EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXII - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
Is this really that important? | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
It is no secret that I find Arn suspicious. His play up to this point in the game is highly suspect from a town standpoint. On day 1, his suspicions were mainly focused on Kick, and in fact one of his wordiest posts this game was made to this effect. But then, inexplicably, he backs off this suspicion and then ultimately hammers the vote on Oats. For reference, this is the timeline of the events of his play Day 1. On December 05 2012 11:21 Arnarnion wrote: Based on the general style in which players have been approaching the game I have a couple of reads First with regards to Yam Man, I have a bit of town read on him based mainly on the way he has been approaching the game by asking questions, even if they have been aggressive. This style of play seems to be harsh but information driven town play since it is actually creating an environment where conversation can actually move forward. This should be obvious given the fact we are still talking about it. If his move against Axle was scum motivated, to what end? He would possibly get Axle lynched and then be cast into immediate suspicion on D2, since he would called out for pushing a mis-lynch. This question oriented play style promotes clarity of peoples intentions, which is ultimate of town's goals In contrast, all of Dickstart's actions have seemed to be aimed towards stalling the game. First, and I've made this point a couple of times, his wishy washy approach to pointing FoS on Yam Man did not help players understand the possible intentions. The fact that he put suspicion on Yam without trying to ask Yam why he acted the way he did does not provide information from Yam on whether he is scum or not. Kick did not ask for Yam's opinion on the accusation and instead attempted to get our reads on Yam without really committing to his own. Why would a town do this? This seems like a very scummy play, trying to get a case on player moving the conversation forward without actually providing any strong evidence on why that player is scum and fishing for scum reads from the rest of town to get that player lynched. As for his case: Here he attacks Yam's use of pressure, which as I've already stated, seems to be more of a town play than scum. Also, going after weaker noobs is more indicative of a town looking for answers, and a scum player would be more focused on targeting noobs who were playing scummily. Kick also gives HIMSELF as an example of proper treatment of confused noobs, which basically says "Hey, guys look at what a good town I am!! I'm not picking on poor defenseless Axle, and anyone who does is clearly scum!" This is a shit argument since it only says that players who play nice are town and players who are jerks are clearly scum, and by the way, Kick plays nice and thus must be town. I fear it comes from a mischievous scum looking to get a mislynch on a semi-suspicious player than from a concerned town and so I'm going to go ahead and ##Vote Kickstart This is his "case" on Kickstart. In this he attacks Kick for his suspicion of me, and almost nothing else. He calls Kick's play wishy-washy and decides that I was pro-town for what I did, a dubious distinction at the time for a town player to make. Now, as I've stated before, I think it was obviously in scum's best interest to attempt to side with me Day 1 because I am perceived as an easy target for manipulation based on my overall play in the last NMM. But, as others have expressed, there is a little doubt as to how far scum would take their double-team Day 1 lest they be caught at the same time. This argument, however, does not apply to Arn because of his following actions... On December 05 2012 15:07 Arnarnion wrote: I'm becoming less and less sure about who is scum at this point, I am beginning to think that it may be possible that two sides of town have started going at it while scum can easily sit it out with having to contribute much. This heated debate is not producing much more meaningful information from either side and I think the conversation needs to calm down and be reconsidered, since there seems to be a lot of rash and reactionary voting going on, which I don't believe is productive to town. The thread is turning into a brawl, which will make it easier for scum to sheep a vote without much more reason than jidolboy gave. Given that, I myself am going to ##Unvote for the meantime until the conversation becomes a little more productive and informative. On December 06 2012 04:55 Arnarnion wrote: As you can see as of right now I'm not voting for anyone. While I am less convinced than I was that Kick is scum, I'm also not ready to say that that makes Oats scum. The fight that broke out between them seems more of a town on town altercation to me and it seems like a good cover for scum to push agenda as town tears itself apart. I haven't liked the actions jidolboy and Sylencia sitting the game out until close to the vote then quickly squeaking their ill explained votes in. And based off of going through their respective filters, I find Sylencia's approach more scum and jidolboy's more newbie town. I say this because based off of their votes Sylencia goes through a list of sheeping