White Flag Mafia

On October 31 2013 09:31 hzflank wrote:
Stutters posting when he does not have to is a town Stutters.

On October 31 2013 12:05 Asinine wrote:

That is exactly what mafia Stutters would want you to think. Why label Stutters as town and leave the thread? We are trying to find scum, not tell scum who is town. Your post serves no greater purpose other than to gain Stutters' support.

On October 31 2013 12:07 Pandain wrote:


What is Qatar like?

On October 31 2013 12:24 Bereft wrote:
no, i want to ask a question -- why does pandain only get to ask one.
asinine, what's your reason for smurfing? i can think of only 2 reasons. which one is yours:
[a] you have a reputation known throughout the land of being an excellent scum hunter, and you don't want to die night 1.
[b] you believe your meta is so obvious people would be able to read your play day 1.
[c] other (please expand)

On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote:


As a conversation starter. Up until that point only little blue men were being discussed and I am unable to partake in that discussion to to my unfamiliarity with big green or red men. Obviously I did not think that Stutters' post gave a clue to his alignment, but I may not of conveyed the tone correctly.

On October 31 2013 09:31 hzflank wrote:
Stutters posting when he does not have to is a town Stutters.

On October 31 2013 13:40 Oatsmaster wrote:
Random lynching is bad and lets not do it.
If we hit scum, great, but then what do we do on day 2?
If we hit town, fuck, but then what do we do on day 2?
Yeah sure we have a 30% chance of hitting scum, but we also have a 70% chance of hitting town, Would you lynch someone who you think is 70% town? I dont think so.

On November 01 2013 04:26 Stutters695 wrote:
So where did Asinine disappear to?

On November 01 2013 05:22 Stutters695 wrote:

I would say he answered your questions decently. What else were you looking for in that regard?

On October 31 2013 13:31 Asinine wrote:
Bereft, I want to know how exactly you arrived at the 25% number. Scumhunting will increase odds of hitting scum to a percentage far greater than that. Please explain.


Your post:

It is quite apparent that you were trying to bait Stutters into posting. This is not what I take issue with.

My issue is that your first post is stated as a fact and an imperative.
In other words, you are essentially saying that Stutters should post -- when he doesn't have to -- and you will automatically consider him town. Now this may not be what you wanted to say, but it is exactly what it sounds like you are saying to any third-party.

"Come out to play, Stutters! If you post a lot, I won't think you're scum."

I don't see much town motivation in this strategy. Yes, you may get Stutters to post a little more. This, in theory, should give you town cred. However, you are quite clearly choosing one of the most obvious lynchbait targets to talk about on Day 1. Additionally, after Stutters reply, you just disappear with no follow-up. When you return, you make a lengthy post that focuses on defending yourself. There is a wishy-washy accusation towards me, but it is weak and unsubstantiated.

You are also strong-arming Stutters to play a particular way that could make his meta harder to read in the long run. All in all, I am still unimpressed with you. Convince me otherwise.

On November 01 2013 09:51 hzflank wrote:
This seems to have flown under the radar:



You say that you are not sure whether the most concerning thing actually exists.



You feel pretty confident with a vote on someone that you only lean slightly scum on.

I would say that you decided on where to park your vote before you decided on the reasons for it.

##vote: mkfuba07

On November 01 2013 03:09 mkfuba07 wrote:

Actually, I think I'm going to vote for him. He's talked quite a bit, but always ends with a noncommittal statement. He kind of narrates the thread, but doesn't give a conclusion.

As far as his involvement in the rng debate, the apparent inconsistency in his position is the most concerning thing to me, though I'm not even sure there is one. I think rng-ing would be bad play, so advocating for it or opposing it are pretty null. I agree with jjd that he appears to be supporting it in one post, then the next one appears to be agreeing with the first. However, I guess it could be interpreted the way hzflank says he meant it, so overall that just makes me lean slight scum on him.

Altogether, I feel pretty confident with a vote on hzflank.

