EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
At this moment in time I am swamped catching up on the thread. I had not preciously payed any attention to it and am completely lost as a result. It is night, so this timing is optimal for me to catch up. I'm taking notes on everyone (as always), and on completion of reading the thread I'll have the working parts of a sound analysis if not a pertinent case. I'll be working around the clock to bring this shit in, until then you only have my apology for my lack of real activity. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Lurker: (stage whispers) Lets lurk the lynchers! Spag: *lynches townie that was lurking for no reason* The input so far for a lot of people is insufficient. I am one of those pro-LAL thugs, so if you lurk and you are town YOU WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WEAKENING TOWN. If you are lurking you are wasting opportunities to both scum hunt and prove your innocence as town. IMO there is no scummier behaviour than lurking, I'm half way through the thread and the number of lurkers is spectacular. I even see cannibal lurkers calling each other into the lime-light when all they have up until that point is three or so posts. I trust the man that whispers naught but scummy temptation in my ear more than he who says nothing. If you feel you are in the bottom three most active people, and you are town, you are ACTIVELY handing the game over to scum. I hope for all of our sake you have picked up your activity since page [15]. I'm so sick of games being determined not by good players, but lurker filth. //back to catching up. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Omni you seem to have taken something on board from my defense of Corazon in XXXIII, and Zare you seem to be sheeping the sentiment. (1) - On day one there was no resistance to a lynch on Laguerta. (2) - If Laguerta were scum, his scum buddies would be worried and try and make another bandwagon (C) - Laguerta is not scum. This mirrors my argument in defense of Corazon precisely, though this may not have been causal. I was wrong in making that argument because Corazon was scum and he was being bussed day one. I wasn't incorrect in thinking that at this skill level people are too thick to bus day one, but I did make a massive error which my good friend DP (he is actually my friend in RL and the reason I started play mafia, he is not my good friend because he coaches scum) was so nice as to point out. DP told me: "I was coaching scum and told them to bus Corazon" You see how my theorycrafting failed to take into account that there was a certain level of organisation created by a scum coach being an active participant in both the scum QT, and exerting control via personal messages? If a scum is being bandwagoned hardcore day one, the coach will tell the other scum to let natural selection take its course. I am not going to make a case or vote yet, as I have only read up to [22], but I don't want you thinking for a second that just because Laguerta had seven votes that he is not scum. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Things may have changed since I read this, but I thought I should post immediately because I don't want to be vegi'd, and a good way to stop that happening is by starting a pattern of contribution before he makes his night action (if he exists). I don't want to be vege'd, and I ask that if you do exist, know that I will be among the most active members (last time I even outgunned Mocsta). There will be no lack of information available on me, so I suggest you hit one of the lurkers or demi-lurkers instead. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Mocsta – 4.8 pages with good contribution Oatsmaster – 4.2 pages with good contribution OmniEulogy – 2.7 pages with good contribution Mandalor – 2 pages with decent contribution Shz – 2 pages with average contribution Acid – 1 page with high contribution Zebezt – 1.5 pages with decent contibution Trotske – 1.1 pages with low contribution Zarepath – 1.1 pages with low contribution Laguerta – 8 posts with no content except defence Sno_man – 8 posts with no content except attacking Mocsta Glutio – 6 posts with no content but voting for LaGuerta While this took me 10min to scratch so some of the descriptions may not be entirely accurate, it gives a good indication of why town is fucking confused right now. Mandalor has far more content posted than most of you and he's been dead a while... In fact I've arguably got more actual contribution already than the bottom 3-5 posters, and I've been here like 12 hours or something. I am voting someone from Zebezt down. So one of: - Zebezt - Trotske - Zarepath - Laguerta - Sn0_man - Glutio This is not set in stone, but honestly I know better than to hope that each and everyone of you will participate. You have the option to take yourself off my list simply by lifting your activity. Once I feel that you are actually participating in the game I will not vote you as a result of policy. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
(1) - The most pertinent factor to our current position is that there are SO MANY LURKERS. I have never seen a game this infested with them. A 50% split of lurkers is absolutely pathetic, and you town lurkers (see how there are so many lurkers I can deduce that at least half of them are town) should be ashamed. Your non-involvement in the game is costing the active town by introducing variables that compound their uncertainty. You are a burden and you are losing the game for town. Any activity at all is better than no activity, at least give the other town the opportunity to read and subsequently ignore you before lurking into a coma. (2) - Who is mayor and should there even be one? Mocsta is usually Mayor, and I am delighted to actually see other people stand up to him in this respect. I don't like there being a mayor that is not me, and even then I don't like people that just let me traipse up and take the crown. Mayor is a role that should be reserved for actually confirmed town, otherwise their power as an organising force is significantly depleted by the doubt in the minds of their townie followers. They are also subject to the pitfalls of being human, the same as the rest of us. I've seen more than enough chest-beating to make me think I should keep both Oats and Mocsta on the lynch-later list. If they both continue to contribute at this rate they will burn out and slip if they are scum. I will actively defend both of these people from a lynch day two. (3) - OmniEulogy is confirmed town. He has changed his meta from scummy to actual pro-town. This is a read from a more complex dialogue outside of the game, but put simply: - he has played deliberately scummy in previous games in order to give himself room to work with when he actually rolls scum - I warned him that while I have been avoiding him in game I had decided to tunnel him as I could no longer take the bullshit, along as communicating several reasons for why a better player would play to the best of their ability every game - He improved his style when he did not need to. I was not in the game to tunnel him, and if he rolled scum he would have had three games worth of established scummy play to work with, all but guaranteeing him a scum victory if he rolled scum. If he rolled scum he would be under zero pressure to change his style and we would be looking at a clusterfuck of WIFOM and OMGUS instead of the rational play he is demonstrating. (4) - The lynch was pure chaos. I am yet to go through the exact process of it, and it is unlikely I'll do it tonight (it's 4:00am here), but a lot of emphasis has been put on the part where Oats yells at Mocsta, and Mocsta changes his vote last minute. I don't get a scum-read off either, but this was part of the stuff I skimmed. Mocsta has been known to change his vote last minute in his town games, but has never really justified this action properly. We all need to comb both the events surrounding the lynch, and the upcoming night actions accordingly. (5) - This point is related to some of the others. The active members have been showing cannibal tendencies, and while every one is laughing and brushing the dust off, these things often resurface. Out of the active players, there is likely only one mafia at most, the other two are among the lurkers. Scum will NK one active member per night, if you add to this mislynched active players you are looking at LURKERS vs SCUM for end-game. I don't need to tell you that this will end badly. We need to LAL, and LAL hard. I have no problem keeping the pressure on active members getting them to justify their continued existence, but when it comes to vote time you need to preserve the people that are actually generating discussion. Swallow your hatred and look to the scummiest lurker. (6) - Laguerta. I've already dismantled one reasoning used by Omni and Zare as to why he has to be town. This should put him back to a NULL read. Everyone needs to understand his lie and make their own decisions as to whether it was scummy. I personally find it to be a mildly-scummy read due to a scum in a previous game wanting a no-lynch on day one. The lie does not really affect my read on him, as it's a mistake regardless of whether he is town or scum. On top of his complete lack of contribution, this makes him a strong candidate for a day two lynch in my eyes. I am going to bed, I will likely arise in 8 hours at 12noon, and then have 6 hours before I need to go to badminton which will last until approximately 11:00pm my time. If people have questions for me please bald my name at the top. I don't see the need (/don't have the motive) to write a will like Mocsta's, as it is unlikely I will be killed by scum. I do appreciate his efforts though. I hope you took the time to read my points as I believe there to be at least one of great importance. I look forward to your questions when I wake up. Goodnight. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
