|
On June 04 2016 10:11 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 10:05 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:
guys, sqrtneg1
he was here and active when it was just "hello wassup"
but when people started talking actual content, he disappeared. Whereas you contributed what exactly?
EBWOP
Hyper-active in the pre-game, come Day 1 and you have what, 2 or 3 posts to your name over the course of 10 pages?
|
On June 04 2016 10:21 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 10:11 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 10:05 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 09:54 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 09:31 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 09:29 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 09:27 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 09:17 Tumblewood wrote:mmmph jealous I read your filters from the other two games you've played. + Show Spoiler [please see diagram] +the notable difference I found was that you tended more towards crazy theories and casting suspicion as mafia than as town. One of the advantages or disadvantages of being a non-native speaker is that I've learned many words that are more accurate to my intention but are unwieldy for native speakers. Another contributing factor is that when my fingers are on the keyboard, I enter some parallel mindset of "must make this Ivy League - level" because of my job. As a mafia in that game, after re-reading my own posts, I've come to the conclusion that I fucked up and tried to be too vehement in my defense and my counter-arguments were all stretches of the imagination. It was the text translation of desperation once I became suspected. +1 Not sure what you're +1 on, the plight of a foreign English speaker who teaches and revises English writing or that of a Mafia who over-extends under pressure?? May I ask for a textual response to this or am I just begging for another meme? Sure. I'll explain it cuz you lack subtlety. The guy in question is complete Null right now and its not a good look for you to be acting like you have a scum read on him already. He has done nothing alignment indicative and as such is the type of player who is going to be caught trying to defend his scummates or will crumble because his team is in a bad way if he is scum. That's why your pressure on him right now doesn't mean shit. I fail to see the connection between your reasoning and the question; what did you +1 on? That he is an educated person who knows his english and you assumed he was just a tryhard. Sorry I thought you were looking for a game related response.
Er, I think you may want to re-look at the post sequence. I believe you have the name to message relationship mixed up.
|
On June 04 2016 10:25 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 10:23 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 10:21 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 10:11 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 10:05 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 09:54 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 09:31 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 09:29 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 09:27 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 09:17 Tumblewood wrote:mmmph jealous I read your filters from the other two games you've played. + Show Spoiler [please see diagram] +the notable difference I found was that you tended more towards crazy theories and casting suspicion as mafia than as town. One of the advantages or disadvantages of being a non-native speaker is that I've learned many words that are more accurate to my intention but are unwieldy for native speakers. Another contributing factor is that when my fingers are on the keyboard, I enter some parallel mindset of "must make this Ivy League - level" because of my job. As a mafia in that game, after re-reading my own posts, I've come to the conclusion that I fucked up and tried to be too vehement in my defense and my counter-arguments were all stretches of the imagination. It was the text translation of desperation once I became suspected. +1 Not sure what you're +1 on, the plight of a foreign English speaker who teaches and revises English writing or that of a Mafia who over-extends under pressure?? May I ask for a textual response to this or am I just begging for another meme? Sure. I'll explain it cuz you lack subtlety. The guy in question is complete Null right now and its not a good look for you to be acting like you have a scum read on him already. He has done nothing alignment indicative and as such is the type of player who is going to be caught trying to defend his scummates or will crumble because his team is in a bad way if he is scum. That's why your pressure on him right now doesn't mean shit. I fail to see the connection between your reasoning and the question; what did you +1 on? That he is an educated person who knows his english and you assumed he was just a tryhard. Sorry I thought you were looking for a game related response. Er, I think you may want to re-look at the post sequence. I believe you have the name to message relationship mixed up. Good, glad you caught that.
Still have yet to answer the question, unless the answer is that you just misread the posts you were responding to in the first place.
|
|
|
On June 04 2016 11:11 QuickTwist wrote:Problem?
You say one thing but do another, despite the fact that finding the discrepancy is stupidly easy. Either you're scum or just... How can I put this nicely... A very individualistic and selfish townie. Either way, I think the game would be better off without you.
|
|
|
On June 04 2016 11:25 Tumblewood wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 11:00 QuickTwist wrote:
##Vote: Tumblewood
I shouldn't be getting this much town cred already should I? said the player who gave out four townreads in the first half hour of the game I think you should be getting towncred because the way you are acting is totally unlike how newbie scums tend to act
You have to remember that he is not new to Mafia, just new to TL Mafia. That being said, knowing that he is an experienced player only throws more confusion into the mix when considering his posts and actions. Confusion is not good for a town win, in my opinion.
On June 04 2016 11:25 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 11:15 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:11 QuickTwist wrote:Problem? You say one thing but do another, despite the fact that finding the discrepancy is stupidly easy. Either you're scum or just... How can I put this nicely... A very individualistic and selfish townie. Either way, I think the game would be better off without you. I agree! The game would totally be better without me. Why change things up amirite?