##Vote: hzflank

On November 02 2013 07:56 Pandain wrote:
Okay, then do you think the votes are still piling up too quickly? I mean to be frank there are only three votes on him.

On November 02 2013 07:57 Pandain wrote:
I agree Hz's reasonings are poor, but it seems to be more of a result of mis-understanding then pure malice. Even ignoring him, what do you think of my points?

On November 02 2013 08:06 Pandain wrote:


Did you look into any more canidates?

On November 02 2013 08:10 hzflank wrote:


Why are there only two lynch targets, to you?

On November 02 2013 08:14 hzflank wrote:
But the votes are 4/4/3 and Stutters is not voting. Why is Pandain not a lynch target, for you?

It doesn't matter I suppose, your position is that you want me lynched so there might as well be only one target.

On November 02 2013 08:19 Pandain wrote:
Can you explain why you think hzflank didn't address your questions?

On October 31 2013 12:05 Asinine wrote:

That is exactly what mafia Stutters would want you to think. Why label Stutters as town and leave the thread? We are trying to find scum, not tell scum who is town. Your post serves no greater purpose other than to gain Stutters' support.

On October 31 2013 13:31 Asinine wrote:
Bereft, I want to know how exactly you arrived at the 25% number. Scumhunting will increase odds of hitting scum to a percentage far greater than that. Please explain.


Your post:

It is quite apparent that you were trying to bait Stutters into posting. This is not what I take issue with.

My issue is that your first post is stated as a fact and an imperative.
In other words, you are essentially saying that Stutters should post -- when he doesn't have to -- and you will automatically consider him town. Now this may not be what you wanted to say, but it is exactly what it sounds like you are saying to any third-party.

"Come out to play, Stutters! If you post a lot, I won't think you're scum."

I don't see much town motivation in this strategy. Yes, you may get Stutters to post a little more. This, in theory, should give you town cred. However, you are quite clearly choosing one of the most obvious lynchbait targets to talk about on Day 1. Additionally, after Stutters reply, you just disappear with no follow-up. When you return, you make a lengthy post that focuses on defending yourself. There is a wishy-washy accusation towards me, but it is weak and unsubstantiated.

You are also strong-arming Stutters to play a particular way that could make his meta harder to read in the long run. All in all, I am still unimpressed with you. Convince me otherwise.

On November 02 2013 08:27 Grackaroni wrote:
Do something Pandas! Our lynch is losing steam.

On November 02 2013 08:30 Pandain wrote:
His response is even better.

You read way too much into that one liner. That he's trying to bait Stutters into posting? What?

You say town shouldn't find other town, that's completely wrong especially in a mini. I also labeled Grack as town with no written reasons, what about that? You're assuming he's trying to lead Stutters into doing something when that is clearly not his intention

On November 02 2013 08:36 Pandain wrote:
No it doesn't at all. People post differently then you. You blandly saying it seems constructed is a horrible reason to justify lynching a three page poster over a three post poster.

I don't know what's taking you so long to answer these, but you're playing so weird right now with horrible reasoning. Are you tunneled right now? How can you justify lynching the second most active person?

On November 02 2013 08:41 OdinOfPergo wrote:
i cant't think the fact asinine having to fight fuba's stance for him 20 mins before the deadline is scummy?

On November 02 2013 08:41 Pandain wrote:
If migz comes back he should help us and realize it's bad move to lynch hz.

Here's a question for Asinine: Ignoring hz, do you think tuba is suspicious?

On November 02 2013 09:06 hzflank wrote:


You will put the guy who was almost lynched instead of the scum on the backburner, while you lynch the guy who dropped the hammer on the scum?

On November 02 2013 09:25 Pandain wrote:
Asinine you thought hz was scum. Why not push him, try to convince others, why were you only focusing on me.

On November 03 2013 06:09 Pandain wrote:
And to be honest I don't think there are going to be many better vig shots.

Knowing Asinine's alignment greatly helps with rest of thread.

