|
First - good thing you are through discussing wheather we should post or not during night. Struck me as kind of odd that you didn't want any discussion during night:
On December 06 2011 10:33 Blazinghand wrote:
Discuss nothing this night. If you have something to post, write it up and post it 24 hours from now-- do not give the mafia any additional material to work with until after they've made their decision. If you think you're about to die and have some grand revelation to make, make it 1 minute before the night ends so the mafia can't base their kill off it.
See you guys in 24 hours.
That last part I may agree somewhat on, but the rest is pretty bad for town, we need to keep the activity up, even during night. But you guys have come to the same conclusion so I won't say more on the subject.
What I find more interisting is the lynch on BByte. As I said before putting my vote on him, I feel he got bandwagoned, but out of the three candidates he was the "best". How do you guys see this lynch in hindsight? Was it the best we could do, with the information we had?
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On December 07 2011 04:59 Tunkeg wrote:
What I find more interisting is the lynch on BByte. As I said before putting my vote on him, I feel he got bandwagoned, but out of the three candidates he was the "best". How do you guys see this lynch in hindsight? Was it the best we could do, with the information we had?
Honestly, yes it was. It was a bandwagon, and I'm somewhat disappointing that so little additional analysis was made, but as BByte noted himself, he picked a bad time to go afk for 24 hours. He hadn't posted enough content for anyone to get a read of any sort on him, and although he turned out to be a townie, he was still a lurker, if not by his own choosing.
All my scumreads were mild, and I don't think we could have increased the probability that we'd lynch a mafia guy in any meaningful fashion by lynching someone different. I don't think anyone was really able to say "this guy here is a mafia" and be justified. We also demonstrated a willingness to lynch lurkers, and I'm sure we will continue to aggressively attack people for lurking in the future. This sets a dangerous precedent for mafia members, who feel pressured to both lurk and now to not lurk.
We could have had a better Day 1, but it could have been much worse. We did what we could.
But I'd also like you guys to analyze more before you vote with me. I'm kind of aggressive with my voting in cas eyou hadn't noticed.
|
[
QUOTE]On December 07 2011 05:04 Blazinghand wrote:
On December 07 2011 04:59 Tunkeg wrote:
What I find more interisting is the lynch on BByte. As I said before putting my vote on him, I feel he got bandwagoned, but out of the three candidates he was the "best". How do you guys see this lynch in hindsight? Was it the best we could do, with the information we had?
Honestly, yes it was. It was a bandwagon, and I'm somewhat disappointing that so little additional analysis was made, but as BByte noted himself, he picked a bad time to go afk for 24 hours. He hadn't posted enough content for anyone to get a read of any sort on him, and although he turned out to be a townie, he was still a lurker, if not by his own choosing.
All my scumreads were mild, and I don't think we could have increased the probability that we'd lynch a mafia guy in any meaningful fashion by lynching someone different. I don't think anyone was really able to say "this guy here is a mafia" and be justified. We also demonstrated a willingness to lynch lurkers, and I'm sure we will continue to aggressively attack people for lurking in the future. This sets a dangerous precedent for mafia members, who feel pressured to both lurk and now to not lurk.
We could have had a better Day 1, but it could have been much worse. We did what we could.
But I'd also like you guys to analyze more before you vote with me. I'm kind of aggressive with my voting in cas eyou hadn't noticed.
[/QUOTE]
I totally agree on the last part. I think there were people voting for BByte who provided little reason to why they were doing so (only stating that your reasoning seemed ok to them). That beeing said he was the "lesser evil" of the three lynches that was in contention (IMO).
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On December 07 2011 04:55 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 04:48 BroodKingEXE wrote:
My bad I skiped over Tunkeg, and jay (you all know what I tink about adam.) I'd like to hear your thoughts on TK and JB.
It seems that, like halley's comet, BKEXE has passed out of our solar system again (despite his brief and incomplete visit)... we can expect to see him return some day again as a habringer of doom.
