Newbie Mini Mafia XXII - Page 37

DarthPunk

Australia10847 Posts

August 02 2012 06:52 GMT

#721

@mordanis

Yep, Something has always seemed off about him, but the weirdest thing recently is how dramatically his style has shifted from the first day. Everyone acknowledged he was a loud player (even though I thought his posts were ridiculous) and although his posting has improved in pure readability and a reduction of WIFOM. he has transformed from a reckless, scum hunting at all costs player, to a careful player waiting to see what others do, giving himself outs in his cases, being wishy-washy etc.

As aRyuujin stated, his shift in style is also correlated with a large reduction in posts. I was wondering even at the beginning of day 2 what was going on with him.

On July 31 2012 14:35 DarthPunk wrote:
Where is mordanis? he goes from making huge waves on the first day. Leads the case on Golbat, jumps on Shady Sands lots of posting etc. It is now 9 hours till deadline on day 2. He has made a case on ange777 with his singular post and has since disappeared. This is quite a contrast to his case on golbat in which there is a large loud and consistent follow up on golbat.
What was that said about burnout? That playing loud mafia is hard, and that he will either scumslip or dramatically lower his contribution if he was scum?

Right.

Reading back through mords filter i cam across something very interesting.

On July 30 2012 05:35 Mordanis wrote:
The main goals of the mafia for the D1 lynch were to force a mislynch (unless they are really bad at bussing :D), and put themselves in a position where they can relatively easily avoid a D2 lynch. They knew how whichever candidate was up would flip, so they had the ability to determine where in the vote they would go to minimize their chance to get lynched D2.

So the main goals of the mafia were to force a mislynch and to not be suspected the following day. So you led a mislynch and then cast doubt on every single person who had nothing to do with it. Thereby attempting to reduce the focus on those who had forced a mislynch (namely yourself) fulfilling the second part of that statement

On July 30 2012 05:35 Mordanis wrote:
put themselves in a position where they can relatively easily avoid a D2 lynch.

@Mordanis I look forward to hearing your response to some of these cases

Ange777

Germany1164 Posts

August 02 2012 07:57 GMT

#722

Now that's what I call an awesome claim. This couldn't have been fabricated in this short time after the flip, therefore I am dropping my case on you Shady.

@Mordanis:

On August 02 2012 05:46 Mordanis wrote:
1.) None of the posts I quoted were from before the game began. Look up his filter, his first post + Show Spoiler +

On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote:
Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.

I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.

On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.

Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.

Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.

aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about.

came before all of the ones I posted. Look at the times if you feel like it, but this is simply wrong.

Ok, my mistake. I was trying to cram in everything I could before deadline and should have double checked before posting.

2.)I felt the case on Prom was very weak. I committed to my case on Golbat because I felt it was a much stronger case, but I felt Prom was a pretty weak scum read. I hold myself in large part responsible for this because I haven't been spending nearly as much time as I should reviewing the game, and therefore I haven't been able to hunt as much as I would have liked. I am sorry about this.

3.) What was scummy about your patterns were, simply, the patterns. The timing was just so perfect to minimize the fallout from the results. As the second person to vote for Golbat, you avoid suspicion for jumping on a bandwagon. Pressuring other players is good, but it also separates you from your case on the person you voted for. The exact timing of tunelling Golbat when the day was wide open, Mixing your play when the lynch would go between Golbat or SS, and then exclusively pressuring other players when it became clear that Golbat would be lynched seems tailored to avoid negative attention. So perfectly tailored it seems more likely that you somehow knew Golbat would flip town than random play.

So you are still convinced of my scummy voting pattern? Because when I read your third point, I don't know if you are actually still thinking this or if you are stepping away from your case against me. You need to take a stance, this again is wishy-washy and so scummy. ##FoS Mordanis

@JingleHell:

On August 02 2012 06:41 JingleHell wrote:
Well, either SS is a VERY smart rolecop scum, (plausible, and this would be one sexy play if that was the case), or he's a mason. For now, I think, I'll give BOTD instead of WIFOMing to death, and move on to something I've been interested in for a while now, but refrained from comment on.

There is no rolecop scum in this setup. Please check the OP about the setup.

Mr Ange777, I note that you at one point wanted me to dive through the thread, and post reads on as many people as I could.

Show nested quote +

Unfortunately, shortly after that point, you suddenly were perfectly happy to jump onto the real Sand Shady.

Show nested quote +

The only motive I can see for this is to set up a fall guy, namely myself, for the death of one Shady Sands, by encouraging me down that track. I was already wondering if this was a possibility before the flip and claim, and now... well, you don't look so hot to me. Can you please explain a rational and plausible townie motive for this?

Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch.

And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads?

Seeing as quite a lot of people seemed quite excited for you to join this game I had hoped you would contribute more. At this moment, I don't see any pro town behaviour at all.

@goodkarma:

On August 02 2012 05:39 goodkarma wrote:
So I talked a little earlier about voting histories, and felt it would be helpful for others to take a look at who has voted, in order of when they voted for each respective person:

Day 2:
Promethelax (7): goodkarma, Zorkmid, DarthPunk, Ange777, alan133, Mordanis, Shady Sands
goodkarma (2): Promethelax (voted, unvoted, then re-voted), Keirathi
Shady Sands (1): Obvious.660
Zorkmid (0): Ange777 - unvoted and shortly thereafter votes Prom

-snip-

Ange's sudden switch on day 2 I feel is suspicious. His original vote was for Zork for "semi-lurking," and after one post he is "convinced" not to vote for him anymore. This feels a bit too sudden to me, and may not be coincidence. Especially when Zork says in that post of one of his earlier suspects, Shady Sands:

Show nested quote +

This makes Zork more suspicious in my eyes since I can't see how you just "forget" about those you're suspicious of... It felt Ange let Zork off a bit too easily here to ensure Prox's lynching.