@Sn0 While I have a deep appreciation for your contribution, please refrain from making association cases until someone has flipped scum. It's just not efficient to go through the ramifications of every possibility until you actually have something to go on, and this method is incredibly prone to confirmation bias. This is the general consensus of experienced town players, and while I usually have a hard time swallowing the shit they spit out, I really do agree with this bit of wisdom. I look forward to your continued contribution :D gnight | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
@Mocsta. I am certain that Oats killed Glurio. He asked several probing question to town about whether they were suspicious of Glurio. It looks to me as if he wanted to hit the lurker that was garnering the lest attention, and I think he was right in doing so. Do not talk about SK, we have enough newbies here with wild imaginations, let's keep the focus on scum. An SK is probably scarier for scum since they can't control him, it's really a wast of time thinking about SK until we have evidence of his existence. I'm going to go and address some of the questions/suspicions placed on me. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I do not want my LAL to hobby interfere with contributing to the cause. While I vote for lurkers the first two days (no, Mandalore would not have been my choice), I like to set up for day three by pressuring the active members. This pressure is not backed up by a day two vote, but will set the stage for a strong day three. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
This is not a town read of petty scale. I will defend this read, and I want people to know that it is pointless attacking Omni while I am around. I am not someone known for my confidence in my reads, this one I am dead certain of. There is no way that Omni would throw away three compromised town games in order to appear town to someone that he did not know would be in the game. Meta-reads in newbies are generally garbage, but this has mitigating circumstances. I don’t care if you decide not to treat him as confirmed town, I just don’t want anyone wasting their time attacking him. @Zebezt in response to this quote: Did ANYONE think bringaniga was useful the way he was playing? I dont think so. I did. He was trying to foster a town atmosphere by asking people to contribute. Granted, his trolling persona was inexcusable, but he was still doing more for town than 70% of players in the game at that time. @Mocsta I know you’ve come under fire from a lot of vets outside the game for your controlling methods (I also criticised you). At this moment in time, I think the energy you give town is invaluable, so please stop being so damn defensive about every upstart resistance and contribute the best way you know how. Up until now you’ve been so involved in positive self-evaluation and crushing dissenters that you are derailing town and filling the thread with whiny victimised bullshit. While I do have a meta-read on the causal reasons for your butthurtedness, that shit can just as easily be used as a cover for scumming the thread up deliberately. @Sn0 For those curious, I quite simply ignored the mafia game except for 5 mins to read the latest page and toss in my vote. I wasn't "lurking" or "couldn't take the heat". I'm happy to answer direct questions you may have. WTFWTF Want a direct question? What the fuck is this? Am I interpreting this correctly? You just casually ignore the game with no excuse, not because you are lurking but because you DGAF? You’re off my day two LAL list, but you better be able to explain this or you’re a candidate for day three. @Trotske Have you not heard? I am a pretty big deal. LAL is what I live and breathe day 1&2, but I understand your point that my contributions on other fronts have been limited. It may or may not be due to HAVING STARTED 50 HOURS AFTER EVERYONE ELSE. I am aware that I did ask you to contribute and that by going Ad-Hom I would be an enormous hypocrite. That you ask for contribution from someone who has been losing sleep catching up on the thread while you are sitting on a two-page filter after night one is not lost on me. You are contributing now however. If you want to pursue me further you need to post a case stating more than I haven’t done anything other than X. X is more than I see most people doing. Make a case or focus your efforts elsewhere please. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
@Zare and Shz This is not a town read of petty scale. I will defend this read, and I want people to know that it is pointless attacking Omni while I am around. I am not someone known for my confidence in my reads, this one I am dead certain of. There is no way that Omni would throw away three compromised town games in order to appear town to someone that he did not know would be in the game. Meta-reads in newbies are generally garbage, but this has mitigating circumstances. I don’t care if you decide not to treat him as confirmed town, I just don’t want anyone wasting their time attacking him. @Zebezt in response to this quote: Did ANYONE think bringaniga was useful the way he was playing? I dont think so. I did. He was trying to foster a town atmosphere by asking people to contribute. Granted, his trolling persona was inexcusable, but he was still doing more for town than 70% of players in the game at that time. @Mocsta I know you’ve come under fire from a lot of vets outside the game for your controlling methods (I also criticised you). At this moment in time, I think the energy you give town is invaluable, so please stop being so damn defensive about every upstart resistance and contribute the best way you know how. Up until now you’ve been so involved in positive self-evaluation and crushing dissenters that you are derailing town and filling the thread with whiny victimised bullshit. While I do have a meta-read on the causal reasons for your butthurtedness, that shit can just as easily be used as a cover for scumming the thread up deliberately. @Sn0 For those curious, I quite simply ignored the mafia game except for 5 mins to read the latest page and toss in my vote. I wasn't "lurking" or "couldn't take the heat". I'm happy to answer direct questions you may have. WTFWTF Want a direct question? What the fuck is this? Am I interpreting this correctly? You just casually ignore the game with no excuse, not because you are lurking but because you DGAF? You’re off my day two LAL list, but you better be able to explain this or you’re a candidate for day three. @Trotske Have you not heard? I am a pretty big deal. LAL is what I live and breathe day 1&2, but I understand your point that my contributions on other fronts have been limited. It may or may not be due to HAVING STARTED 50 HOURS AFTER EVERYONE ELSE. I am aware that I did ask you to contribute and that by going Ad-Hom I would be an enormous hypocrite. That you ask for contribution from someone who has been losing sleep catching up on the thread while you are sitting on a two-page filter after night one is not lost on me. You are contributing now however. If you want to pursue me further you need to post a case stating more than I haven’t done anything other than X. X is more than I see most people doing. Make a case or focus your efforts elsewhere please. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I have some opinions on your case on Zarepath, but I'll allow him to answer for himself before I post. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
How does At this moment in time, I think the energy you give town is invaluable, so please stop being so damn defensive about every upstart resistance and contribute the best way you know how elicit a response like In the meantime, I am going to take a step back from trying to lead discussion, I hope this will give others the incentive to step up and contribute more. I want you to be active, but cut the crap. Are you so certain that the entirety of your contribution is crap that in order to cut said crap you must stop posting? I want you there on day three because you are active, and if you are scum you will slip as a result. If you downgrade your activity I will shit on you for motivated lurking. It is clear that I want you to stop wasting time being a victim, and I am not the only person with these thoughts. You are not responsible for other people lurking, but you are responsible for hiding their posts with tirades of self-pitying crap. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
See that you do. That was one of the single worst explanations for lurking I've ever seen. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Feel free to suspect me, but please stop looking to solve the game in one glorious glance of insight before a single red-flip. Such a feat speaks more of phenomenal luck than talent, and the pursuit of such an objective inhibits useful scum-hunting methods and clogs up the thread. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
