TL Mafia LIX - Page 6

On January 21 2013 09:25 austinmcc wrote:
The times that I've seen Chezinu give reads, they've been QUITE good. He also, in my mind, has some other qualities that I want in a mayor - someone that scum is going to have a hard time misleading and someone who can deal with being masoned well.

On January 21 2013 09:30 austinmcc wrote:
I guess the above isn't a full thought. If you don't consider Chezinu a candidate for mayor, I think you're being silly. He's a risky pick because he could be scum and he doesn't seem particularly readable before the election ends, plus he might just be chezinu as mayor, but in a vacuum he's a solid mayor candidate and you shouldn't write him off.

On January 21 2013 09:39 austinmcc wrote:
I don't like writing someone off as unreadable. It's so lazy to just say "Chez hard to read and silly" and completely ignore the "Chez often has very, very good reads" aspect.

He's got enough upside if he's town and in the mayor position that it's worth considering him and trying to read him.

On January 21 2013 09:56 austinmcc wrote:
Nope, unless I should make something up.

---

Read closer. I give my reasoning why I think he should be a candidate, and on what conditions I think he's someone to vote for. Those conditions haven't been met, therefore he's not someone I want to vote for atm. And yes, as FT notes, they may be conditions that simply can't be met, maybe you can't get a read on Chez D1, but oh well, still gonna try.

On January 21 2013 10:50 austinmcc wrote:
You're not killing the folks I'm most interested in killing.

Reads + being hard to mess with + probably decent at dealing with being masoned by a couple folks and trying to read them/not give mafia masons info = good mayoral candidate. Therefore, Chez is a good mayoral candidate.

IF he comes off strongly town, he should be getting votes. IF he doesn't, then he shouldn't. But I dislike that people are considering him to not even be a possible mayor, because who knows what happens in the next day.

My arguments on that point have mainly been that Chez should be a candidate, not that he should be mayor given the first 24 hours of this game. You may disagree that chez could be readable, that he could be a strong town read, but I don't see how it's dissonant that he is a legitimate candidate, and should get votes if he comes off as strongly town + he hasn't come off as strongly town so doesn't have my vote atm.

On January 22 2013 00:39 austinmcc wrote:
Gah. So much posting overnight. Got a couple observations to start today off with.

(1) annul, not everyone is ignoring your accusations. A couple folks have expressly disagreed with you. Yes, Toad has been throwing out some pure wifom, but that's ... whatever. It happens in any game. Vivax's vote for sandroba doesn't bother me, I'd rather he run for mayor but actually consider other players legitimate candidates then try and shove his campaign down everyone's throats. That's a POSITIVE thing in my mind, "I want to be mayor but I also want the best candidate to be mayor." Yes, that's only one of your initial issues you had with Vivax, but that did not strike me as a scummy contradiction in his actions.

---

(2) You remember when I said Chez was a legitimate candidate and should at least be considered, then got flak for that? Well, I'm still not voting him. But, reading his posts, I got the feeling that he was one of the few people who has posted that they are running who has done anything beyond "I want to be mayor, if you elect me I will lynch this dude (or that dude)."

On January 21 2013 11:00 Chezinu wrote:
As mayor, I will be more than just a mayor. I will form a great circle like no one has ever seen. This circle will be protected. This circle will survive! For Chezinu loves his circles. If mafia dares to destroy it, they will be destroyed themselves!

That. Even if it's bs, even if it's almost nothing. We've seen some general "Ah wil be transparint an gud fer yu." And everyone mayoral candidate has a lynch target. But chez, at least if you trust his statements, is actively thinking about how to be mayor beyond today. Moreso than any other candidate.

Is it enough to vote him? No. But...it looks good. And I wish someone else would have pointed this out, because I think it's actually something worth pulling out of his candidacy versus others.

---

(3) STUTTERS. debears has posted some, but I'm not picking up anything strong one way or another. BUT STUTTERS GUYS HOLY CRAP.

He returned with a single post - This post doesn't make me feel any better.

When I rolled mafia my first time, I had a hard time not taking this out when accused of being mafia. "Well yes, I've been doing x thing that's scummy, but..." where the "but..." is something WEAK. Stutters does that here, picks out a single thing I didn't like, admits to it, and then "but it was early." It doesn't matter if it's early, plenty of folks wrote long early posts (candidacies, general strategies, etc.).