My vote on Zork was intended as a pressure vote to get him posting while I was more convinced of Promethelax and Shady being scum. I saw Zork contribute to the discussion (three times, I just checked) and thought that I had achieved my goal and therefore unvoted. I just re-read the part and I can see why you would think that I let him off too easily, especially as I myself was not exactly satisfied with the content of what he posted.

Actually, you are right goodkarma. One simply should not forget about those that one has suspicions against. When I was pressuring other players day 1 I definitely did not forget about Golbat. Therefore I think I might have made a mistake (being too focused on Promethelax and Shady) when I let him off that quick. I'll quickly read through Zork's filter one more time.

Mordanis

United States893 Posts

August 02 2012 08:35 GMT

#723

Hey guys, I'm really sorry about the inactivity. Hopefully it won't continue to hurt my play.

@ Shady
I'm glad to see you're back on the active side. Without further ado, to your case:

I don't know why you say I had no special reason to go after Golbat when I first pointed out his play. 3 people working together to start a bandwagon not 12 hours into the game seemed like the most obvious place to find scum. So I looked into what all 3 had posted to that point, and found that DP and SS had a fairly good motive to start such an early bandwagon. Golbat just seemed to be jumping on the first bandwagon he saw. So he seemed to me to be the scummiest player of the scummiest "group". That seems like a pretty good reason to post a read on someone.

About my excuse for waiting for caffeine, I worked over 8 hours with 7 hours in between. I needed some caffeine to make sense, because I had just had trouble counting. True to my word, I spent all of my coherent time looking in to one person's play. Unfortunately, it turned out to be the wrong person and I came away merely confused. But my "excuse" was only to buy 45 minutes, and I delivered my results.

About my tunneling of Golbat: Golbat was at that point by far the strongest read IMO. Of the people who got any votes (Golbat, Shady, Me, Aryuu), the only thing about SS was his early mistake in policy talking, I know I'm not scum, and Aryuu was voted for his haiku and lack of content. Golbat however had several good cases on him, so in the absence of new information (his flip, NK, anything), I didn't see anything else to do.

About my vote for Prom: I have already pointed out the reasoning behind this. I hadn't been analyzing nearly as much as I would have liked to, and I thought the cases on Prom were weak. Stronger than the ones on other players, but still weak. His occasional jokes made the thread brighter though, which made me sad to vote for him, but I still voted for my strongest read.

This also got me thinking: Keir might have given his mason connections away when he posted that "defense post" of me at the end of D1. Then Mord, if scum, knows that Keir can pull my vote on Prome, so Mord actually casted the deciding vote on Prome.

What?

About the excerpt from Ver's guide: I didn't detract from a polarized vote because there couldn't have been one. Almost all of the voting came in the last 12 hours, and then I voted for my strongest read.

So basically Mord knew Prome was a useless lynch, somebody that he himself did a last minute switch on, and Mord still went ahead even though he thought Prome himself wasn't that scummy. Mord cast the deciding vote on Prome even though he knew Prome's lynch was useless and Prome was not that scummy.

I was annoyed at myself for not analyzing the thread more. I hadn't found anyone very scummy, and voting for what I thought was a weak case felt shitty. It feels even worse now that I know how he flipped.

So Mord's modus operandi seems to be exclusively targeting players with big, easily exploitable weaknesses, then encouraging bandwagons to form on them. Golbat's newbieness. Prome's repeat of his XIX playstyle. Every single day, Mord will wait for someone to expose a weakness, then try to tunnel them--and he explicitly states that this is his strategy for the town--to pressure people. Then, when people even jump on his bandwagons, he then accuses them of suspicious post timing:

3.) What was scummy about your patterns were, simply, the patterns. The timing was just so perfect to minimize the fallout from the results. As the second person to vote for Golbat, you avoid suspicion for jumping on a bandwagon. Pressuring other players is good, but it also separates you from your case on the person you voted for. The exact timing of tunelling Golbat when the day was wide open, Mixing your play when the lynch would go between Golbat or SS, and then exclusively pressuring other players when it became clear that Golbat would be lynched seems tailored to avoid negative attention. So perfectly tailored it seems more likely that you somehow knew Golbat would flip town than random play.

This is misconstruing my post. I said that Ange's behavior D1 was suspicious for its timing. Ange never voted for me D1, or even posted any suspicion on me when I posted the case originally.

Finally, my inactivity has been really bad. I feel that I have a lot more information to go on now, so I'll be able to post better. Right below I'll be posting my best reads as of now.

Mordanis

United States893 Posts

August 02 2012 08:35 GMT

#724

Ok, so hopefully you guys aren't so sure I'm scummy you'll hear me out. Part of the reason that I was having trouble coming up with reads D2 is that I had no solid read on what strategy the scum were trying to use. Obviously they were trying to win which includes forcing mislynches and using their kp, but there is so much more to scum strategy. They could be trying to snipe blues, stall scum lynches as long as possible, force a few mislynches before having one blatant scum slip that destroys all lines of discussion, in hopes of "starting anew", bussing, etc. The playstyle for each would be different, so what traits would the scum exhibit? In this way the lack of a KP N1 actually harmed my analysis, as I couldn't think what scum traits to hunt for. Then they kill Keir. As I had mentioned earlier, I don't think Keir's play matched that of a blue, so the scum weren't trying to blue-snipe. Keir had no really solid outstanding cases, so they weren't looking to take pressure off themselves. Keir was, however, an even tempered and logical townie. Scum seem to be trying to destabilize town, either to put themselves in "mayor" position, or to simply eliminate a player whom few seemed to be suspicious of. The more everyone is suspicious of everyone, the less obvious scum slips are. Alternately, Keir may have been a random kp designed to simply keep town from getting more information. Traits that should be looked for then are people who are trying to gain a position of confidence, or active scum, or hardcore-lurking scum.

