|
@Superouman
On June 01 2012 05:38 Superouman wrote:
Since it's getting late in europe and not much time remaining, i'll vote now
##Vote sciberbia
You do realize we have another 24 hours before lynch correct? If you really see something in sciberbia's play that you find suspicious make a case about it. Don't just throw his name out there.
Ummm yeah i should talk more but the thing is that i don't know what to say, this is kind of a blind pick for now, but i am always suspicious of people who talk too much at the beginning
---snip
And considering your lynch logic, what if all the mafia already talked, you would just kill townies and make mafia's life easier.
For the first day, i think we should lynch one of the lurkers. They maybe think if they do nothing, they will pass under the radar. Or if they are townies, well... they should just have said something to be less suspect
Do you see the contradictions here? First you say not to talk too much and then you throw out a useless hypothetical situation. Afterwards you encourage lynching lurkers which is an extremely safe stance to take. How are we supposed to post? A lot? A little? These posts from you are not helping, and they are leaving us with very few stances to hold you to as the game goes along.
All I've seen while looking through your filter has been one or two line posts with very little content to them. This can mean either lazy town or mafia trying to keep from committing to too much information. These contentless posts are just as bad as lurking.
|
On May 31 2012 07:48 Vivax wrote:
Giovanni Falcone reporting in.
Pro lynch, any information better than no information.
Also, Sciberbia, the blue font is reserved for the mods.
Let's see who's active, i also remember a guy announcing exams, anyone silent will hang from the towns' tree.
Who is that guy? Did I miss anything?^^
The playerfield for me is:
1. ) Ange777
2. ) Xatalos
3. ) Suki
4. ) unforgiven_ve
5. ) O.Golden_ne
6. ) Cattivik
7. ) s0Lstice
8. ) Superouman
9. ) Eishi_Ki
10.) sciberbia
11.) heist
12.) Miltonkram
And I don't see his name in there lol
Edit: I send him a pm, so I screwed up the palyerfield somehow, a sec lol
|
|
|
@heist
I don't really follow your stance on Cattivik. Could you please clearly explain how his defense of me has implicated him as mafia in your eyes? I agree that his behavior is out of the ordinary. But I would like to hear why you feel that his staunch defense of me is more likely a mafia move than a townie move.
|
Votecount so far:
unforgiven_ve ( 2 ): Xatalos, Suki
Eishi_Ki ( 1 ): Vivax,
sciberbia ( 1 ): Miltonkram, Superouman,
About 23,5 hours left until deadline.
If you see mistakes in my votingtally feel free to tell me, noone is perfect
|
@ Sciberbia
There is no reason that one townie should be that sure of another townie, Day 1 especially. For me, there is absolutely no one that I'm so convinced of as Cattivik seems to be. So any attempt to deflect every single accusation on a fellow player is of course highly suspicious on my mind. Mafia tend to find it much safer to create a stance defending someone rather than accusing someone. Fewer repercussions. It suggests to me an ulterior motive.
And now he's starting to suggest that any indication of his scumminess needs to be disregarded precisely because he defends you to such an extent. It's convenient and not out of the realm of mafia possibilities. He is simply my most suspicious player especially since the alternatives are not very convincing at this point.
|
@heist
So it seems you find it most likely that I am town, Cattivik is mafia, and he is just trying to gain townie cred. This is a reasonable hypothesis, but imo it's not that likely.
The tone of Cattivik's posts suggests to me that he is a very confident, aggresive player. And therefore it is in character to be more sure about his beliefs than most people would be. Also, he went out of his way to defend me. Nobody even asked his opinion.
The reason I ask is that under your hypothesis, your town-read of me should reinforce your mafia-read of Cattivik, rather than 'temper' it. I guess this is a bit counter-intuitive.
|
On June 01 2012 07:34 heist wrote:
@ Sciberbia
There is no reason that one townie should be that sure of another townie, Day 1 especially. For me, there is absolutely no one that I'm so convinced of as Cattivik seems to be. So any attempt to deflect every single accusation on a fellow player is of course highly suspicious on my mind. Mafia tend to find it much safer to create a stance defending someone rather than accusing someone. Fewer repercussions. It suggests to me an ulterior motive.
And now he's starting to suggest that any indication of his scumminess needs to be disregarded precisely because he defends you to such an extent. It's convenient and not out of the realm of mafia possibilities. He is simply my most suspicious player especially since the alternatives are not very convincing at this point.
Townies not being sure of each other is ideal for mafia, it doesn't limit the pool of suspects, which is actually what I'm trying to do and you are disrupting.
When we lynch with no read and maximum pool of suspects, we shoot fish in a barrel. When we limit the pool of suspects, the barrel gets smaller, the fishes might get louder.
You might aswell say, we don't know anything except for me defending people who i believe are townies, which is incomplete, I have already pushed my case against Eishi_Ki but will obviously have to focus on other cases since I won't find a majority for that one in day 1.
I create my stances in all possible ways on restricted cases, that's how a townie should play.
Mafia creates stances maybe even defending townies when it's possible for them to blend in while doing so (notice how I am actually the first guy supporting sciberbia?). It also causes A LOT of repercussions for me, as opposed to your generalized argument.
Also, when mafia gives advice, they will try to not adress problems in the thread, but try to give more generic advice everyone probably knows already. That also helps them blend in without creating vulnerable points for later.
With all that said, heist, you're either badly informed about the game or scum. Pick one.
