EPTGive me a few minutes.
I'm not too familiar with how to combine quotes in TL foryums (if my post count wasn't enough to give me away HAHA hehe
)But I'll try to string it together the best I can.
Rough ETA probably 20 mins.
Newbie Mini Mafia XLIX - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Give me a few minutes. I'm not too familiar with how to combine quotes in TL foryums (if my post count wasn't enough to give me away HAHA hehe )But I'll try to string it together the best I can. Rough ETA probably 20 mins. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
On October 14 2013 15:52 OdinOfPergo wrote: Well, I read through my last post, And then decide how bad that thought is. Judging by what you just said July, a 100% GUESS at a "afk lynch" is better than a 40% chance to land a scrum roll on the first day within the first 4 hours. My only question is; Are you being serious right now? Because trying to throw off town that hard would seem pretty scummy to me. I'll hold my vote for 2 hours for you to respond. After that I will have to start thinking about going to sleep since I have to work real early. I'm already staying up late for this. My pre-arguement on why we should do this instead of "Silence" or "afk" lynch. ou're going to randomly tag someone who could be potential town and marking them as scum? Doesn't sound like a safe way to play to me . July's response to me. This is stupid, because you are trading chance to lynch (All-be-it 4 to 6), For a 100% guess. Setting up an RNG to lynch someone is really stupid, especially with those odds plus it also takes away the fun/skill of the game. Also seems silly to be talking about an afk lynch when the game literally just started, would rather vote for someone suspicious looking like SagaZ who was so quick to start talking about lynching people minutes after the game started. Vonthin supports this view point. Which makes me wonder about him too. Why would people freak about about of 4-6 chance when they are willing to jump on a 1-10? Nothing adds up right now. So now you join in. On October 14 2013 16:24 playerboy345 wrote: Agree with this post 100%. We have to keep people talking and find oddities, it's our best chance at catching scum (and something they say might bite them in their ass later). You jump in supporting my suggestion. On October 14 2013 14:38 istandwithmitt wrote: ##vote: SagaZ Lynching lurkers gives us no information for future days & keeps scum from having to lay down a real vote. The way he's trying to guide the town is really scummy too & makes him look town without contributing anything. Well, see ya That is a ballsy move, what makes you think it's a good idea to go ballsdeep on him because of his ONE post?[/QUOTE] Again we agree. On October 14 2013 15:29 July617 wrote: You're going to randomly tag someone who could be potential town and marking them as scum? Doesn't sound like a safe way to play to me . Makes a good point, but would it really be all that smart for scum to play risky? I don't necessarily agree with his post but I don't see it as scummy. [/QUOTE] This is where you lose me. They are trying to call me out for my RNG. But what better plan are they suggesting? Because alls I've heard to this point is "lynch afk". Which, most likely, means we waste our votes on someone who is going to get mod-killed/replaced the following morning. Describe in detail if I have not followed peoples logic soundly. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
I do not think our cop role-claiming would be a good move at this point. The scum already know one of our roles and we don't want to add to that. I'd much prefer to gather intel. from him first. If he just points us in the right direction without giving himself away in the first few days... Well, honestly, I'll be ecstatic. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
On October 14 2013 17:00 playerboy345 wrote: "We can alter rng votes according to what players argue." would it still be a rng if you alter your vote? And chill, I never said that your suggestion is scummy. I am a bit confused by this post. From what I can get.. "Would I support a RNG if it pointed vs myself?" Simple answer is no. This method only for sure works if you roll town. It works more efficiently the more players you can for sure eliminate from scum. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Sorry guys, I had to get a TEENY bit of sleep before I had to go to work. I'll be off at 12:30 (I'm on break now. This out time is a hour away.) I drafted up a part of my current reads during my lunch. Alas, 30 minutes was not enough time to explain everything. So I only have part of you down. Depending on if I try to take a nap after I get off work, I will post up my current reads within the next couple of hours. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Setting up an RNG to lynch someone is really stupid, especially with those odds plus it also takes away the fun/skill of the game. Also seems silly to be talking about an afk lynch when the game literally just started, would rather vote for someone suspicious looking like SagaZ who was so quick to start talking about lynching people minutes after the game started. How is July's thought a bad idea, it is unsafe, while you have a 40% chance to land a scum you have a 60% chance to blame an innocent townie like myself. Police detectives just don't take a group of people then choose one of them at random and arrest them. Don't even understand how you think he is throwing off the town when you are a danger wanting to pick random people to lynch, that is what seems scummy to me. I have a obvious goal in mind. Everyone should be able to see it by now. I've