That sounds more reasonable. I apologise for over-reacting. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I had assumed that when you did start posting, you would be continuing that pattern from now on. The Stuff you posted was seemed good, but you still have the smallest filter. I know this is a backflip since you weren't on my list of people under pressure, but your complete lack of activity is giving you the smallest filter, and a town shouldn't feel that he needs to be pressed into doing town activity. I want to see more from you, so while this is a vote that does have intention to lynch, it is conditional in that I will remove it the second you start contributing properly again. ##Vote: Acid | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I know this isn’t the most important topic to comment on, but I feel I’ve got some things to say here. By reviewing a review I effectively get to appraise two people with one post. I will make up for it soon with some OC I promise. + Show Spoiler + On January 15 2013 06:24 zarepath wrote: I am posting all of my reads right now because I'd like to do so before the end of N1 and I'm not confident that I'll be around/have the time to do so closer to the deadline. These are reads, not full claims, and so I welcome any argument/discussion about them. But they're all based on me reading through the entire thread, and the entire filter for each person. Hi guys I've contributed nothing but I'm totally worried about being NK'd for no reason that I can think of. Probably worried about being Vigi'd? Dunno but this post seems a bit weird. Not seriously off though, I can see townie zare writing this A will is always a good thing to post. While I can’t begin to imagine why he would be night-killed, I don’t see any scum motive behind this decision so it is irrelevant. Laguerta + Show Spoiler + He just seems very rough, and very inactive, but not in a tone that seems to imply intended inactivity, but one of pure laziness. It's clear he did not work very hard at his contributions Day 1, and that, combined with the ease of the Laguerta Lynch, suggests to me that he is TOWN. I'm still unsure that lag is town. He is/was merely a terrible player (see TeMil last game) Laguerta was a smurf. I can’t see a reason why a smurf would come into a thread and be as lazy as he was unless it was calculated. This calculation could have been prior to rolling his alignment, but I doubt he was as shit as he seemed. Are we allowed to know who the smurf was owned by If we can find out who the smurf was, we can make an informed decision as to whether they would lurk in game. It could be Threesr coming back for more, but I think it’s more likely it’s some vet that wanted to fuck with us. + Show Spoiler + Sn0_Man His inactivity immediately puts him on the side of scum, then he has a full "review post" of the chaotic final hour of the lynch. His cases have not been rigorous, his biggest case (against Troske) involves a lot of association and hypothetical scenarios. But he's the only one really pushing Troske and it does seem like he's trying to figure things out. I don't see enough to put him firmly in one camp or the other, so I consider him someone to watch. Wheee its me. I'm not gonna comment on other's reads except that "inactivity puts him on the side of scum" isn't right. Lurkers aren't helping town, but that doesn't necessarily make them scum (just bad town). Zarepath is right in thinking that lurking = scummy. It’s not 100% chance (the game would be too easy), but lurkers are more likely to be scum than active town. There is little reason for a scum team to have more than one active member, and it’s worse to mislynch an active townie than it is to mislynch a lurker. On top of this, Zare’s post soft-pressures people not to lurk, which is more townish than not doing so. Zare was right to note your lurkiness, but fortunately for all involved, you have reversed this trend so it is no longer a factor. + Show Spoiler + Oats I voted for him yesterday, but after going through his filter today, he oddly seems to be the most valuable townie we have right now. He has pressured more people than anyone else, which HAS led to discussion. I don't see scum motivations for his behavior other than the free use of his voting power, and erratically switching it around until he finally liked where it rested. That seems to fit with his play style, however, so I don't think that is enough for a scum read, even along with the fact that he was immediately aggressive towards Mocsta -- that seems to be a trend in this game, and it's not necessarily unwarranted. Feels like TOWN In light of the NK, its clear what Oats had been doing all along. I too feel like this 180 by zare *could* be a case of "oh we are NK'ing him? time to get buddy buddy" but it certainly isn't proof. We now interrupt our regular programming to bring you his previous vote for Oats: + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 12:35 zarepath wrote: ##Vote Oatsmaster Has not been helpful towards town, was an active scum player in another game (so not necessarily a lurker scum), has unvoted FOUR times, most recently very late in the day when it was almost assured that Laguerta would be lynched regardless. His reasoning? "He's scummy but he's not here to defend himself. I'm gonna go vote for someone that nobody else is voting for and will definitely not get lynched, so when Laguerta flips town, I look good." (Okay, so not his literal read, but a possible motivation was thrown in there.) His timing and his lack of reasoning worry me, and I find him to be far more likely to be scum than Laguerta. This is a massive backflip and should garner attention. I’m not sure if Zarepath has responded to this as I have not read past the post I am responding to yet, but if he hasn’t he bloody well should. I can see both a town and scum explanation for this, just as you have outlined Sn0, but this does increase my read on Zare somewhat. + Show Spoiler + On January 15 2013 06:24 zarepath wrote: Mocsta Has been as active as I would expect based on his meta, but he is a lot more defensive this time around. After reading filters, I would suggest that's because there are people here deliberately pushing his buttons. It's frustrating how his various defenses clutter the thread and half the time are filled with re-quotes of himself or others, and then there's also the fact that his vote sealed Mandalor's doom. However, I don't find it likely that mafia would switch their vote so that the FINAL vote for a lynch is one of their own. That does not seem like good scum play -- although as I noted earlier, if he were scum and resting his vote on Laguerta even after Oats yelled at him, that may look more suspicious. Perhaps he HAD to vote for Mandalor. However, he'd already suspected Mandalor earlier in the day. So I would not call him a confirmed town, but I still have an overall TOWN read on him. Seems like an honest assessment. If I'm scum though, I'm calling Mocsta town 10/10 because again I think he is kidna making their lives easier. I think you (Sn0) overestimate how much Mocsta by himself damages town. It may be true that he threw one game away, but the forward trajectory he lends town is valuable. He might be in a bit of a rut ATM due to harsh assessment, but as town I will always decide to keep him around until at least day 3 or 4 (not a soft-claim, when I am town I always keep Mocsta around despite our in-fighting). I actually like Zare’s initial post more than your response to it. Nobody called anyone 10/10 town, and Zare’s post is actually a very clear analysis that I can’t find anything to add to. + Show Spoiler + OmniEulogy OE has largely been a voice of reason this game when the last game he seemed a lot more emotional. Part of me worries that he was intending to be reasonable as soon as he becomes mafia, but his contributions have all been town-motivated from my perspective. He has pressured people, defended others fairly well, and done some thorough analysis. I have a slight TOWN read on him. I'd love to see examples etc here but I suppose the post has to be a human length. I can't find real fault in this analysis I would like to see Omni do more for town, as while I read him as 9.5/10 town, he is not pressing anyone particularly strongly. He knows he has some town credit, he shouldn’t just leave it in the bank. + Show Spoiler + Well, being first on Mandalor is a BAD thing, given that mandalor was a mislynch. He also defended laguerta wayyyy hard which seems dubious to me. His voting logic was horrible and he was clearly taking the easy lynch on kush at the start. I'm not sure how this feels town but I suppose "noob" excuses everything? You guys already know I think Trotske is scummy I haven’t checked Trotske as I didn’t see it as a valuable use of my time. Anything I said would be seen as WIFOM, and I couldn’t really see much on his filter to talk about. If there is a wagon forming I will need to go trawl his filter and get informed *grumble*. Sn0 finishes up his analysis with a look at Zare’s voting history, all of which I agree with. I’ll finish with some responses to some of the things Sn0 has said relating to myself: + Show Spoiler + I'm somewhat worried about Spag's LAL drive today actually. As much as I'd like everybody to contribute a serious amount (rofl just 2 pages overnight o.O), I'm not sure we have the time. If there are 3 mafia (or 2 mafia 1 SK), which seems reasonable for a 13 player game, we have exactly 1 free mislynch before GG (unless we have a JK/Doc who has sick reads on mafia/targets). DO you want me to go over my reasons for LAL day two? I don’t want to repeat them, but I have good reasons. I don’t want to further clutter the thread with them, but I honestly think killing lurkers is better scum-hunting for day one and two than going and lynching an active player. It’s meeting more resistance this game, but I think that is because I did not have the opportunity to establish my intentions early on day one. Also, I would like to note that it is unlikely that scum have any number of members but three. The traditional ratio of scum/town is 1/3, which would mean an SK would come out of the town numbers IMO. Taking away one scum also means taking a large percentage of their numbers, but taking one town wouldn't change too quite as much. + Show Spoiler + I mean, I'd love for everybody to be active, but I'm not sure that is gonna work. And spag, I know you are experienced, but that is the most WIFOM argument for Omni being town... My argument for Omni being town is not WIFOM. It is a calculated insight into his motives. I’m not sure exactly how you think it is WIFOM, but I’m not terribly interested. So long as you understand that you’ll meet resistance if you target Omni for a lynch, I don’t care what you think of my reasoning. Omni is currently under no pressure, so let’s not talk about this again until he is. I'm also only on my fourth game, so I'm probably not as experienced as you've assumed. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