On November 02 2013 08:47 Tehpoofter wrote:
##Vote mkfuba07

I don't like his accusations on hzfanks I think between the two he looks the most scummy in his filter.

1) I honestly don't like either of the two main lynches but its too close to deadline now. 2)I realize my activity has been shit but as for now I think that Grack is most town to me his aggressive style with his constant pings make me think he is the most town by far and I think on the early grack/oats fight both are just town argueing with town.

As of now town is grack/oats more to come during the night.

On November 03 2013 06:37 hzflank wrote:
I would be surprised if there is a vig shot. Not only is it unlikely that there is a vig, but even if there is they may not of been active enough to decide on their target.

Best to play as if there are no power roles, for the moment.

On November 03 2013 06:42 hzflank wrote:


So I should not of doctored Asinine?

On November 01 2013 01:24 Laughing Jack wrote:


Jarjar doesn't bring up anything new but just says he's against randomlynching, However most of the post is just fluff about what rng-lynching is to make it seem like his saying more then "Yeah I agree". And it's very certainly fluff because he doesn't reach a conclusion with it. It's scummy to try to make yourself look more townie then you are.

His hzflank vote is really weak. He says he wants to lynch hzflank for being one of the rng-supporters but provides no reasoning other then that others seemed to lynch him. It's a very un-townie park-vote.

He's still not contributing but just talking about rng-lynching trying to make supporters look scummy for supporting it.

On November 01 2013 19:46 Laughing Jack wrote:

This might be difficult for you but try to use your head.
I'd love to hear what kind of backwards logic makes you want to lynch me.

On November 01 2013 03:28 Laughing Jack wrote:
Bereft while your vote on the lurker is most admirable I don't really care about it, and you're floating around without any real opinions so would you mind sharing any of your current scumreads?

On November 01 2013 16:12 Laughing Jack wrote:
Your sacrifice is noted,
What do you two think about the current votes?

On November 01 2013 16:18 Laughing Jack wrote:
No, Are you happy with them? Do you think anyone's vote suck, do you think my vote suck? How would you like the votes to be, who do you want pressured?, is Pandain really your top scumread? Plenty to talk about.

On November 01 2013 22:17 Laughing Jack wrote:

To elaborate.
hzflank hasn't done enough to make me lean town or scum on him. Early on cases are generally weak and when the majority of the players gives very little to go on it's better to lynch the person who will give us most information going into day2.

On November 03 2013 07:22 Bereft wrote:
asinine, what's with the self-sacrificial post volunteering to get vig'ed??

if you are town as you say and you are vig'ed, assuming no doctor saves, we now have 2 instead of 3 mislynches:



8-3 DAY 2 STARTS
7-3 MISLYNCH
6-3 DAY 3 STARTS
5-3 MISLYNCH

On November 03 2013 07:25 Pandain wrote:
So here's what I don't like about Asinine's analysis'.

I don't like how he's analyzing only a group of people. If he really wanted to leave town with a definite understanding of where he stood, then he'd be analyzing the thread in the whole, not just looking at specific people. So that's weird to me.



He finds several townie reads and then says lynch with fire. His only reasoning is that jack's vote on hz is suspicious. It is suspicious but there are possible justificatinos. He said he wanted to lynch someone to get information, HZ more then fuba who was afk would provide information. Furthermore, he could have simply made a bad choice as he voted like basically last second and was mainly afk.

In fact, only voting and not justifying it is something scum would very very very very very very very very much try to avoid.
Town should avoid it but don't always.

On November 03 2013 07:47 Bereft wrote:
right now i'd say he's likely town. his first hz case coupled with his advocation of a lurker lynch close to the deadline when there's no vote consolidation speaks to either a pretty transparent mafia player or a townie who's not very cautious to how he's being perceived.

if he's a pretty transparent mafia player, the vote on fuba would not be in line with previous behavior.

not as confident with this read as i am with grackapack -- would like to hear his current reads. previously everyone was operating under the assumption he was an overwhelmed newbie, but he's actually played quite a few games so it's very possible i'm underestimating him.

