|
@biosc
Sure, this is why I think you're scummy:
Sounds like a solid strategy. Basic, but solid. Getting rid of lurkers/low content players seems like a win/win. If they are lurking scum players, town gets a nice snipe. Should they be town, they would be just as bad as scum in that they wouldn't help town anyways.
You're agreeing with me here, but then the "they would be as bad as scum" phrase really seems out of place. My first suspicion based on that.
While I agree that the back half of his post is worthy of discussion, I would hope that simply saying that him hoping you aren't mafia is worthy of a lynch. Maybe it's just me, but that simply sounds as if he remembers you from a previous game, and perhaps you did well as mafia then. I feel like the mafia/town alignment of a previous game shouldn't be a factor in deciding whom to lynch in THIS game.
Read what I posted again. I threw my suspicions towards him as well. Not sure what about my post was defending him.
By throwing your suspicions I assume you mean the phrase "back half of his post is worthy of discussion". Super passive and non-committal.
Not enough to drive my vote to you, but I'm sure to keep an eye on your posts.
Sounds like something one scum says to another.
I'd also like to hear more on who you think is suspicious beyond Analectus?
|
My best pressure is my vote. i believe i started the wagon, so why am i listed as a bandwagon?. bandwagon if anything are dahdum who has join the vote on whomever is being pressured at the very moment. as for me voting without reason i believe any townie who saw the first post after my list would be decent enough to figure out why
|
Alright, here goes.
First, though, the guy's name is Anacletus. I'm going to assume the misspelling was simply a Freudian slip of the tounge >.<
I'm suspicious of Darkfirex5. He seems to be trying to shift focus away from Anacletus, and this is why I think that.
+ Show Spoiler +On May 11 2012 10:58 Darkfirex5 wrote:
Well though i still think Anecletus seems the scummiest, but he does make a... point i guess about BioSC id need more proof though than to change my vote to him, ill keep it in mind when reading his posts. I still find this a weak bandwagon forming as i stated before, does anyone want to respond to my post before? (feeling ignored D: )
He's already done this twice in this day, pointing out small flaws and meaningless details in my posts to try and get an argument started against me. My strategy to deal with it was to stamp it out. Just because I'm putting pressure on someone, though, doesn't mean I'm not looking for more reads. There are at least 4 mafia in this game, and town needs to find them all to win.
By me saying I'm watching his posts, I mean exactly that. I'm trying to stay pretty crystal in my intentions in this game.
Another I'm iffy about is Mufaa. He hasn't posted much, and has given a reason about jobs and shifts taking up a lot of time. His other posts are a question on when the end time for voting is (useless fluff, a mod post covered that), and a weak pressure on Ana. What I can't tell is if that is just shoddy town play, or mafia bussing. Either way, I need more posts from him to either change or strengthen my read on him.
|
On May 11 2012 11:45 dahdum wrote:
Here are my reads and yes I know this is partially a rehash of events.
--Scummy List - --
Most To Least
Analectus - No point summarizing so far, chief suspect. Actually votes for himself after attempting to throw his vote away without reason, and says "I never said I was protown". Not acting like town.
Hyaach - Bandwagons, no pressure at all. Urges caution. Scummy.
BioSC - Highly defensive, focuses on Analectus.
Darkfirex5 - Keeps cautioning against bandwagons and voting too early, sounds like scum trying to defend Analectus. Last post says he's voting against Unforgiven but then botches the vote for Analectus?
Crossfire99 - Obsessed with Analectus, doesn't discuss anyone else.
BKE - Not providing reads, only a semi-baseless vote which helped get the game going. Talks about scum will do and urges caution. Scummy.
Jailbreaker - Worried about people pressuring too much, defensive, not contributing reads, promises something soon.
Mufaa - Very few posts but cites RL reason and reiterates basic strategy. Jumps on Analectus for technicality, contributes no reads on anyone else.