This makes no sense.
|
On June 04 2016 11:27 Tumblewood wrote:
wait what
qt why did you vote ("vote") me in this thread and then vote sqrt in the voting thread? what do you mean by that?
The only outside theory I have, if I may, is again collusion.
He voted for one player. He then changes his vote to another player, while possibly trying to slip by the fact that he actually voted for yet another player, one that only has any votes from kushmountain, a player whose defense for the lack of activity and analysis in comparison to his previous posting style was simply "I was at work so I had more free time," which should be bullshit to begin with.
As I see it, there are two interpretations here:
1. QuickTwist is a free radical, a wildcard, and for that reason he is dangerous to the town. He does not respond to questioning with any substance, makes unsubstantiated claims, and he intentionally misleads the other town members. Maybe he just doesn't care. Regardless of the underlying cause, he should be lynched because even a townie of his character is detrimental to the town simply because of the chaos he propagates.
2. QuickTwist is Mafia, and potentially so is kushmountain. Being new to TL Mafia, QuickTwist acted rashly and had to backtrack after some further coordination with the veteran player. This means he is scum, and is detrimental to the town, and should be lynched.
I fail to see any other alternative.
|
On June 04 2016 11:41 Tumblewood wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 11:36 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:27 Tumblewood wrote:
wait what
qt why did you vote ("vote") me in this thread and then vote sqrt in the voting thread? what do you mean by that? The only outside theory I have, if I may, is again collusion. He voted for one player. He then changes his vote to another player, while possibly trying to slip by the fact that he actually voted for yet another player, one that only has any votes from kushmountain, a player whose defense for the lack of activity and analysis in comparison to his previous posting style was simply "I was at work so I had more free time," which should be bullshit to begin with. As I see it, there are two interpretations here: 1. QuickTwist is a free radical, a wildcard, and for that reason he is dangerous to the town. He does not respond to questioning with any substance, makes unsubstantiated claims, and he intentionally misleads the other town members. Maybe he just doesn't care. Regardless of the underlying cause, he should be lynched because even a townie of his character is detrimental to the town simply because of the chaos he propagates. 2. QuickTwist is Mafia, and potentially so is kushmountain. Being new to TL Mafia, QuickTwist acted rashly and had to backtrack after some further coordination with the veteran player. This means he is scum, and is detrimental to the town, and should be lynched. I fail to see any other alternative. of course this is a crude summary, but the vibe I get from this post is, "QT acts irrationally, and therefore he is probably mafia," which is a poor basis for a scumread, because town players frequently act irrationally. QT has actually been the single most helpful person to town so far, regardless of alignment, because he has sparked quality discussion and remained active all game so far.
Your summary of my summary is not accurate. A more accurate summary would be "QuickTwist acts irrationally, therefore is a detriment to the town, regardless of his actual affiliation." Activity is not a metric here, because the majority of his activity as far as I can tell has been vague, full of memes, and as I've said countless times, unsubstantiated. The few posts of his which do have some sort of value I think I could count on one hand. A scum player would follow this posting pattern - inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis. You've also ignored the fact that his vote does not reflect anything he has said in the thread, and that sqrtofneg1 has done nothing to gain the amount of suspicion necessary for two people to vote for him. Hence, I suspect collusion and that QuickTwist and possibly kushmountain are scum, but in the end I am only certain that I don't think QuickTwist will actually benefit the town whether he is scum or not, so I voted for him.
|
On June 04 2016 11:44 Tumblewood wrote:
also jealous what do you mean by collusion? I don't need a dictionary definition, but the word would imply that a townie is working to help the scum, which is surely not your intent. I may know what you mean as "buddying"-- do you mean that a scum is working to gain the trust of a townie by townreading him?
My initial statement of collusion was to imply that it appeared like two scum are engaging in seemingly playful banter and thus eliminate the chance of either of them being called out for inactivity, while not-so-subtly hinting at each other being townies and thus not the scum that they very well may be. "Buddying" could be what QuickTwist was doing after this in regards to myself and other posters, by calling townies whom he well knows are townies but with no evidence in order to give them a window of acceptance that could potentially cause them to trust him and support him.
|
Also, this playful banter would serve to dilute their posting summaries, inflate the page and post count, and add space between incriminating posts. Certainly one way to approach the accountability issue in a medium such as an online forum.