Moreover, JUST LOOK AT THE FRIGGIN' POST AND HIS FILTER. There's been way more discussion, way more to look at, comment on, anything. Stutters hasn't done ANY of that. He pops in, says he's catching up, does NOTHING beyond that.

This reads to me like someone who came under some fire, dropped by to address, but has been told to keep his head low.

---

To anyone DEFENDING stutters, or who thinks stutters may be town:

I BELIEVE someone else made a comment that they didn't want to lynch stutters, but I have lost that. If you made that comment, let me know plox. This was the only one I remembered. Let's not lynch stutters because stutters is scummy as town.

I know I've said that about players this game. But I don't like it as reasoning not to lynch stutters. He did something scummy, and then the followup has also been scummy. He just dipped in, said he was catching up, dipped out. Gave this really weak response to some weak early pressure on him. To me, it reads EXACTLY like he has been told to lay low. Someone brought up the difference between a mayoral D1 and a normal lynch, where players can hide or play poorly because you won't be under constant scrutiny, the discussion is about the mayor and his lynch instead of who is scummy (to some extent, or at least to the extent that it allows more trolling to go unpunished D1). Stutters is harnessing that. Stutters is staying under the radar, his head way down, and everyone is passing him over for other targets that are ... higher profile or more active.

Do not forget stutters. Don't pass him over. Read his filter. Read his response, and ask yourself whether a "yes, but" and "now I'm catching up" into silence feels scummy or towny as a response.

Stutters should be the mayoral lynch today.

On January 22 2013 01:11 austinmcc wrote:
I know I had some votes for mayor earlier. I will gladly accept votes/run/whatever. Right now, I would lynch stutters, because of the reasons given above. I think his couple posts were scummy and I think his response to an accusation was scummy.

Some assorted reasons you should vote me:
(1) I found that kittens stuff in the OP.
(2) I often write walls of text, but they are legible.
(3) I tend to be pretty clear with my thought processes. You may find them absurd (red check on Sandroba in paranoia comes to mind), but I almost always explain my reads and my actions in ways that you can follow.
(4) I am thinking about the game longer term than today's lynch. I've noted that the the masons in this game are going to be of particular importance to the mayoral position, as he's likely to get masoned by most/all of them, and needs to know who is scum/town and what information to give out/trust coming in. I think I have toned down my paranoia, but have a healthy sense of mistrust and am relatively difficult to sway. I don't currently plan on setting up some town circle immediately, but I at least notice that Chezinu was talking about that, again...I'm thinking about the mayor position as more than just a lynch today.
(5) I will sometimes post paint pictures. But not scum-BH-getting-lynched amounts.
(6) I am generally pretty involved in the games I play. I will not be an absentee.
(7) You know who I am. I don't think smurfing should disqualify someone from running, nor should being a crazy-play-loving enigma. But you can go through my games, see my posting style, see how I'm usually trying to figure things out, and some of you have a decent handle on how I play from being with me in those games. There's slightly more accountability there, if you're into that.


NOW. Check this out. Here are reasons you should NOT vote me.
(1) Next Saturday I will be almost entirely unavailable. I don't want an inactive mayor, and I don't want someone who will miss a full cycle. Saturday will be the first half of D3, so ... it's not a full cycle, but that's an important consideration. I have not seen any other candidate discuss their availability, and I don't like the idea that we could elect someone and have them go MIA for a bit.
(2) In sort of the same vein, I'm a little behind at work. I will absolutely put in the time if I'm mayor, but I'm not entirely sure how much I can actually play during like 8 AM - 7 PM or so EST. I can read up, and I can post some, but I can't promise to be able to give the game the full treatment during those hours.
(3) In the past I have been both overly paranoid AND stupid when I try to scheme. Those are not qualities that you want in a mayor. However, and this part is positive, I have specifically tried to temper those qualities, and in the games that I've played more recently I think I've done okay with that. I felt like I was a good threat-quality monitor and positive influence on...GSL mini 3? Tried specifically to improve my play and the thread itself, rather than just make reads, and I think that was good for the game. Tried to use my abilities to help town in the recent world-swapping mafia, and felt like I did okay with that (noticed things were dead D1, used my ability to try and make things un-dead, but didn't follow through enough after doing so). Ymmv on how much I can actually consciously temper my paranoia and sometimes-stupidity though.