I don't really think anyone is in a position of trust except for SS. It would have been hypothetically possible for scum to have a "will" written out beforehand, with just the name needing to be changed. The will was posted 12 minutes after the flip, and it contains the people whom he mistrusted, and some other things. If scum were to fake one of these, it would require only one "will" written per night. Assuming the broken link (when I click on the link that was provided in the will, I get a fun TL broken link message) actually provides pretty good evidence, SS is pretty much cleared.

Analytical-Active scum tend to try to out-logic their opponents. Players whose playstyle has been dominated by arguing in pure logic include: No one. Maybe JH at this point, but he's new. Ange, Obvious, Alan, GK, Aryuu, Zork and myself don't fit. The first 5 because they haven't really posted a case, and myself because I've made some pretty bad mistakes. Over-pushing the thing about Keir not being blue, shitty D2 play, and no content N2 when people said I would seem really scummy if I started to go inactive are really dumb mistakes. Mistakes that I should not have made, but they don't fit the motives for an analytical-active scum.

This leaves inactive scum. I am most sure there will be at least one inactive scum 1.) because inactivity by its nature contributes no content, and scum have been trying to deprive us of content, and 2.) there's been basically no pressure on lurkers except for the votes on Aryuu. The main thing I find scummy about GK's play (his timing for policy-talking about lurkers when there was an active scum-hunting conversation happening) has already been discussed, so I'll move on to my other reads.

Alan:
Alan started the game quite active in posting large posts addressing several players, along with a read on my play.
+ Show Spoiler +

On July 27 2012 16:22 alan133 wrote:
This is my read on Mordanis

@Mordanis
My argument for Mordanis is that he is the first person who throws out a case. Loosely quoting someone else in my previous game:

Show nested quote +

It would not make sense for scum Mordanis to trigger the scum hunt while putting himself in the spot light.

That said, the problem I had with Mordanis is he is reluctant to give up on his case against Kei despite how other people has pointed out how weak it was. (Refer to his second case) It seems like he is trying to start a bandwagon on a random townie based on their first post.

This part caught my attention:

Show nested quote +

Why would you want to find out who is blue or not? That is not the priority here. Are you suggesting it is okay to lynch Kei because he is not blue? What do townie possibly gain from trying to find out who is "not blue"?

TL:DR
Townie Mordanis characteristics

Starts the scum hunting process

Scum Mordanis characteristics

More interested on "Kei is not blue" more than "Player X could be scum".
Reluctant to back down from a well refuted case

I originally had a slight town read on Mordanis, but now I am inclining to think Mordanis is possible scum.

##FoS Mordanis

However, I am still reluctant to jump on the bandwagon, mainly because I haven't gone through everyone else's filters, and there a handful people that have yet to produce anything of significance for any analysis whatsoever. I will do so when I'm off work a few hours later.

On July 27 2012 19:44 alan133 wrote:

@Mordanis
You said:-
+ Show Spoiler +

On July 27 2012 19:07 Mordanis wrote:

Show nested quote +

What is it that has changed your mind? You went from "Mordanis could go either way, started scumhunt but didn't agree with everyone" to "scum", without saying what changed your mind. In fact

Show nested quote +

I just want to point out that if internal contradiction is grounds for lynching, I think pretty much everyone's dead D1. And I really do want to know why Alan is suspicious of me, because I see one mistake (over-pursuing my case on Keir), and I'd argue that this post is equally a mistake. So I wait patiently.

Show nested quote +

Refer to the quote below. When I think you were slightly town it was before you posted your second case.I know that was posted AFTER your second case, but in all honesty I did not read it as I click on "post". I did another evaluation on you so you can see from my quote below.

Show nested quote +

Also, unless I missed it, you have not address my accusation against you, correct? Especially this part:
+ Show Spoiler +

All I said was that he isn't blue. Which leaves the two possibilities of him being scum or VT, which everyone seemed to interpret as pushing for a lynch

Can you explain a possible town motivation for this?

Also, the reason why you were getting more and more suspicious to me. You wrote a counter-case against Golbet, and went so far as to counter-vote him. I thought it was actually decent if you were town. However, you failed to follow through, you did not apply any pressure on your target whatsoever. So yea, if you're asking what makes me think you're scum the more I reread the filter, there you have it.

@Ange777
Mind you I am a paranoid person when it comes to playing Mafia, so if you're asking me what do I think, I would say Mordanis appears to be more scummy to me, but I also read Golbat's play as slightly scummy. However I did not go after Golbat lynch because Mordanis is after Golbat, and I don't see both Mordanis and Golbat being scums together. Hence I logically assume Golbat's is a townie playing badly. (Ignoring WIFOM/bussing)

Since someone else (you) flashed Golbat out, I would also like take the opportunity pressure Golbat clearing my doubts.

@Golbat
As of now, I am letting you slide. I am not building a case on you, merely wanting you to convince me why Mordanis isn't what I think he is.

I am heading home now, will be back within an hour.