Austinmcc - Rightly pressures Analectus for his "i don't have much to add" vote, continues to lay one the pressure but never calls him out as scum or gives any real reads/analysis.
FirmTofu - Defends the bandwagon well, placing reasonable pressure on Analectus. Compared to last game he seems more thoughtful however, so I'm suspicious of that.
ShiaoPi - Jumps on Hyaach, lots of analysis. The huge post is somewhat indicative of a scum play, but I concur with his picks (Analectus/Hyaach) so far.
I wouldn't say I was only reiterating basic strategy. Although yes, I was pointing out something "basic" the town isn't following that basic principle and it is clearly hurting us. Once I get home I'll give you the analytic reads you want, but its pointless to make a case after half a day because there is so much more to be said by everyone. What might be a great case now can change in a heartbeat if someone makes a slip that lets us piece shit together better later. Like you said in you
|
On May 11 2012 11:45 dahdum wrote:
Here are my reads and yes I know this is partially a rehash of events.
--Scummy List - --
Most To Least
Analectus - No point summarizing so far, chief suspect. Actually votes for himself after attempting to throw his vote away without reason, and says "I never said I was protown". Not acting like town.
Hyaach - Bandwagons, no pressure at all. Urges caution. Scummy.
BioSC - Highly defensive, focuses on Analectus.
Darkfirex5 - Keeps cautioning against bandwagons and voting too early, sounds like scum trying to defend Analectus. Last post says he's voting against Unforgiven but then botches the vote for Analectus?
Crossfire99 - Obsessed with Analectus, doesn't discuss anyone else.
BKE - Not providing reads, only a semi-baseless vote which helped get the game going. Talks about scum will do and urges caution. Scummy.
Jailbreaker - Worried about people pressuring too much, defensive, not contributing reads, promises something soon.
Mufaa - Very few posts but cites RL reason and reiterates basic strategy. Jumps on Analectus for technicality, contributes no reads on anyone else.
Austinmcc - Rightly pressures Analectus for his "i don't have much to add" vote, continues to lay one the pressure but never calls him out as scum or gives any real reads/analysis.
FirmTofu - Defends the bandwagon well, placing reasonable pressure on Analectus. Compared to last game he seems more thoughtful however, so I'm suspicious of that.
ShiaoPi - Jumps on Hyaach, lots of analysis. The huge post is somewhat indicative of a scum play, but I concur with his picks (Analectus/Hyaach) so far.
I wouldn't say I was only reiterating basic strategy. Although yes, I was pointing out something "basic" the town isn't following that basic principle and it is clearly hurting us. I'll give you the analytic reads you want tomorrow, but its pointless to make a case after half a day because there is so much more to be said by everyone. What might be a great case now can change in a heartbeat if someone makes a slip that lets us piece shit together better later. Like you said in your own defense of your list you need debates and opinions. Giving reads focuses on tunneling someone and provides an easy outlet for mafia to hide behind a consensus whereas if you are just questioning individual actions and statements, their answers provide material to analyze their style and make a case closer to the deadline.