On January 16 2013 17:45 zebezt wrote: @Spaghetticus: You were the most active player during your last game. You seem to post significantly less now. Why the change of playstyle? [b]. @Zebest Several reasons. Firstly, my prolific post-count has been getting me ignored. I often find when suspicion is placed upon me, I am unable to defend myself because even though my words are logical, there have been far too many of them and people become desensitized and unable to differentiate the important from the unimportant. I have made a meta-decision to remain in the top posters of content, but to take the post-count back a notch. Secondly, I am having difficulty getting a feel this game. Usually I have two more days to wrap my head around who people are and how they act. The content of this game is low for a lot of players and I'm finding it difficult to tell the lurkers apart. Thirdly, a lot of people are asking for reads on me, but don't seem interested in asking me questions. While I understand that both: a) you are asking me a question now and b) good town should not need to be prompted into action The interaction component is not there, and this slows my input. Fourthly, real world problems. I am having massive oversleeping issue (sleeping 12 hours a day uninterrupted), and spend two hours at the gym almost everyday (though not today). I have less time in the day than I normally would, and so the number of posts goes down. + Show Spoiler + I realise that I totally overdid my answer, it was a pretty minimalist question | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Well done, I will now read your case  | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
(in bullet points) (1) - I think Trotske's attempt to hinder overt aggression comes off as town. In a game where everyone is experienced would say the opposite, but a big part of getting reads is allowing people to speak, and the aggro was preventing this as a result of people not being used to it. (2) - His quality and quantity is not up to scratch, and his attacks on other people for their low quality/quantity, is hypocritical, but not scummy. If you take away a lurker's ability to call out other lurkers, you are basically limiting their options for input. This is not good if you want lurkers to step up. (3) - His case on Sn0 is bullshit from a current perspective, but may not have been terrible fro the time he posted. I don't really want to backtrack that hard into the thread but I will if Trotske's lynch develops, in which case I will need to know where I stand. (4) - his indecision is scummy in an experienced game, but is also normal for a lot of newbies. I think we should pressure him to make real decisions so he can't backflip, but shouldn't read too much into it unless he continues. (5) - in regard to his FoS on me. I can only think that he has some idea of my meta, and that I did not meet those expectations. He was right in that I over-reacted, as it was only a FoS. I think instead of a FoS he should have pointed out my single-mindedness and asked me to contribute in a way he can appreciate, but w/e. I understand that if you don't value lurkerbeating, then my contributions would look pretty small. Other than the five point above I am pretty much in full agreement with your case. Good work. I was already fairly convinced just from his general lack of output (LAL). He's already on my 'dar, and he's already under pressure. I don't think I will vote to lynch him just yet, as with him already pressured, it's my job to pull the next lurker up by the ears, and I'll need my vote threat to do that. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Shz Zebezt Trotske Zarepath Presence on this list does not mean I have looked into your happenings, it just means I have not eliminated you from my possible lynches yet. If everyone on this list proves themselves then I will draw up a new, more inclusive list. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
@Trostske I sincerely apologise for reacting to your FoS on me the way I did. Please do not let this discourage you from posting as much as you can. I was wrong to do this, I misread the FoS as something more than it was meant to be. @Zebezt I appreciate the etiquette, but you need to drop the kiddie gloves and come out swinging bare knuckle. While shit slinging can be detrimental if it outlives it's usefulness, being too nice makes everyone think you are manipulative. Most people have ingrained heuristics to target nice people, and for a very good reason. In XXXIII I was the nice guy who just wanted town to get along and work together. I was lynched day one, and have since reverted to the asshole internet persona you see before you. I regret that being nice seems to hurt town, but if you wanna play mafia you just need to accept it and move on. The both of you need to take some hard positions that town can work with in order to read you. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
You are both equal in my eyes, but Trotske is already coming under fire, so I thought I would exert pressure on you instead. The onus is now on you to improve your play beyond Trotske's, and preferably beyond that of Shz and Zare. I am hoping that some action happens soon. I have difficulty keeping track of the different times and not, but I believe the lynch is in Approx 12 hours? This will likely mean more abusive sleeping patterns for me, but I will attempt to be awake three hours prior to the deadline to try and control the lynch. I suggest you all do the same if possible. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
1) - Have a vote on someone and a reason why. If you sheep (sheep:// verb meaning to follow someone else's reasoning without contributing, not a spell of polymorph  ) your vote will not count as contribution or taking a hard stance. It is the way of scum to not take hard positions on things, and sheeping is really the absence of a position.2) - Evaluate the cases against other people who's heads are on the block. You are not looking to simply vote anyone but you, you are trying to establish yourself as town, as well as land a scum lynch. If you manage to survive today but have not contributed any real thought, your head will be on the block tomorrow and we will have to repeat. Having to spend time on hunting lazy town hurts only town. Your number one priority is to establish your innocence, and this is achieved by hunting scum and contributing thoughts. I would go through your filter and force you to contribute by asking you specific questions, but this would effectively kill Troske. Other than you being likable, I currently have no reason to value you over Troske and so I offer only general tips that apply to you both. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I know you love to build suspense, but could you please release some details of who you are planning a case on? It's more time efficient for me since I'm about to hit the sack, I can stop doing sweet fuck all now and start evaluating their input without your influence. I'll have a good idea of where my thoughts lie, and can read your case in the morning. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
...Mocsta... I appreciate the effort... I really do, but really? I haven't given it the attention it deserves yet, but a brief overview was all I needed to see more wishful conditionals than a new earth creationism convention. I'm going to bed. Note to newbies struggling for content: tear this case down. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
##Vote: Trotske | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Book-keeping: Why did Spag quick-switch? Let's ignore the fact that I was blatantly wrong not to vote for Mocsta for just a second. Recall that I was: (1) - Going to lynch one of the lurkiest players (2) - Was going to wake up in order to control the lynch (3) - Had already short-listed Zebezt and Troske When I woke up at 10:00, I believe there was Acid and I on Zebezt, two on Mocsta, and two on Troske. Now, while I did not want Mocsta lynched, I did not particularly care who got lynched between Zebezt and Troske. At two votes each, I could leave it at 2/2/2, or exercise my influence on the vote, and make it 3/2/1 making it significantly less likely that Mocsta got voted. While I was wrong, and glad I was was, as Mocsta making power plays end-game with no fear of being inspected could pretty much instawin scum the game, my reasoning is the same as pretty much every other day one/two lynch I've ever done. I don't get my first choice of lynch because I don't wield that much influence, so I need to settle for going for the next best thing: protecting the people I consider more catchable/valuable end-game. Acid is absolutely correct to expect me to step up and start taking names, the time has truly passed for LAL. I will note that I have a commitment to my Mother to go down to my hometown and supervise some Youth reachout gig at 5pm tomorrow for an unspecified amount of time. I don't have a license and the public transport is terrifyingly bad, often taking a lot longer than it should. This will hinder my contribution somewhat, but should not be too big of a deal. I will reallocate my time spent on rousing lurkers to making cases. I'm going to go and gorge on lasagna and cider to celebrate, this is a big win peops! | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Your point about his small filter is already a known. Transport has been resolved for my commitment tomorrow, so it shouldn't be too big an obstacle to my continued contribution. I'm going to go to the gym and think. I'll try and pursue my reads when I get back in 2-3 hours. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Some of Mocsta's words were undoubtedly intention, while some were used to conceal his machinations. This So we pick the parts of his thought process that are conveniant to your theory and ignore the rest? Presumes that his words were either all fluff or all intention, which is very unlikely. Theorizing as to which parts were intention and which bits were fluff is sort of all we can do. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Switching last minute is not as scummy as people think. There are plenty of town motives that explain such action. I have done it in every game I remember (all of them town). Your heuristic that most vote switches are scummy is incorrect. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