Srsly man if you skip over a couple people AND you acknowledge that you did so, please take the time to evaluate them too...
|
On December 07 2011 04:15 Velinath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 04:09 Blazinghand wrote:On December 07 2011 04:06 xtfftc wrote:On December 07 2011 03:55 Blazinghand wrote:
Tonight the mafia may have already made their decision, but if we can get the same info without exposing ourselves more by delaying an analysis post another hour, is that really a bad idea? One thought would be that we need as much information as possible, but I'm not saying we shouldn't have the info, just that a minor delay is good. Five hours is what we're talking about here. Yes, because it's not just about your own analysis. It's about your analysis and everyone else reacting to (or ignoring) it. An isolated read isn't as good as being able to analyse people's responces. Hm. That's true, the extra 24 hours may make the difference. On the other hand, it's worth noting that at the beginning of the day, we do receive another piece of information: assuming that either (a) there is no doctor or (b) the doctor guesses wrong, one of us dies and is a confirmed townie or blue. A dead confirmed townie or blue, but a confirmed townie or blue no less. This information might be unhelpful but it could also play a big role in terms of analysis. Going off your assumption that someone will end up dying tonight, why should we hold off on posting analysis? The more conversation that we can have before night ends, the more that the dead townie will be able to contribute before they die. Given this, I feel that we stand to gain more by posting analysis earlier so that we can discuss it with all of the town voices.
For the sake of conversation what are you thoughts on the BByte lynch yesterday. You were the first one voting for him, what do you think of the rest of us that ending up voting for him. Any votes you find more suspicious than others?
|
On December 07 2011 05:57 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 04:15 Velinath wrote:On December 07 2011 04:09 Blazinghand wrote:On December 07 2011 04:06 xtfftc wrote:On December 07 2011 03:55 Blazinghand wrote:
Tonight the mafia may have already made their decision, but if we can get the same info without exposing ourselves more by delaying an analysis post another hour, is that really a bad idea? One thought would be that we need as much information as possible, but I'm not saying we shouldn't have the info, just that a minor delay is good. Five hours is what we're talking about here. Yes, because it's not just about your own analysis. It's about your analysis and everyone else reacting to (or ignoring) it. An isolated read isn't as good as being able to analyse people's responces. Hm. That's true, the extra 24 hours may make the difference. On the other hand, it's worth noting that at the beginning of the day, we do receive another piece of information: assuming that either (a) there is no doctor or (b) the doctor guesses wrong, one of us dies and is a confirmed townie or blue. A dead confirmed townie or blue, but a confirmed townie or blue no less. This information might be unhelpful but it could also play a big role in terms of analysis. Going off your assumption that someone will end up dying tonight, why should we hold off on posting analysis? The more conversation that we can have before night ends, the more that the dead townie will be able to contribute before they die. Given this, I feel that we stand to gain more by posting analysis earlier so that we can discuss it with all of the town voices. For the sake of conversation what are you thoughts on the BByte lynch yesterday. You were the first one voting for him, what do you think of the rest of us that ending up voting for him. Any votes you find more suspicious than others?
Hi!
As far as where I stand on the BByte lynch, despite the flip I think it was the best option we had. As a town I felt that we were somewhat divided between a couple of scumreads from different people, and, given that, it would be too easy for scum to swing a lynch one way or another in that situation. BByte, as a policy lynch, was a good call - lurking is and will always be anti-town play. I wish he would have gotten back earlier to defend himself and avert the lynch, but as it stands it was the right call.
I must admit I didn't expect people to jump over and start voting BByte as easily as they did. A couple people even said that they had decent scumreads but "because nobody's going to vote for them, I'll just vote for BByte". This is a little bit of a matter for concern. I don't know whether it's just town complacency or actual suspicious behaviour, but either way people need to step up and push their reads.
+ Show Spoiler +On December 06 2011 04:00 xsksc wrote:
Okay, I'll go with your judgement on this one. He seems like a decent lynch I guess, I'd prefer Tunkeg but that doesn't look like it's happening today.