Also, start voting for a lynch if you think I'm mafia. Town won't like you for being opportunistic and go for votes you didn't push by yourself, that allows for jumping on the most convenient bandwagon.
|
Trying to catch up with the thread at 1:30 am is not that effective ....
Out of the three players that already got a vote Unforgiven seems the most scummy. As townie your vote is always your strongest weapon for the scumhunt. I don't say that you should random vote other players but once you have a good case it is always good to push and vote it. Until now your play seems very safe, a lot of fluffy posts.
But yes, I shouldn't be the one complaining when I am officially lurking. I even have to announce another day of lurking, but I promise some more (and BETTER!) action from me tomorrow before deadline!
|
On June 01 2012 07:56 sciberbia wrote:
@heist
So it seems you find it most likely that I am town, Cattivik is mafia, and he is just trying to gain townie cred. This is a reasonable hypothesis, but imo it's not that likely.
The tone of Cattivik's posts suggests to me that he is a very confident, aggresive player. And therefore it is in character to be more sure about his beliefs than most people would be. Also, he went out of his way to defend me. Nobody even asked his opinion.
The reason I ask is that under your hypothesis, your town-read of me should reinforce your mafia-read of Cattivik, rather than 'temper' it. I guess this is a bit counter-intuitive.
My town read of you is definitely something that tempers my evaluation of Cattivik. The alternative of you being mafia, and Cattivik being your scumbuddy is a much more damning alternative and i would be pushing HARD, much harder than now, for a lynch.
On June 01 2012 08:16 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 07:34 heist wrote:
@ Sciberbia
There is no reason that one townie should be that sure of another townie, Day 1 especially. For me, there is absolutely no one that I'm so convinced of as Cattivik seems to be. So any attempt to deflect every single accusation on a fellow player is of course highly suspicious on my mind. Mafia tend to find it much safer to create a stance defending someone rather than accusing someone. Fewer repercussions. It suggests to me an ulterior motive.
And now he's starting to suggest that any indication of his scumminess needs to be disregarded precisely because he defends you to such an extent. It's convenient and not out of the realm of mafia possibilities. He is simply my most suspicious player especially since the alternatives are not very convincing at this point. Townies not being sure of each other is ideal for mafia, it doesn't limit the pool of suspects, which is actually what I'm trying to do and you are disrupting. When we lynch with no read and maximum pool of suspects, we shoot fish in a barrel. When we limit the pool of suspects, the barrel gets smaller, the fishes might get louder. You might aswell say, we don't know anything except for me defending people who i believe are townies, which is incomplete, I have already pushed my case against Eishi_Ki but will obviously have to focus on other cases since I won't find a majority for that one in day 1. I create my stances in all possible ways on restricted cases, that's how a townie should play. Mafia creates stances maybe even defending townies when it's possible for them to blend in while doing so (notice how I am actually the first guy supporting sciberbia?). It also causes A LOT of repercussions for me, as opposed to your generalized argument. Also, when mafia gives advice, they will try to not adress problems in the thread, but try to give more generic advice everyone probably knows already. That also helps them blend in without creating vulnerable points for later. With all that said, heist, you're either badly informed about the game or scum. Pick one. Also, start voting for a lynch if you think I'm mafia. Town won't like you for being opportunistic and go for votes you didn't push by yourself, that allows for jumping on the most convenient bandwagon.
Townies not being sure of each other Day 1 is natural. There is almost no information to go. You, on the other hand, are almost completely convinced of Sciberbia's alignment almost from the first minute of this game. Again, this lynch is not a matter of probability. Our goal isn't to eliminate suspects by placing them in pro-town status and "shooting blindly" into the rest. Our goal is to actively find suspicious, scummy people. I think this is crucial. Do not try to find townies, try to find mafia. Townies not being sure of each is much better than blindly following one player, being so seduced that you will automatically disregard everyone who attempts to argue with you or that person.
I too am making and have been making my stance. And by now, I'm hoping you can see that spending Day 1 just defending one person is not helping town at all come lynch time. Even if you are right, eliminating the possibilties from 11 to 10 (excluding ourselves), this just isn't very useful. And before you keep going on and on about how my posts are generalized, that was isolated to my first post, which if you look at was not limited solely to generalized tips but also my take on the policy brought up by Sciberbia and my mention of you.
Finally, I don't need to vote yet. Day 1 is literally only half done. We have about 23 hours to further clarfiy the situation. As you've notced your single vote on Eishi isn't doing much. So yes, I'll reserve my vote. But I'll tell you exactly how I'm going to vote. Depending on how Superouman and Unforgiven post, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this early on. But should they come back and start wowing me with subsequent posts and start establishing a better town atmosphere, you will be getting my vote.
|
Ok, finally got home.
Im going to really try to clear the suspicions abotu me (but i must confess i dont really see it).
First of all, my "contradictions"...dont use PAST games as a guide is the first one i think. Im saying this, because i see (and saw in the past game) some people talking about "meta-game", for me, when i read NEWBIE Mafia and some players triying to do indepth analysis based on a few, sometimes even ONE random post is just hilarious, i understand we have to get the ball rolling but again, i say, we have to do this in a smart way, not just throwing gazillions of FoS and votes.
Now, at this stage of the game and seeing the post count we have something to work on, still very little, but at least is something.
About the "town leader", is something that manifest for itself, i never said lets vote or something.