|
On June 04 2016 11:54 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 11:48 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:41 Tumblewood wrote:On June 04 2016 11:36 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:27 Tumblewood wrote:
wait what
qt why did you vote ("vote") me in this thread and then vote sqrt in the voting thread? what do you mean by that? The only outside theory I have, if I may, is again collusion. He voted for one player. He then changes his vote to another player, while possibly trying to slip by the fact that he actually voted for yet another player, one that only has any votes from kushmountain, a player whose defense for the lack of activity and analysis in comparison to his previous posting style was simply "I was at work so I had more free time," which should be bullshit to begin with. As I see it, there are two interpretations here: 1. QuickTwist is a free radical, a wildcard, and for that reason he is dangerous to the town. He does not respond to questioning with any substance, makes unsubstantiated claims, and he intentionally misleads the other town members. Maybe he just doesn't care. Regardless of the underlying cause, he should be lynched because even a townie of his character is detrimental to the town simply because of the chaos he propagates. 2. QuickTwist is Mafia, and potentially so is kushmountain. Being new to TL Mafia, QuickTwist acted rashly and had to backtrack after some further coordination with the veteran player. This means he is scum, and is detrimental to the town, and should be lynched. I fail to see any other alternative. of course this is a crude summary, but the vibe I get from this post is, "QT acts irrationally, and therefore he is probably mafia," which is a poor basis for a scumread, because town players frequently act irrationally. QT has actually been the single most helpful person to town so far, regardless of alignment, because he has sparked quality discussion and remained active all game so far. Your summary of my summary is not accurate. A more accurate summary would be "QuickTwist acts irrationally, therefore is a detriment to the town, regardless of his actual affiliation." Activity is not a metric here, because the majority of his activity as far as I can tell has been vague, full of memes, and as I've said countless times, unsubstantiated. The few posts of his which do have some sort of value I think I could count on one hand. A scum player would follow this posting pattern - inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis. You've also ignored the fact that his vote does not reflect anything he has said in the thread, and that sqrtofneg1 has done nothing to gain the amount of suspicion necessary for two people to vote for him. Hence, I suspect collusion and that QuickTwist and possibly kushmountain are scum, but in the end I am only certain that I don't think QuickTwist will actually benefit the town whether he is scum or not, so I voted for him. You both have valid points. However, what is the motivation to kill me off if I am Town? This is a question that has been heavy on me heart for a little while now and I would really like to hear your rationale for why killing a Townie is ever a good idea.
A townie acting in a manner such as you have, which is: "inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis" and not answering direct questions which would be rather innocuous if you were not scum or answering in a misleading fashion means that through your play you have demonstrated that you would serve no value to the town whether you are scum or not. Even if you have a PR and it is valuable to the town, your posting game is detrimental to the point where I'd rather take the chance that you are in fact scum and that your role is not in fact in important. The chances of you being scum are higher than the chances of you being valuable, and the chances of you being valuable in text form, judging by the past 10 pages or so, are low as well. Therefore, you are the most valid candidate for lynching in my view and I have yet to see you say anything that would prove me wrong.
On June 04 2016 11:55 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 11:53 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:44 Tumblewood wrote:
also jealous what do you mean by collusion? I don't need a dictionary definition, but the word would imply that a townie is working to help the scum, which is surely not your intent. I may know what you mean as "buddying"-- do you mean that a scum is working to gain the trust of a townie by townreading him? My initial statement of collusion was to imply that it appeared like two scum are engaging in seemingly playful banter and thus eliminate the chance of either of them being called out for inactivity, while not-so-subtly hinting at each other being townies and thus not the scum that they very well may be. "Buddying" could be what QuickTwist was doing after this in regards to myself and other posters, by calling townies whom he well knows are townies but with no evidence in order to give them a window of acceptance that could potentially cause them to trust him and support him. This claim is not based on evidence, but on conjecture.
This game has no clues so all claims are based on conjecture.
|
On June 04 2016 12:00 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 11:55 Jealous wrote:
Also, this playful banter would serve to dilute their posting summaries, inflate the page and post count, and add space between incriminating posts. Certainly one way to approach the accountability issue in a medium such as an online forum. I notice you are strong in claim that I make the best lynch today. But you fail to see that I have provided content to talk about (we are talking about it right now in fact).
When the content you provide largely revolves around yourself, have you contributed to anything but the criticism of your actions and thus your own demise? Compare this to the content of my posts, which is questioning people about their actions and intentions. Providing content to talk about is useless if you are only generating hot air. Volume does not imply quality.
|
On June 04 2016 12:01 Tumblewood wrote:
going to take a break until I inevitably get bored and come back
playing this game is just not fun for me right now because the only two active players are on (what I see as) the wrong track and set in it. feels like I'm talking to a brick wall.