I think that's an honest assessment of how my play makes me both a good and bad mayor. I'm still currently looking at stutters as my lynch candidate. Right now on the to-do list is: (1) Look at stutters past games, does he feel scummy as town? If so, does he seem scummy in those games in the same way he seems scummy in this game? (Can feel scummy for different reasons, "scummy as town" is no good, but "looks scummy for x as town and looks scummy for x here" is better). (2) Look more at prplhz, since there's a sizeable group on him. I don't like some of the case on him, but it's got some valid points and shouldn't be ignored. (3) Try and find some little things. Chez thinking about the future, toad early on thinking about solving the game, little bits and pieces that are interesting or can help us get better reads on specific players. (4) Look at Gonzaw hard. If he's town, I think he'd be a solid mayor. He can get caught up in his own scheming just like I can, but he's shown an ability to be able to direct a game/faction if put into a position of power, and that's, again, a valuable quality to have in a mayor. I do not want scumGonzaw in that position though, at all. So he's a lot like Chez for me, in that I really don't want to risk mayor Gonzaw unless we're pretty certain of his alignment.

On January 22 2013 01:31 austinmcc wrote:
Read over Gonzaw some more. Like Gonzaw. Gonzaw is a candidate I would place a vote on.

Some short reasons:

• This bit of a post - + Show Spoiler +
  I am reminded of really old game called Master Of magic The guide to it says they would like to see the AI summon Toren Once, just once. Toren in that game is a virtual force of nature, one game strategy is to summon toren but it requires such huge resource commitment that normally you just could have won the other way. I wish to Summon a Chezinu once.
  - just feels like an odd and genuine thought.
• Picked up on stutters, has stayed somewhat on stutters.
• Looks dumb because he's agreeing with me, but look at this - + Show Spoiler +
  I do have to say that I agree with austin that JieXian's 1st post wasn't as "scummy" as many people (you+sandro) pointed out, it's null at worst.
  I think the 1st posts from many other people would be "far" more scummy (in relation, not objectively at least), like our guy Stutters' up there, and maybe other's like FiveTouch, or maybe even debears.
  Why did you give Jiexian so much flak Vivax? Why did you instantly want to lynch him instead of other's (based on their 1st post as well)?
  - He doesn't just say "I don't find JX's post scummy." He says, "I also don't find JX's post scummy, especially when compared to the posts from these people." That shows me he's looking through the game, reading posts, and actively keeping track of people looking scummy. Would expect scum D1 this game to be more focused on controlling who gets the positions of power in this game, rather than making a little offhand remark like this.
• Is wary of Sandroba, and follows up on that wariness. Has asked Toad multiple times for updates on how Toad reads Sandroba's continued play.
• Is critical of others reads when he deals with them, but again, pushes things forward. Not "I think JX town" but "I think JX town, because under the reasoning you guys gave for him to be scum, these guys scummier." Same thing when he talks about oats here. Not "I think oats town/scum," but "I don't like this bit of the case on oats, but I do like these bits. Here is how I see things." Then an added bonus follow-up about stutters AND sandro that post.
• When chatting with mocsta for a moment, shows he's critically thinking about the difference between mayoral and normal games, but also at the end of that again follows up by asking about mocsta's views on stutters and clarity

I view Gonzaw as townie because of the above. I know that a lot of those points are all the same thing, in that Gonzaw is never just stopping at a response or an explanation, but continuing to make reads or push his reads. Even so, I like that, and the fact that he's constantly doing that makes it feel more genuine and townie to me.

On January 22 2013 11:23 austinmcc wrote:

The chez voters were chez/axle/grush for a while. Not exactly votes that I find informative.

The votes on me aren't wonderfully informative, given that one is from me and one was from sandroba. Bar the early votes from you and fivetouch, I had oats and djo on me at times. Late enough tonight that I'm going to put it off, but tomorrow I'll look at when in terms of the feel of the game they voted me, unless someone else has beat me to it.

I know oats's vote was a post that people had issue with, and the "Why would you vote austin when oats is voting austin?" comment was a legitimate concern when it was made. djodref's exact reasons I don't remember.

There were also some...halfvotes? BKE says he would have voted for me. I believe it was mocsta who voted me in the thread but not in the voting thread itself?

On January 30 2013 15:25 AxleGreaser wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Without commenting on the accuracy or presence or lack of holes in your argument.

Why did you make it, or more specifically why did you post it in the thread?

On January 30 2013 15:30 AxleGreaser wrote:


Why has it been doing that.... ?

Ahh

because you are currently not voting for your top scum read...
" If I had to say who I feel most likely to flip scum at the moment, I would say austin. "