My Day Two Voting Explanation Post + Show Spoiler + Book-keeping: Why did Spag quick-switch? Let's ignore the fact that I was blatantly wrong not to vote for Mocsta for just a second. Recall that I was: (1) - Going to lynch one of the lurkiest players (2) - Was going to wake up in order to control the lynch (3) - Had already short-listed Zebezt and Troske When I woke up at 10:00, I believe there was Acid and I on Zebezt, two on Mocsta, and two on Troske. Now, while I did not want Mocsta lynched, I did not particularly care who got lynched between Zebezt and Troske. At two votes each, I could leave it at 2/2/2, or exercise my influence on the vote, and make it 3/2/1 making it significantly less likely that Mocsta got voted. While I was wrong, and glad I was was, as Mocsta making power plays end-game with no fear of being inspected could pretty much instawin scum the game, my reasoning is the same as pretty much every other day one/two lynch I've ever done. I don't get my first choice of lynch because I don't wield that much influence, so I need to settle for going for the next best thing: protecting the people I consider more catchable/valuable end-game. Acid is absolutely correct to expect me to step up and start taking names, the time has truly passed for LAL. I will note that I have a commitment to my Mother to go down to my hometown and supervise some Youth reachout gig at 5pm tomorrow for an unspecified amount of time. I don't have a license and the public transport is terrifyingly bad, often taking a lot longer than it should. This will hinder my contribution somewhat, but should not be too big of a deal. I will reallocate my time spent on rousing lurkers to making cases. I'm going to go and gorge on lasagna and cider to celebrate, this is a big win peops! I believe it was Zarepath who complained that I hadn't justified my actions (It might have been Acid). This was wrong. My justification is strong, and I believe that if I had acted any other way I would have been acting to the detriment of Town (with the information available). I have done similar moves in previous games, and given the same scenario I would do the same again. Someone stated they didn't like me saying I didn't care who died between Zebezt and Trotske. At the time I had equal reads on both, and they are still on my 'dar with the addition of JSL. I really didn't care which one was lynched, I think narrowing my scope down to two people is sufficient. I never have the confidence in my scum reads others seem to have (yes I'm talking about previous games), I am known for my cautious scum reads, and voting for reasons other than tunneling the one person. I believe Shz or Zarepath can give you the meta-read. The interplay between myself and Mocsta was more cautious than normal. We just threw away XXXIV with in-fighting between Mocsta and myself, his jabs throughout the entirety of that game being damnright nasty. That he approached me with what I interpreted as some composed humour this time around was a relief. I wanted Mocsta around day Three, as I didn't think there was any chance of him slipping past us if he were scum come day three. I mean, could you honestly see him surviving given that last big case? At the time I voted, I had skimmed over it the night before, given some denunciation to make sure that it didn't gain traction in the eyes of some of the newer players, and went to sleep. When I voted in the morning, I voted without rereading the case (it was even worse than what I thought), switched my vote to improve the chances of me getting my way, and went straight back to sleep. I don't know if I would have switched my vote to Mocsta if I had reread the case, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't. --- Two out of my three biggest town-reads died in the night: Sn0 and Omni. This leaves only Shz as confirmed town in my eyes. There is no way that he would make the hammer vote on Mocsta if he were scum, the bus was too unnecessary. The only way Shz is scum is if Trotske is also scum. That way, Shz was choosing which of his buddies to lynch, not whether to lynch one of his buddies. If Trotske flips town, Shz is confirmed town 100% no question. Of who I think is scum, I think at least one is hiding among Trotske, Zebezt, and JSL. I'm leaning towards Trotske in this position based off Mocsta's erratic behaviour. Town was in a bad position prior to Mocsta's lynch, three deaths in one cycle is bad. Why would Mocsta act so erratic if there wasn't another scum on the chopping block? If there was only town up for killing, all he had to do was play consistently and we would dig ourselves an even deeper hole. Instead he stepped up and made a bizarre case against a strongly confirmed town. Scum are more than capable of bussing their buddies, but why would Mocsta take such massive risks to protect someone that was town? It looks to me as if he was making a distraction to try and destabilize the vote on a buddy. Voting Troske now also has the benefit of establishing Shz as 100% town if he does flip green, and gives us a strong lead on a third scum if he flips red. ##Vote: Trotske I will be open to discussion when I get back, but I need to start packing and make my way to the bus-stop. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I am absolutely fireoutmyfuckingfingers FURIOUS at the family drama and little brats squealing to One Direction I’ve been dealing with for the last 24 hours, so I apologise in advance for any hurt feelings. I’m going to try and keep it reasonable, I really just want to go to bed but don’t want to hand this game away. I’ll now go through the somewhat dull two pages of filter that I missed out on. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
"Too scummy to be scum" play happens all the time, and if they are not LALed they generally persist until the endgame. Nobody wants to waste a vote on someone that is THAT stupid. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I like lists, I’m glad to see a fellow enthusiast. But should we let our hobbies get in the way of being the extraordinary citizens we aspire to? NO. Your contributions since the lynch have been posting lists, riding my wagon and posting half-hearted reads. + Show Spoiler + Spag Before Spag, in the beginning, there was Bringaniga, one of the few people that Mocsta was relatively silent on. If I recall correctly, Mocsta even soft-defended Bringaniga, telling people to lay off until we saw what he produced. Upon Spag's entrance, not much interaction except for Mocsta's enormous "FU" (twice) to him, to which Spag responded fairly meekly. So while Spag was critical of Mocsta, it almost seemed a token resistance, while Mocsta's response was very dramatic but didn't draw an equal response from Spag. If you compound that with Spag's vague criticism of Mocsta's case (after it was clear nobody liked it), and then Spag's voting behavior D2, I can see a Spag scum. Your ‘deep’ analysis into the interaction between myself and Mocsta is wind. Me and Mocsta were playing our third game in a row, the previous two of which we had both rolled town and Mocsta got my arse mislynched both games. Last game he was absolutely fucking brutal in his smear campaign, and this game it looked like he was going to let me get to day three without calling the lynch squad on me. I was confident that Mocsta would be caught if he was scum, as his play is transparent due to his posting style. There was no need for me to gun him except when he fucked up. Why would Mocsta not come at me? Maybe because he knows that drawing the attention of someone who had played two games with him previously would get him spotted? Maybe he knows that when he comes at me, he knows that he comes off worse due to his arguments being smears, and mine being based on formal logic? Maybe he was planning on having me killed soon and didn’t want to encourage me to speak up on him? Maybe he wanted me to look bad by deliberately scumming our interactions? I don’t know precisely what goes through Mocsta’s head, but I think he knew there was no way he would stay alive come late game if I was in the game. I’ve been watching his style, and he mine. While the kill on Mocsta was massive, it was a day or two earlier than it would have been (at most), and he’s managed to throw town into disarray regardless of the timing. Can you not see why I wanted him around longer? Without me and Mocsta pushing, this thread has died and town has stagnated. That you implicated Shz here: + Show Spoiler + Shz The only times Shz and Mocsta really interact with each other is during N1 directly after Mocsta's hammer on Mandalor. Shz eventually calls it off by saying "whatever," and his questioning wasn't incredibly insightful. I can see a Mafia QT realizing that Mocsta would be the final vote on Mandalor and say, "One of us should be the first to call Mocsta out on it." This, of course, is hypothetical. But note Mocsta later calling Shz his "prime interrogator" a day later, when Shz hasn't interrogated him on anything since. Why is Shz his prime interrogator when others are pressuring Mocsta much more? My thought is perhaps that was a staged interaction that Mocsta is relying on to break associations. The main problem with this FoS is the fact that Shz was the final vote that brought Mocsta down. Even if this were a choice between two fellow mafia (Mocsta and Trotske, hypothetically), I don't understand why mafia would rather lynch their godfather than a non-godfather (unless it is a RBer and they consider that more useful; although nobody claimed RB N1 but Mocsta, so the likelihood of this goes down). So his vote certainly makes this a weaker FoS, but he is one of the few people that Mocsta let get away free for much of the game. Is… ridiculous. Shz is town, why would he be in your top-reads? Do you read anyone, ANYONE, as more town than Shz? If not, why would you mention Shz? If so, who and why? Next: JSL + Show Spoiler + Mocsta was after Mandalor for much of Day 1, and voted for Mandalor before he voted for Laguerta before switching back to Mandalor. Is it conceivable that Mocsta was bandwagon bussing Laguerta, seeing as how poorly he was performing, and then switched back to Mandalor when the opportunity was there? Compounding this are Mocsta's reads that he's 100% sure that Laguerta was mafia, but that we shouldn't vote for him; we should vote for Trotske, who was defending Laguerta. (When Trotske flips town, perhaps that will then clear Laguerta?) Others have mentioned this, but only scum know 100% that another scum is scum. He has also called Laguerta a bad townie, showing his stance on him isn't exactly constant. (Which could be true of mafia's stance on any townie, however.) Compounding this is Laguerta/Jacob's vote for NO ONE