I answered your questions and don't see any reason why my deductions are false, so I don't know why I should be judged for being "set in" my track or why anything you've said should derail me.
|
On June 04 2016 12:09 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 12:00 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:54 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:48 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:41 Tumblewood wrote:On June 04 2016 11:36 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:27 Tumblewood wrote:
wait what
qt why did you vote ("vote") me in this thread and then vote sqrt in the voting thread? what do you mean by that? The only outside theory I have, if I may, is again collusion. He voted for one player. He then changes his vote to another player, while possibly trying to slip by the fact that he actually voted for yet another player, one that only has any votes from kushmountain, a player whose defense for the lack of activity and analysis in comparison to his previous posting style was simply "I was at work so I had more free time," which should be bullshit to begin with. As I see it, there are two interpretations here: 1. QuickTwist is a free radical, a wildcard, and for that reason he is dangerous to the town. He does not respond to questioning with any substance, makes unsubstantiated claims, and he intentionally misleads the other town members. Maybe he just doesn't care. Regardless of the underlying cause, he should be lynched because even a townie of his character is detrimental to the town simply because of the chaos he propagates. 2. QuickTwist is Mafia, and potentially so is kushmountain. Being new to TL Mafia, QuickTwist acted rashly and had to backtrack after some further coordination with the veteran player. This means he is scum, and is detrimental to the town, and should be lynched. I fail to see any other alternative. of course this is a crude summary, but the vibe I get from this post is, "QT acts irrationally, and therefore he is probably mafia," which is a poor basis for a scumread, because town players frequently act irrationally. QT has actually been the single most helpful person to town so far, regardless of alignment, because he has sparked quality discussion and remained active all game so far. Your summary of my summary is not accurate. A more accurate summary would be "QuickTwist acts irrationally, therefore is a detriment to the town, regardless of his actual affiliation." Activity is not a metric here, because the majority of his activity as far as I can tell has been vague, full of memes, and as I've said countless times, unsubstantiated. The few posts of his which do have some sort of value I think I could count on one hand. A scum player would follow this posting pattern - inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis. You've also ignored the fact that his vote does not reflect anything he has said in the thread, and that sqrtofneg1 has done nothing to gain the amount of suspicion necessary for two people to vote for him. Hence, I suspect collusion and that QuickTwist and possibly kushmountain are scum, but in the end I am only certain that I don't think QuickTwist will actually benefit the town whether he is scum or not, so I voted for him. You both have valid points. However, what is the motivation to kill me off if I am Town? This is a question that has been heavy on me heart for a little while now and I would really like to hear your rationale for why killing a Townie is ever a good idea. A townie acting in a manner such as you have, which is: "inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis" and not answering direct questions which would be rather innocuous if you were not scum or answering in a misleading fashion means that through your play you have demonstrated that you would serve no value to the town whether you are scum or not. Even if you have a PR and it is valuable to the town, your posting game is detrimental to the point where I'd rather take the chance that you are in fact scum and that your role is not in fact in important. The chances of you being scum are higher than the chances of you being valuable, and the chances of you being valuable in text form, judging by the past 10 pages or so, are low as well. Therefore, you are the most valid candidate for lynching in my view and I have yet to see you say anything that would prove me wrong. you would have to provide evidence that the ratio of keeping me if I am town with my playstyle vs lynching me if I am town with my playstyle is +EV. If You can demonstrate concretely that lynching me because of my playstyle ie Policy Lynch is better for town that not then I might change my game plan up a little. You would further have to provide evidence that I will remain to have "inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis" throughout the entirety of the game and that I would not have the ability to be an asset to town. Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 12:00 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:55 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:53 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:44 Tumblewood wrote:
also jealous what do you mean by collusion? I don't need a dictionary definition, but the word would imply that a townie is working to help the scum, which is surely not your intent. I may know what you mean as "buddying"-- do you mean that a scum is working to gain the trust of a townie by townreading him? My initial statement of collusion was to imply that it appeared like two scum are engaging in seemingly playful banter and thus eliminate the chance of either of them being called out for inactivity, while not-so-subtly hinting at each other being townies and thus not the scum that they very well may be. "Buddying" could be what QuickTwist was doing after this in regards to myself and other posters, by calling townies whom he well knows are townies but with no evidence in order to give them a window of acceptance that could potentially cause them to trust him and support him. This claim is not based on evidence, but on conjecture. This game has no clues so all claims are based on conjecture. If this game has no clues then we are basically just playing mental masterbation with ourselve in a very circle jerk type fashion.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/508622-newbie-mafia-xxi#3
Chance of you being scum, excluding myself from the equation because I know that I am not scum = 3/12 = 1/4
Chance of you being blue = 2/12 = 1/6
Chance of you being a truly valuable PR blue like the doc, cop, or vigilante = 3/4
Chance of you being useful to the town without considering your textual input = 1/6 * 3/4 = 3/24 = 1/8
Therefore the chances of you being scum as opposed to a valuable blue are 2:1.
