|
On November 23 2012 22:58 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 22:51 Acrofales wrote:
I was going to put some examples here, but I have a better idea that will let me figure out more about the unique capabilities of our squiggly line drawer :D
@Dienosore: I am starting to agree with you on the strangeness of some of GK's posts. However, I want you to explain a bit better what in GK's posts reads as contrived. We can compare notes afterwards. We will then use our combined powers to ascertain whether he is scum or not!
@everybody else: go ahead and do the same, but please let Dieno answer the question first. It was him who first mentioned this stuff.
Ok, but for what it's worth (something Dino won't know) BC and DrH pegged goodkarma as scum in... Palmar's normal (LVII?) for making a post that looked way too constructed. I had a look at gk's filter in his town game in newbie XXIV before I made my post earlier, and I didn't feel quite so certainly about it as I thought I would have. XXIV is on the front page if you wanna have a look yourself.
I already opened both those games for comparison material 
|
[QUOTE]On November 24 2012 01:06 goodkarma wrote:
[QUOTE]On November 23 2012 22:44 Acrofales wrote:
[QUOTE]On November 22 2012 22:30 goodkarma wrote:
For all those who are still distrustful of me:
You are certainly entitled to distrust me. I spent a good portion of the opening of this game discussing mechanics and not really so much reads. However, I would like to point out that I have since then:
1) Established a system of greater transparency for who is selected. It is very likely all we'd discuss is party leader, and not the corresponding parties, if I hadn't stepped in. Further, I have shown exactly why this is the best approach...
2) I have been proactive about demonstrating exactly why it is I have chosen who I have and my line of reasoning. Further, I have been (and continue to be) willing to change my platform if compelling evidence can be brought to my attention that a candidate is a weak choice.
3) The only reason I have pursued a party leader position this cycle is that the alternatives I feel at this point do not have trustworthy platforms. I am not trusting of Kita, nor at this point am I content with sending sandroba.
4) I have actually been active this game... If you were to look at any of my scum games, you would notice that I am not nearly this proactive when I play scum. You have discussed prior how it would be absolutely great if we had a candidate that had an easily recognizable town vs. scum game. Well, your welcome.
I will not be submitting my party until I leave for Thanksgiving lunch/dinner late tomorrow morning. I look forward to hearing your opinions on my party, and replying to them in a few hours. But until then, I'm getting a few hours' rest.[/QUOTE]
You can add to that dissatisfaction with syllo's decision to not discuss who was in his party. If you're wandering why that bothered me so much, I could quote more stuff from my filter I guess... -_-
Tbh, I've done my best to be very transparent in my reasoning behind my decisions. Most questions you bring up about motives for playing as I have I am quite confident that you will find the answers to in my filter.
[/QUOTE]
You have a full-on town read of Sandro at the time you decide to run yourself (as evidenced by your very "GK for president" post. Syllo only came much later (I checked timestamps). I am having a lot of trouble understanding why you were "uncontent" sending Sandro at the time.
|
God, I screwed up quote tags :S
On November 24 2012 01:06 goodkarma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 22:30 goodkarma wrote:
For all those who are still distrustful of me:
You are certainly entitled to distrust me. I spent a good portion of the opening of this game discussing mechanics and not really so much reads. However, I would like to point out that I have since then:
1) Established a system of greater transparency for who is selected. It is very likely all we'd discuss is party leader, and not the corresponding parties, if I hadn't stepped in. Further, I have shown exactly why this is the best approach...
2) I have been proactive about demonstrating exactly why it is I have chosen who I have and my line of reasoning. Further, I have been (and continue to be) willing to change my platform if compelling evidence can be brought to my attention that a candidate is a weak choice.
3) The only reason I have pursued a party leader position this cycle is that the alternatives I feel at this point do not have trustworthy platforms. I am not trusting of Kita, nor at this point am I content with sending sandroba.
4) I have actually been active this game... If you were to look at any of my scum games, you would notice that I am not nearly this proactive when I play scum. You have discussed prior how it would be absolutely great if we had a candidate that had an easily recognizable town vs. scum game. Well, your welcome.