On May 11 2012 10:22 dahdum wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 10:16 Mufaa wrote:On May 11 2012 08:32 Anacletus wrote:On May 11 2012 08:28 Darkfirex5 wrote:
yeah Unforgiving i think i have to put my vote on you, ill wait a little longer before i do so, but just puting your vote on Unforgiven_ve does not seem to have any justification, you're just leaving your vote on someone with no backing/reasoning why, it seems you are trying to draw attention away from explaining yourself. You still seem the guiltiest out of everyone, maybe you should start voicing your opinon on how you are not scummy, rather than place a vote holder and do nothing productive... you're most suspicious to me. I dont know if i will be able to get on before 7 tomorrow so im voting you atm
[b\]##Vote Anacletus You're required to vote - so I am putting my vote on someone who has no other votes - I'm just leaving it as a placeholder in case I forget later. How is that suspicious at all man....what the hell are you on about.... >_> Makes sense, but FYI you didn't actually vote for unforgiven. Instead of unvote you did unvite so I don't think your change will be counted. I figured after getting called out for editing you'd pay closer attention to your posts. For claiming to be pro-town these things(edit & failed voting) do nothing but benefit the mafia through ambiguity if you really are town. So why should we believe you're town if you can't take the extra 30 secs to proof your posts? Why shouldn't we assume the failed vote was you attempting to hide your focus on Tofu while ensuring that when you got called out you had a fallback ready by just saying oops? Actually I think it makes very poor sense and he is even more suspicious for it. He's essentially saying "I'd like to throw my vote away, I might not bother to vote again later so I definitely don't want it to matter". That's a scum move. [/b]
I would like to point out with this that although it is fishy, this is by no means a scum move. A lot of beginner games go like this (based off of reading the mafiascum wiki) where early on everyone random votes just to make sure they are counted in case something happens while some people don't understand why then follow up by random voting themselves halfway through the day. His explanation for the vote is much more important than the vote itself this early.
On May 11 2012 10:58 Darkfirex5 wrote:
Well though i still think Anecletus seems the scummiest, but he does make a... point i guess about BioSC id need more proof though than to change my vote to him, ill keep it in mind when reading his posts. I still find this a weak bandwagon forming as i stated before, does anyone want to respond to my post before? (feeling ignored D: )
I'm assuming you
|
On May 11 2012 13:18 Hyaach wrote:
My best pressure is my vote. i believe i started the wagon, so why am i listed as a bandwagon?. bandwagon if anything are dahdum who has join the vote on whomever is being pressured at the very moment. as for me voting without reason i believe any townie who saw the first post after my list would be decent enough to figure out why
My bad, you did start that wagon and I do see the justification for it. He gave us more reasons afterward too.
What are your thoughts on BioSC & Mufaa?
|
EBWOP 2: Sorry my computer is being a complete bitch atm and posting randomly. Ill do future posts in notepad and copy them over.
anyway,
Dark: I feel like my first real post explained my thoughts on it, but I'll reiterate. Bandwagoning is bad, I agree, but we (the town) have to be active in forcing the bad posters to improve their posting or else we can't really stop it. If that means we have to mislynch n1 so be it, but we need to set a precedent that it isn't accepted. Makes it much easier for the mafia to hide. I still think Ana will flip town if we lynch him. Yes he's very scummy, but its so scummy its hard to believe that a mafia would play that bad. He might as well come out and say he's mafia and just get modkilled at the current rate. Feels kind of like bad town to me, I'm still on the fence about it though. At this point I'd back a lynch on him, but that's very hesitant. I mostly want to see him step up his game.
|
Im at school surfing this with my mobile so i cant really read thru everypost people made before but i believe ive said biisc was trying to remain neutral all these time and not committing ro anything
Biisc is biosc and my read on him is before his recent post in the last 10 hours
will give an update when im at home in around 7 hours
|
On May 11 2012 13:48 Hyaach wrote:
Im at school surfing this with my mobile so i cant really read thru everypost people made before but i believe ive said biisc was trying to remain neutral all these time and not committing ro anything
Biisc is biosc and my read on him is before his recent post in the last 10 hours
will give an update when im at home in around 7 hours
Yeah, I'm remaining so neutral that I've casted a vote for someone I believe is scum, and gave reasons for others that I believe is scum.
I think you and I have different definitions of neutral...
|
Holy balls guys, calm down and think before you post for a bit.
You are all listing all of the people you deem suspicious AND least suspicious. Why? We only need to find ONE guy today and that guy is supposed to be BAD not GOOD. With all these lists of scummy to non-scummy, we are just giving the mafia advice on how to play better. Instead of showcasing your reads of EVERYONE, just tell us the reads of the people you think are scummy. You are doing mafia's work for them if you tell everyone who you think is the most pro-town. i.e. me.