This does not include my admittedly subjective but still substantiated claim that your value as a talking head in this game so far is low, so I won't go into that because it is impossible to quantify but it certainly is possible for me to say is my opinion. I could do a post-by-post analysis of your history in this thread and determine how many of your posts were a waste of time and space and how many actually contributed something, but I've already read all of them once and don't have the desire to do so again just to make a fraction in this post for your amusement.
In response to your latter statement, if that's how you want to paraphrase it then that's up to you, but without official clues from the OP I don't see how you could have expected anything different than what we have now.
On June 04 2016 12:10 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 12:04 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 12:00 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:55 Jealous wrote:
Also, this playful banter would serve to dilute their posting summaries, inflate the page and post count, and add space between incriminating posts. Certainly one way to approach the accountability issue in a medium such as an online forum. I notice you are strong in claim that I make the best lynch today. But you fail to see that I have provided content to talk about (we are talking about it right now in fact). When the content you provide largely revolves around yourself, have you contributed to anything but the criticism of your actions and thus your own demise? Compare this to the content of my posts, which is questioning people about their actions and intentions. Providing content to talk about is useless if you are only generating hot air. Volume does not imply quality. yes, and where has that gotten you exactly? Its gotten you to the place where you would rather lynch a known townie.
"Known" townie? Please, don't throw that term around casually as if anything has been confirmed about you through a cop or otherwise. It's gotten me to the place where I've singled out the most suspicious player in my eyes and allowed me to cast a vote, pending further investigation and activity from others. This is not a policy kill, unless you are in fact townie are not playing to win as is stated in the rules in the OP, which I certainly do not think you are so far.
|
Another thing I forgot to add into my mathematical analysis is the fact that if you flip red, I would have a very strong case against kushmountain and sqrtofneg1 would be cleared of suspicion, meaning we would have 1 confirmed townie and 1 strongly suspected scum for Day 2. Seems like a worthwhile chance.
|
On June 04 2016 12:40 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 12:24 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 12:09 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 12:00 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:54 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:48 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:41 Tumblewood wrote:On June 04 2016 11:36 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:27 Tumblewood wrote:
wait what
qt why did you vote ("vote") me in this thread and then vote sqrt in the voting thread? what do you mean by that? The only outside theory I have, if I may, is again collusion. He voted for one player. He then changes his vote to another player, while possibly trying to slip by the fact that he actually voted for yet another player, one that only has any votes from kushmountain, a player whose defense for the lack of activity and analysis in comparison to his previous posting style was simply "I was at work so I had more free time," which should be bullshit to begin with. As I see it, there are two interpretations here: 1. QuickTwist is a free radical, a wildcard, and for that reason he is dangerous to the town. He does not respond to questioning with any substance, makes unsubstantiated claims, and he intentionally misleads the other town members. Maybe he just doesn't care. Regardless of the underlying cause, he should be lynched because even a townie of his character is detrimental to the town simply because of the chaos he propagates. 2. QuickTwist is Mafia, and potentially so is kushmountain. Being new to TL Mafia, QuickTwist acted rashly and had to backtrack after some further coordination with the veteran player. This means he is scum, and is detrimental to the town, and should be lynched. I fail to see any other alternative. of course this is a crude summary, but the vibe I get from this post is, "QT acts irrationally, and therefore he is probably mafia," which is a poor basis for a scumread, because town players frequently act irrationally. QT has actually been the single most helpful person to town so far, regardless of alignment, because he has sparked quality discussion and remained active all game so far. Your summary of my summary is not accurate. A more accurate summary would be "QuickTwist acts irrationally, therefore is a detriment to the town, regardless of his actual affiliation." Activity is not a metric here, because the majority of his activity as far as I can tell has been vague, full of memes, and as I've said countless times, unsubstantiated. The few posts of his which do have some sort of value I think I could count on one hand. A scum player would follow this posting pattern - inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis. You've also ignored the fact that his vote does not reflect anything he has said in the thread, and that sqrtofneg1 has done nothing to gain the amount of suspicion necessary for two people to vote for him. Hence, I suspect collusion and that QuickTwist and possibly kushmountain are scum, but in the end I am only certain that I don't think QuickTwist will actually benefit the town whether he is scum or not, so I voted for him. You both have valid points. However, what is the motivation to kill me off if I am Town? This is a question that has been heavy on me heart for a little while now and I would really like to hear your rationale for why killing a Townie is ever a good idea. A townie acting in a manner such as you have, which is: "inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis" and not answering direct questions which would be rather innocuous if you were not scum or answering in a misleading fashion means that through your play you have demonstrated that you would serve no value to the town whether you are scum or not. Even if you have a PR and it is valuable to the town, your posting game is detrimental to the point where I'd rather take the chance that you are in fact scum and that your role is not in fact in