explained my reasoning behind this point already. If you didn't read it, It doesn't help your position to point attention to it. Anybody that graduated grade school can do the simple math. That will tell them a almost 40% chance is better than a blind shot in the dark. Which was like a 20 something iirc. From what I've seen to this point, you are just trying to side-track me. Also Vonthin, How does that work into what I said at all? July didn't even post a counter argument. He just disagreed with what I suggested. He was just saying he disagreed with your methods, he didn't say anywhere(unless I missed something which i don't think i did) that we waste our votes lynching inactive members which you said he did in one of your earlier posts. Both lynching RNG/getting the inactive person is both sorta stupid Ok, so he tried to derail my train of thought without trying to giving me a new one? Sounds like your trying to stall for something. Again. On October 14 2013 16:20 OdinOfPergo wrote: Yes. The difference between his and my idea, Is mainly, I have a strong chance to land scum. He has a penny in a hay bail. More over, my idea leaves me the entire rest of D1 to ALTER my vote. While he is claiming, regardless of what happens in the next FORTY hours, that we should waste our votes on "in-active" members that may or may not be mod-killed and replaced anyway. Also Vonthin, please note; I have not even cast a vote yet. You should really contribute to these arguments at this point. Because from I can tell you are just side-tracking them without an alternative. Player Boi -- Leaning towards town + Show Spoiler + That is a ballsy move, what makes you think it's a good idea to go ballsdeep on him because of his ONE post? I enjoy the fact that at least you question things. You are contradicting yourself. First you say you don't want to waste your vote on someone who doesn't post and then you proceed to push for a RANDOM lynch. My responce. Well, that was sort of my point. We can force early conversation with a RNG. Best case scenario; We rid ourselves of a scum role. Worst case scenario; We have to change our votes because a townie defends himself. This is the entire reason I found the previous post twards this questionable. Player did not understand my previous post. I explained it out again through pages 8&9 (Too lazy to copy this since people do NO FORMATTING PLS. USE YOUR SPACE/ENTER KEY PLS.) But anyway, the result came to this: Alright, allow me to clarify in lamest terms for you. If town lynches a lurker/afk that has not posted at the end of day one. Odds are, is that SAME person will proceed to afk and NOT VOTE (Which is mandatory I might add.) Resulting in a mod-kill. This outcome leads to the ENTIRE TOWN wasting their votes on a lynch that meant LITERALLY NOTHING Why take these odds when you have much better odds with a rng? We can alter rng votes according to what players argue. We can apply pressure to try to flesh of scum on day 1 with these votes. We can move the town in the right direction with these votes. Now please answer me; What the heck do you find scummy about my suggestion? TO which PB answered quickly; ( I GOT FREAKING LAZY. I WILL CONTINUE IF PEOPLE ARE TO LAZY TO GO READ TWO PAGES. Actually screw this. I've been trying to peice this post together for almost and hour and a half now. I just got off work and it's still not done. Our conclusion comes out to: PB calls me out to explain my claims- I explain them- PB explains his point of view. I explain mine. We tend to agree after a while on most subjects. EVERYTHING to do with this takes place on pages 8-10 Go read up on it. I'm tired. Also, you guys, for the most part, don't format shit. It's hard to type things out on notepad (Haha, It denies me [for the most part] the ability to format anything.) Ok, well at least you have come to a point on this. There is literally no point in lynching someone who's afk. Our current big lurkers, SagaZ and istandwithmitt, Haven't given us much to bais on. I'm more agains't Istand because it seems he's trying to bandwagon an early vote. While that's not suprising in these games, He doesn't follow up with anything (Be it because SagaZ didn't post anything after or not.) At this point I'll agree with you in saying this action is slightly disturbing. You can pressure vote on SagaZ though Istand. I will not vote for you yet because of this. If SagaZ comes back into this discussing I might even apluad you for it (Thought, it's been several hours, I have my doubts this will happen gracefully.) LATER ON I'm against lynching afkers. Lurkers are kind of a different story though, we have to force those to post. Honestly your suggesting isn't lynching someone randomly, it's lynching whoever is the scummiest (something I agree with). Lynching afkers should never happen in my opinion as it's more likely to set us back then anything else. I HATE E00e!!!! SERIOUSLY WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? July -- Questionable/SCUM + Show Spoiler + On October 14 2013 15:29 July617 wrote: You're going to randomly tag someone who could be potential town and marking them as scum? Doesn't sound like a safe way to play to me . My responce. I don't agree with this at all. How exactly is lynching a afk/lurker at this point better than taking stronger odds chance of a RNG I posted earlier better? I just don't get it. his "responce"? I mean this seriously isn't even coherent. How am I suppose to answer this per my previous question? At least you realize how bad that sort of thinking is , I don't feel comfortable lynching anyone just yet . I never said we lynch anyone . let's just let people talk for a bit. We ARE talking. Why are