My "reads" so far:
The ridiculous aggresiveness im getting from Xatalos got me thinking about 2 things, he's just a really bad townie triying to use his ubber skills...or just a mafia playing in a pretty risky way (metagame uh?) I confess deep inside me i think its the first option, just a bad townie, contradiction and all, thats what my personal experience dictates.
My main suspect revolve around someone who have had some kind of agression but not making it too risky and not taking any pressure at all.
suki: his first post is about the NL d1 theme, and asking Miltonkram about his fst vote. His 3rd post is some semi-analysis about the people the town is talking about and to close his post he throws a vote against me, before make it clear "it may change"...then a couple more post naming Cattivik, Superouman and me.
That's it...he nevers really pressure someone, playing it really safe, his filter is short, he's just taunting Cattivik in hopes of preparing a Day 2 candidate.
For now on:
##Vote suki
but it may change uh?!
-----------------------------------------
Im heading out to work (i work at night and study at day) i will make a post tomorrow about my second suspect. I can get online form my phone, if anyone wants to ask something please make a precise question and i'll try to answer it. It sucks to write a long post from the phone.
|
Honestly Superouman is pissing me off. His posts are empty, and few. While he is not lurking as hard as Ange777 i find him to be a useless irrational player. I would be happy to vote for him if we cant decide on who is the most scummy however i want to see some proper cases arising in the next few hours.
@Cattavik. I'm not sure how you can see my suspicions of you as baseless you post saying
On June 01 2012 08:16 Vivax wrote:
Also, when mafia gives advice, they will try to not adress problems in the thread, but try to give more generic advice everyone probably knows already. That also helps them blend in without creating vulnerable points for later.
.
however all of your post are pretty much that, you give general advice udner the guise of specific information by posting NAMES with vague rehashes of things that have been said. ugh. wtf is with the name change too ugh.
more at lunch. x
|
Alright Vivax, I'm still not a big fan of your play, but I'll give you some time off from defending yourself and answering questions. I'm not completely satisfied with your defense, but tunneling you mercilessly doesn't help anyone either. Please stop listing out who you think is town. It is just filler and distracts from our real goal here which is finding scum. It's fine for you to make a list of who you think is town and keep it to yourself, but posting a list of the towniest townies is also like posting a hit list for scum. If you need to list out your confirmed town reads, post it some time when the scum can't actually use it against us such as the end of N1 right before the deadline.
If you really are town, spend the time you would be using to defend yourself and post a decent case against a player or two.
|
In case it wasn't clear from my earlier post, I'm not too happy with either of the current top lynch candidates, Cattivik and Unforgiven. So I'm going to try to convince you guys to vote for someone I think actually has a good chance of being mafia.
My top scumread is currently suki. I think I have a pretty good case. For what it's worth, I typed up most of this post before unforgiven's recent accusation and vote on suki.
Here we go. Sorry for the lengthy post, but I've put a lot of time into it and I think there's some good points so I'd appreciate it if you all read the whole thing.
suki's first post
+ Show Spoiler +On May 31 2012 12:34 suki wrote:
Simply voting to 'pressure' an explanation seems too flimsy - he could have simply asked for one and saved his pressure vote for later on if he needed it.
Rather, it feels like he has a distinct purpose in throwing out a vote that early, as if to say 'hey, I'm a townie because I'm not afraid to take bold actions'.
Let's say sciberbia is lynched on day 1 and turns out to be scum. Milton gains credibility for making a good read, and for being the first one to make it. On the other hand, if sciberbia is lynched and turns out to be town, Milton can hide behind the 'pressure vote' reasoning, and claim that it was too early to really know for sure when he made the vote.
And then there's the possibility that sciberbia isn't lynched at all, in which case his vote ends up making no real difference - except that he still gains some townie credibility for being bold enough to take action.
I'm leaning towards Milton being town, simply because it would take a pretty ballsy mafia to make such a move so early on, but between sciberbia and Milton, Milton is the more suspicious to me at the moment. Although I don't agree with a Day 1 NL, I find that sciberbia's motives for pushing of a Day 1 NL are sincere and at the very least is generating discussion (which is good for the town regardless), whereas Milton's vote is just confusing.
@Miltonkram
I'd like a clear explanation of why you felt it was so important to vote for sciberbia this early in the game.
On May 31 2012 12:43 suki wrote:
Oh wait, this is kind of important to my reasoning.
Are you allowed to change your vote after you make it?
I dont see any explicit answer in the rules. I assume you can't since we're not able to edit our posts, but just to make sure... Here are his first two posts in which he ponders Miltonkram's vote on me. I believe suki that he didn't know the rules about changing votes, but I still find this post a bit off. First of all, his logic doesn't make sense to me. He recognizes the vote as confusing and thinks the reasoning behind it 'flimsy'. So far so good. He seems to be suggesting that Miltonkram might be mafia. But then he analyzes the possible outcomes of the vote from the perspective that Miltonkram is town. Notice that suki considers the scenario that I am mafia. At that point in the game, it looked pretty damn unlikely that me and Milton were both mafia. So why is suki analyzing what a townie Miltonkram stands to gain from that vote? What's the point of that analysis? Then he says that he's leaning toward Miltonkram being town. Makes his previous analysis even more pointless. He also pays me a nice compliment, which is definitely something a mafia might do: try to ally with the active posters. Finally, I can think of one really good explanation as to why he realized his mistake: He might have gone back to the mafia QT where his scumbuddies set him straight. Just a theory. But I'd like to hear suki explain how he realized that he had misinterpreted the rules. In Summaryhis first post contains some confusing, pointless analysis where he seems to be putting suspcion on Miltonkram, but then backs off of it
Suki's big followup post
+ Show Spoiler +There's a lot to talk about here, and in my opinion, a lot of evidence against suki. I'll try to break it down. + Show Spoiler +On May 31 2012 23:51 suki wrote:
MiltonKram
First, the ability to change your vote kind of lessens the importance of Milton's extremely fast voting, and sort of discounts a lot of my initial suspicions of him, but his response to criticism is... lackluster at best. I find it interesting that after making such a big action early on, he's content to simply apologize, meekly acknowledge that sciberbia's math was right and recede his vote...
