|
On December 10 2010 11:25 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:20 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 11:12 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:04 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:58 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 10:46 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:42 LSB wrote:On December 10 2010 10:34 jcarlsoniv wrote:On December 10 2010 10:31 LSB wrote:On December 10 2010 10:26 jcarlsoniv wrote:
[quote]
Well, here is my thought process. Wasting a lynch on an inactive sucks. However, I would prefer to use a lynch than a DT. Using a lynch is hit or miss, but it only wastes one action, while making more headway to finding scum with the DT. Using the DT on inactives pretty much wastes the DT if it is on town, while a lynch on a player is still a bit hit or miss (unless good analysis is done), and accidentally lynching an active townie would be more hurtful than an inactive townie.
I am hoping it does not come to this and that everyone contributes though. I would love for a game without a bagillion modkills. Wait. What? Lynch is less important than a DT check? I would rather waste a Day 1 lynch than a Day 1 DT I feel. Day 1 lynches are tough. Definitely not impossible, but tough when everything is just starting out. Using a DT on someone who isn't going to even bother contributing wouldn't be worth it. Using DT checks on active members is definitely more important. I'm a bit confused now though...You want to DT check inactives AND lynch inactives? That just seems like a waste of resources. Lets say there are three people that are lurking. That's not a far fetched number, mafia love to lurk. Sure we lynch one of them during day one, but what about the other ones? Not all the DTs have to check of course. But maybe setting something such as a probability system would be enough to flush out the mafia. Roll a 1 check inactive A. Roll a 2 check inactive B. Roll a 3 check whoever you want. That plan will need to be modified, if not scrapped once we get our D1 vote list out. I rather check the active player and lynch the inactive player. The active player right now is more likely to be +info in the future anyways, while the inactive is just... well... inactive. By the way one of the worst game aproachs is the "im noob just reading and getting used to play". If you are town you rather post something small but with actual meaning. I still have a decent target day 1 unless he posts a few more than oneliners. Inactives is also my treasure box. I have no idea what that last line means. Why don't you tell us/vote for who your "decent target"? +info always benefits town. I have a half decent target in the "im new guys" list. However right now i really want to flip Infundibulum  because A) He came out of nowhere to dismiss lynching inactives (and that is really nonsense for a player that has played a lot of games) B) I cant believe jcarsoniv just posted a single Why? to LSB vote. With a game of 31 people and a little more than half the people having posted recently it's just dumb to blindvote someone for "just showing up." What do you read into the line about efficiency that I don't? Is it really efficient at this point lynch an active player over the inactive that is going to die anyways?? Really? I mean mafia is not going to die because he doesnt vote, blues are not going to die because they dont vote. Meh i want to flip infundibulum badly.
If you read the rules you would know that people who don't vote will be killed by Dr.H (the moderator). So yes, Infund is correct that it would be more efficient.
|
Active lurking =/= Mod-kill.
|
On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:
Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain
A) your vote
B) your deep posts?
what?
|
On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course  I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2.
what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you?
|
On December 10 2010 11:28 Infundibulum wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:25 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 11:12 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:04 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:58 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 10:46 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:42 LSB wrote:On December 10 2010 10:34 jcarlsoniv wrote:On December 10 2010 10:31 LSB wrote:
[quote]
Wait. What?
