your case is not mainly based on meta anymore. Really, however, unless you disagree with him that his more recent games are different from your claim about his meta, it should be recognized that that element of the case on him is weak. Something else you argue - he did originally take a position against BKE and later backtrack on it. Though I've said above that I don't understand why he backtracked, and though I really want to hear his reasoning, and though I think it's scummy to backtrack from one position and jump on another one without explaining yourself, I do think that at least taking a position is better than not taking a position, even if there is scummy backtracking. Ultimately, here's where I stand. Voting for BKE because I think he's scummier - his positions are less both in number and firmness, and there's also the factor of him doing what I believe is "smokescreening" by talking so much about "how important it is for people to vote in both threads" and then about "how people didn't understand what he meant when he was talking about how important it is for people to vote in both threads", neither of which matter very much. With that said, however, I think a lot of what you say about Adam makes sense, and I wouldn't strenuously object to voting him if that's necessary to get a majority. so yeah looks town to me On November 16 2012 11:13 Blazinghand wrote: Also, if you're not voting for SnB you need to give a very good reason for why he's town. ##vote: SnB | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
also ##vote: blazinghand | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
"but snb i'm so town because I'm an un-counterclaimed blue claim this is stupid and you should feel stupid. This is a semi-open setup, the lack of a counterclaim means nothing. There could be no jailkeepers or two jailkeepers, we don't know. We should judge a player based on their play. "but but but the hapahauli lynch" (1) On November 16 2012 15:17 Blazinghand wrote: Take a look at the timestamps on those votes, Djodref-- they were all made within the span of the last couple of minutes before the lynch. Nobody knew how many votes where on anyone else and we were getting hit with flood control. Everyone on the Hapa wagon was town. Anyone could have been scum. There was no indication that Hapa was actually getting lynched until all of a sudden he did. (2) On November 15 2012 12:03 Blazinghand wrote: big plays cf. my "Blazinghand psychology" argument. Blazinghand is into trolling and "big plays". By "trolling" what I mean here is "doing things that get a rise out of people" not "posting with bad grammar and shit" like I was doing. "Big plays" -> high-risk, high-reward. (3) Number three is something I'm calling "trying to be consistent in the heat of the moment." For an example, look at the recent Whose Line is it Anyway mafia game. Gonzaw basically gave up himself and Mementoss because he wanted to stay consistent at the moment of the lynch. He'd said something earlier in the day, before the bandwagon on Mementoss started, that he wanted to lynch Mementoss. Once it started looking like Mementoss was a viable lynch option, the best move would clearly have been for Gonzaw to jump onto the other bandwagon, but instead he hemmed and hawed and eventually voted mementoss, but he did so in a way that made it obvious that he didn't want to lynch him. In this case, what it meant was BH backed himself into a corner by "fos"ing hapa etc, and felt like he couldn't get off the bandwagon when it actually formed. "but why would he claim jailkeeper in the first place?" I addressed that in my case post yesterday on BH. On November 14 2012 23:06 strongandbig wrote: that sir is what's called "pushing your luck" BH posted this after reading exactly the same explanation from DP that I read, and exactly the same comments on DP's meta from marv as I read, and doing exactly the same amount of work looking into DP's actual scum/town meta as I did (none) - and yet he comes up with a vote? Without at all addressing the points from Marv and from himself about DP's meta? And without addressing the other game in progress issue - which isn't an "unverifiable irl excuse," we can go look at the thread - and yet he comes up with a vote? guys what we have out of BH is not just a scummy and needless claim - we have a scummy and needless claim from a player who isn't playing up to his usual town standard in several ways - bad cases - trolling/fluff while taking the easy opportunity to gain points by attacking other people for fluff and most importantly - the huge mismatch in thread presence, thread control, and town organization between BH's last town game (whose line) and this game And then we have BH psychology: he just saw me do well - not win, except for self-declaring victory, but do much better than I should have given how the game started out - he saw me do well by fakeclaiming blue and then really pushing that fakeclaim hard. He also just had what I assume must be a trollgasm from evoking ridiculous reactions from Keirathi in that same game. Now he's claimed blue for no good reason, and it's a blue role that he can "verify" easily by withholding KP, or that he can make unverifiable by claiming to be roleblocked. There's no way a town BH decides "there are 3 or 4 votes on me, like 30 hours before the lynch - time to claim!" I just don't believe that thought process is real. ##vote: blazinghand | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 17 2012 08:59 Blazinghand wrote: When you bailed and decided lurking was the best strat do you really think you've effectively addressed A) my claim and B) the Hapa lynch to the point where lynching me is a good idea? or is this your last hope as scum that I might be a worth mislynch, and some bads will jump on the wagon with you? lol so my not posting for a while was enough to make you change your mind about all the points you made previously saying I was town? I don't believe that. Plus, this is like the first time you've mentioned it. It reaaaaaaaaaally looks to me like you're just trying to ride the wave of the popular lynch of the moment. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 17 2012 08:59 Blazinghand wrote: do you really think you've effectively addressed A) my claim and B) the Hapa lynch to the point where lynching me is a good idea? yes I do | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 15 2012 11:16 Blazinghand wrote: Anyone who thinks I'm scum need to square the following circles: 1: my claim 2: we lynched Hapa 6-5, and I was one of the 6. Why would I do this as scum with Hapa looking much townier than me? that's one On November 16 2012 10:10 Blazinghand wrote: but like it doesn't matter, I'm like super town anyways for my claim and for killing hapa two On November 16 2012 10:13 Blazinghand wrote: See, this is even more evidence for me being town-- if I'm so bad, surely a scumteam with me and hapa would sacrifice me rather than him three On November 16 2012 15:19 Blazinghand wrote: And like, I'm an uncontested blue claim in a way that makes no sense for scum, and I voted for and lynched Hapa. I really don't get why you're so stuck on me-- clearly you're just wrong, because nobody's being convinced. If you think SnB is town, that's fine, but make a case on someone other than me. I'm not getting lynched and honestly you're wasting your time and ours with this stuff. four On November 16 2012 16:03 Blazinghand wrote: dude just think about all the mental contortions you put yourself through to explain A) the uncontested blue claim and B) the fact that I lynched hapa. did I like kill your father 10 years ago or what five seriously would an actual townie really just repeat the same argument over and over again? and try this hard to claim towncred for something which they themselves said was random? I don't believe it | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 17 2012 09:03 Blazinghand wrote: Your interpretation of what happened in the final 2-3 minutes of D1 is pretty crappy. pretty sure it's not my interpretation. pretty sure I just quoted you there. And honestly do you really think *I* took a page out of *your* scum-play book? I may not be an amazing scum player, but I sure don't want any of what you're selling. not out of my scum-play book out of my awesome-big-plays book It doesn't even have to be because of me, it could be for whatever reason. The point is, you've been trying all game to ride what I guarantee is one of the worst blue claims in history instead of actually play like a townie and help the town. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
even if we accept that I was somehow lurking or whatever why does that change your interpretation of my day 1 posting? you were pretty adamant that it meant I was town, and then you completely changed your mind without any explanation whatsoever. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MZ2fT.png) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gWpZ2.png) I started a dota game at 2:50 AM and it went for 38 minutes. I posted some "lol"s when I alt-tabbed out and saw the hapa lynch. I don't lie about that stuff. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 17 2012 09:14 Blazinghand wrote: Um, yes, given how people have been attacking me, and ignoring the obvious points in my favor, I'm gonna re-mention them. Let me repeat them for you, since you clearly don't get them, or are choosing not to get them: 1) my claim does not make sense except from a town perspective, and is uncontested 2) I lynched hapa, which makes zero sense no matter how much you strain your small brain to wrap around it and contort your logic around it. You have not resoundingly defeated either of these arguments. I would never borrow from YOUR meta. You're saying "I , SnB, have a meta of this kind of claim as scum, and BH was in a game in which I did that, therefore BH is fake-claiming this game" which makes no sense. In fact, in WLIIA Mafia scum could buy powers just like town, which made that kind of claim viable. This is a setup in which such a claim cannot be maintained. If this was an argument for "BH is a SK fakeclaiming Vigi" then it would make sense, but I claimed JK. Your logic is terrible. And the hapa lynch is what it is. I don't have a meta of doing that. I did it once. And it was sweet. I don't think you borrowed from my meta. It doesn't matter where you got the idea, I'm not trying to claim credit here. All I'm saying is that the idea fits in with my image of your psychology as a mafia player and a scum player. And here's something else you're ignoring - your claim makes even less sense from a town point of view. You claimed early in day 1 when you had like three votes on you. If you were town, by doing this you would have unnecessarily ruined your effectiveness as a town power role. The argument that your claim is "uncontested" is completely irrelevant. This is not an open setup. I mentioned this above. Your claim is also unverifiable, making it a good claim for scum. The thing is, nothing about your behavior in this game resembles your town play. Your cases are terrible, your arguments are terrible, and your thread presence isn't constructive. And I don't have to "defeat" your argument about lynching Hapa. You did that yourself. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On November 17 2012 09:20 Blazinghand wrote: This isn't even about our argument. It's about how you play the game. Whether you're town or you're scum, that's not how you play mafia. I might as well keep my stream on constantly (though never streaming my web browser, of course) at any time I claim to be AFK and use that as evidence. What you've done here is incredibly unsportsmanlike. clarity accused me of lying I don't like that | ||
| ||