And yet he still sits on the fence about sciberbia, and 'everyone else'. Just like s0lstice, I find it suspicious that he's so aggressive without conviction. Only after prodding (5 hours after he receded his vote), does he start sharing his thoughts about other players, and even then he only targets three, two for being lurkers and one for a glaring contradiction. He fails to make any committing calls for action.
Finally, although I suspect that his apology was directed to everyone, he did not respond to my question, when my entire first post was directed towards asking him his motivations in voting (the fact that he didn't respond to me is suspicious to me regardless of how valid my points actually were).
Miltonkram, I'm keeping my eye on you.
OK so before he said he was leaning toward Miltonkram being town. s0lstice stated he was suspicious of Miltonkram. Now suki piles on some suspicion, but is so damn wishy/washy about it. He describes Milton's response as "lackluster" and his actions as "interesting". Then he concludes by saying "I'm keeping my eye on you." All this seems scummy to me. He changes his mind about Milton, bandwaggoning with s0sltice, and is quite noncomittal about it. + Show Spoiler +On May 31 2012 23:51 suki wrote:
Eishi_Ki
Eishi_Ki seems bandwagon-y in his first post. By the time he posts, Cattivik already has heist and golden posting their suspicions on him. He then calls out Milton for targetting sciberbia for... going against the grain? It doesn't seem to contribute anything.
The rest of his posts are defending himself, and then he calls out me, Xatalos and Super. His insight on Xatalos is interesting... but I feel like Xatalos has been contributing his thoughts quite a bit in the thread and calling out people for scummy behaviour.
In any case, I don't think Eishi is scum, but he hasn't contributed that much to the thread as of yet.
This also seems like scummy analysis. He piles suspicion on Eishi_Ki, but then says he doesn't think eishi_ki is scum. Again, what is the point of posting this analysis? It seems to me like he's just trying to make it look like he's doing analysis, without actually accusing anybody. Also, remember how he complimented me on my posts before? Well here he is sucking up to Xatalos, who is another active poster and was directing a lot of discussion. + Show Spoiler +On May 31 2012 23:51 suki wrote:
Unforgiven
Unforgiven seems to be the hot topic of the day, for his inconsistencies. I agree that he seems really suspicious. He also hasn't even accused anyone yet, much less contributed anything other than generalities and apologize for his english.
Really scummy. For the sake of brevity, I'll keep this short, but I'm willing to expand on my thoughts on Unforgiven if asked.
##Vote Unforgiven_ve
It may change later but for now I feel he is the most suspicious one in the game.
He hasn't even mentioned unforgiven before, but now he jumps on the bandwaggon, simply agreeing with everyone else who thought Unforgiven was suspicious. Suki, you said you'd be willing to expand your thoughts on Unforgiven. I'd appreciate it if you did. + Show Spoiler +On May 31 2012 23:51 suki wrote:
I'd also be up for a lurker vote on day 1.. From reading everyone's opinions it seems lurkers can be really dangerous. In which case, I'll call out Ange777 and superouman. Not the most damning statement, but certainly doesn't convince me he's town. He's trying to seem like a helpful noobie townie who is willing to go along with popular opinion and lynch lurkers. Take that for what it's worth.
Now he bandwaggons on Cattivik
+ Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +On June 01 2012 00:27 suki wrote:
Cattivik's entire defence of his innocence in the initial stages of the game seems to revolve around him either knowing or not knowing whether sciberbia is a townie.
He also throws out a vote for Eishi, because he claims Eishi says he has 'a reason to keep lurking.' I didn't see anything of this sort in Eishi's posts. The only thing close is the very reasonable statement that he lives in Korea so his schedule is different from everyone else. It feels like his vote is purely a defensive reaction to Eishi calling him out.
Add Cattivik to my scum list. Really bandwaggony here. Heist, eishi_ki, and golden had all already accused cattivik. Suki basically just repeats their reasons and adds cattivik to his 'scum list'. I don't think that this is necessarily scummy, but as you will see later, he becomes quite wishy/washy about Cattivik.
Now a fluffy, non-controversial post
+ Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +On June 01 2012 02:22 suki wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 02:04 Superouman wrote:
And from my first mafia game ever point of view, the first day is no more than a lottery The first day is not a lottery, though, and even if it was, the information that we gain from everyone posting their thoughts is invaluable in the later stages of the game. You NEED to post your opinions, and you need to post them often. Your Day 1 posts may be the only thing keeping you from getting lynched come Day 4 or whatever. I'm starting to see why people dislike lurkers so much. Over time, we may find out more clear reads on Cattivik and Unforgiven_ve by analysing their posts, but someone who doesn't contribute will a) never give a read and b) will be a wildcard come voting time and may not properly push the town's agenda. States some pretty fluffy, non-controversial stuff. Doesn't take a hard stance on who we should lynch.