Lynch is less important than a DT check? I would rather waste a Day 1 lynch than a Day 1 DT I feel. Day 1 lynches are tough. Definitely not impossible, but tough when everything is just starting out. Using a DT on someone who isn't going to even bother contributing wouldn't be worth it. Using DT checks on active members is definitely more important. I'm a bit confused now though...You want to DT check inactives AND lynch inactives? That just seems like a waste of resources. Lets say there are three people that are lurking. That's not a far fetched number, mafia love to lurk. Sure we lynch one of them during day one, but what about the other ones? Not all the DTs have to check of course. But maybe setting something such as a probability system would be enough to flush out the mafia. Roll a 1 check inactive A. Roll a 2 check inactive B. Roll a 3 check whoever you want. That plan will need to be modified, if not scrapped once we get our D1 vote list out. I rather check the active player and lynch the inactive player. The active player right now is more likely to be +info in the future anyways, while the inactive is just... well... inactive. By the way one of the worst game aproachs is the "im noob just reading and getting used to play". If you are town you rather post something small but with actual meaning. I still have a decent target day 1 unless he posts a few more than oneliners. Inactives is also my treasure box. I have no idea what that last line means. Why don't you tell us/vote for who your "decent target"? +info always benefits town. I have a half decent target in the "im new guys" list. However right now i really want to flip Infundibulum because A) He came out of nowhere to dismiss lynching inactives (and that is really nonsense for a player that has played a lot of games) B) I cant believe jcarsoniv just posted a single Why? to LSB vote. With a game of 31 people and a little more than half the people having posted recently it's just dumb to blindvote someone for "just showing up." What do you read into the line about efficiency that I don't? Is it really efficient at this point lynch an active player over the inactive that is going to die anyways?? Really? I mean mafia is not going to die because he doesnt vote, blues are not going to die because they dont vote. Meh i want to flip infundibulum badly. It is stupid to lynch someone that is going to be modkilled because that is like not lynching anybody at all. That is what my first post was trying to say.
Well now that you have started posting it is not "lynching anybody" to lynch you. And the big fallacy there is that we just dont know who is going to be modkilled because it is enough for a guy to vote or even abstain at the last minute. So your argument is: we shouldnt vote inactives because they are going to be modkilled, except that the ones that we want to get sniped are those that are actually not modkilled (whatever the definition of inactive you may have).
Im still voting Infundibulum. Kenpachi is still missing?
|
I don't know if the inactive plan is really going to be good. This is why I figured the DT's should be smart enough to make their own decisions and post only when they come across something ground breaking.
|
On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you?
A) You dont want to be active posting
B) You want to "look" active
C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare.
D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work.
E) You want enlightment.
F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least?
|
On December 10 2010 11:22 Infundibulum wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:11 LSB wrote:
Oh.
By Inactive, I mean someone who is lurking, maybe making one token post in the thread that isn't anything new and doesn't attempt to contribute anything at all, but still votes every day.
These are the uninterested townies, the lurkers, and the people studying for finals. Oh i see, we were kinda using different contextual definitions. Yeah by inactive i was thinking of the people that just never show up, not the 1 post 1 vote lurkers. In my experience most modkills happen during Day 1 or Day 2, a period during which it is difficult to distinguish true inactives from lurkers since they both exhibit similar behavior (i.e. very little). Lynching an 'inactive' Day 1 is always a nice neutral ground, but I feel that many people offer it as an excuse since they don't know what else to do (the same reason RNG always comes up, which is IMO worse than lynching inactives).
I think of discussing lynching inactives as a jumping point for town discussion. Most people complain that nothing happens day 1, and I want the thread to be filled with activity. Activity is needed to find scum.
Speaking of inactivity, everyone should say something!
On December 10 2010 11:37 Amber[LighT] wrote:
I don't know if the inactive plan is really going to be good. This is why I figured the DT's should be smart enough to make their own decisions and post only when they come across something ground breaking.
Its up to the DTs to decide. But the key point of this plan is that it flushes out the mafia. If we get general town agreement, even if the dts don't actually check the inactives, the mafia will be pressured to be more active.
|
On December 10 2010 11:35 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:28 Infundibulum wrote:On December 10 2010 11:25 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 11:12 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:04 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:58 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 10:46 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:42 LSB wrote:On December 10 2010 10:34 jcarlsoniv wrote:
[quote]
I would rather waste a Day 1 lynch than a Day 1 DT I feel. Day 1 lynches are tough. Definitely not impossible, but tough when everything is just starting out. Using a DT on someone who isn't going to even bother contributing wouldn't be worth it. Using DT checks on active members is definitely more important.