Day 2, which makes sense in the circumstances, but also allows him some convenient escape from having to answer for his vote while also not voting for Mocsta. What are you even saying because I’m not even sure I understand you anymore? Why would you think that Mocsta (a 100% Mafia) would give a 100% read on someone truthfully? Is that what you are saying? How is it not what you are saying? Why thefuckonearth would Mocsta mention another scum in such a way as to draw any attention to them whatsoever? + Show Spoiler + Mocsta's first mention of Spag -- defending his list post from Trotske: ________________________________________ On January 15 2013 11:39 Mocsta wrote________________________________________ Personally. I found his attempt at a re-cap: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=29#580 to be the most impartial analysis of the Day1 events. Most people that tried to summarise, had the perception skewed towards their goals.. (e.g. Shz with me.. and Sn0_man with Trotske etc etc). Hence.. I found this post useful, I'm surprised you dont care to mention it as a meaningful contribution? Further on in the same post, he gives more defense and a soft town read on Spag as he encourages Spag to target lurkers. Note that he claims that Spag's LAL posts include "original thought": I did have original thought. Part of having original thoughts is looking for them in places others have not drained dry. + Show Spoiler + @OmniEulogy and to a lesser extent Zarepath Omni you seem to have taken something on board from my defense of Corazon in XXXIII, and Zare you seem to be sheeping the sentiment. (1) - On day one there was no resistance to a lynch on Laguerta. (2) - If Laguerta were scum, his scum buddies would be worried and try and make another bandwagon (C) - Laguerta is not scum. This mirrors my argument in defense of Corazon precisely, though this may not have been causal. I was wrong in making that argument because Corazon was scum and he was being bussed day one. I wasn't incorrect in thinking that at this skill level people are too thick to bus day one, but I did make a massive error which my good friend DP (he is actually my friend in RL and the reason I started play mafia, he is not my good friend because he coaches scum) was so nice as to point out. DP told me: "I was coaching scum and told them to bus Corazon" You see how my theorycrafting failed to take into account that there was a certain level of organisation created by a scum coach being an active participant in both the scum QT, and exerting control via personal messages? If a scum is being bandwagoned hardcore day one, the coach will tell the other scum to let natural selection take its course. I am not going to make a case or vote yet, as I have only read up to [22], but I don't want you thinking for a second that just because Laguerta had seven votes that he is not scum. + Show Spoiler + (3) - OmniEulogy is confirmed town. He has changed his meta from scummy to actual pro-town. This is a read from a more complex dialogue outside of the game, but put simply: - he has played deliberately scummy in previous games in order to give himself room to work with when he actually rolls scum - I warned him that while I have been avoiding him in game I had decided to tunnel him as I could no longer take the bullshit, along as communicating several reasons for why a better player would play to the best of their ability every game - He improved his style when he did not need to. I was not in the game to tunnel him, and if he rolled scum he would have had three games worth of established scummy play to work with, all but guaranteeing him a scum victory if he rolled scum. If he rolled scum he would be under zero pressure to change his style and we would be looking at a clusterfuck of WIFOM and OMGUS instead of the rational play he is demonstrating. + Show Spoiler + @Mocsta. I am certain that Oats killed Glurio. He asked several probing question to town about whether they were suspicious of Glurio. It looks to me as if he wanted to hit the lurker that was garnering the lest attention, and I think he was right in doing so. These are all things I say first. I fucking changed your mind on Laguerta being confirmed town. How do I do that by repeating posts? On top of this shit you post you go on to talk about reaction scales between myself and the MocFather. This is garbage based on the super-scientific art of Tunneling like a wombat. There is nothing wrong with applying pressure, but this is wasting time. I’ll take this back if a single person comes forward and agrees that your step by heart-throbbing step analysis to our interaction is useful in confirming their opinion of me. + Show Spoiler + Further on in the same post, he gives more defense and a soft town read on Spag as he encourages Spag to target lurkers. Note that he claims that Spag's LAL posts include "original thought": ________________________________________ On January 15 2013 11:39 Mocsta wrote: @Trotske Spaghetticus identified you as as a low post count, low quality contributer. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=29#570 You have reciprocated by saying he is only targetting lurkers, and therefore he is a cause for concern. Why would this behaviour be scummy motivated? ________________________________________ @Spaghetticus I want to see more from you. I think coming in as a replacement and providing a through summary - that includes original thought is a good sign of your alignment. However, we are now in Day2, and I am going to be watching your actions carefully. Its easy to say you are targeting lurkers, but I want to see this followed through. Actions need to speak louder than words. I ask that you begin to lead the discussions on one your identified scummy-ish lurkers. i.e. ________________________________________ Show nested quote + ________________________________________ ________________________________________ Now, the next time he interacts with Spag (directly or indirectly), it's quite different: ________________________________________ On January 15 2013 13:30 Mocsta wrote: ________________________________________ Show nested quote + ________________________________________ [Let me clear my system] Go fuck yourself.. (thats for you antagonizing me constantly in Newbie 34 I have spent the whole Night1 under the gun, and explaining my actions. And you come into the thread and say im scumming the thread up.. + Show Spoiler + [System cleared] ________________________________________ ________________________________________ This was Mocsta's second mention of Spag, and it's QUITE strong. Note Spag's soft town claim of Mocsta mixed with a criticism, within quotes. Note that while Mocsta strongly rejects Spag's criticism of him, he doesn't call HIM out for being overly critical of active townies and suggest he's scum, as Mocsta did with Oats and Acid and Zarepath and Shz (although this was mostly implied). When someone responds with an enormous "FU," twice, to your criticism of them, what's the appropriate reaction? It's apparently to not call him scummy: ________________________________________ On January 15 2013 13:43 Spaghetticus wrote: WTF RLY? How does ________________________________________ Show nested quote + ________________________________________ elicit a response like ________________________________________ Show nested quote + ________________________________________ I want you to be active, but cut the crap. Are you so certain that the entirety of your contribution is crap that in order to cut said crap you must stop posting? I want you there on day three because you are active, and if you are scum you will slip as a result. If you downgrade your activity I will shit on you for motivated lurking. It is clear that I want you to stop wasting time being a victim, and I am not the only person with these thoughts. You are not responsible for other people lurking, but you are responsible for hiding their posts with tirades of self-pitying crap. ________________________________________ I read disproportionate reactions from these two to each other, both in relation to what the other person said and in relation to their normal reactions to others in the game. This post (mine, here) does not even attempt to go into Spag's endorsement of Mocsta's case on me, or his voting behavior, or lack of cases on who the other 2 scum are. (Really, if he were actually going after scum, he would ASSUME I were scum, because if he supposedly knows he's not scum, then he has to assume that I was backing Mocsta up by voting for Trotske. Where is Spag's case on me? Shouldn't I be the most obvious scum to him if he's NOT scum? NO, instead he has a convoluted case which main goal is to confirm someone town.) I post this now because I think people are overlooking the importance of analyzing his interactions with the one person we KNOW to have been scum. The thing about Mocsta that you seem to forget is that while he self-destructed this game, he is not and idiot, and he WAS SCUM when all of these interactions occurred. I pulled Mocsta up when I thought he was wrong. Every read you have on me from interactions with him is based on post-hoc reasoning that for some reason assumes his intention was innocent when HE WAS THE MOTHERFUCKING GODFATHER. + Show Spoiler + Contradictions in Spag's defense and case of Trotske ________________________________________ On January 18 2013 12:51 Spaghetticus wrote: The interplay between myself and Mocsta was more cautious than normal. We just threw away XXXIV with in-fighting between Mocsta and myself, his jabs throughout the entirety of that game being damnright nasty. That he approached me with what I interpreted as some composed humour this time around was a relief. ________________________________________ Mocsta's composed humour to Spag: ________________________________________ On January 15 2013 13:30 Mocsta wrote: [Let me clear my system] Go fuck yourself.. (thats for you antagonizing me constantly in Newbie 34 I have spent the whole Night1 under the gun, and explaining my actions. And you come into the thread and say im scumming the thread up.. + Show Spoiler + [System cleared] ________________________________________ There's some dissonance between how Spag just described