important. The chances of you being scum are higher than the chances of you being valuable, and the chances of you being valuable in text form, judging by the past 10 pages or so, are low as well. Therefore, you are the most valid candidate for lynching in my view and I have yet to see you say anything that would prove me wrong. you would have to provide evidence that the ratio of keeping me if I am town with my playstyle vs lynching me if I am town with my playstyle is +EV. If You can demonstrate concretely that lynching me because of my playstyle ie Policy Lynch is better for town that not then I might change my game plan up a little. You would further have to provide evidence that I will remain to have "inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis" throughout the entirety of the game and that I would not have the ability to be an asset to town. On June 04 2016 12:00 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:55 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:53 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:44 Tumblewood wrote:
also jealous what do you mean by collusion? I don't need a dictionary definition, but the word would imply that a townie is working to help the scum, which is surely not your intent. I may know what you mean as "buddying"-- do you mean that a scum is working to gain the trust of a townie by townreading him? My initial statement of collusion was to imply that it appeared like two scum are engaging in seemingly playful banter and thus eliminate the chance of either of them being called out for inactivity, while not-so-subtly hinting at each other being townies and thus not the scum that they very well may be. "Buddying" could be what QuickTwist was doing after this in regards to myself and other posters, by calling townies whom he well knows are townies but with no evidence in order to give them a window of acceptance that could potentially cause them to trust him and support him. This claim is not based on evidence, but on conjecture. This game has no clues so all claims are based on conjecture. If this game has no clues then we are basically just playing mental masterbation with ourselve in a very circle jerk type fashion. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/508622-newbie-mafia-xxi#3Chance of you being scum, excluding myself from the equation because I know that I am not scum = 3/12 = 1/4 Chance of you being blue = 2/12 = 1/6 Chance of you being a truly valuable PR blue like the doc, cop, or vigilante = 3/4 Chance of you being useful to the town without considering your textual input = 1/6 * 3/4 = 3/24 = 1/8 Therefore the chances of you being scum as opposed to a valuable blue are 2:1. This does not include my admittedly subjective but still substantiated claim that your value as a talking head in this game so far is low, so I won't go into that because it is impossible to quantify but it certainly is possible for me to say is my opinion. I could do a post-by-post analysis of your history in this thread and determine how many of your posts were a waste of time and space and how many actually contributed something, but I've already read all of them once and don't have the desire to do so again just to make a fraction in this post for your amusement. In response to your latter statement, if that's how you want to paraphrase it then that's up to you, but without official clues from the OP I don't see how you could have expected anything different than what we have now. On June 04 2016 12:10 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 12:04 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 12:00 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:55 Jealous wrote:
Also, this playful banter would serve to dilute their posting summaries, inflate the page and post count, and add space between incriminating posts. Certainly one way to approach the accountability issue in a medium such as an online forum. I notice you are strong in claim that I make the best lynch today. But you fail to see that I have provided content to talk about (we are talking about it right now in fact). When the content you provide largely revolves around yourself, have you contributed to anything but the criticism of your actions and thus your own demise? Compare this to the content of my posts, which is questioning people about their actions and intentions. Providing content to talk about is useless if you are only generating hot air. Volume does not imply quality. yes, and where has that gotten you exactly? Its gotten you to the place where you would rather lynch a known townie. "Known" townie? Please, don't throw that term around casually as if anything has been confirmed about you through a cop or otherwise. It's gotten me to the place where I've singled out the most suspicious player in my eyes and allowed me to cast a vote, pending further investigation and activity from others. This is not a policy kill, unless you are in fact townie are not playing to win as is stated in the rules in the OP, which I certainly do not think you are so far. LOL at your math. You have to carry over not simplify for it to even be remotely valid. Plus, what you are meaning with your math is essentially the exactly same numbers for everyone (if you are infact town, which is kinda hilarious because when you give yourself a given that you are town anyone can make up those numbers). I had a math teacher once tell me something that I think you might enjoy. He said "When you make up your own rules for math it becomes infinitely easier, but that does not mean it is correct." you cannot quantify what is considered "content" because the term is subjective in nature rather than concrete. You said yourself that this game is based on no clues so if that is true then your claim that there is even such thing as optimal play gets thrown out the window. Anyway I don't think you can fake this as scum since iirc people would know your meta so the only one you would be deceiving is me.
Carry over? Not simplify? I didn't simplify anything nor did I make up any rules. What?
My math is legit, and yes I am working off of the knowledge that I myself am not scum. You are correct in saying that this math applies to anyone currently in the game, which is exactly why you are a worthwhile vote because unlike others your posting habits are inconsistent and your voting is intentionally misleading. If on Day 1 all we are doing is taking a stab in the dark, I'd rather face towards the one light source I do see. As you said and I said before you, I cannot quantify content because it is subjective. However, I can make a damn good case if need be. There may be optimal play here, but there is certainly sub-par play.