That being said, I would like to shift our bandwagon because it's becoming a bit superfluous at this point, with a lot of the same points repeated and the same fail defense from Analectus.
Here's a post I found extremely scummy from a different person.
On May 11 2012 10:58 Darkfirex5 wrote:
Well though i still think Anecletus seems the scummiest, but he does make a... point i guess about BioSC id need more proof though than to change my vote to him, ill keep it in mind when reading his posts. I still find this a weak bandwagon forming as i stated before, does anyone want to respond to my post before? (feeling ignored D: )
Wait, did I just read that? In the same post, two sentences right next to each other seem to contradict one another. That's odd. Let me explain if you didn't catch it.
The first sentence:
1) Acknowledges that Anecletus is scummy
2) Asserts that Anecletus has a good point about BioSC
The second sentence:
1) States that the bandwagon on Anecletus is "weak"
2) Wants someone to read his unsubstantial post from before
Isn't 1) from the second sentence somewhat contradictory to 1) from the second?
So yeah, I have another elaborate theory for you. I'll be your friendly neighborhood theoretic translator so that you can know what's going on in my head.
Sentence 1: "Well though i still think Anecletus seems the scummiest, but he does make a... point i guess about BioSC id need more proof though than to change my vote to him, ill keep it in mind when reading his posts."
Possible Translation if both Anecletus and Darkfirex5 are mafia: Anecletus is a goner at this point... but maybe there's a chance I can save him by lending support for his accusation of BioSC (which btw is complete BS). I'll say that Anecletus is scummy so that no one thinks I'm suspicious.
Sentence 1: "I still find this a weak bandwagon forming as i stated before, does anyone want to respond to my post before? (feeling ignored D: )"
Possible Translation if both Anecletus and Darkfirex5 are mafia: I'll now discredit the wagon on Anecletus in hope of saving him, but I can't outright support him without risking buddying.
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Now remember, this is only a possible theory. I'm just putting it out there so we can discuss it. Its only useful if Ancletus flips mafia, otherwise it's best to throw it out the window.
tl;dr: I have a theory that darkfire and anecletus are both mafia. Read for the excruciatingly boring details.
|
I've expressed this stance in my post answering dahdum about whom I felt was scummy, but this points it out pretty clear as day.
My post about it: + Show Spoiler +On May 11 2012 13:19 BioSC wrote:Alright, here goes. First, though, the guy's name is Anacletus. I'm going to assume the misspelling was simply a Freudian slip of the tounge >.< I'm suspicious of Darkfirex5. He seems to be trying to shift focus away from Anacletus, and this is why I think that. + Show Spoiler +On May 11 2012 10:58 Darkfirex5 wrote:
Well though i still think Anecletus seems the scummiest, but he does make a... point i guess about BioSC id need more proof though than to change my vote to him, ill keep it in mind when reading his posts. I still find this a weak bandwagon forming as i stated before, does anyone want to respond to my post before? (feeling ignored D: ) He's already done this twice in this day, pointing out small flaws and meaningless details in my posts to try and get an argument started against me. My strategy to deal with it was to stamp it out. Just because I'm putting pressure on someone, though, doesn't mean I'm not looking for more reads. There are at least 4 mafia in this game, and town needs to find them all to win.
I would like to see some posts out of Darkfirex5 about this. Why did you make the post above?
I also tend to agree with the stuff about making lists. Dahdum, I think your heart is in the right place, but focusing on a "short list" of the most scummy players would allow us to focus on finding, like Tofu said, a single guilty party.
|
On May 11 2012 14:37 BioSC wrote:Dahdum, I think your heart is in the right place, but focusing on a "short list" of the most scummy players would allow us to focus on finding, like Tofu said, a single guilty party.