##vote: BByte
Going to sleep now, will be back and active early tomorow morning. This one stood out to me - "it's not my best lynch choice, but it's not a bad one - and I can be more sure that my vote will help cement a lynch".
+ Show Spoiler +On December 06 2011 05:13 Grackaroni wrote:
I'm willing to vote for BByte because he has not contributed to the game so far and his lynch target was stupid.
HassyBaby could still be a good lynch for today. Similar thing here. "This guy's a good lynch. Here's another option, but hey, I can actually get BByte lynched".
+ Show Spoiler +On December 06 2011 07:26 xtfftc wrote:
I'm going to bed, so I'm voting for Bbyte. It's not ideal but it's better than some unpleasant last minute surprise.
##Unvote: xsksc
##Vote: BByte
Similar to the last couple.
What it came down to for a lot of people was "who can I vote for that will be a safe bet to avoid last-minute surprise vote switches?". BByte was a safe lynch. Not the best, perhaps, but safe. His behaviour was scummy, but we could have done some more analysis on other people and maybe gotten a better candidate. EB's case on Hassybaby springs to mind as a pretty impressive case, I think if we had had the time to discuss that he would have maybe made a better lynch target.
Now that we have another day ahead of us, we need to start looking less at policy lynching and more at scum reads. While there was a reasonable amount of scumhunting yesterday, we were unable to act on those reads.
After filtering the voters on BByte, I can't really see anything suspicious. Every vote was based off of Lynch All Lurkers, meaning it's really hard to distinguish between which voters were motivated by policy and which were scum. Despite my voting first, I really feel like BH led the bandwagon here, and that should merit some scrutiny. As has been said in the last two pages, players thinking for themselves is a good thing. Forming your own reads will always be better than going off of someone else.
That said, I find one thing suspicious. xkskc's post stood out to me as just jumping on a bandwagon and really helping to get it rolling. At the time, BH had just gotten things started. An informed mafia would be able to switch votes after seeing as visible a bandwagon as BH got rolling, and allay suspicion. "Yeah, I would prefer we lynch X, but that's not happening so I'll just go along with Y". Seems weird to me, but like anything in this game we could WIFOM it to death.
Tomorrow, I think it might be a good move to focus on Hassybaby more. EB posted an interesting case yesterday, and I think I posted some stuff slightly before that. One of the big points there is his complete sheep vote on BKEXE based solely on my reasoning, and then disappearing from the thread. Something to look into. While I don't want to policy lynch him for lurking, his play so far does seem scummy.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 07 2011 06:30 Velinath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 05:57 Tunkeg wrote:On December 07 2011 04:15 Velinath wrote:On December 07 2011 04:09 Blazinghand wrote:On December 07 2011 04:06 xtfftc wrote:On December 07 2011 03:55 Blazinghand wrote:
Tonight the mafia may have already made their decision, but if we can get the same info without exposing ourselves more by delaying an analysis post another hour, is that really a bad idea? One thought would be that we need as much information as possible, but I'm not saying we shouldn't have the info, just that a minor delay is good. Five hours is what we're talking about here. Yes, because it's not just about your own analysis. It's about your analysis and everyone else reacting to (or ignoring) it. An isolated read isn't as good as being able to analyse people's responces. Hm. That's true, the extra 24 hours may make the difference. On the other hand, it's worth noting that at the beginning of the day, we do receive another piece of information: assuming that either (a) there is no doctor or (b) the doctor guesses wrong, one of us dies and is a confirmed townie or blue. A dead confirmed townie or blue, but a confirmed townie or blue no less. This information might be unhelpful but it could also play a big role in terms of analysis. Going off your assumption that someone will end up dying tonight, why should we hold off on posting analysis? The more conversation that we can have before night ends, the more that the dead townie will be able to contribute before they die. Given this, I feel that we stand to gain more by posting analysis earlier so that we can discuss it with all of the town voices. For the sake of conversation what are you thoughts on the BByte lynch yesterday. You were the first one voting for him, what do you think of the rest of us that ending up voting for him. Any votes you find more suspicious than others? Hi! As far as where I stand on the BByte lynch, despite the flip I think it was the best option we had. As a town I felt that we were somewhat divided between a couple of scumreads from different people, and, given that, it would be too easy for scum to swing a lynch one way or another in that situation. BByte, as a policy lynch, was a good call - lurking is and will always be anti-town play. I wish he would have gotten back earlier to defend himself and avert the lynch, but as it stands it was the right call. I must admit I didn't expect people to jump over and start voting BByte as easily as they did. A couple people even said that they had decent scumreads but "because nobody's going to vote for them, I'll just vote for BByte". This is a little bit of a matter for concern. I don't know whether it's just town complacency or actual suspicious behaviour, but either way people need to step up and push their reads. + Show Spoiler +On December 06 2011 04:00 xsksc wrote:
Okay, I'll go with your judgement on this one. He seems like a decent lynch I guess, I'd prefer Tunkeg but that doesn't look like it's happening today.