I'm a bit confused now though...You want to DT check inactives AND lynch inactives? That just seems like a waste of resources. Lets say there are three people that are lurking. That's not a far fetched number, mafia love to lurk. Sure we lynch one of them during day one, but what about the other ones? Not all the DTs have to check of course. But maybe setting something such as a probability system would be enough to flush out the mafia. Roll a 1 check inactive A. Roll a 2 check inactive B. Roll a 3 check whoever you want. That plan will need to be modified, if not scrapped once we get our D1 vote list out. I rather check the active player and lynch the inactive player. The active player right now is more likely to be +info in the future anyways, while the inactive is just... well... inactive. By the way one of the worst game aproachs is the "im noob just reading and getting used to play". If you are town you rather post something small but with actual meaning. I still have a decent target day 1 unless he posts a few more than oneliners. Inactives is also my treasure box. I have no idea what that last line means. Why don't you tell us/vote for who your "decent target"? +info always benefits town. I have a half decent target in the "im new guys" list. However right now i really want to flip Infundibulum because A) He came out of nowhere to dismiss lynching inactives (and that is really nonsense for a player that has played a lot of games) B) I cant believe jcarsoniv just posted a single Why? to LSB vote. With a game of 31 people and a little more than half the people having posted recently it's just dumb to blindvote someone for "just showing up." What do you read into the line about efficiency that I don't? Is it really efficient at this point lynch an active player over the inactive that is going to die anyways?? Really? I mean mafia is not going to die because he doesnt vote, blues are not going to die because they dont vote. Meh i want to flip infundibulum badly. It is stupid to lynch someone that is going to be modkilled because that is like not lynching anybody at all. That is what my first post was trying to say. Well now that you have started posting it is not "lynching anybody" to lynch you. And the big fallacy there is that we just dont know who is going to be modkilled because it is enough for a guy to vote or even abstain at the last minute. So your argument is: we shouldnt vote inactives because they are going to be modkilled, except that the ones that we want to get sniped are those that are actually not modkilled (whatever the definition of inactive you may have). Im still voting Infundibulum. Kenpachi is still missing?
There is no fallacy. It is hard to distinguish active lurkers from genuinely inactive players during Day 1 to Day 2. In the interest of not running the risk wasting a town lynch I am of the opinion that we can start to eliminate active lurkers around Day 3 or probably even 2 if things go well. If you disagree with me that is fine, but I'm not sure how your logic is leading you to think that I'm red.
|
On December 10 2010 11:40 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you? A) You dont want to be active posting B) You want to "look" active C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare. D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work. E) You want enlightment. F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least?
A) 4 hours does not judge that. what if i went on TL tomorrow for the first time in the past 3 days?
B) Anyone who posts would want to look active.. Why would they post if they want to look inactive?
C) Why are you assuming i read the rules? how do you know i didnt just assume the KP?
D) It doesnt. shh
E) ?? its enlightenment
F) I dont agree with you voting for Infundibulum.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Yay done with exams for the semester. Mafia party time ^_^
As stated before, the problem with lynching an inactive is that the mafia can usually guide the vote towards the inactive of their choice. While the lynch should be used to pressure inactives, they don't have to necessarily be the target. Even after day one, it is important that we continue to pressure everyone to contribute to the thread. We can't go overboard on the inactive hunt, however. The goal of the lynch and dt check is to find scum, not confirm inactives.
I agree that guiding the blue roles may not necessarily be the best idea, but in the chance that a new player holds one of the blue roles there should be at least a general discussion how the roles should be best used. For example, the Cloyster should be actively trying to draw a hit. Please don't sit back and hope the hit eventually comes to you. Even worse, do not allow yourself to get lynched. Early on, the more experienced players are probably going to be targeted first and thus should probably be protected by Chanseys. As a town circle is not a priority at this point, checking blue's is a waste so obviously Alakazam's should check the scummiest players. You do not necessarily have to check the most active players, as suggested, since they already provide the most material to analyze.