you saying that this discussion is bad? I dont think anyone is sidetracked, I just think we need to talk more so we can get idea's of the active players and a direction in which to go towards . Preferably a sane one. I don't understand how you expect us to move foward. You are obviously agains't my idea. You are "undecided" (I lack a solid statement) saying that you are for/agains't a policy "afk/lurker" vote. If I missed something here, point it out. Because alls I can gather from your current filter is that you obviously have no set objective. That makes me think you're scum GGTemplar -- Have to wait. NULL + Show Spoiler + I think between SagaZ and istandwithmitt, at most one of them is mafia. SagaZ's first post is somewhat suspicious but istandwithmitt instantly going so hard on him is just as suspicious because it seems like such an easy target at that point. There's no way they're both mafia together. It's possible both are town, but if we gain information that one of them is mafia, it would clear the other as town I'd say. He did at least "sort of" defend his post. I don't think if istandwithmitt was mafia, he would throw his buddy so hard under the bus that hard and that quickly. E00e -- NULL (RESEARCH PREV.) At the end of the road here, I've come into a few conclusions. Which is good. It was the whole reason I posted the RNG in the first place. I would have used it if nothing else came up. Lucky for me, there is plenty of things that have drawn my attention since this topic started. @Suess -- I don't intend to follow through with a RNG now. I have reads/tells that I have posted above that resulted from this days current discussions. I will adjust my views depending on what happens after this. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
If I get quiet for a few hours, I simply decided to take a short nap. I'm off to take a shower now. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
On October 14 2013 14:38 istandwithmitt wrote: ##vote: SagaZ Lynching lurkers gives us no information for future days & keeps scum from having to lay down a real vote. The way he's trying to guide the town is really scummy too & makes him look town without contributing anything. Well, see ya This being his only post I am somewhat torn about it. I understand that trying to pressure vote is a way to get people to talk. But I don't really think this is a "pressure vote" There is no pressure here. It's a scape goat "Oh look, I posted this day" Now I will proceed to lurk and not follow up any argument or pressure on this "pressure vote". This particular post is scummy. But as it is his only post, I'm not really enticed into chasing for this lynch yet. Perhaps I will revert to it if my other scum reads post valid counter-arguments. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Also Suess, I comment on my previous statement briefly in the PB read I posted earlier. If I have to choose between SagaZ and Istand, Istand looks worse. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Give me a hour or so to soak in what I've read and I'll post on this. It's the whole reason I left E00e as NULL for right now. I haven't really studied what happened between last night and now. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Some good things going on, and some bad things going on. Personally I want to write off the bad things on bigginers in-experience. The over-all objective of his post seems to be pro-town. But he does ask some questions that could of caused us problems. As he doesn't persue any of these, I don't really have any issue with him. On October 14 2013 17:19 E00e wrote:+ Show Spoiler + Hello everyone, my first post! I think the discussion about a semi random lynch or an afk lynch was somewhat pointless because the day is still early and we might find something else to lynch on. In the rare (?) case that we dont get any information we can argue about that again. On that topic I dont think it is reasonable to immediately vote for SagaZ (who suggested afk lynch first) like istandwithmitt did. I like that GGTeMpLaR started giving thoughts about the players in this game, because ultimately we need to do that to find our lynch target. Something else we could and maybe should discuss is when the Cop should come out. Should they come out after checking X Mafia or Y Town or when they are about to be lynched, etc... We dont need to do that on the first day and I dont want to sidetrack the discussion but it is something to keep in mind for the next day or if we run out of things to talk about. This is July's response. I don't like July's post in general. It's why he's my second scummy read. He hasn't posted anything that's convinced me 100% that he is scum yet, But he's for sure not helping his position in my eyes with post like these. + Show Spoiler + On October 14 2013 17:29 July617 wrote: I dont think anyone is sidetracked, I just think we need to talk more so we can get idea's of the active players and a direction in which to go towards . Preferably a sane one. Player's response. For starters, this post seems a lot worse than it actually is depending on how you view it. Player seems REALLY harsh in this. I can't really fualt him for that in this case. You want to be hyper aggro on everyone to get: #1) Discussion going #2) Be able to learn thing from said discorse. So yes, PB post comes off rather rude. Especially the end of it. I will not give him a scum read for doing it though, since I almost did the same at the suggestion of having our cop role-call. It sounds like a terrible idea to me. It obviously sounds like a terrible idea from PB too (from what I've read here.) The only reason I didn't say something to the