My opinion is my own, not a consensus of the group and not a guide for mafia. If you don't feel comfortable commenting more broadly feel free to focus down on 1 or 2 people while ignoring your scumbuddies. Focus happens as we have more information.
|
Whatever Anacletus is trying to do it isn't town. His response to me is that he doesn't have any information, then he throws a vote at BioSC. Pretty cut and dry.
##Vote Anacletus
@dahdum I'm not going to post a whole list of people like you, but I'll post my reads tommorow morning. I feel your list is a little skewed though, the people on the bottom have scummy aspects as well (according to you) so it makes it feel like you suspect everyone in town.
|
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
Just read through everything you guys posted, there are a few things which really strike me as noticeable.
Hyaach's play remains fishy in my opinion, posts are more useful now, but his instantvote with reasoning following later is still scummy. A connection between him and Anacletus deems unlikely with the vote, but hyaach's play is really confusing.
Jailbreaker actually promised to deliver something:
posting this now, going to formulate a new post based on BroodKingEXE, ShiaoPi, Hyaach (page 7 to 8)
but still no post yet. Laziness/slow at best but scummy and suspicious at the worst.
Darkfirex5 campaigns caution and nothing overhasty in regards to the developing votes. Withholds his vote for this reason:
Im still not placing a vote down yet but the starting reasonings for the votes lacks evidence and the follow up points (to me dont seem solid).
Which is contradictory on his own suspicions on Tofu, Bio and dahdum as they lack evidence as well (every case on day1 lacks solid 100% evidence anyway). Keeps up a slight defense of Anacletus, while voting for him (in the wrong format though). Weird behaviour as Anacletus' play has not improved and remains scummy. Keeping an eye on him.
|
On May 11 2012 04:05 BroodKingEXE wrote:
@Hyaach Why did you put your vote on Ancletus? You had just as much reasoning as him. That is none.
Okay....
On May 11 2012 16:08 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Whatever Anacletus is trying to do it isn't town. His response to me is that he doesn't have any information, then he throws a vote at BioSC. Pretty cut and dry.
##Vote Anacletus
Well then, you're just throwing a vote at me. Very cut and dry bandwagon.
Has nobody worried about voicing themself too well, or making themself seem too unsuspicious so you become a mafia target?
|
At this time,
My read on BioSC since start of game is his being very passive. Taking little jabs at everything possible but not really sticking it in. His throwing a huge net and offering very little in comparison. I do not know if he was asleep when the Anacletus wagon started but when he did replied, he only stated what others before had say.
His only vote which is on Anacletus was casted after most of the players has started focusing on Anacletus and Anacletus kept repeating poor defense and a general bad play if he was townie.
He could be a overly ambitious townie or just mafia that's spreading his alibi from the very start.
But right now innocent until proven.
BTW, regarding darkfirex5, i think you need to quote the two post about him diverting attention away from Anacletus and onto you because I do not see it. His two post, one was before Anacletus wagon started and one is after. Grasping at straws or just did not read clearly?
As for Mufaa, until he post his futher post before this day ends. I have 0 read as his being even more vague than BioSC.
|
My thoughts on Anacletus:
His play does not feel like good townie play. I brought that up earlier, we've all discussed it by now, and I think we all seem to come to the same conclusion. While I would support a lynch of Anacletus, I think we have better targets. I'll look through his responses more today, but for now I would prefer to look elsewhere, and see how Anacletus continues to play. Right now, "not good townie play" is my read, but I'm not convinced that his play is scummy and not just bad townie play.
However, we've got a quarter of D1 left, and I want to throw this case out and push it a little, see what comes of it. My top scum read: BroodKingEXE.
BroodKingEXE filter - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=334707&user=233869
Skip 2/3 of the first page. It's pregame. He's active, vocal, chatting a lot with everyone in the pregame. Doesn't really mean anything.