On December 10 2010 09:36 tube wrote:
yeah dont lynch inactives
this is my first one and im pretty much just reading through the thread until i come up with something
If you were an observer, just reading through the thread would be fine, but a player you have to jump right into the discussion. Even if you are just starting to understand how things work, try to contribute and let the other more experienced players guide you along. Watching is going to make you a target.
On December 10 2010 10:06 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 09:40 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 09:16 jcarlsoniv wrote:
Also @LSB: I don't think we should say "we need to lynch inactives". While it may pressure scum to come out from hiding, I have seen it hit town more often than not. I think we need to deal with who is out and talking and giving us things to analyze rather than just blindly shooting into a room with a shotgun. I rather start the blind shoot into this small room with a shotgun. We are not getting analysis going too far away day one. Picking the right guy at the right time is picking a dead weight at first. Show nested quote +
How can you possibly say this? The game literally just started, and we have 48 hours to scumhunt. Again, I am going to say, there is no reason to dismiss the idea of finding a lynch candidate Day 1.
Game started long before first day post. Interesting that you still defy chances: mafia takes some time to get in contact. Maybe you want to propose a lynch candidate right now? I actually have one right in front of me. Edit to pretify
What exactly do you mean by this? How has the game started long before the first day post? There was enough time for 2 posts after pm's were sent out and then the first post was made.
|
On December 10 2010 11:28 jcarlsoniv wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:25 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 11:12 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:04 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:58 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 10:46 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:42 LSB wrote:On December 10 2010 10:34 jcarlsoniv wrote:On December 10 2010 10:31 LSB wrote:
[quote]
Wait. What?
Lynch is less important than a DT check? I would rather waste a Day 1 lynch than a Day 1 DT I feel. Day 1 lynches are tough. Definitely not impossible, but tough when everything is just starting out. Using a DT on someone who isn't going to even bother contributing wouldn't be worth it. Using DT checks on active members is definitely more important. I'm a bit confused now though...You want to DT check inactives AND lynch inactives? That just seems like a waste of resources. Lets say there are three people that are lurking. That's not a far fetched number, mafia love to lurk. Sure we lynch one of them during day one, but what about the other ones? Not all the DTs have to check of course. But maybe setting something such as a probability system would be enough to flush out the mafia. Roll a 1 check inactive A. Roll a 2 check inactive B. Roll a 3 check whoever you want. That plan will need to be modified, if not scrapped once we get our D1 vote list out. I rather check the active player and lynch the inactive player. The active player right now is more likely to be +info in the future anyways, while the inactive is just... well... inactive. By the way one of the worst game aproachs is the "im noob just reading and getting used to play". If you are town you rather post something small but with actual meaning. I still have a decent target day 1 unless he posts a few more than oneliners. Inactives is also my treasure box. I have no idea what that last line means. Why don't you tell us/vote for who your "decent target"? +info always benefits town. I have a half decent target in the "im new guys" list. However right now i really want to flip Infundibulum because A) He came out of nowhere to dismiss lynching inactives (and that is really nonsense for a player that has played a lot of games) B) I cant believe jcarsoniv just posted a single Why? to LSB vote. With a game of 31 people and a little more than half the people having posted recently it's just dumb to blindvote someone for "just showing up." What do you read into the line about efficiency that I don't? Is it really efficient at this point lynch an active player over the inactive that is going to die anyways?? Really? I mean mafia is not going to die because he doesnt vote, blues are not going to die because they dont vote. Meh i want to flip infundibulum badly. If you read the rules you would know that people who don't vote will be killed by Dr.H (the moderator). So yes, Infund is correct that it would be more efficient.