Mocsta's interactions with him in his defense, and how Mocsta ACTUALLY interacted with him. Other contradiction: Spag's number one town read: ________________________________________ On January 18 2013 12:51 Spaghetticus wrote: Two out of my three biggest town-reads died in the night: Sn0 and Omni. This leaves only Shz as confirmed town in my eyes... If Trotske flips town, Shz is confirmed town 100% no question... ...Voting Troske now also has the benefit of establishing Shz as 100% town if he does flip green, and gives us a strong lead on a third scum if he flips red. ________________________________________ Note that of his three strongest town reads, two just died, and he's so certain of his other town read that he wants to go confirm him town by lynching someone(?). Again, disproportionate responses. And again, if he were actually looking for scum, he'd be all over my filter because I was the other person to vote with Mocsta, and surely SOME other mafia would have voted with Mocsta to defend him, right? What the shit are you speaking? How is my description not apt? If you think Mocsta was in any way antagonising me you are dead fucking wrong. When Mocsta comes at me he comes at me with Ad Hom in the left hand and an aids corrupted needle in the other. He was posturing to defend himself without starting war. As for the reads on Omni and Sn0, this was no big claim. Omni WAS on my town list and I came under fire for saying so. Sn0 was very obviously town once he came out of lurker phase, and of you read any different then you are desperately bad at mafia. Shz is confirmed town based on his actions pertaining to Mocsta’s death. These were all knowns to me. Wouldn’t a mafia try and throw their town read out before the guys dies, then reap the benefits? Why would I CHOOSE as a mafia to let someone die, and then call them a strong town read, when I would have the power to do better? This was a small explanatory claim for me, the state of the game was changing faster than my understanding of it, making it difficult to make strong reads of quality. You keep saying this word: disproportionate responses. It appears to me that every time I want to DO something it is a disproportionate response, and every time I don’t I am lurking and breaking promises. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
On January 18 2013 01:49 zarepath wrote: I should think that me being Mocsta's #1 scum target during N1, when he thinks he has control of town, in addition to his constant following-up on his case of me with multiple other people during D2, should clear me. Note that Spag was one of the only people to really back Mocsta's case on me, and while he did so, he defended Mocsta from Sn0: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=35#698 You're entitled to thinking my N2 contributions are scummy, but it's still a lot more helpful of a contribution than over half of town has contributed over N2. My reads are more of myself thinking out loud trying to reason things through -- it's true they're hypothetical, but they outline each possibility and illustrate why I think each person is worth scrutiny. And what the fuck is this? Let’s disregard the horrible start logic, the bit in the middle where he says I defended Mocsta from Sn0: Note that Spag was one of the only people to really back Mocsta's case on me, and while he did so, he defended Mocsta from Sn0: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=35#698 I can’t even remember backing a case on you by Mocsta, though I imagine I had reason. The bit I’m really interested in is the link, and your description of it: “he defended Mocsta from Sn0” In what way was the post you linked implicating me in anything? I was FUCKING RIGHT. Look how dead this thread is. You are being a moron. I am allowed to acknowledge the good someone does in order to further my already transparent agenda. The fact that he later flipped red (accompanied by the thread shuddering to a grinding halt) is irrelevant and your conclusion that I am scum because I was insightful is non-sequitur. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + I assume you're going to say that I should have justified my vote then and there, and that not doing so is scummy? Why is it scummy? What possible scum intention could I have? I am so sick of my intentions being misinterpreted just because they are not entirely standard. THIS GAME IS NOT SPOT THE DIFFERENCE. For something to be scummy, it must have a scummy intention. Going back to bed was not good for my agenda regardless of whether I am town or scum. I was tired and half asleep. A Town me would see that he could make one of his preferred lynches happen and be content. A Scum me would need to stay awake in order to guide the lynch. While conventional logic dictates that a scum doesn't care who gets lynched, this is wrong. A scum needs to make sure that scum is not lynched. A Town has the fallback of the possibility he was wrong when he does not get the lynch he wants [as demonstrated by this very game]. STOP HITTING ME BECAUSE I'M DIFFERENT OR LAZY, HIT ME BECAUSE MY ACTIONS SPEAK OF SCUMMY INTENT. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
[QUOTE]On January 15 2013 02:19 Spaghetticus wrote: (3) - OmniEulogy is confirmed town. He has changed his meta from scummy to actual pro-town. This is a read from a more complex dialogue outside of the game, but put simply: - he has played deliberately scummy in previous games in order to give himself room to work with when he actually rolls scum - I warned him that while I have been avoiding him in game I had decided to tunnel him as I could no longer take the bullshit, along as communicating several reasons for why a better player would play to the best of their ability every game - He improved his style when he did not need to. I was not in the game to tunnel him, and if he rolled scum he would have had three games worth of established scummy play to work with, all but guaranteeing him a scum victory if he rolled scum. If he rolled scum he would be under zero pressure to change his style and we would be looking at a clusterfuck of WIFOM and OMGUS instead of the rational play he is demonstrating. [/QUOTE] While this turned out to be true I think this might have been a scum slip, even with all the evidence town are normally far more careful with reads. For example with this evidence I would say most likely town and would think of the possibility of having improved his play to appear more town not remaining scummy to appear more town. (although I haven't seen him play before I don't think?) Also in general Spags meta is way off... he is the only other australian and while he has given reasons for being less active you would have thought he would have at least chimed it (it's almost 1pm Australian time) So in other words his meta is off, he isn't posting much (which is a separate issue from meta while being connected) and he isn't following though on his non LAL policy. A LAL policy is really easy for scum to talk about because it requires no evidence beside from lack of content. Also he posted this [quote] I want you there on day three because you are active, and if you are scum you will slip as a result. If you downgrade your activity I will shit on you for motivated lurking. It is clear that I want you to stop wasting time being a victim, and I am not the only person with these thoughts. You are not responsible for other people lurking, but you are responsible for hiding their posts with tirades of self-pitying crap.[/quote] Is seems he has taken up the mantle of motivated lurking.... after being so bold and aggressive against them has he realised he can't keep up? FOS# Spaghetticus[/QUOTE] [QUOTE] A scum-slip? Fuckoff. With this evidence you would have been wrong. I have also had the pleasure of playing two games Omni, and I have a feel for his play and mind-set. I looked at his intentions behind this massive change and saw only town motive, with zero possibility of scum short of some sort of complex (and spontaneously appearing) code of conduct. I gave you the brief version, as that was all that was functionally needed. Again, I WAS FUCKING RIGHT. I know scum have information that town do not, but again I respond with an argument based on a now familiar paradigm: If I say something it is ignored until I am proven correct, and then I must be scum for knowing. I do have information that you do not. I talked to OmniEulogy and you didn't (though I believe the conversation is available in the obs QT for XXXIV). What possible SCUM MOTIVE could I have for protecting a townie? He would likely still be in the game if he hadn't DCed, and I would be getting zero credit. I could make a long term play and have Omni killed day four or so, which would gain me town cred, but by reducing the number of threats townies were thinking about I would be doing town a ginormous favour in finding a scummy spag and his scummy friends. This would not be a good play, particularly since any fire that would be going onto Omni would be going directly onto me for protecting him. Your analysis of his actions was okay, as you thought him probable town, but ultimately inferior due to the depth of your probing. Your proposition that he could start acting as town while being scum is simply an inferior play when he's spent three games setting up a scummy meta. You know it, I know it, and Omni would know it. As for me being inactive... I'm sorry for that but it was unavoidable as previously stated. I have sleep issues that have affected previous games, I am busy with obligations to my family, and I am in the middle of sorting out the next semester of university. I can't make you believe me on these things, but I am still managing to get a fair bit done, and more than some other players. The action that takes place without me is... negligible. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