First posts:
+ Show Spoiler +On May 10 2012 12:53 BroodKingEXE wrote:
/confirm
Lynching lurkers in the early game not a good idea. My reasoning is that people need to be able to post before we persecute them. Something to think about lurkers, Mafia will try to lurk, but their posts will have more intent behind each one. Why? Every post they make is going to push its own idea of an agenda, but the more they post the more the idea could be misinterpreted. Before we lynch a lurker let's look at the intent of the post: a Mafia agenda push or a helpful Townie post.
+ Show Spoiler +On May 10 2012 13:18 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Not true, lynching an inactive is a waste. Scum wants us to not lynch them. We can call lurkers out, and they have to respond. They don't respond, we start looking at them. Lynching, because they are lurkers is stupid.
+ Show Spoiler +On May 10 2012 13:48 BroodKingEXE wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 08:36 FirmTofu wrote:
Hi again dahdum! I hope you aren't mafia again ><
I'm all for lynching a lurker, but we should definitely wait a bit for everyone to have a chance to post. What are you implying here? We should wait for everyone to post before coming to conclusions? That seems scummy to me, we should be analyzing peoples posts right now. You just created a reason for you not to post. Convince your not scum. ##Vote: Firm Tofu
These aren't entirely incompatible. Lynching lurkers bad, pressuring them good, let people post before we jump to conclusions. That seems townie, fine and dandy, but then he fires off the very first vote of the game on FirmTofu.
Why? Because FirmTofu posted + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 08:36 FirmTofu wrote:
Hi again dahdum! I hope you aren't mafia again ><
I'm all for lynching a lurker, but we should definitely wait a bit for everyone to have a chance to post.
Look at the bolded part of Broodking's first post. Now back to me. Now back to the bolded part of FirmTofu's post. Now back to me. Anything? That's the same exact thought process. And yet when FirmTofu vocalizes that, Broodking fires off the first vote of the game. I still don't agree with that vote at all, even if it was just to "pressure" someone, because there's absolutely no grounds for voting someone because they express a thought you just expressed slightly earlier.
From then on out, it's a series of one-liner and response posts, but never really DOING anything. Last night (eastern time), BroodKing had one of the longest filters, and yet the only substantive post was him voting FirmTofu off the bat.
For example:
+ Show Spoiler +On May 11 2012 03:30 BroodKingEXE wrote:
You can withhold your vote but you still need to scum hunt.
+ Show Spoiler +On May 11 2012 04:01 BroodKingEXE wrote:
This post makes sense, Anacletus' play has been pretty wierd. I need to hear a response from him before I vote though. This line stood out to me. BroodKing threw out of FIRST vote of the game on Tofu, before there was play to analyze and before Tofu responded to anything. Why does he need a response now to vote?
After that, he starts giving responses to other people, specifically ShiaoPi's reads, but doesn't really add anything of substance. scummy
+ Show Spoiler +On May 11 2012 04:05 BroodKingEXE wrote:
@Hyaach Why did you put your vote on Ancletus? You had just as much reasoning as him. That is none. On May 11 2012 04:33 BroodKingEXE wrote:
WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH!!!! ShiaoPi are you defending Hyaach? A null read? He has provided zero evidence for his vote. Your whole list is terrible, it provides nothing more than a bunch "I'm leaning town, but you can never be sure reads". I smell a scumwagon. On May 11 2012 05:38 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Your big post brings up a list of null reads. Its misleading due to its size when its content is a bunch of reiteration of events. Scum will make posts like this to make themselves seem useful. If you actually read your reasoning for voting for anacletus it is: he was not eager, a post lacking logic, and a bandwagon. The first two could be townie mistakes and bandwagons aren't very effective when people have strong objections to the canidate. On the other hand, you have voted with the person you first thought was scum and had dropped your suspicions based on...nothing. On May 11 2012 09:09 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Just needed explanation for your vote/post. This canidate seems really rushed though, people haven't looked at his latest posts for signs of scumminess. I agree that his past posts are suspicious, but we need to look at his current posts. Too much like a wagon for me to vote for him yet.