Now he backs off of cattivik
+ Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +On June 01 2012 02:41 suki wrote:Show nested quote +
People accusing cattivik
Consider both sides of the spectrum. Can you really not see a logical town motivation behind his posts thus far? Getting in everyone's faces, tunneling Eishi_Ki, and staunch, energetic defense of his actions. He has been very active thus far. I don't agree with his methods, but they sure as hell read town to me.
Don't make mountains out of molehills. Consider not just his words, but the aims behind them.
s0lstice, I'm inclined to agree with you, but don't you think it's strange that cattivik seems so confident that sciberbia is town, simply from the first few posts in Day 1? It just strikes me as really off. The fact that he was so quick to lash out at Eishi_Ki may just be 'getting in his face', and I suppose both sides of the argument seem pretty petty all things considered.. But I'm not so sure that you can say that his actions strictly read town. Cattivik, I think the discussion regarding the earlier posts of Eishi_Ki and sciberbia should be set aside for a moment. I'd like to hear your opinions on other players. s0sltice addresses cattivik's accusers and defends cattivik against them. Now look how suki tries not to take a stance. He's "inclined to agree" with s0sltice. Whereas just a minute ago Cattivik was on his 'scum list', now he "supposes that both sides of the argument seem pretty petty". But he's "not so sure that you can say Cattivik's actions stricly read town". This is about as wishy/wasy as it gets. Scummy behavior.
In summary suki displays many characteristics of a mafia
- he is very hesitant to take a hard stance on anything
- he tried to pile suspicion on miltonkram, eishi_ki, unforgiven, and cattivik without really taking a strong stance
- he was wishy/washy in his accusations of both miltonkram and cattivik
- he tries to befriend active posters such as myself and xalatos
@Town
If you agree with me about suki, please say so, and indicate what in particular you find scummy. If you disagree, I'd like to hear you at least say so and give a reason why. Personally, I'm more confident about suki than anyone else so I will...
##Vote suki
|
It's been 3 hours and not a post has been made since my accusation of suki. I'd like to hear some opinions on him.
Anyways, I'm going to bed. I'll probably be back online about 6 hours before the deadline. Night.
|
@Sciberbia. I'm uncertain of suki at the moment. but i'm worried that a bandwagon is forming on him. we need to rationally consider a few options. i need to mull over suki's filter a while longer before condemning him. I feel that we may be more prosperous lynching some lurchers first, because as far as scumminess goes if suki is mafia (or anyone for that matter) chances are they'll keep digging themselves a hole if we can see it this early. I'm just so super wary of lurker now because of their potentially game changing absence.
I guess what i'm trying to say is. scumslips will stay on the record, and chances are if they are scumslipping this early they'll continue as time goes on. Lurker however, if not dealt with early in the game where they are less of a % of the team, may end up in the final rounds where the % of town per player is alot higher and the responsibility of town individuals is even higher.
These are my thoughts. more soon. x
|
I'm 85% sure suki will flip mafia, he is playing a pretty standar mafia or a really bad (till now) blue. I will wait for his response.
Golden: wait and you will see every lurker will go active at the last hours of the day
|
ebwop: im going to sleep now and get up early to class tomorrow, i will try to be online in 11 horus or so
|
On June 01 2012 01:40 s0Lstice wrote:
Eishi_Ki
Nobody is going to accuse you of bandwagoning if you are directly asked your opinion on someone. That said, what is your opinion on Unforgiven?
I think he made a couple of posts promoting a town leader (which imo is a bad idea), I see no lack of conversation, therefore, no need to 'get the ball rolling' as you put it. The ball is already in motion. He then went away for a while, came back and saw a lot of people becoming suspicious of him and he panicked, dropped the idea of town leader very quickly but continued to remind everyone not to judge on past games to which no one so far has mentioned or even brought up in conversation. Probable mafia.
And here we go for my REVENGE post (huehue)
After dropping the subject of Vivax because there wasn't a lot to talk about, I now feel I have more substantial points. First off
+ Show Spoiler +Eishi_Ki: Pretty poor arguments to accuse me, but blends in well with the opinions of the former posts.You also say you have a reason to keep lurking. A win/win situation for mafia. You also suspect those who are most active here.
Then there's this:
On May 31 2012 14:04 Eishi_Ki wrote:
Yeah just a note on my activity times, I live in Korea so 7am KST actually 7am (whodathunk) and I gotta work, so activity time before the deadline will be minimal I'm afraid (or maybe it's a good thing, hmm)
Dude, what. How is it a good thing? You are basically saying that you won't contribute much to the scumhunt while the scumjuice flows out of your every pore.
I don't even want to go on with other players cause I think you should start telling us more about your thought processes:
##VOTE :Eishi_Ki
Straight up calls me out for no concise reason
+ Show Spoiler +Yes, i never supported a NL, but aknocwledged sciberbias point
I suggest that you keep the discussion to yourself, you talk a lot about me, not about the accusations towards you.
If you admit you are scum now, you may choose the way you get lynched, Eishi_Ki, like being drowned in single malt whisky to have a last taste of your country.
I'll keep the vote locked in.
Continues on the warpath with no sway in opinion whatsoever.
Next post, after my rebuttal, he continues to press the issue.