I will not be submitting my party until I leave for Thanksgiving lunch/dinner late tomorrow morning. I look forward to hearing your opinions on my party, and replying to them in a few hours. But until then, I'm getting a few hours' rest. You can add to that dissatisfaction with syllo's decision to not discuss who was in his party. If you're wandering why that bothered me so much, I could quote more stuff from my filter I guess... -_- Tbh, I've done my best to be very transparent in my reasoning behind my decisions. Most questions you bring up about motives for playing as I have I am quite confident that you will find the answers to in my filter.
You have a full-on town read of Sandro at the time you decide to run yourself (as evidenced by your very "GK for president" post. Syllo only came much later (I checked timestamps). I am having a lot of trouble understanding why you were "uncontent" sending Sandro at the time.
|
On November 24 2012 01:08 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 00:53 Oatsmaster wrote:
Hopeless, how does predicting the party show his alignment? It doesn't, but it is definitely not scummy to me. He called out what I presume are two townies (event success) very early. That supposed ability is why he was a candidate in the first place, and he has lived up to that expectation in my eyes. Granted, he gave little in the way of reasoning, and it would be immensely easy to do so as mafia when you know which 'newbies' are town (or at least not mafia), but its still a point in his favor that his most recently proposed party (die/oats/kush) would likely have succeeded as well. (Man, Cyrus and Glenn in the same party? IMBA!)
Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 00:56 Clarity_nl wrote:On November 24 2012 00:52 Clarity_nl wrote:
Can everyone get over the fact that sand has been inactive and just gave a weird excuse and read his filter and my case, please?
This goes especially for the people sheeping without giving reasons other than him going inactive. Wait, I'm doing that thing where I care more about the method than the result again, aren't I? A little bit, but I don't think you're wrong to insist we make a goddamn read for ourselves. Your case on sand shows that he's not trying to win the election. His activity could be to blame for that. -> He doesn't give strong or informed reads. Withholding reasons for a townread to me is not scummy until those same townreads become scumreads. If he continues to read a player as town, I'm fine with that. If they suddenly change to scum, only then do I feel I deserve to know his entire thought process. As a candidate for party leader, I can see why people would want his reads to be as transparent as possible, but I believe that winning the events is more important and I don't consider his 'not trying' to be scummy.
Just pointing out that your reasoning is complete shite.
If Sandro is scum, he doesn't magically lose the ability to see who is appearing townie in the thread. Add to that that he already KNOWS who is town and it becomes even easier for Sandro to pick a team with three townie noobs in it. We then get to setup speculation about whether that would make the event succeed, but on the face of it I still think 1 scum is enough to sabotage a 4-player mission.
So Sandro picking a townie team is indicative only and alone of his ability to pick a townie team, which was never in doubt in the first place.
|
@Chronicler: I think it's important to clear some stuff up and for that you will have to unsmurf.
I am very uncomfortable with you being a smurf, but playing like a noobie. If you are, in fact, a noobie hiding on a smurf (like we had in HRM) for TL reasons, claiming your identity will not suddenly set lights flashing everywhere. However, if you are someone acting as a misguided noobie as some hairbrained scheme, we need to know.
|
On November 23 2012 09:11 TheChronicler wrote:
I would be really interested in seeing how sand flips at this point. He'd be really useful as a reference for some people in this thread. I won't put my vote on him until I make a case, though.
It's turkey day and I just checked in to see the result of the event. I'll be home in about eight hours.
If anything is "testing the water", this is it. Also, lynching Sandroba for information?
This post stinks.
Other than that I cannot find anything one way or the other in his filter. I do feel TheChronicler is not a total noob from his general knowledge and some random comments he made. Which makes me even MORE curious as to why he is smurfing. He's either someone extremely experienced who is faking a bad plan just to fuck with us, or is someone who is not actually that experienced at all and truly thought the suggestion was good. The former seems very unlikely. The latter I don't know who might feel the need to get away from their meta.