Note that at this point, ShiaoPi has just thrown out the first real list of reads we had from anyone. BroodKing posts a couple times concerning the list, but doesn't really add anything. While he gets information out of ShiaoPi, he doesn't really provide any himself. At no point in those posts does he agree with a read or disagree with a read, rather, he simply acknowledges that reads were made and ShiaoPi voted. This is also the first point we begin to move AWAY from the Anacletus discussion (which has run its course at this point), and BroodKing continues to ask for information based on ShiaoPi's vote for Anacletus.
Finally, compare his filter from this game with his filter from Newbie VIII, where he was town.
+ Show Spoiler +
There are some posts in a similar style to his posts here, but a LOT of @x and @y, what do you guys think about z. Lots of longer discussions, paragraphs, lists. SOME of that is because he was the lynch target D1 and so had to be active and defend himself. But his townie posts from VIII feel more robust and they contribute, whereas his posts so far in XIII do not.
-------------------------------
Anacletus's play still feels more bad than scummy. I would like to let him live for now, and see if he starts to really contribute. Right now he has 0 town cred, so if he's mafia he can't actively muck up town discussion. If we back off the pressure, MAYBE he mounts a decent defense and provides some good reads, because...he's got to do that to get any cred back. If not? We lynch him later, or we see if we can get any information N1 from blue roles that push us forward.
Compared to Anacletus though, BroodKingEXE looks actively scummy. So far he hasn't contributed anything of note except the first vote of the game, which made little sense. He's supports getting responses before voting, but then votes without a response from FirmTofu. He wants scumhunting and reasoning, but has provided none. Again, I'm not opposed to an Anacletus lynch, but I would prefer to lynch the player that seems scummiest, which is BroodKing.
##Vote BroodKingEXE
##FOS: Anacletus
Dahdum, I'm especially interested in hearing your thoughts on this, as you read BroodKing to be scummy as well. I didn't really notice him until I looked through all the filters last night and realized he was my best scumread. Do you agree with my reasoning? Did you have different reasoning?
|
Vote Count:
Anacletus(8): Hyaach, FirmTofu, ShiaoPi, Dahdum, Darkfirex5, Anacletus, BioSC, BroodkingEXE
BroodkingEXE(1): austinmcc
Not Voting(4): Mufaa, Jailbreaker, Crossfire99, Unforgiven_ve
Currently, Anacletus is set to be lynched.
Please feel free to PM me if my vote count is incorrect, just let me know.
|
My god Anacletus, of course i give you some credit, but i dont undertand ANYTHING you post, your contributions makes no sense, they are contradictory and change everytime someone points his finger at you. You need to understand this is a TEAM GAME, you just cant convince people saying "My plan so far is more of a cluster-fuck spider-web of ideas written in a language that I don't know." are you really THAT bad of a player? if you turn mafia im gonna laugh, really.
I have a couple reads taking some shape. My four main suspects so far are, Anacletus(for obvious reasons), Mufaa (being very passive, maybe i dont belive his works excuses), Shaopi (super active at first, then just defending his BIG list and a couple post naming Broodking) and Jailbraker (2 post, whitout much information, I'm going to withhold my vote until later when everyone has a chance to post everybody already posted and im still waiting, and
posting this now, going to formulate a new post based on BroodKingEXE, ShiaoPi, Hyaach (page 7 to 8)
and being under the radar in general)
Im gonna wait a couple more hours to cast my vote, i want to see if everyone goes active and chatty and the end of the day
|
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
@austinmcc: Considering your thoughts on Anacletus: There is always the possibility of bad town play instead of scummy play. But doesn't the defense of Anacletus (or more the lack of) seem weird to you? Also his lack of good contributions? I guess bad townie play is always a possibility, but for now I stand by my vote.
On the accusations on BroodKingEXE: You bring up some good analysis. I guess I overlooked those aspects of his posts because I was more busy defending my posts against him than analyzing. I'll have to reread his filter thoroughly though, before doing anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