+ Show Spoiler +On June 01 2012 02:07 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 01:36 s0Lstice wrote:
You decided to vote for him based on the fact that his schedule means he can't be around during lynch time, and him wondering if it's a good thing that he isn't around during that time. You mean his joke?Yes, I didn't get the joke. My main points (which I wonder you don't know, cause they were at the beginning of my argumentation against him) are that he just started posting after two accusations were out, with the claim of me talking of 'us' townies with the purpose of making myself sound as if I were one, while heist, a few posts above, does exactly the same thing I did. So Eishi_Ki bandwagoned with a very weak claim, a very small post and no pressure to post in the future cause of his schedule. Also, notice how once confronted with his weak claim he suddenly accuses three other people but not me anymore. He must have noticed that his claim is really weak and is now dodging the accusations. He also denied a statement concerning the weak claim instead asking what the accusation is. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=340298¤tpage=8#143I think there is not enough information on unforgiven, except for a nonexistent post analysis. He gave general tips so far, then he agreed with statements from other players without questioning them and without posting something concrete. I'll stick to my opinion regarding sciberbia and Eishi_Ki. In case I won't have a majority on Eishi_Ki, I'll try to help achieve the majority on the case i believe is most correct in order to get a Day 1 lynch 100%.
And up to this point I STILL don't know what I was accused of. I never asserted that I was accusing you, only that I was suspicious. What do you want, a full accusation after you post a couple of times? I felt the need to contribute, and I did. Yes my points were weak but I frankly don't know anything about D1 vs D2 lynch so I opted out of saying anything in that regard. Plus, it was a dead horse.
Finally, since that point, I have said nothing regarding Vivax to sway or dissuade him (sleeping and working). But from going from a vehement hyper aggressive vote for myself to this....
+ Show Spoiler +On June 01 2012 05:51 Vivax wrote:Cattivik here, I just had my name changed <_< , hope noone gets confused. Anyway, suki wanted some opinions on other players, so I'll put sciberbia and Eishi_Ki aside. Alright, where should I start. Let's start with you, suki:You have 5 substantial posts so far, excluding those answering game related questions or correcting formal mistakes. Your first stance was expressed after Miltons' vote against sciberbia. You believe sciberbia to have posted in the towns' interest. So do I, that's why I defend him.And the argument of mafia not posting first in a newbie game doesn't seem wrong to me. You seem to support cases especially against unforgiven_ve, then Milton, then Eishi, then me. Frankly, I don't think you are mafia. On to s0lstice:Very focused on unforgiven_ve, but also very eager to get opinions and wake up the lurkers. Rather than focusing on the exposed ones, he's getting the guys behind first, without doubt he's working pro-town and not afraid to defend people who he believes are townies, in this case me. The first post didn't look decise, but everything following convinced me of your town alignment. Xatalos:First trying to get the lurkers, now he's pushing the case against unforgiven_ve along with s0lstice. Not seen too much of a hard stance except for the one on unforgiven yet. But I'm pretty sure you are townie aswell. Miltonkram:He suspected sciberbia before understanding his point of view and apologized accordingly, suki found that apology a little suspicious, I don't. I think it's strange you have a scumread about me trying to buddy up with someone. I immediately dismissed the NL option in the s0lstice case.Doesn't exactly support his post. Still, I believe you are townie. O.golden_ne:Not sure why he's pushing the case against me so hard, then suspects Xatalos for defending me. Then he defends Eishi_ki against my accusations, saying he contributes more than me to the discussion. Actually, Eishi_ki started posting suspects after this post. Eishi's only claim before this post was that I am suspicious cause I spoke of 'we', the town. I think it's a really weak defense of Eishi and a weak case against me. More to my defense further down in the post. I do like that you also suspect the lurkers though. I can't tell if you are mafia or town. heist:One of the things I notice is that you didn't acknowledge my defence so far. You also didn't post a definite opinion in form of a vote or FoS. You gave general hints at the start. I can't tell if you are mafia or town. Superouman: The only thing you said which could haunt you as mafia later in the game is this: Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 00:57 Superouman wrote:On June 01 2012 00:45 heist wrote:
Sciberbia is NOT a confirmed townie.
This, i don't understand why he could be a "confirmed" townie, even the most townie-looking person can be toying with us The rest reflects a strong indecision. In one of his posts, he says he doesn't want to judge only based on assumptions. While such a Day1 attitude doesn't produce anything useful, he could just be making the mistakes of a noob townie. Cause of the neutrality of his posts I might vote for him in absence of another strong case. I believe Superouman to be scum or not confident enough. He just voted for sciberbia out of nowhere, whatever. Unforgiven_veNo cases, basically a resume of what has been posted so far. He might have felt the urge to post something positive cause he missed the timing when all the reccommendations were posted, or he might just try to blend in with the majority. There is a fairly strong case against him, although people have been accusing him fast. It might also just be a misunderstanding cause of the different languages, but we can't go for charity in this game, that's why I also suspect you of being scum. Ange777:Permanent lurker. He promised he would contribute something soon. If it's not enough, I will vote for him first and unvote Eishi_Ki. Alright, now to my next defense: I'm one of the most, if not the most active poster in this game so far. Assuming that I survive this day or night while being mafia, my posts make me so transparent that I wouldn't survive day 2 for certain. In that case, I would have played mafia like an idiot. Also cause I'm exposing myself quite extremely. Whoever should be proven wrong for promoting the case against me in case I get lynched will most likely get in trouble the next day, cause I will flip town. The first to fall should be the lurkers. Killing me would also provide a nice bunch of information about peoples' motives for pushing against me, but naturally, I would like to avoid that.