On July 27 2012 23:46 alan133 wrote:
I am back online.
@Shady
I skimmed through Shady's filter since other people has rise suspicion, and I found this:

Show nested quote +

I honestly dislike this. It seems like he is pushing to lynch Golbat if Mordanis flips town. Is there something I missed? How are you convinced that scum must be in one of them? For all I know it is possible that both could flip town.

I have came out with 2 explanation:

A town Shady could have just simply overlooked this possibility, while a scum Shady could be trying to get 2 mislynch knowing both are town.I think both scenarios are equally plausible.

It also seems like he is advertising "lynching the other player if one flips town" all over his post. However, it also make me thinks that it is too careless for a scum Shady to do this.

TL;DR I am indifferent about Shady's alignment

@Golbat
The thing that raised my brows is his sudden backing off Mordanis without a satisfying reason. He do stated that he stood back and realized he is rushing towards things. However, this does not automatically discredit the scummy traits we caught on Mordanis. That said, I believe that he is being honest about his feelings and it is reasonable for him to back off.

TL;DR I am not comfortable with lynching Golbat

@Mordanis
I think you misunderstood me. I was asking why do you need to mention if someone is blue or not. I am not saying you're trying to lynch a "blue". I am suspicious of you because you actually care who is blue. I see this as mainly scum motivated.

Also, this is a list of things I based my suspicion on you.

Your refusal to back down on a weak case (which you somehow did quietly?)
The fact that you state "Keir is not blue".
Possible motivation behind this:
- Townie PoV: suggesting it is "safe" to lynch this person.
- Scum PoV: force a reaction/ blue hunt,
Play "nice" with your lynch target.

Like I mentioned, your first post actually gives me a slight town read on you despite it is based on a far fetched reason, and being the first to make a case that's actually a town favoured trait.

However, your later posts shows that you are not ready to back down from your weak case, and go so far as to say something like "Kei must not be Blue", why would you even care if Kei is blue or not? Even in the Townie PoV I suggested in my list, you are trying to say it is okay to lynch Kei, which is anti-town at best. We lynch people because he acted scummy and is possible scum, not because you think it is "okay" to lynch him. You also mentioned you never wanted to lynch Kei. That totally took out the "Townie PoV" I suggested, which means you are trying to hunt for blue roles, unless you can provide me with another reason why Townie would want to go "Player X is not a Blue". I personally thinks it is a scum slip on your part.

TL;DR I think Mordanis is the best lynch candidate right now

Also, I would like to call out MrMedic, Obvs and aRyuujin. While I am not saying these three people must be scum, I hope they contribute more so we can hear more from them.

On July 28 2012 20:42 alan133 wrote:
Goodkarma
I disagree that we should focus on lynching lurkers at this point of time. We have better lynch targets out there, so I suggest we focus on them. The problem with lynching lurkers day 1 is that it is much harder to make the correct call this early on. Later into the game, townies get more information so we can make a better decision when it comes to low content poster.

Also, when it comes to lurking, there are two types of them: 1) Those that post very little, and 2) those that post a lot of junk post. I suggest we drop the lynch lurker discussion and go on scumhunting. It is fine if you want to call out a lurker but with better evidence other than "he lurks". The first successful lynch we got in my last game was a lurker, and despite having very little post count they are all really scummy.

The reason you voted aRyuujin also fits in a few other players, MrMedic, Keirathi and Zorkmid to name a few. You addressed one more point why you intend to lynch him instead of the others:

Other people are defending them.

That's flawed reasoning here. When other people defend someone it doesn't automatically mean they are scum buddies. Why wouldn't a townie defend another person who he thinks is townie, too?

I don't think you should pursue a aRyuujin lynch as of now, a few players have argue that they are not in favor of a lurker lynch (That includes me). I skimmed through his post and the scummy thing I got off him is his poems, which he stopped doing.

Current Situation
That said, I am feeling very uncomfortable with how the game is progressing. Compare to my first game, the activity level is really poor, and the "active posts" were mostly about Mordanis, Golbat and Shady, based on what has been brought up since 24 hours ago. Also, I did not count, but the impression I got was that is set to be lynched. I feel discouraged because I read Golbat is the least scummy one, of all 3.

So I did a re-read on all their filters.

Shady
I went through Shady's post. Skimming through his filter reminded me of this eerie feeling when I read about his policies and advices, which a few other players have highlighted, so I am not going to repeat after them. There are also one other post in his filter that I am not a big fan of:

Show nested quote +

Like I said, our focus is to lynch a scum, not what happens if player x flips scum. This is the kind of post that got Scum killed in my first game. However, the severity aren't as bad as the one since it is not a list of "what if we kill this player".

Also, although my last game has a successful day 1 lynch, I thought Shady just missed it since there are so many games out there. However, Mordanis' did a list of day 1 lynch and from there I saw day 1 scum lynch is not as uncommon as stated. I originally think Shady's willingness to do his research on other games is a townie trait, and I did not put my pressure on him because of this. However, with this new information, I believe Shady lied.

TL:DR I am slightly inclined to believe he is Scum.

Golbat
After re-reading Golbat's filter, my stance on Golbat is townie remain unchanged. Here is my defence for him.

Golbat reminds me of my first game. I basically was wishy-washy because I believe we shouldn't jump to conclusions and town is going after me because of that. I spent most of my entire day 1 defending myself. Someone mentioned Golbat spent most of his time explaining why he is town. I say this is a normal newbie townie reaction when people is after you.