##vote: BByte
Going to sleep now, will be back and active early tomorow morning. This one stood out to me - "it's not my best lynch choice, but it's not a bad one - and I can be more sure that my vote will help cement a lynch". On December 06 2011 05:13 Grackaroni wrote:
I'm willing to vote for BByte because he has not contributed to the game so far and his lynch target was stupid.
HassyBaby could still be a good lynch for today. Similar thing here. "This guy's a good lynch. Here's another option, but hey, I can actually get BByte lynched". On December 06 2011 07:26 xtfftc wrote:
I'm going to bed, so I'm voting for Bbyte. It's not ideal but it's better than some unpleasant last minute surprise.
##Unvote: xsksc
##Vote: BByte
Similar to the last couple. What it came down to for a lot of people was "who can I vote for that will be a safe bet to avoid last-minute surprise vote switches?". BByte was a safe lynch. Not the best, perhaps, but safe. His behaviour was scummy, but we could have done some more analysis on other people and maybe gotten a better candidate. EB's case on Hassybaby springs to mind as a pretty impressive case, I think if we had had the time to discuss that he would have maybe made a better lynch target. Now that we have another day ahead of us, we need to start looking less at policy lynching and more at scum reads. While there was a reasonable amount of scumhunting yesterday, we were unable to act on those reads. After filtering the voters on BByte, I can't really see anything suspicious. Every vote was based off of Lynch All Lurkers, meaning it's really hard to distinguish between which voters were motivated by policy and which were scum. Despite my voting first, I really feel like BH led the bandwagon here, and that should merit some scrutiny. As has been said in the last two pages, players thinking for themselves is a good thing. Forming your own reads will always be better than going off of someone else. That said, I find one thing suspicious. xkskc's post stood out to me as just jumping on a bandwagon and really helping to get it rolling. At the time, BH had just gotten things started. An informed mafia would be able to switch votes after seeing as visible a bandwagon as BH got rolling, and allay suspicion. "Yeah, I would prefer we lynch X, but that's not happening so I'll just go along with Y". Seems weird to me, but like anything in this game we could WIFOM it to death. Tomorrow, I think it might be a good move to focus on Hassybaby more. EB posted an interesting case yesterday, and I think I posted some stuff slightly before that. One of the big points there is his complete sheep vote on BKEXE based solely on my reasoning, and then disappearing from the thread. Something to look into. While I don't want to policy lynch him for lurking, his play so far does seem scummy.
Thank you for answering. I agree with your thoughts here. It is pretty hard to say anything about which votes are more suspicious. But if I am allowed to speculate I would think at least 1 scum was in on the lynch of BByte, and more likely 2 scums to secure it. 0 and 3 would be very unlikely IMO. 0 is unlikely because I think scum wanted to secure the lynch of a townie. 3 unlikely because then they would put all their eggs in one basket (if all 3 jumped in early), and a change in lynchtarget would mean that at least 2 of them would have to switch to secure themselves (that would cause suspicion). If not all 3 jumped in early it would be no point in jumping in late for a third scum unless the vote weren't secured (for a secound scum, yeah, for a third no).