...does seem highly suspicious. I haven't attempted to change your mind on your vote, so why the weak knees and change of heart to calling out a lurker? Was it everyone else basically telling you your argument was moot and that my responses were adequate? In either case, I had you fingered from the start and my suspicions were not waived despite moving onto other subjects. Here be mafia.
I'm also calling out Superouman, I have tried several times and attempted to encourage you to contribute more. Enough's enough though, I believe you are mafia and are using the newb excuse to sway opinion. I'm not buying it.
I'm not going to vote just yet, a response from Vivax will make my decision.
Be back this evening. I'll try and stay awake as long as I can for the vote (might be drunk, who knows, fire friday and all)
|
I guess one thing I'm quickly learning about this game is that you're not allowed to change your mind once you've stated your opinion on anything. Rather than appear wishy-washy, it's better to go full out aggressive on someone over the littlest details and stick to your guns even if you realize your argument doesn't make sense anymore.
For what it's worth, I've only changed my mind on someone once, and that is on Cattivik. Let me go over the accusations brought to me.
He hasn't even mentioned unforgiven before, but now he jumps on the bandwaggon, simply agreeing with everyone else who thought Unforgiven was suspicious. Suki, you said you'd be willing to expand your thoughts on Unforgiven. I'd appreciate it if you did.
Is agreeing with someone bandwagoning? I never mentioned Unforgiven before because I hadn't considered his posts before someone brought up some very good points on him.
My reasons for voting for Unforgiven:
+ Show Spoiler +
His first three posts were general advice that was confusing at worst, contradictory at best. He states that you shouldn't use past games as a guide, yet he references two past games in the same post. He states that blue people shouldn't roleclaim, and yet they should roleclaim (as a last resort!). He states that mafia is more active during the last hours of the day, yet he slips in that he'll save his vote for the last hours as well, as if by stating it early he alleviates all suspicions on his actions later on. He's really against bandwagons, yet he asks for a town leader for people to follow.
I regret not posting my thoughts before, I was trying to avoid a huge wall of text but apparently it has come back to bite me. I felt that the points were already explored by s0lstice and Xatalos and didn't want to simply repeat their words.
I'm not sure what I would do in this situation in the future, where I feel I have a strong read against someone, so I want to put in a vote, yet I have nothing new to add to the topic. Say nothing, and not let your stance be known? Agree with another player and be accused of bandwagoning?
On Miltonkram:
+ Show Spoiler +I don't feel I've been wishy-washy towards Miltonkram. When I analyzed the possible outcomes of either player being town/scum: So why is suki analyzing what a townie Miltonkram stands to gain from that vote? What's the point of that analysis? Doesn't reputation mean a lot, especially for a townie? I was simply going through all the possibilities to be thorough, it seems strange to call me out simply because I was looking at all the possible outcomes of a lynch. At this point I felt that Milton was suspicious and asked him to explain his actions, reserving a firm opinion for after he responded to me. OK so before he said he was leaning toward Miltonkram being town. s0lstice stated he was suspicious of Miltonkram. Now suki piles on some suspicion, but is so damn wishy/washy about it. He describes Milton's response as "lackluster" and his actions as "interesting". Then he concludes by saying "I'm keeping my eye on you." All this seems scummy to me. He changes his mind about Milton, bandwaggoning with s0sltice, and is quite noncomittal about it. I don't understand what's wrong with my choice of language here. Milton's response WAS lackluster. It was a simple 'hey, I'm sorry I didn't understand your point. I'll back off here.', and then he proceeds to ignore my question to him completely. Let me reiterate my negative points on him - he makes a big move then apologizes without so much of an explanation, he takes his time and then posts a safe list of obvious lynch candidates. Everyone seems to be willing to forgive him for his early actions, but his actions scream wishy-washy to me. In fact, at the end of this post I'll further back up my suspicions with his most recent posts.
On Eishi_ki:
+ Show Spoiler +This also seems like scummy analysis. He piles suspicion on Eishi_Ki, but then says he doesn't think eishi_ki is scum. Again, what is the point of posting this analysis? It seems to me like he's just trying to make it look like he's doing analysis, without actually accusing anybody. I wasn't piling suspicion on Eishi_ki. Eishi was under fire by Cattivik, so I was posting my read on him, and my read was that, based on his posts thus far, Eishi had not contributed anything, but I did not feel he was scum.
On Cattivik:
+ Show Spoiler +Really bandwaggony here. Heist, eishi_ki, and golden had all already accused cattivik. Suki basically just repeats their reasons and adds cattivik to his 'scum list'. I did not simply repeat the accusations. I was the first to point out and elaborate that his entire self defence relied on him being sure/not sure that sciberbia was town. I also pointed out his vote on Eishi wasn't even valid, he was completely twisting Eishi's words. This was not bandwagoning in the least. s0sltice addresses cattivik's accusers and defends cattivik against them. Now look how suki tries not to take a stance. He's "inclined to agree" with s0sltice. Whereas just a minute ago Cattivik was on his 'scum list', now he "supposes that both sides of the argument seem pretty petty". s0lstice's statement about reading into the town motivation behind his posts makes sense. I was focusing on Cattivik's inconsistencies and quick, aggressive defense, and s0lstice was pointing out that it makes sense for a town to act this way. I'm 'inclined to agree' that you COULD see a town motivation behind Cattivik's actions, but I then proceed to ask s0lstice to clarify how he explains the point I had initially made against Cattivik, because you can also see a SCUM motivation as well. That is, how strange it is that Cattivik is so confident in his read on sciberbia. I reiterate that it feels off to me. I don't feel this is wishy-washy. Maybe I should have stated clearly in that post 'I am still suspicious of Cattivik' before I asked him to start commenting on other players, but I didn't feel that my intentions were unclear. Let me state it really clearly here: I wanted to acknowledge to s0lstice that it was possible to read Cattivik as townie, but that didn't mean that he had to be townie. I never retracted my suspicions on Cattivik, and in fact asked him to start talking about other players, so that there would be more information about him other than a petty quarrel between one other player. Not wishy washy. I just didn't feel it was necessary to make clear in every post that my opinion on Cattivik hadn't changed. But he's "not so sure that you can say Cattivik's actions stricly read town". This is about as wishy/wasy as it gets. Scummy behavior. I conceded that his staunch, energetic self defense could just as easily be a genuine townie reaction. That's not wishy-washy, that's simply acknowledging the other side's validity. My statement was made to point out that just because it could be a genuine townie reaction, doesn't mean it couldn't also be a genuine scum action. The only way I could see this as wishy-washy is if you take the phrase literally. 'I'm not so sure' is not a statement of indecisiveness, it's a figure of speech used in every day conversation to politely point something out to someone.
