EPTLet's do this!
Newbie Mafia XL
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
Let's do this! | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 05 2013 02:39 iamperfection wrote: that's the punishment for not living in America. Or you could be like marv and not sleep. Can I become as good as marv if I don't sleep? Please tell me if that is the secret to being good, would totally do that. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 05 2013 03:42 Acrofales wrote: Ah, the first question for the coaches. Absolutely! All it takes to be as good as Marv is to stop sleeping ever again. Effects guaranteed after approximately 72 hours. #neversleepagain | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 05 2013 12:57 Rainbows wrote: I like you, Obzy. In what way do you like Obzy? On Rainbows vote on Saraf, I think it's Rainbows missinterpreting Sarafs post. When you are policy lynching, you are not finding scum. You're trying to get rid of something in the way people behave that benefits scum. Lurking makes you harder to read, since you won't posted your opinions on lynches/reads/cases/claims/flips. Scum can easily mask themselves as lurkers, so you lynch all lurkers so that scum can't do that. Spamming really hard makes the thread hard to read and hides important posts, so you lynch all spammers who don't actually contribute to scumhunting. Policy lynching isn't about finding scum, and I think you should accept the fact that the target might flip anything. But I'm against any policies whatsoever. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 05 2013 09:56 Moloch wrote: You're just seeing what type of personality you can use to not be suspected, skinny guy! People who don't say a lot and just stay low take a higher priority over people that say a lot. Especially early game. If the guys who talk a lot are good, they'll be better for the town than people who don't say much, and if they do happen to be non-fatties, there's a higher chance they'll slip up sooner or later. It's difficult to slip up when you don't say anything or don't have an opinion of your own. So, in your situation probably C or D. Moloch, in this post you calling Rainbows scum in a noncommital way (bolded by me). Do you think he is actually scummy for that post? On April 05 2013 09:45 Rainbows wrote: My point. Keep in mind the following question isn't policy-based. Let's say we have this one guy, super emotional, yelling at people, voting all over the place. Call him guy A. Guy B is cool, suave, making decent points here and there, voting is in line with his thinking. Guy C is hardcore lurking are barely here, but won't get modkilled because he votes. Guy D is kinda wimpy, and sheeps cases but is also hard to read. Who do we lynch? Rainbows, what is the purpose for this post? Why should we tell beforehand what kind of behaviour we see as scummy? On April 05 2013 11:57 Saraf wrote: Can we vote for a no-lynch in this game, or must votes be placed on individuals? Saraf, does this mean you have interest in no-lynching? jrkirby, where did you go? You where here and then popped back here just to make sure your vote was valid, but you didn't say anything of value. I want your opinions. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
By that way, you are voting Rainbows. What makes hi scummy? | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
Rainbows, if you are here, could you please answear? I want you to be active to get a better feel for your alingment, so that we don't knock on your door without good reasons. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
Fishgle, does your post mean that you are going to sleep? Your posts so far have all been reagrding Rainbows. Any other opinions? | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 05 2013 15:42 nobodywonder wrote: Hmm, just like everyone, I am puzzled by Rainbow's peculiar behavior. Does Rainbows behaviour make him scum in your eyes? | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
Warrent, your filter still doesn't give information what you think about anyone other than Rainbows. I'm sure you must have opinions on others. TheRavenName, I wasn't calling Rainbows for policy lynching, I was interpreting Sarafs post for him. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
Rainbows is really scummy. At the start, he had the opportunity to continue discussing what was being discussed, but instead he brings up this hypotetical question. Now what purpose does it serve? Scum could post this to know what kind of behaviour we find scummy. Town could post this to generate discussion. But I don't believe that. Rainbows had already got good discussion rolling about something that matters to town (policy). But instead he brings up something that can't benefit town. And there is no followup whatsoever. Rainbows asked if Ravens was scum or VT. Blatant bluefishing. No scum would ever answear "Yes, I'm scum". If Ravens had claimed VT there, scum would know he isn't blue. Ravens may have in confusion softclaimed a powerrole there. I can't find any townie reasonin Rainbows would ask this question. Rainbows says how he likes Obzy. If you look at any mafia games posts, when someone likes someone, he thinks that