On November 03 2013 07:38 Mig wrote:
Asinine you are definitely grasping at straws with your LJ analysis. Do you really think LJ is a better lynch than someone like Oats? What are your thoughts on Oats?

I am here now Pandain!

On November 05 2013 02:45 Mig wrote:
Asinine who do you think the mafia are?

On November 05 2013 02:48 Laughing Jack wrote:
Asinine,
If you're town, why are your reads so useless and shallow?
Why haven't you been active?

That you defended fuba is scummy, and yes scum does that and use the exact argument you're using to play it off.
if you don't want to die you're going to put in some serious fucking effort today.

On November 05 2013 02:56 Pandain wrote:
Although Jack eating his hat is amusing

On November 05 2013 03:01 Stutters695 wrote:
Asinine, what changed between the immediate aftermath of the Fuba lynch and when you disappeared that made me go from (as far as I can tell) one of your top suspects to just I could be scum?

On November 05 2013 03:09 JarJarDrinks wrote:
So then whet did you mean by this post from right before the flip?

On November 05 2013 03:12 Hopeless1der wrote:

---

Let us review.

The Player list for this game:
Red = known scum
Green = known/almost confirmed town
Bold = people Asinine thinks could be scum
Blue = people Asinine does not consider for possible scum

1. Oatsmaster
   
2. Mig
   
3. mkfuba07
   
4. OdinOfPergo
   
5. Tehpoofter
   
6. Stutters695
   
7. Pandain
   
8. Hopeless1der
   
9. Bereft
   
10. Asinine (By default)
    
11. Grackaroni
    
12. JarJarDrinks
    
13. LaughingJack
    
14. hzflank
    

So once more for those that don't feel like counting, Asinine has rattled off 7/14 players for scum where 3 are already dead, 1 is almost confirmed town, 1 is himself and 1 is the guy he's currently attempting to curry favor with. That gives him a pool of 8 players to identify the scum from. He's fingered 87% of the player base as "possible scum". Explain to me again how your reads are meaningful and fleshed out, because I dont see it Asinine. You do not deserve to live in this game any longer.

On November 05 2013 03:14 Pandain wrote:
Asinine I would feel more comfortable and therefore be more pro-active trying to save you if you told us your real ID since you'll get lynched anyway

On November 05 2013 03:19 Stutters695 wrote:
Asinine, when you get a moment can you please look at my giant post on you? Obviate I've assumed quite a bit about your actions, but I would love to hear your thought process behind the things I brought up. Especially:

Why did you not comment on the meta portion of the case on Fuba?

Why was I one of your two mentioned people to check into after the lynch, yet you never actually checked into me?

On November 05 2013 03:29 JarJarDrinks wrote:
I did and can't figure it out. Please answer my question directly. What did you think was suspicious about stutters vote ?

On November 02 2013 08:51 Asinine wrote:
That Stutters vote is soooo suspicious if fuba flips town. Let's not forget that post.

On November 02 2013 09:03 Asinine wrote:
I want to lynch Stutters tomorrow. I'm putting hzflank on the backburner until we lynch this guy.

On November 02 2013 09:10 Pandain wrote:


It was far from extraneous, it put us in the lead.

It doesn't clear him because he voted hz before for very weak reasons, but it doesn't really mean he's scum.

On November 02 2013 09:12 Asinine wrote:
Oh right, Stutters unvoted as well as voted. Fair enough. I still think he should be looked into, along with tehpoofter,

On October 21 2013 07:55 HiroPro wrote:

Overview:
This is a semi-open setup. The possible roles are listed, but the exact role counts are unknown. The mafia win when they equal or outnumber town while having more than 1 member alive. The town wins when mafia only have 1 member left. There are 10 townies and 4 mafia. Mafia have 1 KP each night. Notifications will only be given if required by the role.