other peoples points and then finally votes Oats after saying nothing original, reads scummy to me. jidolboy literally just votes with no explanation after being being absent for long while, and then sheeps when pressed about, which seems more like a frightened noob who didn't realize how suspicious he was being. So I'm going to ##Vote: Sylencia Now suddenly both Kick AND Oats are town, and Sylencia the Lurker is scummy. This distances scum Arn from scum Oats in that Arn did not stay on the Kick bandwagon, and is therefor less in the way of the collateral damage from Oats flipping scum. If you think Rad is too close, Arn is certainly the PERFECT distance away from Oats while still managing to push the scum agenda day 1, get a mislynch. Only now instead of going after Kick he's pushing a Lurker Lynch on Sylencia without ever having mentioned it before. BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE! On December 06 2012 08:20 Arnarnion wrote: How's is voting for my top scum read not giving a fuck about who is lynched? I give a fuck, I just I'm not sure you have the right guy and I'm pretty sure that Sylencia has exhibited some scummy behavior. That being said, since you guys seem set on lynching Oats above anyone else and I don't like the idea of a no lynch, I will ##Unvote and ##Vote: Oatsmaster, since I don't have a strong enough town read on him to adamantly say don't lynch him. I just hope this is worth it. I still think there should be more attention on the sheeping lurkers, though. Why would town do this? If you think Sylencia is scum why not make a case on him like you did Kick? Why vote for Oats, a player you had said just ONE POST AGO looked town to you? It makes no sense, unless you were trying to get heat off your back for the consecutive days by making a "pro-town" play. Arn even makes the defense that he did it for information, which is somewhat understandable from a town perspective. On December 07 2012 02:01 Arnarnion wrote: I voted for Oats because a no lynch seemed more detrimental to town than either a scum lynch or a mislynch. So I voted him hoping that if he flipped scum, he flipped scum and yay, one down and one to go, or if he flipped town, clearer reads could be made on people who voted for him or against him. A no lynch would do nothing good for town besides keeping a possible scummer or a possible town alive and scum could then pull off an easy NK. When I voted, I voted for coin flip reasons, which aren't very good reasons but I felt it would be better for town than to let nothing happen. But if he was really pushing a pro-town information play from the beginning, why would he suddenly vote against that day 2? On December 09 2012 11:41 Arnarnion wrote: I'll tell you why i didn't vote to consolidate. If I voted Rad and he turned out not to be scum, what would happen next? Someone would be NK'd and then I would be placed under suspicion like the last time I voted to consolidate, you guys would lynch me next and boom, 4 dead town in a row for one scum. If you guys were wrong it would be the end of town and I wasn't willing to risk that, especially since the only people on the vote where the sheepiest player we have, a guy I don't trust, and someone who seems to think that he has solved game because he led a lynch on scum day one. I wasn't buying it. He wants to avoid the suspicion he thinks we had of him after his play Day 1. Why would you vote for Oats day 1 and not Rad day 2 if you thought that both had a chance not to flip scum? His reasoning for voting Oats day 1 is in DIRECT CONTRADICTION with his reasons for not voting for Rad day 2. The play is EVEN SAFER day 2 because there is already one scum dead, so a mislynch means less D2 than it did D1, but yet he's more paranoid about mislynching a town, and why? Let's look at the post again. On December 09 2012 11:41 Arnarnion wrote: I'll tell you why i didn't vote to consolidate. If I voted Rad and he turned out not to be scum, what would happen next? Someone would be NK'd and then I would be placed under suspicion like the last time I voted to consolidate, you guys would lynch me next and boom, 4 dead town in a row for one scum. Because he doesn't want to be placed under suspicion. Why would a town player think that the same play would somehow get him lynched D3 when it didn't get him lynched D2? He wouldn't. A scum player, would, however, because they would have known that Oats was scum D1 and knew that town wouldn't attack the people on his wagon, but the D2 mislynch of town Rad would DEFINITELY garner some suspicion for the people on his wagon. I voted for Rad despite these potential consequences but yet Arn didn't? Furthermore, why is he so worried about Rad being town when the guy hasn't really been that pro-town? He never even offers up a defense of Rad's play that makes him think he's town, but yet he's so worried about it that he decides not to consolidate and risk a mislynch? On December 09 2012 13:28 Arnarnion wrote: Kick, just because I've been lurking doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. And 3 out of 7 people is not the majority of town. And I didn't tell you guys not to vote rad because A) I didn't think I(Captain Lurker) could change the minds of the guy who got the first lynch and his two nodding followers and B) I was agonizing up to the last minute on whether or not I would