guy is town. Just look at the list posts in this game: "I don't like XXX" is used in contexes, where people think XXX is scummy. Yet when I ask him to explain his liking of Obzy, he says he liked the name and that he has posted a lot, when at the time, Obzy had three posts. If look at those three posts, that is not a good basis for a town read. Rainbows thinks he is the center of the thread and that he should be talked about. On April 06 2013 01:49 Rainbows wrote: You were summing up the thread because I was the only one doing things. On April 06 2013 12:36 Rainbows wrote: First post of the day. Neglects to comment on my play which I find exceedingly odd. I was pretty much the entire thread at that point. On April 05 2013 23:37 Rainbows wrote: A bunch of generic pro-town things being advocated. He provides a (bad) summary of events in the thread and... that's it. [snip] It is obvious that Saraf is referring to me here. I'm spamming, I'm doing a bunch of nuisance-like things and he doesn't like it. He says he would like to lynch me; even if I'm probably town. Saraf seems to know I'm town, because he refers to me as such and tells me how I should be playing. [snip] I digress, he's brought up the policy to 'lynch the spammiest asshole', but that in itself people are already talking about because I'm the center of discussion. So antagonisitic. On April 06 2013 12:12 Rainbows wrote: This scummy since Rainbows clearly cares his image. He cares that people see him as town. He cares enough to make a point of being the center of discussion. Scum care for their image.He didn't do anything of use early game. He was around, but chose to do nothing useful. He barely even talked to me, and pretty much ignored events in the thread. His real 'entrance' post to the thread is here: Here is another case of Rainbows caring about his image: On April 05 2013 23:37 Rainbows wrote The only post which he brings up from nobodywonder is this one, where nobodywonder suspects Rainbows.Nobodywonder NW gives a huge summary. and throws some shit. He meditates on the policy thing, which I told everyone wasn't policy. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOW PEOPLE THINK AND POLICY JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE. Had to get out of the way. This post, and subsequently the spoiler, show no effort on NW's part to come to a conrete read on me. He simply says that I'm doing things. He seems really apprehensive about giving an actual read and just flops around. I want peoples opinions of NW. Saraf might just be a banality-spewing town; and I'm unsure if his lolpolicy was serious or not. But NW - that guy. He's scummy. Rainbows is hellbent in his interpretating that Saraf called him town, even when multiple people have said that was not what Saraf intented to say. If Saraf is town, what Rainbow did was scummy, because he has more reasons to potentiaaly misslynch Saraf. If Saraf is scum, it's still scummy. Rainbows appears to put pressure on Saraf and if Saraf is ever on the chopping block, Rainbows can go "oh shit, my reasoning is really dump" and save him. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
Rainbows cares enough of his image to make a point about the center of discussion. It doesn't say you want to be the center of discussion. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 06 2013 16:25 Obzy wrote: Trying to follow guidelines on what sort of behavior people find scummy is pointless, it's been well proven even in our newbie game that we are willing to adapt. Scumminess indicators are not a thing that are engrained since birth. I feel like he was just trying to generate conversation and promote a positive town atmosphere - in the same way that my first few posts, upon re-reading, look sorta pointless. I was trying to help get the thread started, so we didn't have an empty day 1 that we couldn't draw good conclusions from. But why didn't continue talking about the things discussed then and instead brought up something else that doesn't serve a purpose? Bluefishing!? How in the world did you get that? Literally no matter what, the proper answer is to say VT. If Ravens had claimed VT, scum would know that he claimed VT. If he's blue, he doesn't have to tell the truth! The question looked like meaningless banter; if it was malicious, it was incredibly shallow, and calling it Bluefishing is absurd in the extreme. (imo ^^) Can you explain why a townie would ask that question? There is no way the answear is going to be alignment indicative in any way. Hehe I like being told that I'm liked though :0 It's motivating! Legitimately thinking that I was strongly town at that point may have been a bit much, but he didn't say that. I feel like you're trying to build a mountain out of a molehill here, and the connection is not as strong as you are making it out to be. He himself implied that it was a townread at the time. Blues also care about their image, though, presumably. They're trying to act like they are just VTs, but without denying information to town. And here, I think that if Rainbows was able to actually form a wagon on Saraf, it would have more to it than just this piece of information. It would be a terrific plan if they were scumbuddies