I don't think anyone "knows my meta" because I haven't played mafia in 8 years, so unless someone does a very thorough investigation of my posts when I was 18 years old and finds some parallels that I would still consequently dismiss as pure imagination, I am going to say that your opinions on my alignment are moot, especially given that you contradict yourself within 2 posts.
|
On June 04 2016 12:56 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 12:51 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 12:40 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 12:24 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 12:09 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 12:00 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:54 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:48 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:41 Tumblewood wrote:On June 04 2016 11:36 Jealous wrote:
[quote]
The only outside theory I have, if I may, is again collusion.
He voted for one player. He then changes his vote to another player, while possibly trying to slip by the fact that he actually voted for yet another player, one that only has any votes from kushmountain, a player whose defense for the lack of activity and analysis in comparison to his previous posting style was simply "I was at work so I had more free time," which should be bullshit to begin with.
As I see it, there are two interpretations here:
1. QuickTwist is a free radical, a wildcard, and for that reason he is dangerous to the town. He does not respond to questioning with any substance, makes unsubstantiated claims, and he intentionally misleads the other town members. Maybe he just doesn't care. Regardless of the underlying cause, he should be lynched because even a townie of his character is detrimental to the town simply because of the chaos he propagates.
2. QuickTwist is Mafia, and potentially so is kushmountain. Being new to TL Mafia, QuickTwist acted rashly and had to backtrack after some further coordination with the veteran player. This means he is scum, and is detrimental to the town, and should be lynched.
I fail to see any other alternative. of course this is a crude summary, but the vibe I get from this post is, "QT acts irrationally, and therefore he is probably mafia," which is a poor basis for a scumread, because town players frequently act irrationally. QT has actually been the single most helpful person to town so far, regardless of alignment, because he has sparked quality discussion and remained active all game so far. Your summary of my summary is not accurate. A more accurate summary would be "QuickTwist acts irrationally, therefore is a detriment to the town, regardless of his actual affiliation." Activity is not a metric here, because the majority of his activity as far as I can tell has been vague, full of memes, and as I've said countless times, unsubstantiated. The few posts of his which do have some sort of value I think I could count on one hand. A scum player would follow this posting pattern - inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis. You've also ignored the fact that his vote does not reflect anything he has said in the thread, and that sqrtofneg1 has done nothing to gain the amount of suspicion necessary for two people to vote for him. Hence, I suspect collusion and that QuickTwist and possibly kushmountain are scum, but in the end I am only certain that I don't think QuickTwist will actually benefit the town whether he is scum or not, so I voted for him. You both have valid points. However, what is the motivation to kill me off if I am Town? This is a question that has been heavy on me heart for a little while now and I would really like to hear your rationale for why killing a Townie is ever a good idea. A townie acting in a manner such as you have, which is: "inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis" and not answering direct questions which would be rather innocuous if you were not scum or answering in a misleading fashion means that through your play you have demonstrated that you would serve no value to the town whether you are scum or not. Even if you have a PR and it is valuable to the town, your posting game is detrimental to the point where I'd rather take the chance that you are in fact scum and that your role is not in fact in important. The chances of you being scum are higher than the chances of you being valuable, and the chances of you being valuable in text form, judging by the past 10 pages or so, are low as well. Therefore, you are the most valid candidate for lynching in my view and I have yet to see you say anything that would prove me wrong. you would have to provide evidence that the ratio of keeping me if I am town with my playstyle vs lynching me if I am town with my playstyle is +EV. If You can demonstrate concretely that lynching me because of my playstyle ie Policy Lynch is better for town that not then I might change my game plan up a little. You would further have to provide evidence that I will remain to have "inconclusive, divisive, and substance-less posts that detract from any actual analysis" throughout the entirety of the game and that I would not have the ability to be an asset to town. On June 04 2016 12:00 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:55 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:53 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 11:44 Tumblewood wrote:
also jealous what do you mean by collusion? I don't need a dictionary definition, but the word would imply that a townie is working to help the scum, which is surely not your intent. I may know what you mean as "buddying"-- do you mean that a scum is working to gain the trust of a townie by townreading him? My initial statement of collusion was to imply that it appeared like two scum are engaging in seemingly playful banter and thus eliminate the chance of either of them being called out for inactivity, while not-so-subtly hinting at each other being townies and thus not the scum that they very well may be. "Buddying" could be what QuickTwist was doing after this in regards to myself and other posters, by calling townies whom he well knows are townies but with no evidence in order to give them a window of acceptance that could potentially cause them to trust him and support him. This claim is not based on evidence, but on conjecture. This game has no clues so all claims are based on conjecture. If this game has no clues then we are basically just playing mental masterbation with ourselve in a very circle jerk type fashion. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/508622-newbie-mafia-xxi#3Chance of you being scum, excluding myself from the equation because I know that I am not scum = 3/12 = 1/4 Chance of you being blue = 2/12 = 1/6 Chance of you being a truly valuable PR blue like the doc, cop, or vigilante = 3/4 Chance of you being useful to the town without considering your textual input = 1/6 * 3/4 = 3/24 = 1/8 Therefore the chances of you being scum as opposed to a valuable blue are 2:1. This does not include my admittedly subjective but still substantiated claim that your value as a talking head in this game so far is low, so I won't go into that because it is impossible to quantify but it certainly is possible for me to say is my opinion. I could do a post-by-post analysis of your history in this thread and determine how many of your posts were a waste of time and space and how many actually contributed something, but I've already read all of them once and don't have the desire to do so again just to make a fraction in this post for your amusement. In response to your latter statement, if that's how you want to paraphrase it then that's up to you, but without official clues from the OP I don't see how you could have expected anything different than what we have now. On June 04 2016 12:10 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 12:04 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 12:00 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 11:55 Jealous wrote:
Also, this playful banter would serve to dilute their posting summaries, inflate the page and post count, and add space between incriminating posts. Certainly one way to approach the accountability issue in a medium such as an online forum. I notice you are strong in claim that I make the best lynch today. But you fail to see that I have provided content to talk about (we are talking about it right now in fact). When the content you provide largely revolves around yourself, have you contributed to anything but the criticism of your actions and thus your own demise? Compare this to the content of my posts, which is questioning people about their actions and intentions. Providing content to talk about is useless if you are only generating hot air. Volume does not imply quality. yes, and where has that gotten you exactly? Its gotten you to the place where you would rather lynch a known townie. "Known" townie? Please, don't throw that term around casually as if anything has been confirmed about you through a cop or otherwise. It's gotten me to the place where I've singled out the most suspicious player in my eyes and allowed me to cast a vote, pending further investigation and activity from others. This is not a policy kill, unless you are in fact townie are not playing to win as is stated in the rules in the OP, which I certainly do not think you are so far. LOL at your math. You have to carry over not simplify for it to even be remotely valid. Plus, what you are meaning with your math is essentially the exactly same numbers for everyone (if you are infact town, which is kinda hilarious because when you give yourself a given that you are town anyone can make up those numbers). I had a math teacher once tell me something that I think you might enjoy. He said "When you make up your own rules for math it becomes infinitely easier, but that does not mean it is correct." you cannot quantify what is considered "content" because the term is subjective in nature rather than concrete. You said yourself that this game is based on no clues so if that is true then your claim that there is even such thing as optimal play gets thrown out the window. Anyway I don't think you can fake this as scum since iirc people would know your meta so the only one you would be deceiving is me. Carry over? Not simplify? I didn't simplify anything nor did I make up any rules. What? My math is legit, and yes I am working off of the knowledge that I myself am not scum. You are correct in saying that this math applies to anyone currently in the game, which is exactly why you are a worthwhile vote because unlike others your posting habits are inconsistent and your voting is intentionally misleading. If on Day 1 all we are doing is taking a stab in the dark, I'd rather face towards the one light source I do see. As you said and I said before you, I cannot quantify content because it is subjective. However, I can make a damn good case if need be. There may be optimal play here, but there is certainly sub-par play. I don't think anyone "knows my meta" because I haven't played mafia in 8 years, so unless someone does a very thorough investigation of my posts when I was 18 years old and finds some parallels that I would still consequently dismiss as pure imagination, I am going to say that your opinions on my alignment are moot, especially given that you contradict yourself within 2 posts. This is turning into some stupid pedantry. I gave you what you want: I contributed in a way that you feel is relevant and you are still arguing for my lynch. And that's good to know that no one has meta on you because that means I can still have a scum read on you.
At this point, you are right in implying that this will not go any further, so let's allow some people to catch up with this line of discussion. Cheers.
|
On June 04 2016 13:23 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 08:48 Tumblewood wrote:On June 04 2016 08:45 Superbia wrote:On June 04 2016 08:44 Skynx wrote:
So, Incognito guide tells me town likes clarity and mafia likes contentless posts.
Jealous sounds towny to me. QT also keep things clean.
Super n moosy are kinda chatting shit so I assume we can read more as game progresses.
Super is most scummy so far. Do you think quicky (QT) is town? 50/50 like for reading and applying Incognito's guide / dislike for maybe (?) hiding behind Incognito's guide instead of speaking for yourself also Incognito's guide is pretty old and now there are a lot of players that spam as both alignments Link to guid?
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/301748-a-general-guide-to-mafia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TcornjZ.png)