So my view on the lynch yesterday is that there is likely to be two scums among the 7 who voted for BByte: Velinath, Blazinghand, xsksc, Grackorini, ey215, xtfftc and Tunkeg. And one among the rest. This is all speculations though, and probably not very usefull.
|
On December 07 2011 04:59 Tunkeg wrote:
What I find more interisting is the lynch on BByte. As I said before putting my vote on him, I feel he got bandwagoned, but out of the three candidates he was the "best". How do you guys see this lynch in hindsight? Was it the best we could do, with the information we had?
I assume this question was open for anyone to answer, so:
This lynch was shit. I said as much in my post right before the cutoff.
He flipped town, as I predicted and what do we gain from losing this townie? We get another dead townie tonight on a Night-kill. We get ZERO information off of this lynch. Bbyte was not scummy, inactive sure, but there was not any noteworthy behavior that warranted a lynch. Who were his "enemies" that we should take a harder look at now that hes flipped town? Well, he didn't like Velinath for his earlier actions in the day. Granted, I noticed the same things, but since Velinath has been an asset to the town, running some good analysis and maintaining fairly active. So that puts us right back at square one... less two townies, unless there is some kind of miraculous medic save (if we even have one).
This lynch was brought about by exactly what I said would happen if people didn't follow their reads and vote on the most scummy person on option regardless of the current vote standing. A bandwagon formed, spearheaded by Blazinghand, everyone merrily jumped on board because it was the easy route. I'm glad that people have recently started coming to their senses and not just blindly following the person who yells the loudest.
Today, I vehemently suggest we lynch someone who is actually active and acting scummy rather than trading another two townies for no information by killing another lurker.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:23 Adam4167 wrote:
Today, I vehemently suggest we lynch someone who is actually active and acting scummy rather than trading another two townies for no information by killing another lurker.
Today, I suggest that nobody lurk.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
Adam4167, I think your post is a little over the top. Less QQ more Pew Pew plz.
I think that you should make a case, right here, to lynch JB. Make good and convincing. I think you think JB is the biggest scumread, and I also think that you're not doing a good job of convincing people. This isn't a game about what you think; it's a game about what you can prove and what you can convince people of. The fact of the matter is, we lynched an inactive player, and *I* didn't have any scumreads strong enough to convince me to lynch someone else.
You, apparently, did.
You failed to convince me.
You failed to convince everyone.
It's your fault that this lynch went the wrong way, if you honestly had a solid scumread and didn't present a solid case to go with it. Please, go ahead. Impress me. Show me the updated case for JB taking into account what he's posted since you last attacked him:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291067¤tpage=19#367
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
FYI it's also everyone's fault the lynch went the wrong way, since we all failed to capture a majority. I'm just saying that if you have a solid read, you have a BIG responsibility to convince the rest of us. ESPECIALLY if you're right.
Also, most towns mislynch on the first day.
|
On December 07 2011 09:33 Blazinghand wrote:
FYI it's also everyone's fault the lynch went the wrong way, since we all failed to capture a majority. I'm just saying that if you have a solid read, you have a BIG responsibility to convince the rest of us. ESPECIALLY if you're right.
Also, most towns mislynch on the first day.
Im going to write my post up on what i think went on this night. Sorry for being a bit inactive. I saw BH post about no posting and then was really busy so i didnt get around till now.
But BH honestly i find this statement really suspicious. But BH you Succeded to capture the majority. You made the case against Bbyte and your case garnered the majority. It almost seems like your trying to take the chunk of responsibility off your back. I put down what i thought about adam. And said why i didnt like BBytes case. Im going back to make my posts about what else happened tonight. As well as response to your nice post about me. Thank you for that btw :D
|
On December 07 2011 09:33 Blazinghand wrote:
FYI it's also everyone's fault the lynch went the wrong way, since we all failed to capture a majority. I'm just saying that if you have a solid read, you have a BIG responsibility to convince the rest of us. ESPECIALLY if you're right.
Also, most towns mislynch on the first day.