In closing, I find TheChronicler more confusing than anything else right now. I agree with Marv that the way the plan was presented and then backed down from felt townie at the time. However, I am back to null after thinking about it a bit more.
|
@Djodref: I went back and looked at your case, now that I have assessed his filter independently. I think your explanation is plausible.
|
On November 23 2012 21:54 sandroba wrote:
@draz are your abilities provable? i.e can you tell us what you intend to do at each deadline?
I think this claim is a little too far fetched to be a fake claim. I can't fathom someone fake claiming 20+ different abilities and if he can tell us before he uses it we can verify.
You do realize you are saying that a guy who fakeclaimed "Crazed Monk from the Swiss Confederation" is making a crazy fakeclaim is farfetched?
This is Drazerk, the compulsive liar we are talking about here, okay?
|
On November 23 2012 23:24 strongandbig wrote:
Hey thread I'm at the airport
Flying to visit my old college roommate in Britain
I'll post as much as I can but idk how consistent wifi ill have
Plz not to kill me like last time I went on vacation - that's the only time I've ever been mostly chef an I'd rather not repeat it
Maybe it has something to do with your scum meta being to lurk the shit out of a game...
You'd better deliver when you get back. When you were around I kinda liked your posting, but not enough to make me confident of your alignment. I know you can play better than this.
|
On November 24 2012 02:25 TheChronicler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 01:52 Acrofales wrote:
@Chronicler: I think it's important to clear some stuff up and for that you will have to unsmurf.
I am very uncomfortable with you being a smurf, but playing like a noobie. If you are, in fact, a noobie hiding on a smurf (like we had in HRM) for TL reasons, claiming your identity will not suddenly set lights flashing everywhere. However, if you are someone acting as a misguided noobie as some hairbrained scheme, we need to know. Just like I told marv, I won't be unsmurfing. I'm alive and didn't take any damage, don't think I'm playing like a noob at all.
Okay, so you're not picking the easy way out.
Did you have some ulterior motive with your plan, or did you suggest it as a serious idea?
|
On November 24 2012 02:27 TheChronicler wrote:
I also like how I'm the scrub smurf and draz is just sitting up the thread.
Well, Draz shits up the thread as either alignment and the best policy on him is to ignore him until you want to lynch him. The fact that Draz HASN'T been shitting up the thread all that much at all, is actually indicative of his town meta.
Deflecting much? We're talking about you.
|
On November 24 2012 00:33 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 00:25 marvellosity wrote:On November 24 2012 00:18 iamperfection wrote:
So i went through biosc games and i have noticed that he tends not be an activity fiend to begin with in really all of his games so i dont know what to think of him anymore. I want to hear more from him before i pass judgement. Also he has disappeared completely once before (with justification) so couple that with thanksgiving today i don't really make that big a deal of him disappearing.
@MarvI on scale of 1 to 10 How important are you to town (this is a seerious question deall with it) I'm always important to town, dear. Your question has a bunch of hidden implications that I'd much rather you came straight out with  Also for anyone having douubts this is town marv again his hearts in it oncce again right marv??
Worst reasoning in the history of terrible reasoning. You place a blatantly obvious "trap", he sidesteps it with a quip and you declare him town?
I will give you the benefit of the doubt: what answer would have made you yell "hah, scumbag, I knew it"? And what about this answer confirmed marv as town in your eyes?
|
On November 24 2012 02:36 TheChronicler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 02:28 Acrofales wrote:On November 24 2012 02:25 TheChronicler wrote:On November 24 2012 01:52 Acrofales wrote:
@Chronicler: I think it's important to clear some stuff up and for that you will have to unsmurf.
I am very uncomfortable with you being a smurf, but playing like a noobie. If you are, in fact, a noobie hiding on a smurf (like we had in HRM) for TL reasons, claiming your identity will not suddenly set lights flashing everywhere. However, if you are someone acting as a misguided noobie as some hairbrained scheme, we need to know. Just like I told marv, I won't be unsmurfing. I'm alive and didn't take any damage, don't think I'm playing like a noob at all. Okay, so you're not picking the easy way out. Did you have some ulterior motive with your plan, or did you suggest it as a serious idea? The revised edition was my original plan but as I was posting it I got cute. Don't know why, that was bad. Was serious about the revised plan. I still think it was a good idea, but if I'm the only one thinking that it must have been bad.