Golbat's pulling out of Mordanis' case is his biggest scum tell. However, follow this logic:

Assuming scum Golbat. Why would he pull out? There are 3 more players after Mordanis if I am not wrong. Assuming Mordanis is town, he could have easily gotten a mislynch. Also, if Golbat is red, pulling out means he would not want to associate himself for pushing for a mislynch. Why would he blatantly say that? So that all of you would jump on him? Town sided Golbat would fit in this behaviour.

However

Show nested quote +

I maintain my position that our focus is to lynch a scum, nothing else. However, reading through this thread I found quite a few players doing it, and obviously they all can't be scum. I suggest focus on scum hunting with what information we have now, instead of thinking what information we could get if we lynch the person

TL:DR I am against lynching Golbat.

Mordanis
His post has improved after the ones that accuse Kei for being not blue. Also, he went so far as to check on other games just to find out if Shady is lying, suggested that he is willing to go through the trouble to scum hunt someone for what he said. There is also scum sided explanation: he could be a scum over-committed to twist every word to get a mislynch. However, I think the later is less plausible.

With him being the first one to start the scum hunt game, I am willing to overlook the part where he "cares about who is not blue".

TL:DR I am swayed to believe Mordanis is less of a scum, I am not a big fan of lynching him right now

As the dead line is approaching, I suggest we narrow down the lynch targets. I believe we need at least 7 votes to lynch. I am strongly against no-lynch.

That said, I would like to commit my vote to:
##vote: Shady_Sands
based on the reasoning above.

. Active posting from him. He isn't coming in with novel information, but he is analyzing. His soft-defenses (X seems kind of scummy, but let's lynch this guy instead) I feel are kind of scummy, because it leaves him the option of being "right" when a scum-lynch happens while also defending that player. Later though, with little pressure on lurking behavior, he has posted 5 times in about 60 hours. One post per 12 hours is very sparse, and there is little meat to his giganto-posts. Another thing that caught my eye: + Show Spoiler +

I will look at Promethelax's filter because it seems like he is set to be lynched.

@Promethelax
I don't have a deep impression on him. Back in my mind he posted a lot of fluffs but I didn't pay much attention to him since he seems to agree with my reads (at least about Shady)

The people he has a scum read in two in-game days is Shady and Goodkarma. That's about 5-6 post spent in about

He stays away from Mordanis and Golbat's cases dismissing them as "two player OMGUSing each other". I have to admit Golbat's play was not the best, what makes him so sure about their alignment?

I find Promethelax a bit "too trusting". Ryu was posting in haik.. poems. I did not comment on it as he stopped pretty soon. I believe scums could easily twist town Ryu's words while scum Ryu can twist around his own words to cover his slips. Promethelax seems to be okay with it.

Also, I couldn't help but notice his buddying up Keir. He claims he has an explanation for that and will post it before the end of night 2. I don't buy it. As far as I know he was the one who was after Goodkarma hiding his "mystery suspect". I know this is in different context, but I believe having a "mystery reason" to be "revealed" after the day lynch (so don't lynch me) is just as bad.

I know other players has mentioned it, but the "town ring" thing he posted seemed very suggestive. He went so far as to dismiss it as a joke, which I strongly dislike. I believe making jokes are bad, it leaves up a lot of room for interpretation, and a scum player can always claim they were joking about something that said which is scummy.

I deem Promethelax's passive lurking, non committal cases, friendly attitude and general bad play to be very scummy, in fact, reminds me a lot of the last scum that we never caught in my last game.

##vote: Promethelax

. The phrases "I will look at Promethelax's filter because it seems like he is set to be lynched", "I don't have a deep impression on him." and finally "I deem Promethelax's passive lurking, non committal cases, friendly attitude, and general bad play to be very scummy". The first seems like he's just trying to jump on the bandwagon, the second and third contradicting seem like a way to try to make himself sound like he was more sure of his case than he really was. Obviously admitting that you think a case is weak hasn't worked out too well for me, but to me this seems like he was just trying to avoid pressure once Prom flips by trying to make a solid case.

The combination of becoming less active, posting soft defenses, and his reasoning for voting for Prom are all reason to be put under suspicion.

Second, is Zork. I commented earlier that the case against him was pretty thin, but I hadn't looked at his play too closely. Let's start from the most recent. Zork said: + Show Spoiler +

On August 02 2012 11:21 Zorkmid wrote:
Hey guys, just home from the golf course, 72.

I'm going to start off by answering questions I've seen and will try and post some analysis either tonight or tomorrow morning. Gf having laser eye surgery tomorrow, playing in this on the weekend.

Show nested quote +

I did forget about him, early on in the game I found it hard to differentiate among the players. Not sure what else I can say about it.

Show nested quote +

About Golbat, I did find his play scummy, especially his on again-off again Mordanis suspicions. I didn't vote for him to avoid a no-lynch, I actually have no problem whatsoever with a no-lynch that early in the game. I believe that now we're getting to the point in the game where a no-lynch hurts more than it did earlier in the game, Scum is getting closer to a win. Barring a lucky save, we're going to lose 2 more townies in the next two nights.

That said, another mis-lynch is even worse.

About why the possibility of no-lynching appealed to me early game, was that it would give us more time to make a better informed lynch, reducing the chance of a mis-lynch of a town lurker on day 2. We all what happened there. However, at this critical juncture in the game, I think it more likely that a lurker would flip red than a lurker earlier in the game.