I still put it this way: You rather have an active poster that is somehow contributing the town dead instead of a non contributer that *may get modkilled* or *may be just hidding*. Note that in everycase *May* just depends on him because he can just post oneliners or vote at the last minute.
|
@Gabriel: Uhhhh, no. We do not aim for the afkers. If they suddenly decide to join in at the last minute, now that's damn suspicious and will draw them attention d2 even if they manage to avoid modkill. So if the day approaches, the votes would be wasted voting for those who are going to die.
|
Gabriel, I don't understand your logic at all.
On December 10 2010 11:46 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:28 jcarlsoniv wrote:On December 10 2010 11:25 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 11:12 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:04 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:58 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 10:46 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 10 2010 10:42 LSB wrote:On December 10 2010 10:34 jcarlsoniv wrote:
[quote]
I would rather waste a Day 1 lynch than a Day 1 DT I feel. Day 1 lynches are tough. Definitely not impossible, but tough when everything is just starting out. Using a DT on someone who isn't going to even bother contributing wouldn't be worth it. Using DT checks on active members is definitely more important.
I'm a bit confused now though...You want to DT check inactives AND lynch inactives? That just seems like a waste of resources. Lets say there are three people that are lurking. That's not a far fetched number, mafia love to lurk. Sure we lynch one of them during day one, but what about the other ones? Not all the DTs have to check of course. But maybe setting something such as a probability system would be enough to flush out the mafia. Roll a 1 check inactive A. Roll a 2 check inactive B. Roll a 3 check whoever you want. That plan will need to be modified, if not scrapped once we get our D1 vote list out. I rather check the active player and lynch the inactive player. The active player right now is more likely to be +info in the future anyways, while the inactive is just... well... inactive. By the way one of the worst game aproachs is the "im noob just reading and getting used to play". If you are town you rather post something small but with actual meaning. I still have a decent target day 1 unless he posts a few more than oneliners. Inactives is also my treasure box. I have no idea what that last line means. Why don't you tell us/vote for who your "decent target"? +info always benefits town. I have a half decent target in the "im new guys" list. However right now i really want to flip Infundibulum because A) He came out of nowhere to dismiss lynching inactives (and that is really nonsense for a player that has played a lot of games) B) I cant believe jcarsoniv just posted a single Why? to LSB vote. With a game of 31 people and a little more than half the people having posted recently it's just dumb to blindvote someone for "just showing up." What do you read into the line about efficiency that I don't? Is it really efficient at this point lynch an active player over the inactive that is going to die anyways?? Really? I mean mafia is not going to die because he doesnt vote, blues are not going to die because they dont vote. Meh i want to flip infundibulum badly. If you read the rules you would know that people who don't vote will be killed by Dr.H (the moderator). So yes, Infund is correct that it would be more efficient. I still put it this way: You rather have an active poster that is somehow contributing the town dead instead of a non contributer that *may get modkilled* or *may be just hidding*. Note that in everycase *May* just depends on him because he can just post oneliners or vote at the last minute.
If they jump in last minute, I'm pretty sure that's something we will notice. This is very very suspicious behavior and will not be overlooked.
You voted Infund and are pegging him as scum with VERY shaky logic, and you jumped on LSB's bandwagon, which could very well be coincidence, but it's not sitting right with me. My vote is going on you for now.
|
On December 10 2010 11:44 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:40 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you? A) You dont want to be active posting B) You want to "look" active C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare. D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work. E) You want enlightment. F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least? A) 4 hours does not judge that. what if i went on TL tomorrow for the first time in the past 3 days? B) Anyone who posts would want to look active.. Why would they post if they want to look inactive? C) Why are you assuming i read the rules? how do you know i didnt just assume the KP? D) It doesnt. shh E) ?? its enlightenment F) I dont agree with you voting for Infundibulum.
A) Well you just wrote 7 one liners and have yet to post something relevant.