Yes... and my million dollar question is how someone who is apparently fairly experienced in mafia could not see that this plan was bad. The main problem is that the rest of your play has been fairly standard. You're not ranting like a maniac, like Risen or Bluelightz, and you're not derping it up with crazy logic like BM. Which means you *should* have been able to see how bad that plan was.
And that is what's bugging me. Because if you knew how bad the plan was, then there is no town motivation for posting it. And that's why I want to know your identity. If you are prone to derps like thinking that that plan was good, then you might be town, but otherwise I can only see scum motivations for posting that.
Now, lets move on to the other stuff Djodref pointed out: explain your vote for Syllo.
|
Okay, I went through Sandro's filter, and other than his absence at some key moments I cannot find anything scummy. He seems to be playing pretty standard for him, calling people town with no reason given. However, I am looking forward to him waking up and starting to play again.
Another thing to keep in mind is that from a game-setup point of view it is very very risky to put people like Sandro+Syllo on opposite alignments. Not quite as bad as Coag+Jackal (and the only game I've played with both of them DrH stuck both of them on the scumteam), but not something you can do without making a very serious consideration, as they are well-known for having each other's number. I don't want to let this weigh too heavily, because meta-speculation about the host is really dodgy ground, but I felt it was worth mentioning.
Syllo+Sand: do you have a recent (last half a year or so) game where you were opposite alignments? 3rd party doesn't count.
|
On November 24 2012 02:55 Dienosore wrote:
Okok, Im awake again.
I'd like to hear everyone's stance on a Robo roleclaim before the next party selection. Should Robo claim? When would be the best time for him to expose himself? Who should he replace on the team? Is it really worth exposing a strong member for the sake of him being there during the proper time period?
well?
We're not selecting a party, we're deciding who to lynch.
You can help us with that, though, there are questions for you! 
+ Show Spoiler [irrelevant bla about robo] +
Robo claiming is irrelevant atm. Even in the future I don't feel Robo as strongly as I did Frog: rescuing the queen felt integral to Frog's story and the developing plot. Robo feels irrelevant storywise (but then again, I'm not even halfway through the game yet, so /shrug).
|
On November 24 2012 03:11 TheChronicler wrote:
If that JUST made me scum to you you're lying or not reading the thread. I already said that exact point earlier in the thread. Admitting my plan is faulty isn't scummy, it's honest. Why do you think it is?
Well, you managed to make a giant logic flip twice in your mind now.. and it feels like POST-HOC rationalization for your syllo vote, which is a direct scumtell.
Reasoning it out:
On November 24 2012 02:50 TheChronicler wrote:
3) Syllo chose a path almost completely opposite to mine. If mine was stupid, his must have been the correct choice. Why would you need to tell other people your choices if you're the one who's taking full responsibility.
So you were convinced your plan was bad. Good, it was. However, at the time, nor about 10 minutes ago did you give anybody the idea that you were convinced your plan was bad. You left off the plan saying it was "probably just bad"... which sounds more like you were cowed into silence than convinced. That was fine at the time.
We then have:
On November 24 2012 02:36 TheChronicler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 02:28 Acrofales wrote:On November 24 2012 02:25 TheChronicler wrote:On November 24 2012 01:52 Acrofales wrote:
@Chronicler: I think it's important to clear some stuff up and for that you will have to unsmurf.
I am very uncomfortable with you being a smurf, but playing like a noobie. If you are, in fact, a noobie hiding on a smurf (like we had in HRM) for TL reasons, claiming your identity will not suddenly set lights flashing everywhere. However, if you are someone acting as a misguided noobie as some hairbrained scheme, we need to know. Just like I told marv, I won't be unsmurfing. I'm alive and didn't take any damage, don't think I'm playing like a noob at all. Okay, so you're not picking the easy way out. Did you have some ulterior motive with your plan, or did you suggest it as a serious idea? The revised edition was my original plan but as I was posting it I got cute. Don't know why, that was bad. Was serious about the revised plan. I still think it was a good idea, but if I'm the only one thinking that it must have been bad.