. This strikes me as pretty anti-town. Right now, assuming 3 scum, there are 4 townies dead, leaving 6 townies vs. 3 scum. We are neither in LYLO nor MYLO. Giving up a flip and the relevant discussion and voting patterns at this point is purely scum-motivated. Scum keep their KP and retain the vast advantage in information while talking policy, while town gives up information in policy talking. Or, think of it in a numerical sense. Say we mislynch, and scum KP hits. 4 town vs. 3 scum, so we're in MYLO. If we don't lynch today, and scum hits, we're down to 5 town vs. 3 scum. This is virtually a LYLO, as town could score a lucky save again and go to a lylo. But in all likelihood, D4 is going to be LYLO unless we lynch scum today. No-lynching today would not change that unless we got that luck save. No-lynch is the worst thing town could do right now, so suggesting it is pretty scummy (It's either scummy or just really bad play).Before this, his reasoning for voting for Prom are pretty suspicious:+ Show Spoiler +

On July 31 2012 23:53 Zorkmid wrote:

Show nested quote +

The bolded section of this quote is the MOST flagrant example of saying "oooh me I'm green! I'm green!" that I can imagine. This comes after questioning GK's "relief claim" after the flavored night post (which I agree, is not something I'd do if I were green or blue)

Darthpunk's attack on you doesn't hold any weight if your posting history is free from a green claim post like that. But it does now.

Show nested quote +

Add to this that you're now doing the same thing and sounds like you're probably planning on claiming Mason, given your upcoming explanation.

Show nested quote +

I hope that it's a good one. Let's see your "spreadsheet".

If you're claiming Mason, there are going to have to be some other claims to back this up.

##VOTE: Promethelax

. He bandwagons on the prevailing case with no reasoning other than a repetition of DP's case. This allows him to conveniently hide behind what another player said, shifting the blame off of himself. It's another case of posting weak evidence but seeming incredibly sure about the result. I'd be much less suspicious of this had we as a thread not condemned jumping on cases with weak reasoning. Going back in time, he posts only fluff until we arrive at his defense post. He does little in this except mention that he is still suspicious of SS, just a few hours before jumping onto DP's case on Prom. Earlier is some weak pressure on GK, and then we come to his emotion post. + Show Spoiler +

On July 30 2012 09:14 Zorkmid wrote:
Since we've been told that:

Show nested quote +

All that we really know is that we have a roleblocker(medic or otherwise), and that that roleblocker saved a kill. (I don't buy the idea that mafia didn't use a KP, especially not in a newbie game).

From this I can infer that the same person viewed as most dangerous by mafia, was viewed as the most valuable townie by the roleblocker.

I'm too tired to do any analysis. And frankly from the tone about my posting, I don't have much desire to.

I'll answer some questions:

Show nested quote +

It does seem to be a fairly arbitrary reason to vote for Golbat, I agree. I'll be honest that at the time of my vote, I hadn't been following the game very closely, and Golbat was just the player I thought most likely to be scum as of the time of (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15625737).

When I said "town vibe" (refering to Mordanis' case) I just believed he was just trying to get a conversation going, and the reasons he gave for it being a weak case rang true to me.

Just saw this question as I was working on my post:

Show nested quote +

Because why risk killing a townie without a good reason. If we lynch MrMedic (as an example of a lurker) and he flips green, what was the point?

About Golbat, my reasons for voting for him are re-iterated in this post. I feel a little funny defending my vote to lynch a guy to someone who voted the same guy.

Why'd YOU vote for him? Oh right, he played scummy as fuck.

Rantddendum:

Show nested quote +

Not so much a fluff post, but I'm sick of being called out for inactivity on a fridaynight/saturday. I was busy, handle it.

Show nested quote +

Same goes for this shit, stop it. You too Keir. I've heard it from several people already.

I'm busy, SHUT THE (expunged) UP.

Now I would not be so suspicious of this but it seems somewhat contrived. The post begins with logic-based argumentation. The later rant section and his ability to censor vulgarity seem to be emotionally at odds with the post itself. He was angry enough to yell at people and to call someone scummy as fuck, but calm enough to write some logic-based arguments and censor himself from saying "shut the fuck up". It just seems too strange, as if it were just a plan to show emotion. This feels like a veiled attempt at saying "Hey, I'm a frustrated townie", which I find suspicious. Finally, we come to his reasoning for eventually voting for Golbat. + Show Spoiler +

On July 27 2012 22:11 Zorkmid wrote:
Okie dokey.

Just got finished reading the thread pages 10-14. First off on the advice of Promethelax, my schedule for this weekend is that I'll be following this thread throughout the day until about 4PM EDT, then I'm off to a Blue Jays game. Tomorrow is a bit of a milestone birthday for me (official old man), but I'll be back and active Sunday afternoon.

Before I talk about the Mordanis-Keir thing, I want to answer Promethelax.

The reason that my opinion from "lynch all liars and lynch all inactives" to not feeling as strongly about it is just because I was not aware that a non-lynch was possible.

Mordanis's Case on Keirathi
I actually got atown vibe from this post. We've all heard about how it is self contradictory and based on a false premise (Keir claiming RB), but I buy Mordanis' explanation that he rushed the case and that the lack of consistent logic and difficulty to follow the case is a result of this.

On the same subject, I'm a little suspicious of those players who were so completely convinced that Mordanis is a scum based on this one post, as this was not a reaction I had.

Among these people is Shady Sands:

Show nested quote +

I see this as a GIANT leap of reasoning, and I still see Mordanis's case as an attempt (albeit a clumbsy one) to get the ball rolling in XXII.