B) But you are NOT. It is not about how you look. Come on that is not an argument, so you post one liners to look active? what is that? Sparta?
C) Well you actually read the rules because you posted the pokemon/classicmafia relation. I wonder why you just couldnt look for the mafia KP, and insisted to look clueless asking for it.
D) It doesnt? well you were pretty much inactive and so was Infundibulum. Maybe it does.
E) You think too much. You have again 2 posts where you "think" about this "think" about that, when it is clear that those post refer to info available in the opening rules. This heavily smells like "im not too sure, i dont know" plot.
F) So you agree that you are protecting infundibulum by voting me: More reason to flip him!.
|
On December 10 2010 11:57 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:44 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:40 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you? A) You dont want to be active posting B) You want to "look" active C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare. D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work. E) You want enlightment. F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least? A) 4 hours does not judge that. what if i went on TL tomorrow for the first time in the past 3 days? B) Anyone who posts would want to look active.. Why would they post if they want to look inactive? C) Why are you assuming i read the rules? how do you know i didnt just assume the KP? D) It doesnt. shh E) ?? its enlightenment F) I dont agree with you voting for Infundibulum. A) Well you just wrote 7 one liners and have yet to post something relevant. B) But you are NOT. It is not about how you look. Come on that is not an argument, so you post one liners to look active? what is that? Sparta? C) Well you actually read the rules because you posted the pokemon/classicmafia relation. I wonder why you just couldnt look for the mafia KP, and insisted to look clueless asking for it. D) It doesnt? well you were pretty much inactive and so was Infundibulum. Maybe it does.E) You think too much. You have again 2 posts where you "think" about this "think" about that, when it is clear that those post refer to info available in the opening rules. This heavily smells like "im not too sure, i dont know" plot. F) So you agree that you are protecting infundibulum by voting me: More reason to flip him!.
This logic is flawed since the game just started. So they didn't post right at the start and their first post was later then a lot of people's. So they were inactive til their first post? What about all the other people that haven't posted yet. When they make their first post are you going to say the same thing about them? After all, they were even later and therefore must be even more suspicious?
|
On December 10 2010 12:01 Oceanic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:57 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:44 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:40 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you? A) You dont want to be active posting B) You want to "look" active C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare. D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work. E) You want enlightment. F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least? A) 4 hours does not judge that. what if i went on TL tomorrow for the first time in the past 3 days? B) Anyone who posts would want to look active.. Why would they post if they want to look inactive? C) Why are you assuming i read the rules? how do you know i didnt just assume the KP? D) It doesnt. shh E) ?? its enlightenment F) I dont agree with you voting for Infundibulum. A) Well you just wrote 7 one liners and have yet to post something relevant. B) But you are NOT. It is not about how you look. Come on that is not an argument, so you post one liners to look active? what is that? Sparta? C) Well you actually read the rules because you posted the pokemon/classicmafia relation. I wonder why you just couldnt look for the mafia KP, and insisted to look clueless asking for it. D) It doesnt? well you were pretty much inactive and so was Infundibulum. Maybe it does.E) You think too much. You have again 2 posts where you "think" about this "think" about that, when it is clear that those post refer to info available in the opening rules. This heavily smells like "im not too sure, i dont know" plot. F) So you agree that you are protecting infundibulum by voting me: More reason to flip him!. This logic is flawed since the game just started. So they didn't post right at the start and their first post was later then a lot of people's. So they were inactive til their first post? What about all the other people that haven't posted yet. When they make their first post are you going to say the same thing about them? After all, they were even later and therefore must be even more suspicious?