So all this time, you thought your plan was a good idea. Yet you voted for Syllo, because "if your plan was bad, then the opposite of that plan must be good"? But you never thought your plan was bad in the first place.
There is no coherent train of thought here. It is a post-hoc rationalization of incongruent behaviour. You voted syllo to blend in with the crowd and it is coming back to bite you.
##vote TheChronicler
|
On November 24 2012 03:16 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 03:05 Acrofales wrote:
Okay, I went through Sandro's filter, and other than his absence at some key moments I cannot find anything scummy. He seems to be playing pretty standard for him, calling people town with no reason given. However, I am looking forward to him waking up and starting to play again.
Another thing to keep in mind is that from a game-setup point of view it is very very risky to put people like Sandro+Syllo on opposite alignments. Not quite as bad as Coag+Jackal (and the only game I've played with both of them DrH stuck both of them on the scumteam), but not something you can do without making a very serious consideration, as they are well-known for having each other's number. I don't want to let this weigh too heavily, because meta-speculation about the host is really dodgy ground, but I felt it was worth mentioning.
Syllo+Sand: do you have a recent (last half a year or so) game where you were opposite alignments? 3rd party doesn't count. So I take it you are not so familiar with his meta? Because both Toad and Adam seemed to give him scum reads on meta. I'm also disturbed on how syllo is reluctant to give a read on him. I've asked him twice at this time, and he still doesn't take a solid position. There are two newbies using the logic "syllo won the event ergo sand is scum" and that's going unopposed. I don't get why he's not taking a position against sand. I second that a game in which syllo and sand played together as opposite alignments would be quite instructive. That way we can tell just how accurate these vet reads being made are and I'll be more comfortable regarding people's reads. For the record I'm opposed to a sand lynch at this time, until more people comment on the cases on him, at least. Right now there are much better lynches, more into that in a bit.
Only remotely normal game I remember Sandroba being scum is Liar mafia. His meta was blatantly obvious there, because he just plain didn't care about the game. That is not the impression I am getting from him.
I have played with town Sandroba a couple of times now, and am getting a similar feeling. The main difference is that he has gone awol for long stretches of time. I don't like that at all, but admit real world stuff does come up and interfere with playing sometimes. I am uncomfortable lynching Sandroba with the ONLY thing I can hold against him is that he was afk when it counted.
Adam states Sandroba is playing like he "don't-give-a-shit", which I disagree with. @Adam: please explain yourself a bit better. What makes you have this read?
Toad doesn't have a meta read on Sandro at all. He has a "Syllo is town, therefore Sandro must be scum" read based on the party leader elections, which is pants-on-head retarded.
|
On November 24 2012 03:28 TheChronicler wrote:
Acro stop being bad. Go through my filter and you'll see me say my plan must be bad much earlier. You're pointing to a contradiction that doesn't exist. Sigh... What a useless diversion. Zbo scum?
The "probably bad" was your first (and only, up until just now) mention of the plan being bad. It is here:
On November 21 2012 12:48 TheChronicler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 12:47 marvellosity wrote:
TheChronicler, take a moment, sip a glass of wine, and ponder why every single person who has read your idea has thought it terrible.
It's either because you're a genius, transcended on a plane above any of us mere mortals, or your idea is bad. Alright, it's probably just bad. I just wanted to spread it out b/c I don't want to elect a scum person and have them controlling everything.
From this I don't infer that you are actually convinced your plan is bad. You leave space open for it to go any way. I did feel convinced you were disabused of any thoughts about your plan when you responded to me, though:
On November 22 2012 03:37 TheChronicler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 03:23 Acrofales wrote:On November 22 2012 03:14 Dienosore wrote:
I italicized 'first' because I wanted to draw attention to the fact that party leaders will be changing quite often and I feel as if people are thinking this is going to be a permanent position.