consolidate because I keep thinking there is the possibilty that my reads are wrong, but this time I felt like if I went and voted without thinking that there would be a 50/50 chance that that action could mean a win for scum or town. And I didn't want to make that decision. I threw my vote down on Yam because of the two people that sheeped you for that vote on Rad, his behavior has been the most inconsistent throughout the game and he hasn't had his own idea since he first went after Axle, jidol has a least been up front about it. You are being followed around by two people without any opinions themselves and feeling like you're hot shit because of it. Wake up Why do you trust Yam now, when you clearly didn't before? I really want to know, because I don't under stand why everyone is talking about him like he's confirmed town. The only other reason he offers up for not consolidating is because Jidol and I are "sheeping Kick" which is somehow bad. He never considers the arguments against Rad, he only thinks about the consequences of the lynch and who he can vilify for wanting to lynch him. He picks me because I am under suspicion from other players, even though he once called my play town favored. I don't see the town thinking in this play. I see a lot of scum thinking. His play has been aligned with what I perceive as the scum agenda for both days. D1, push an easy mislynch. Day 2, deny town the information from a lynch and kill off the towniest player in the game at night. D3? Well I suppose he'll have to make a REAL GOOD case against me now. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
On December 11 2012 11:17 Rad wrote: I'm noting your actions, yamato, not the fact that every town should be suspicious of everyone right now. You had your vote on me last lynch, but that shit didn't work. You're now FoSing 3 different people, none of which include your last lynch vote, but also subtly keeping the door open to move back to me if the opportunity presents itself. Now your reasoning is that Arn's guilt would imply my innocence, but the same goes for the rest of the people in this game, including the ones you FoS'd. You claim you're slinging shit at them to motivate, but also take the stance that I have basically done nothing the entire game. Why I no get motivations from you </3  ??If you want to be all nitpicky about who I spoke about in my posts, go ahead, but I did not FoS anybody. I don't recall using the term this game at all. I called them out and told them that what they were doing was not pro-town in my eyes and that I was going to look into that. I did, and Arn is by far the most suspicious. Right now though you look pretty scummy because your "case" on me is hilariously weak and also opportunistic in the sense that you think you can actually get me lynched because of Axle's vote and the conflict between Arn and I. This fits right in with your opportunistic play D1 and D2 trying to get easy mislynches on players you thought were already under fire. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
This is hardly "falling apart." | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
First we have Axle. He plays his own version of this game that doesn't involve doing anything other than pushing his own separate agenda. Then we have the lurkers. They rarely post, and when they do, they either make silly decisions or decide to not do anything at all, basically. Prodding and complaining about this fact has done nothing. 3 players who are basically useless to me because they don't make original arguments or discuss their reasoning, they just come in the thread, make their post, and then leave. Finally we have Rad, who is basically claiming scum at this point with his really fucking dumb post and vote on me that makes zero sense. Is that really a good reason to vote for someone at this point in the game? Some kind of imagined discrepancy between my posts that somehow belies I'm scum? It doesn't even detail HOW my play is scummy, it just makes snide remarks about my play without actually making the connection to scum agenda. Honestly, I want to lynch all of you. The sad fact is that only one of you is scum and the rest of you have done nothing to make that person more apparent. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
... Huh? | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
On December 11 2012 20:26 Sylencia wrote: And Yamato, it's perfectly reasonable to be looking at a confirmed scum's post to see what trails could be left behind. We're hunting for the final member, why would we limit ourselves to speculating who could and couldn't be scum just by looking at our own posts. I mean, sure, my interpretations of Oat's posts may not be completely correct, but it's a hell of a lot more trustworthy than what anyone alive says. Knowing he was scum, you have to think what he was trying to achieve by posting what he did, who he was trying to protect and cover for, and how he did so. Your entire case against me is what Oats said. If you honestly think that makes me scum you are seriously misguided. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
That being said, I still stand by my assertion that Rad is scummy for how his vote is on me but Arn needs to answer my accusations before I will switch my vote. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
| ||