Note that Kenpachi was actually posting since the start of the thread. People is inactive because we are just starting the game but nonsense has to be pinned down as soon as it comes out. I find hilariously weird that a guy posting one liners comes right after i vote Infundibulum (with a reason that may or may not be strong for other players) and simply votes Gabriel because he doesnt like my vote on Infundibulum. What do you think? Is that normal? He didnt even posted that.
|
On December 10 2010 12:11 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 12:01 Oceanic wrote:On December 10 2010 11:57 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:44 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:40 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you? A) You dont want to be active posting B) You want to "look" active C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare. D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work. E) You want enlightment. F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least? A) 4 hours does not judge that. what if i went on TL tomorrow for the first time in the past 3 days? B) Anyone who posts would want to look active.. Why would they post if they want to look inactive? C) Why are you assuming i read the rules? how do you know i didnt just assume the KP? D) It doesnt. shh E) ?? its enlightenment F) I dont agree with you voting for Infundibulum. A) Well you just wrote 7 one liners and have yet to post something relevant. B) But you are NOT. It is not about how you look. Come on that is not an argument, so you post one liners to look active? what is that? Sparta? C) Well you actually read the rules because you posted the pokemon/classicmafia relation. I wonder why you just couldnt look for the mafia KP, and insisted to look clueless asking for it. D) It doesnt? well you were pretty much inactive and so was Infundibulum. Maybe it does.E) You think too much. You have again 2 posts where you "think" about this "think" about that, when it is clear that those post refer to info available in the opening rules. This heavily smells like "im not too sure, i dont know" plot. F) So you agree that you are protecting infundibulum by voting me: More reason to flip him!. This logic is flawed since the game just started. So they didn't post right at the start and their first post was later then a lot of people's. So they were inactive til their first post? What about all the other people that haven't posted yet. When they make their first post are you going to say the same thing about them? After all, they were even later and therefore must be even more suspicious? Note that Kenpachi was actually posting since the start of the thread. People is inactive because we are just starting the game but nonsense has to be pinned down as soon as it comes out. I find hilariously weird that a guy posting one liners comes right after i vote Infundibulum (with a reason that may or may not be strong for other players) and simply votes Gabriel because he doesnt like my vote on Infundibulum. What do you think? Is that normal? He didnt even posted that.
So is this your first game?
|
On December 10 2010 11:57 Gabriel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 11:44 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:40 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you? A) You dont want to be active posting B) You want to "look" active C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare. D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work. E) You want enlightment. F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least? A) 4 hours does not judge that. what if i went on TL tomorrow for the first time in the past 3 days? B) Anyone who posts would want to look active.. Why would they post if they want to look inactive? C) Why are you assuming i read the rules? how do you know i didnt just assume the KP? D) It doesnt. shh E) ?? its enlightenment F) I dont agree with you voting for Infundibulum. A) Well you just wrote 7 one liners and have yet to post something relevant. B) But you are NOT. It is not about how you look. Come on that is not an argument, so you post one liners to look active? what is that? Sparta? C) Well you actually read the rules because you posted the pokemon/classicmafia relation. I wonder why you just couldnt look for the mafia KP, and insisted to look clueless asking for it. D) It doesnt? well you were pretty much inactive and so was Infundibulum. Maybe it does. E) You think too much. You have again 2 posts where you "think" about this "think" about that, when it is clear that those post refer to info available in the opening rules. This heavily smells like "im not too sure, i dont know" plot. F) So you agree that you are protecting infundibulum by voting me: More reason to flip him!.
A) There isnt much to post in the beginning, due to low information and lack of suspicion.
B) I am not what? I posted in the beginning to "look" active because i have a history of lurking.
C) You are still assuming i read the rules. Did i read or skim it? Did i read it but pass the KP? I posted that in the thread for people who also didnt know to possibly take a burden off many people.
D)Idk man. you found a bunch of posts in the beginning and call me inactive? Refer to B). Why am i posting to "look" active?
E) "I think its 2." hey i only played 1 game with Double Lynch before.