In Summary:
+ Show Spoiler +
In summary suki displays many characteristics of a mafia
- he is very hesitant to take a hard stance on anything
- he tried to pile suspicion on miltonkram, eishi_ki, unforgiven, and cattivik without really taking a strong stance
- he was wishy/washy in his accusations of both miltonkram and cattivik
- he tries to befriend active posters such as myself and xalatos
1. I have taken a hard stance on unforgiven. I have also been clear about my suspicions regarding Miltonkram. 2. This is the same as point one, but let me reiterate. I've been suspicious of Milton from the start, and Unforgiven and Cattivik after my own analysis. And I have never thought Eishi was scum. 3. Please, explain again how I was wishy-washy. 4. I stated that your motives were clearer than Milton's, and I stated my opinion on Xatalos as an example for how Eishi_ki's point against Xatalos wasn't quite valid, thus backing up my claim that Eishi_ki hadn't contributed much to the thread at that time. Is this really 'befriending' or simply discussion? Does every statement of agreement or support carry with it the implicit motive to befriend someone? Also, for both sciberbia and unforgiven who are singling out my comment that 'it may change later', I made it because I wanted to reserve my right to change my vote if the town wanted to lynch someone else. In hindsight, I realize that that's a given, and that it was an unnecessary or even stupid comment to make. I clarified in the post right below that I was sure my read on unforgiven was scum, and that I was reserving my right to change my vote. These words aren't as extreme as you make them out to be.
In summary, I have clearly addressed each and every point made against me by Unforgiven and sciberbia. I have shown that I have not swayed in my suspicions nor simply bandwagoned on any topic.
I admit that I have used the wrong vocabulary (such as 'I'm not so sure you can say that...' and 'I'm inclined to agree'), and that at times I did not spell out that I was suspicious of someone (relying on context to imply that I was still suspicious, as I had made no statement to the contrary). I'm still getting used to Mafia where using colloquial phrases can be analysed to death, so one has to be extremely clear about what they're saying. That said, I don't think that my intentions or actions have been wishy-washy at all.
ON MILTONKRAM BEING SUSPICIOUS
Take a look at Milton's most recent posts (After his apologies).
His opinion on Unforgiven is 'confused'. He lists all sorts of inconsistencies and says its easier to 'extrapolate some sort of scum logic' for unforgiven's call for town leadership.... And then doesn't commit to either calling him suspicious or not suspicious.
He states that Cattivik/Vivax is his 'top scum read as of this moment', then later on says:
'Alright Vivax, I'm still not a big fan of your play, but I'll give you some time off... I'm not completely satisfied with your defence, but tunneling you mercilessly doesn't help anyone either.'
and
'If you really are town, spend the time you would be using to defend yourself and post a decent case against a player or two.'
It really, really sounds to me like he's trying to ease off from his extreme stance against Cattivik.
Finally, he writes a large post directed towards superouman in which he points out superouman's contradictions, and states that he could be 'either lazy town or mafia'.
Up to this point, Miltonkram has made a strong attack on sciberbia, which he quietly retreated from. He has targeted superouman and ange777 for lurking (safe choices). He has called Cattavik out for being scum, followed by what may preparing to ease off of him ('If you are town...'). He has been wishy-washy regarding unforgiven.
Aside from this, Miltonkram has not even commented on anyone else in the game.
I don't see how you can look at my play and call it wishy-washy, but look at his play and not even criticise it a little.
@unforgiven_ve
suki: his first post is about the NL d1 theme, and asking Miltonkram about his fst vote. His 3rd post is some semi-analysis about the people the town is talking about and to close his post he throws a vote against me, before make it clear "it may change"...then a couple more post naming Cattivik, Superouman and me.
That's it...he nevers really pressure someone, playing it really safe, his filter is short, he's just taunting Cattivik in hopes of preparing a Day 2 candidate.
I'm 85% sure suki will flip mafia, he is playing a pretty standar mafia or a really bad (till now) blue. I will wait for his response.
I'm 85% sure that unforgiven hasn't even read my filter. The last 15% is that unforgiven is a REALLY BAD BLUE. I'm sorry, your only solid 'read' on me is to call me out on being wishy washy for stating the obvious (that I can change my vote if I want to), and then you add in a safety clause that I may be town?
I voted unforgiven for a reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