On January 18 2013 12:07 JacobStrangelove wrote: While this turned out to be true I think this might have been a scum slip, even with all the evidence town are normally far more careful with reads. For example with this evidence I would say most likely town and would think of the possibility of having improved his play to appear more town not remaining scummy to appear more town. (although I haven't seen him play before I don't think?) Also in general Spags meta is way off... he is the only other australian and while he has given reasons for being less active you would have thought he would have at least chimed it (it's almost 1pm Australian time) So in other words his meta is off, he isn't posting much (which is a separate issue from meta while being connected) and he isn't following though on his non LAL policy. A LAL policy is really easy for scum to talk about because it requires no evidence beside from lack of content. Also he posted this Is seems he has taken up the mantle of motivated lurking.... after being so bold and aggressive against them has he realised he can't keep up? FOS# Spaghetticus A scum-slip? Fuckoff. With this evidence you would have been wrong. I have also had the pleasure of playing two games Omni, and I have a feel for his play and mind-set. I looked at his intentions behind this massive change and saw only town motive, with zero possibility of scum short of some sort of complex (and spontaneously appearing) code of conduct. I gave you the brief version, as that was all that was functionally needed. Again, I WAS FUCKING RIGHT. I know scum have information that town do not, but again I respond with an argument based on a now familiar paradigm: If I say something it is ignored until I am proven correct, and then I must be scum for knowing. I do have information that you do not. I talked to OmniEulogy and you didn't (though I believe the conversation is available in the obs QT for XXXIV). What possible SCUM MOTIVE could I have for protecting a townie? He would likely still be in the game if he hadn't DCed, and I would be getting zero credit. I could make a long term play and have Omni killed day four or so, which would gain me town cred, but by reducing the number of threats townies were thinking about I would be doing town a ginormous favour in finding a scummy spag and his scummy friends. This would not be a good play, particularly since any fire that would be going onto Omni would be going directly onto me for protecting him. Your analysis of his actions was okay, as you thought him probable town, but ultimately inferior due to the depth of your probing. Your proposition that he could start acting as town while being scum is simply an inferior play when he's spent three games setting up a scummy meta. You know it, I know it, and Omni would know it. As for me being inactive... I'm sorry for that but it was unavoidable as previously stated. I have sleep issues that have affected previous games, I am busy with obligations to my family, and I am in the middle of sorting out the next semester of university. I can't make you believe me on these things, but I am still managing to get a fair bit done, and more than some other players. The action that takes place without me is... negligible. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
On January 19 2013 01:20 shz wrote: Spag is indeed very interesting. He plays just strange. In the beginning it was okay because he just replaced the troll and had to settle in. His LAL thing was okay, but in the end worthless as we lynched the GF on d2 with him being the most active player. But thats over now. And I still don't get the vote-switch. @Spaghetticus: You said you will wake up in time for the lynch and participate. You did. Or, you were awake at least. You came in, changed your vote and went off. Why did you not post your explanation before the flip? You are a self-proclaimed god in Mafia, so why the fuck do you do something so obviously bad? Also, confirming my last 10% of being town is not a good enough reason to lynch someone. Not that I disagree that Trot should be looked upon. I already posted a response to this, but I think your wording and the way you came across was really shitty. You are in the happy place of being confirmed town by one action, you are a valuable if not the most valuable member we have in that your questions come not as possible scum machinations, but genuine town concern. Everyone can answer you plainly knowing they are not being lead by malicious intent. And yet... You are applying little critical thought to the game. (1) - Voting without explanation hurts all agendas. (2) - I can't remember calling myself a God, but I assume you misinterpreted some banter as I entered the thread? I do remember easing myself into the game by talking myself up a little, but this should be plain for all to see. Any expectation of actually godly play in a newbie is an uncritical one on your part. (3) - My reasons for suspecting/voting Trotske are not only that he confirms you as 100% town, though I am someone who factors in such things into his initial estimate of a person. I believe JSL stated it should only be a tie-breaker, this is very conservative and IMHO dead wrong. Trotske has very little contribution, and what he does say is generally fairly weak. He is one of my two biggest reads (the other being JSL, though I'm starting to suspect Zare), and while my post did not explain everything, it was a summary post, not a case. I feel that a lot of the misinterpretations of my content are happening because a failure of people to look at the context (as well as delve into my possible intentions). | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
What I am doing is helping you not lynch town, which is more urgent to me. My reads are not comparable to the 100% chance of mislynching if I am lynched. People are completely warping context and motive for an easy lynch and I believe that this is the most pertinent information I can help correct. That said, I will now develop some of my suspicions, as I have already attended to filing the more dangerous contours of the case against me. I will now be looking at Trotske and possibly JSL. My read on Jacob is less solid and may or may not develop strongly when I trawl his filter. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
- Trotske probably did not believe the lynch on Mocsta would happen (I certainly didn't). By the time it became a real possibility it was too late for him to back out without being called scummy, and he may as well rack up town cred for the lynch. - it's not as if these were hard buses. A scum's role is not to act predictably, but to win the game. If they thought that neither target would go down (I know Mocsta left enough options open), then why shouldn't they remove themselves from the lynch is it was a reversible maneuver? Honestly my head is getting fuzzy, and your argument is not making as much sense to me as it should. What is your fourth paragraph about? I don't see the double bus play at all, and I'm not even sure of the mislynch you refer to. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
(1) - Trotske is not a noob: He isn't, he's played more games than me, and while I'm not sure why he would tell us that as town or scum (A requirement for being allowed in the game maybe?), and argument that relies on him being a noob is fallacious. A year away is a while, but it's no reason to not have posted any content by now. (2) - Which leads into my next point: he seems to have almost made efforts to not contribute. I have offered more content despite starting two days later, sleeping 12 hours a day, and being pulled into family affairs I want no part of. He is neither leader of opinion nor a creative thinker, simply a follower of other's ideas. Somehow he has managed to fail to contribute, and this is not acceptable at this point in the game for someone that has any experience whatsoever. (3) - This third point is more the negation of arguments used to defend him. Whatever Mocsta's plan was, it was damn erratic. People seem to be banking a lot on knowing Mocsta's intentions when they just don't seem that clear to me. I am bone tired. I need sleep and I am no use continuing to write myself into the ground. I think I will be lynched tomorrow, and frustrating as it may be I have not the strength of character to stop it. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
(1) - Don't lynch Shz. He will likely die to NK, but if he does not you should lynch Trotske first and see where that leaves you. (2) - Acid is also coming up as strong town. I may not currently have the mental agility at this point in time to understand WTF he is saying, but if you can understand it, it sounds like he's put in a lot of genuine effort into analysing the lynch. Such effort is not something that a scum would be required to do. It also wouldn't make sense for scum to do such an analysis and then post so sparingly. Such effort could better be used as a scum in acting as town and not furthering their cause. If Acid is lynched you better have a really damn convincing reason. (3) - JSL. He hasn't done much. He's another "read" of mine, equal to Trotske in input, but without the deminoob excuse. He shows signs of insight, but seems to be wasting time defending himself when I am hogging all the votes, or pestering Zarepath. (4) - Zarepath. He's active(ish) and scummy as hell. His lists are semi helpful, but they are probably his biggest contribution other than getting me mislynched with really fucking bad rhetoric. I don't blame JSL for attacking Zarepath, but I feel as though his attacks have been half-hearted and not at all real. I was actually leaving Zare alone believing that JSL was going to post a solid case, but this never eventualised, so in some way it has worked as a protection... (5) - Zebezt. I can see the noob in this one... If you look not at all that closely you can even see when they started consulting guides/coaches and changed their game around to conform to town meta of aggressive tunneling. They don't seem to have developed the savvy required to hide their scummy behaviour, so I would go with a town read, or a "not a threat" read at worst. (6) - Trotske. I've already made my thoughts clear on Trotske, I can't even collect enough data for a real case which should speak louder than any case I could make. I suggest looking to Acid when thinking of lynching this one. He seems to have some lynch logic that proves Trotske town that I don't really understand. (7) - There is no seven. I'm going to bed. I'll look over you from the Obs QT, | ||
| ||