As for the majority elected team, I think it's more logical to do things this way, at least for the first cycle while we are completely in the dark. I don't view polling the masses as dodging responsibility, but rather taking away the mafias chance to have an iron grip on the initial proceedings (assuming scum is elected and starts a dictatorship). By putting the vote out into the open, we also have another opportunity to see where loyalties lie. I will correct you on this: 1. Polls are a terrible idea in mafia (I have tried to use them myself in my younger more nubby days and they are a terrible idea) 2. Expecting that mafia cannot manipulate a vote (especially an anonymous vote as in the poll system) is exceedingly naive. 3. You are dodging responsibility, because one of the reasons for voting for a leader is so he can be held accountable for his team. If the party fails, then everybody in that party comes under serious suspicion, but the leader most of all: he put a party together with at least one scumster (and probably more, or third parties, or something). Given that town reads are generally easier than scumreads, especially so early in the game, that means the leader either has really bad judgement, someone really fooled the crap out of him, or he is scum. By avoiding this dilemma and putting it up to majority vote, you cannot be held accountable in this manner, thus dodging this use of the party system, which, in the long run may very well be its most powerful use. I agree with your first two points, but I disagree with the third. Simply because he wants more people involved in the decision doesn't mean he doesn't want the responsibility. I'm assuming he's voicing the idea for whoever the leader ends up as. It's very similar to my idea.
You didn't try to play it up as if the plan was good, or your idea should be brought back to the table. You simply gave your reasoning behind it.
However, the problem is now. Your reasoning for voting for Syllo doesn't feel right at all. Lets look for any indication you think syllo is town:
On November 22 2012 03:42 TheChronicler wrote:
I'm going to place my vote on syllo. Cave seems to be pushing syllo as someone who can't be elected because he's "taken himself out" when he's a very viable candidate. I'm driving to California, and won't be back in the thread for a good 12 hours. I will try to keep up with the thread on my phone, though. Just don't expect your questions to be answered until I get to my parents' place tonight.
Not here.
On November 23 2012 03:50 TheChronicler wrote:
I don't think we should be going for a swap with 4 hours left. I'm happy with my vote on syllo.
Not here.
On November 24 2012 02:50 TheChronicler wrote:
3) Syllo chose a path almost completely opposite to mine. If mine was stupid, his must have been the correct choice. Why would you need to tell other people your choices if you're the one who's taking full responsibility.
And least of all here. This reinforces my suspicion that you are scum and didn't need to "think" Syllo was town, because you knew Syllo was town. If someone at any point had asked me (and I believe they did) why I was voting for Syllo, my answer is: I believed Syllo to be town and trust his judgement to pick townie party members. You skip over the "I think Syllo is town" part in every one of your explanations for your vote and justify it with contrived excuses that give post-hoc rationalizations for a sheep vote.
Ergo: you're scum
|
On November 24 2012 03:42 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 03:11 TheChronicler wrote:
If that JUST made me scum to you you're lying or not reading the thread. I already said that exact point earlier in the thread. Admitting my plan is faulty isn't scummy, it's honest. Why do you think it is? Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 02:36 TheChronicler wrote:On November 24 2012 02:28 Acrofales wrote:On November 24 2012 02:25 TheChronicler wrote:On November 24 2012 01:52 Acrofales wrote:
@Chronicler: I think it's important to clear some stuff up and for that you will have to unsmurf.
I am very uncomfortable with you being a smurf, but playing like a noobie. If you are, in fact, a noobie hiding on a smurf (like we had in HRM) for TL reasons, claiming your identity will not suddenly set lights flashing everywhere. However, if you are someone acting as a misguided noobie as some hairbrained scheme, we need to know. Just like I told marv, I won't be unsmurfing. I'm alive and didn't take any damage, don't think I'm playing like a noob at all. Okay, so you're not picking the easy way out. Did you have some ulterior motive with your plan, or did you suggest it as a serious idea? The revised edition was my original plan but as I was posting it I got cute. Don't know why, that was bad. Was serious about the revised plan. I still think it was a good idea, but if I'm the only one thinking that it must have been bad. @TheChroniclerI think you don't know how to keep your story straight
Yeah, I should just have said that instead of posting walls of quotes :D
|
@Marv: when you have time, has any of this changed your opinion? If so, why? If not, why not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