level of what PB posted here is: E00e never actually followed up on his call out for the cop. + Show Spoiler + On October 14 2013 17:35 playerboy345 wrote: [green]No the discussion isn't pointless - it forces people to talk which is a good thing. And going ballsdeep on SagaZ AND istandwith mitt.... Dude I can't even be bothered to mention the last paragraph: ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS? On October 14 2013 17:44 OdinOfPergo wrote: @E00e - I do not think our cop role-claiming would be a good move at this point. The scum already know one of our roles and we don't want to add to that. I'd much prefer to gather intel. from him first. If he just points us in the right direction without giving himself away in the first few days... Well, honestly, I'll be ecstatic. I will quote this to emphasize my point. I feel like E00e just slipped up early by asking for this roll-call because he's new. In this post, unless he's lying to try to cover up his tracks, it implies he STILL doesn't even understand where he messed up at. And in his defense, no one has explicitly pointed it out for him yet (Though this post will. You should explain your reasoning here E00e. I'm giving you the option too rather easily.) + Show Spoiler + On October 14 2013 17:53 E00e wrote: Yes it is good that people talk, however there might be other more rewarding ways to do that. I think that meta discussions about this topic are pointless too, so I wont argue about that more. Could you explain your rage about the last paragraph? From your post I dont understand the problem with it and I said everything very calmly and careful. PB followed with this The last line irks me about this post. Suess is right about this. Why are you jumping on him so hard? It's plain as day to me he just made a mistake. You should probably of followed up in a manner such as I just did a paragraph above this one. This looks pretty bad from other perspectives. It isn't enough for me to change my read on you yet. But you'd best explain the reasoning behind this attempt at a bandwagon. You're trying to flesh people out. I like that. But you do actually need to have evidence for your claims. + Show Spoiler + On October 14 2013 17:53 playerboy345 wrote: [green]I'm against lynching afkers. Lurkers are kind of a different story though, we have to force those to post. Honestly your suggesting isn't lynching someone randomly, it's lynching whoever is the scummiest (something I agree with). Lynching afkers should never happen in my opinion as it's more likely to set us back then anything else. I HATE E00e!!!! SERIOUSLY WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? Reading through this I feel like I made the right initial call. Look, he re-words his post to better explain his point. The ONLY problem I have with this is: Why is E00e interested in helping our cop role-claim at all? We have coaches. Let him work it out with them. The less blue roles scum have to target the better. The only scenario that our cop should role-call in is if he is about to get lynched. In which case, if I hasn't defended himself to this point, it's probably too late regardless. On October 14 2013 17:55 E00e wrote: @Odin I agree that the cop should not come out now. Im just interested in helping the cop to figure out when they should come out. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
I've come to the conclusion; I cannot type to save my life. No edit hurts  | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
If E00e defense of SagaZ is wrong, was mine wrong too? Please explain. SagaZ has made 1 post. It doesn't seem like it's complete trash but he hasn't posted anything else yet. I have to wait to see if this changes. Like my first couple post were about this. One of them specifically mentioned I was not on board with lynching SagaZ at the moment. It's kind of the reason I lean towards Istand lynch of SagaZ. Either way, at this point, either of them could probably post a compelling statement to sway my reads on them with solid reasoning. The whole reason I don't have a real read on either of them is entirely a lack of content. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Obv my scum reads are still higher on my list than Istand. I figure I should clear this up before/if it became an issue. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Yeah, I guess I must of missed that. Ashamed. But this post still just kind of rehashes what we have been talking about anyway. Istand's actions seem scummy. There isn't a way to know for sure until he post more. At the point I still prefer to wait. There isn't a lot to tell about either of them this way or that. I guess I'll wait for everyone else to come back around. If my formatting was bad I'd prefer to settle any misunderstandings. I don't want bad scum reads on people because of simple miss understandings. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
I'd rather have to pick apart my info so we can try to move the town in the right direction. My post mean nothing if they don't move us towards lynching scum. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
my first couple post were really blotchy. Since this got brought up, Is my formatting in my last reads post on E00e better? I tried to clean it up a bit when Suess commented on it. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
Could you at least elaborate on the reads I put up? | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
You should explain why you feel I'm trustworthy. I've tried to make it pretty clear what and what and why I think about people. You aren't even trying to. | ||
|
OdinOfPergo
United States840 Posts
##vote:istandwithmitt | ||
| ||