Why are you being so defensive over this? I didn’t single you out and railroad you for this lynch because I felt your play was CONSISTENT with your stance towards lurkers. I specifically targeted everyone who jumped on the bandwagon and made it pick up steam so easily because they weren’t willing to stick to their own reads.
Its OK to be wrong, I'm not out to get you. But everyone else really needs to be held accountable for why they are blindly following.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:49 jaybrundage wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 09:33 Blazinghand wrote:
FYI it's also everyone's fault the lynch went the wrong way, since we all failed to capture a majority. I'm just saying that if you have a solid read, you have a BIG responsibility to convince the rest of us. ESPECIALLY if you're right.
Also, most towns mislynch on the first day. Im going to write my post up on what i think went on this night. Sorry for being a bit inactive. I saw BH post about no posting and then was really busy so i didnt get around till now. But BH honestly i find this statement really suspicious. But BH you Succeded to capture the majority. You made the case against Bbyte and your case garnered the majority. It almost seems like your trying to take the chunk of responsibility off your back. I put down what i thought about adam. And said why i didnt like BBytes case. Im going back to make my posts about what else happened tonight. As well as response to your nice post about me. Thank you for that btw :D
Well, I meant that in the sense that we all failed to vote for the right candidate. Nobody is every allowed to abdicate responsibility for their own vote just because other people are voting a certain way, but I do acknowledge that several people probably just voted the way I voted.
Don't do that.
Read people's analysis and choose the one you like best, and make your own analysis and see if it lines up.
I still stand by the BByte lynch. We lynched a lurker, and I'd do it again in the same situation (no solid scumreads, nobody convinces me of theirs, obvious lurker).
I'm still waiting to hear that case on JB, Adam.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:54 Adam4167 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2011 09:33 Blazinghand wrote:
FYI it's also everyone's fault the lynch went the wrong way, since we all failed to capture a majority. I'm just saying that if you have a solid read, you have a BIG responsibility to convince the rest of us. ESPECIALLY if you're right.
Also, most towns mislynch on the first day. Why are you being so defensive over this? I didn’t single you out and railroad you for this lynch because I felt your play was CONSISTENT with your stance towards lurkers. I specifically targeted everyone who jumped on the bandwagon and made it pick up steam so easily because they weren’t willing to stick to their own reads. Its OK to be wrong, I'm not out to get you. But everyone else really needs to be held accountable for why they are blindly following.
I'm being defensive because the BByte lynch was the right move.
I'm also being offensive because, goddamnit, if you found a mafia member, I WANT TO KNOW THAT AND BE CONVINCED. A first-day lynch would be awesome! But you failed to convince me and evidently you had a better case on JB.
Let's hear it.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
|
- Day 2 -![[image loading]](http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/2513/communistparty.gif)
After class the day before, some of the students felt in the mood for a party, and tagged along with ElectricBlack, one of the older students, back to his part of the dormatory. Drinks were had, and they also performed an impressive experiment involving tequila, oranges and fire. There were no major injuries, and one death.
Memories of the evening went foggy after that. At the class several of the students showed the effects of a late night of heavy drinking, but what really caught everyones attention was not the state of those present, but one notable absence.
Zona arrived and looked around the classroom. "Isn´t ElectricBlack here yet? Not much we can do about that, we will just have to continue the exercise without him."
ElectricBlack, the Vanilla Townie missed class and was expelled!
Day 2 ends in 48 hours, at 01:00 GMT (+00:00), or 10:00 KST the 9th of December
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
Yeah it's definitely JB.
##Vote: jaybrundage
|
Keep in mind what I said earlier, EB made a case on Hassy; EB's death doesn't necessarily mean that Hassy is mafia.
I must admit though that this was an unexpected death IMO.
|
On December 07 2011 10:02 Blazinghand wrote:
Yeah it's definitely JB.
##Vote: jaybrundage
LOL I had a feeling you were trying to save yourself from being the NK, that's exactly why I never brought up your analysis.
But on what I've said on JB so far in my analysis and also your pretty compelling analysis, lets do the right thing here:
##Vote: jaybrundage
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
