EPT/in
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
/in | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
Not sure. I'd have to go with yes for similar reasons as stated above. A lurking townie is doing us little good, so lynching lurkers should generally have a positive outcome (for town). I'm for it. 2) How do you think scum would try to infiltrate us? Also not sure. This is my first game of Mafia outside of some eight grade bastardization that shall never be spoken of again. 3) [Being from Australia] Do you like prawns/shrimp on the "barbie" Yes! Seafood is my favorite! | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
I've been thinking about lurking and I find that there is very little reason for it. For townies, it is in no way beneficial. You are not helping the rest of the town when you lurk. This I believe is the primary reason for the lynching lurkers policy. Now, none of this is new discussion so I'd like to throw something else out there: It is not beneficial for mafia to lurk either. Although it helps them more than the town. They are not forwarding their agenda in doing so. That, along with the ongoing consensus to lynch a less active player D1 would drive scum to play more actively, else they draw more attention to them (although they should be doing this anyway). This leads me to believe it isn't a player who is trying to hide in the shadows, but one who is just as active as any other townie. Instead of looking for scum players, they would be making unjustified claims hoping others hop wagon in an attempt to get an innocent player lynched. This is scummy behavior and is what we should be on the look out for. I would like to note I'm not excluding lurkers/less active players from scrutiny. It just should not be a deciding factor. - Corazon, I disagree with your reasoning to vote Aqua. His behavior is hardly scummy. I don't agree with everything he has posted, but his vote for you was justified, even though I don't believe you're scum. He voted to stimulate discussion. It worked. - On December 19 2012 23:21 cakepie wrote: Q: Pick and make a case against someone. I don't feel obligated to respond to this question. I've found very little evidence to incriminate any player and deem it foolish to attempt a case towards anyone I'm entirely unsure of. Maybe I'll come across something before Day's end, but until then I'm inclined not to answer. | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
On December 20 2012 06:29 cDgCorazon wrote: I'm voting for him in self defense. I've offered to take my vote off of the table if he does this same. I just believe that head-hunting on Day 1 isn't the most innocent thing to. I must admit, it did work to create discussion, but there are other ways to do it besides putting someone on the chopping block. Edit to this post below, look for the bolded words that aren't votes. I believe you were warned for this post. Even though you clearly stated the edit, you could've changed something else in the post and nobody would've been the wiser. Just don't edit posts at all. as a side note, you edited the wrong post lol | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
To be completely honest regarding Corazon's slip up (accidentally claiming mafia), I read it completely normally thinking he did anything wrong and didn't notice until Threesr pointed out that he had. I don't know what that says about me, but if he read it right and I read it right, he could possibly be telling the truth. I do agree with you that they're both acting incredibly defensive. | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
Of all players nominated for lynching, FatChunk, Threesr, and cDgCorazon are the ones I'm considering. Otherwise, I have a slight suspicion of Sylencia that is based solely on a hunch and little to no evidence. | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
On December 20 2012 12:17 Spaghetticus wrote: @Orangeremi Do you still believe it is not beneficial for mafia to lurk? You shouldn’t, as you’d be wrong. As I have done before, I would point you to the resources available on this topic on this very forum. Lurking bad. Speaking of which, you still only have a one page filter. Admittedly my filter is only two pages, but your one page only has 1-2 posts of any substance. Step up if you’re town, continue to stagnate if you’re scum. I suppose what I mean to say was that lurking isn't completely beneficial to Mafia. They will get much more done and be more successful (bar slip ups and mistakes) when active was my point. | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
On December 20 2012 18:22 OmniEulogy wrote: I'd also like to note to Spaghetticus and everybody else that if you are looking for more people who came to Corazon's defense, Orangeremi tried to make a case of why Corazon wasn't scum and went back to lurking. I'd like to actually hear why Orangeremi refused to give us an idea of who his top scum reads were and why he didn't actually say why Corazon wasn't acting scummy. The fact that he then put out the same three names for his top scum reads that everybody else had and then went into hiding again is also suspicious. I refused at the time because I felt like the evidence towards any player wasn't nearly compelling enough. In essence I didn't have scumreads, only a few suspicions that I wasn't willing to voice because they were hardly substantial. And I also don't think jumping on a bandwagon when you aren't even slightly convinced is good play so I avoided doing so. Regarding Corazon, I didn't claim he wasn't acting scummy. I believe he's been acting the scummiest in the game so far. I'm just unsure if it's on purpose or not. I put out the top three scum reads at the time because I was under the impression that the evidence pointed towards those players was good (as did everyone else, seeing as why they're top scum reads). On December 20 2012 18:22 OmniEulogy wrote: In Orangeremi's own words "Instead of looking for scum players, they would be making unjustified claims hoping others hop wagon in an attempt to get an innocent player lynched." and then "Otherwise, I have a slight suspicion of Sylencia that is based solely on a hunch and little to no evidence." At this point I was responding to Chrom's post asking our thoughts on those lynches. Regarding Sylencia, his first post seemed suspicious to me. And in making a random claim I was hoping to get a rise out of a less active player, see how they'd react to the pressure. His reaction (or lack thereof) and more recent posts have lowered my suspicion. On December 20 2012 18:24 Mocsta wrote: @orangeremi. Your filter comments on corazon doing the slip. You said you didnt pick up anytjing till someone else pointed it out. Q. If scum have superior starting knowledge and know remaining scum. Do you think it is reasonable to think you took corazon comments innocently because you knew he was innocent? Do u have rationale to make me think otherwise? ##fos: orangeremi Completely reasonable. Clever, in fact. I'm happy you caught that, I never would've thought about it. I'm not sure what kind of rationale you're looking for. The only thing I can think of is how foolish it would be of me to post what I did if I were mafia. I'd have no reason to defend a non-mafia claiming to be one since he would be an obvious distraction and good lynch target for me to bandwagon without suspicion. | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
On December 20 2012 19:29 OmniEulogy wrote: @Orangeremi Are those three still your top reads? If not who is new and can you give any additional information about why you are focused on those players. I don't really have any more to say about anybody for now so I'd like to hear some other opinions about the way things are going. Also if we had to vote right now how would you feel about a Corazon lynch? Best option or do you have better reads on somebody else? I'm not fond of how Kickstart is currently playing. He's the #1 lurker right now and I'd put him near the top of my list of suspicion. I want to see more of what he has to contribute, so far I'm not impressed. Corazon has done a lot more than expected in an attempt to redeeming himself. I'm not convinced he is scum anymore but I'd still keep my eye out. The other two players have yet to post anything since they've become top reads, I'm waiting on that. The case for Spag is huge, I'm leaning towards that. It's really the only case so far that has actually made me consider voting something other than no lynch (my previous top choice). I'd currently rate my voting choices at 1. Spag 2. Kickstar 3. FatChunk with a possibility of no lynch if they have sufficient evidence to the contrary. | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
##Vote:No-lynch If I return I will do my best to find a more suitable vote. Until then, adieu! | ||
| ||