F) your logic is flawed. i can vote for anyone i want to and im defending Infundibulum by not voting for him. Why do you think youre gonna be the main bandwagon from 1 vote?
|
On December 10 2010 12:12 d3_crescentia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 12:11 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 12:01 Oceanic wrote:On December 10 2010 11:57 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:44 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:40 Gabriel wrote:On December 10 2010 11:34 Kenpachi wrote:On December 10 2010 11:20 Gabriel wrote:Interesting: my half good "im new" shot is now voting for me. Kenpachi care to explain A) your vote B) your deep posts? + Show Spoiler +On December 10 2010 07:11 Kenpachi wrote:
oh shit.. i cant really imagine Professor Oak dead D: On December 10 2010 07:47 Kenpachi wrote:
Pikachu - Townie
Raichu - Miller
Chansey - Medic
Cloyster - Veteran
Alakazam - Detective
Electrode - Mad Hatter
Mew - Special Detective
Gengar - God Father
Koffing - Mafia Grunt
Weezing - Mafia Shrink
Mewtwo - 3rd Party Vigilante
notice how our only way of killing at night is Mad Hatter and 3rd party.. 3rd party is technically against us and will probably kill town over mafia due to immunity and their goal is to be last alive. On December 10 2010 07:50 Kenpachi wrote:
yea claiming is a no no. and i hate lynching inactives. doesnt work at all. On December 10 2010 08:01 Kenpachi wrote:
how many people can Mafia target per night? On December 10 2010 08:12 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:11 Eiii wrote:There always seem to be posts about how we all need to establish a 'pro-town environment', which is obvious of course I (and I'm sure lots of other newer players) have no clue what that *means* though, especially when we can't PM each other. (That might turn out to be more of a blessing than a curse though.) So... can someone enlighten me? basically, where we can point out scum easily without confusing them as town.. i think On December 10 2010 08:14 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 08:13 KtheZ wrote:
Do we have a limited amount of double lynches? I think its 2. what would posting history 4 hours into the game show you? A) You dont want to be active posting B) You want to "look" active C) You read the rules but you actually dont know mafia KP? That was rare. D) You dont want to lynch inactives because that doesnt work. E) You want enlightment. F) You vote for me out of literally nowhere. I mean: i post to flip Infundibulum and you come right after me. Care to explain at least? A) 4 hours does not judge that. what if i went on TL tomorrow for the first time in the past 3 days? B) Anyone who posts would want to look active.. Why would they post if they want to look inactive? C) Why are you assuming i read the rules? how do you know i didnt just assume the KP? D) It doesnt. shh E) ?? its enlightenment F) I dont agree with you voting for Infundibulum. A) Well you just wrote 7 one liners and have yet to post something relevant. B) But you are NOT. It is not about how you look. Come on that is not an argument, so you post one liners to look active? what is that? Sparta? C) Well you actually read the rules because you posted the pokemon/classicmafia relation. I wonder why you just couldnt look for the mafia KP, and insisted to look clueless asking for it. D) It doesnt? well you were pretty much inactive and so was Infundibulum. Maybe it does.E) You think too much. You have again 2 posts where you "think" about this "think" about that, when it is clear that those post refer to info available in the opening rules. This heavily smells like "im not too sure, i dont know" plot. F) So you agree that you are protecting infundibulum by voting me: More reason to flip him!. This logic is flawed since the game just started. So they didn't post right at the start and their first post was later then a lot of people's. So they were inactive til their first post? What about all the other people that haven't posted yet. When they make their first post are you going to say the same thing about them? After all, they were even later and therefore must be even more suspicious? Note that Kenpachi was actually posting since the start of the thread. People is inactive because we are just starting the game but nonsense has to be pinned down as soon as it comes out. I find hilariously weird that a guy posting one liners comes right after i vote Infundibulum (with a reason that may or may not be strong for other players) and simply votes Gabriel because he doesnt like my vote on Infundibulum. What do you think? Is that normal? He didnt even posted that. So is this your first game?
You are not good at reading my friend ⇓.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