Another of these people is Golbat:
So far, Golbat has, in this order:

voted Mordanis
unvoted Mordanis
FoS Mordanis

His unvote seems to coincide with Mordanis's making a case on him. He claims he backed off the vote because:

Show nested quote +

+ Show Spoiler +

This reminds me of that futurama ambassador from the neutral planet. "All I know is that my guy says maybe."

I'm not sure what this could mean, but I think that it's worth pointing out. It's one of the stranger seeming posts I've read in this game.

Is the deadline today at 17:00 EDT?

I am suspicious of both of these players right now, but there's lots of daylight left.

. His reason is that Golbat made the mistake of changing his attitudes too quickly. It seems like a pretty weak case to say that scum would for some reason be trying to confuse people by changing quickly, and Zork didn't even mention this. He only said that Golbat made the mistake, not how it was scummy. Voting for people because they make mistakes is not a townie characteristic. For his posting history, Zork has more than earned a finger of suspicion.

Mordanis

United States893 Posts

August 02 2012 08:48 GMT

#725

Also feel free to post any other cases you feel I haven't covered, as I felt going through every case individually would be too distracting. If there's something you really feel needs clearing up, I'll be more than happy to try to explain.

Ange777

Germany1164 Posts

August 02 2012 08:49 GMT

#726

@Mordanis: Could you please try to format your cases better next time, I find them rather tiring to read.

DarthPunk

Australia10847 Posts

August 02 2012 09:07 GMT

#727

Well Day 1 Mord seems to have suddenly reappeared, based on the WIFOM in his post and it's difficulty to read. I am going to read through carefully several times and get back to you with some analyasis.

DarthPunk

Australia10847 Posts

August 02 2012 09:13 GMT

#728

EBWOP: I am going out with friends for dinner. It may be a few hours until I have time to read through proms post and analyse it adequately. I will have something up before bed. Which should be in the morning for the US.

Ange777

Germany1164 Posts

August 02 2012 09:17 GMT

#729

Okay, so goodkarma's post made me go back to my original case on Zorkmid and I have to say stupid me! Why did I even let go off Zork?

Zorkmid

Let's go back to see his explanation on my case.

On July 31 2012 22:02 Zorkmid wrote:
As for this:

Show nested quote +

I honestly just forgot about SS, but your accusation has led me to go back through his filter. I've noticed that he has never addressed my accusation about him.

+ Show Spoiler +

On July 27 2012 13:29 Shady Sands wrote:
When you look at all that, and the weak logic against Keir, then what you see is the following pattern:

Mordanis first claims that Keir is the likeliest candidate for lynching because he a likely candidate to be red. Then he backs off and claims that Keir could go red or green. Then he argues that we should lynch controversial candidates first. The point is, lynching controversial candidates would be fine, if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. This totally smacks of a Red finding out his original tactic for generating a bandwagon has failed, acknowledging that he is the only one arguing for a lynch, and then stating that because he is the only one arguing for a lynch, the person is "controversial" and should be lynched.

What?

I see this as a GIANT leap of reasoning, and I still see Mordanis's case as an attempt (albeit a clumbsy one) to get the ball rolling in XXII.

I don't know if he didn't see this, or didn't feel he had to defend himself from it. He was under attack from Ange, and Prom around this same time.

The other thing that I notice is that since the night post, the only posts that he has made have concerned:
1. Speculation about what night actions happened.
2. C9++ format possibilities
3. Posted massive quote walls with a useless sentence at the end.

This is in stark contrast to his heavy activity earlier in the game. This could mean that he is part of the mafia, and that the medic save/roleblock in night 1 has confused the reds to the point where they haven't figured out how to proceed. It could also mean that Shady is mafia switching up strategies because he had so much heat on him day 1, and he wants to duck it by being more selective about what he

My original case had three points:
1. semi-lurking
2. posting inconsistently
3. waiting for cases to sheep

In his defense he states he just simply forgot about his previous suspicions. My mistake was that I simply thought could that be a townie who in the midst of discussion loses focus. But if you try to explain this with scum motivation you get this: Scum Zorkmid tries to hide the fact that he forgot who he was blaming earlier. It is so much more probable that a scum forgets whom he had blamed earlier than that a townie forgets whom he honestly suspected.

Going through the posts of Zorkmid I still have the problem that he does not make his own cases. Instead he takes wishy washy stances as seen in this explanation for his suspicions against Shady.

What made me feel extremely stupid when re-reading:

On July 31 2012 22:46 Zorkmid wrote:
About this:

Show nested quote +

A few of us have stated that this thought alone is not a convincing tell for scummy behaviour. But your thought should be taken as one! You are basically claiming scum in that post! Why do you need to state that as green or blue you would never post that? Because you are red. I can't believe I missed such a huge scum slip!

##Vote Zorkmid

Ange777

Germany1164 Posts

August 02 2012 10:52 GMT

#730

On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote:
-snip-
His reason is that Golbat made the mistake of changing his attitudes too quickly. It seems like a pretty weak case to say that scum would for some reason be trying to confuse people by changing quickly, and Zork didn't even mention this. He only said that Golbat made the mistake, not how it was scummy. Voting for people because they make mistakes is not a townie characteristic. For his posting history, Zork has more than earned a finger of suspicion.

While I agree with most of the content of your post, I still have a problem with your playstyle. In the last part, you say that Zork has earned more than just a FoS. So the natural thing would be a vote on him. But where is yours? Or at least that FoS?