and Rain had the amount of thread presence necessary to direct AND THEN UNDIRECT an entire lynch, several days in - but that's some tinfoil hat stuff right there. As such - I do not think that your case has merit. I'm not sure if it makes you scum or not, though - and I wish that Rain hadn't absolutely fucking exploded when you posted it lol. Does that answer the question to your satisfaction? Does his response to my case look like a townies response? He is overemotional and instantly OMGUSSES me. He missinterprets my logic. He clearly feels the pressure but still calls the case BS. How is this a townie response? In addition to everything I have already posted regarding Rainbow's innocence and my townread on him, I suppose I could also point out this - And these quotes are a pain to get - If he is scum, why is he antagonizing everyone one at a time, writing cases whimsically and without warning, dropping them at a feather's touch - almost if not always because he himself decided another case was better? I'm not verbose enough to explain this in a poetic way, but he's too batshit crazy to be scum at this point in time. (In a good way ^^;; )(...Imo. =P) The first few fall into the trolly start category and I don't think anyone could think of them as serious. He votes for Smancer for not answearing his question that by his own words meant nothing. He votes on Saraf totally missinterpreting Sarafs post. Do these votes hold any weight? I see them as scum trying to look for potential misslynches. His case on Raven has some good points but the others just bad. Then he OMGUSSES me and switches back to Raven. I see 1 vote that has a clear meaning. And I just noticed that he calls Raven null at the end of his case. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
And like half of Rainbows cases were really bad. Look at his case on Saraf. A bunch of missinterpretings and lies. His case on nobodywonder? Picks up one post, says that nobodywonder doesn't have a read on Rainbows, when wonder gave his read on him in the post Rainbows bought up. Rainbows calls out Ravens for not giving his opinion on nobodywonder, even though Ravens called him dump town. And do you think Rainbows reacted to my case in a townie way? | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
##Unvote These suspicious people are JarJarDrinks and Saraf. We'll start with JarJar. All JarJar has done this game is call jrkirby scum. His read seems to be an overreaction to jrkirbys early vote on Rainbows. JarJar seems to think that jrkirby in his reasonin post kept his vote on Rainbows even if he thinks Rainbows is bad town. But to me jrkirbys vote reads more as a pressure vote: if Rainbows doesn't stop being stupid jrkirby will lynch him. Then he reads Rainbows as town because jrkirby is scum, but in the same post implies that Rainbows might be scum since in JarJars last game Rainbows totally fooled him as scum. Saraf on the other hand started the game with some policy discussion. Not alignment indicative per se, but he has done very little of something else. He called Rainbows suspicious for missiterpreting his posts, but that can as easily be seen as being defensive. Saraf called jrkirby suspicious for stating that he had a hunch on someone being scum, but didn't mention who it was. This lines up with votes piling up on jrkirby, making it seem Saraf wanted to hop on the bandwagon. Then when he finally comes back, he fails to to call me, Rainbows and Ravens scum or town, just stating that we are not good lynches. He does have a good point on JarJar and is at least here giving his opinion on something. Out of the suspcious people here, I find JarJar the most suspicious. You can this a vote for survival or scum trying to save himself with an easy bandwagon, but I think he is the scummiest. ##Vote: JarJarDrinks | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
If you are lynching me for doing nothing, why aren't you lynching JarJar? If you are lynching me for bad cases, why aren't you lynching Rainbows? If you can answear these question, then fine, lynch me. But if you lynch me, you better make the most out of it postflip. Pressure the shit out of anyone who can't answear these questions. Pressure the shit out of anyone who voted for me with halfassed reasoning or blatantly sheeped. Hopefully I'm alive when I wake up. Goodnight folks. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 18 2013 05:26 Hapahauli wrote: Oh yeah I was going to comment on that too. I think the way you played the opening of the game (trolling) was a really poor strategic decision on your part. Trolling is OK in normal game when veterans understand that it's non-alignment indicative, or even townie. Doing it in a newbie game is a really bad idea, since players often won't understand your motives and are prone to lynching players they dislike the posting of. The truth has been told. What separates newbies from true vets is the newbies desire to lynch people for being annoying. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On April 17 2013 12:59 Hapahauli wrote: One of the more interesting and instructive newbie games in a while - heck of a comeback by town! I'll do a write-up later. Still waiting for this. | ||
| ||