Mordanis

United States893 Posts

August 02 2012 10:59 GMT

#731

I just dislike the whole ##FoS X. It just seems like you're being a bit of a try-hard. I thought it would be obvious that posting "X has more than earned a finger of suspicion" was quite clear in saying "I'm suspicious of this player, but I want to see what he says before voting", and therefore accomplishing the same task as a FoS. FoSs aren't counted by hosts and accomplish no task that a textual equivalent would also accomplish, so I don't know why you're criticizing me for it. So what is it that you find suspicious or annoying about my not bolding and abbreviating my suspicion?

Mordanis

United States893 Posts

August 02 2012 11:20 GMT

#732

Hey Shady, could you provide another link to or quote the post that showed that you and Keir shared a QT? The link in Keir's will hasn't been working and 2 minutes of searching didn't reveal it. The link appears to have been abbreviated with ellipses :C Ta!

Ange777

Germany1164 Posts

August 02 2012 11:42 GMT

#733

Fine. FoSs are not your thing. I can accept that. But what I have a hard time accepting is that you always seem to wait for a few votes to be cast on players before you add your own.

Until now your more convincing cases and votes (Golbat and Promethelax) where made after that player had already been targeted by others. Although you made cases and voted of your own (Keir and Shady) they were rather poor and you unvoted them quite quickly. And than we have the third category: You made cases and didn't follow them up (me and Zork). Until now I have not seen you comment on my previously so scummy play (maybe because no one else joined you in your opinion on me?) and you have yet to vote for Zork.

Seeing this I can't shake the feeling off that you are trying to avoid any attention. Building some poor cases to gain town cred but always going with and hiding in the majoritiy. Voting is such a strong pressure tool, why do you want to wait to vote? Because you want to see how it goes and how other players react to your case before casting your final vote?

What I don't like in your playstyle is this as well:

On August 02 2012 05:46 Mordanis wrote:
2.)I felt the case on Prom was very weak. I committed to my case on Golbat because I felt it was a much stronger case, but I felt Prom was a pretty weak scum read. I hold myself in large part responsible for this because I haven't been spending nearly as much time as I should reviewing the game, and therefore I haven't been able to hunt as much as I would have liked. I am sorry about this.

On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote:
Hey guys, I'm really sorry about the inactivity. Hopefully it won't continue to hurt my play.
-snip-
Finally, my inactivity has been really bad. I feel that I have a lot more information to go on now, so I'll be able to post better. Right below I'll be posting my best reads as of now.

So many sorrys and excuses for your inactive/bad play. I don't know what you want to achieve by stating that over and over again. If you really were sorry and felt bad, you would step up your play. This gives me a really scummy vibe.

Another thing that makes me suspicious right now is how you completely ignore the scumslip by Zork. Apparentely you are suspicious of Zork but after reading that scumslip you decide to just solely answer my question instead of commenting on it? Were you trying to distance yourself from your scum buddy but were taken by surprise by the revealment of this slip and now you don't know how to react?

alan133

Malaysia159 Posts

August 02 2012 11:52 GMT

#734

It seems like I have to do a little defending:
@Mordanis
Your argument about me "soft-defending" people
The only person I recall myself soft-defending was Golbat. I believe he was the less scummy among all 3 first-day lynch candidate. I explicitly said that he plays similar to my previous game, and was inclined to not lynch him. I don't recall myself calling him scummy, other than maybe this :"I agree that his play was anti-town". Remember, we are lynching scum, not bad townies.

About "X is scummy but Y is scummier so vote Y"
If you are referring to my Promethelax vote over Shady's, I don't see a problem with that. Why would you vote for someone that is less scummy? I know my late vote on Promethelax made me looks a lot like a scum bandwagon, but I started writing my case on Promethelax a few hours ago. I was finishing my Zorkmid, Goodkarma and Shady post and I intended to vote Shady, but when I refreshed the page I saw 3 votes on Promethelax, there when I spent another 2 hours to analyse and wrote my analysis on him. There's where you found my "contradiction". I started with very little impression on Promethelax and ended up thinking he is more scummy. I suggest you read into my reasoning in between my case on him. That was over a few hour span, believe it or not, and time was short.

Also, I apologize if you feel like my day 2/night 2 activity is not up to standard. I was indeed very busy over the weekdays. Meetings to attend, certificates to take, but enough excuses. I have just passed my certificate examination and have tonnes of time for the game now. However, due to my typing speed, it will take a long time for me to write a post.

Believe it or not, the above text took me 1 hour and a half to complete.

I need to drive a friend somewhere, so I won't be back in 2 hours. But I will do this in the future: I will write a Summary and my intention so people knows when I started my post.

I am working on a post, and this is my agenda

I intend to push a case on Mordanis
- Why I thought he was cleared starting day 2
- Non existence presence in day 2 when no one pressures him
- His case on Promethelax
- His case on me. Before accusing me of OMGUS, I believe there are enough scummy things to warrant a vote from me
- Other misc things that I noticed.
  Also, ##vote: Mordanis
I intend to point out Obvious's scummy behaviour
I intend to point out Zorkmid's scummy behaviour
I intend to point out aRyu's scummy behaviour

And thats another 30 minutes.

I will be back.

Ange777

Germany1164 Posts

August 02 2012 11:53 GMT

#735

Could you add JingleHell's filter to the OP please ghost?

Ange777

Germany1164 Posts

August 02 2012 11:58 GMT

#736

@alan: Did you see my post about Zork's scumslip?

Zorkmid

4410 Posts

August 02 2012 12:42 GMT

#737

Good morning. Right to it.

On August 02 2012 18:17 Ange777 wrote:
Okay, so goodkarma's post made me go back to my original case on Zorkmid and I have to say stupid me! Why did I even let go off Zork?

Zorkmid

Let's go back to see his explanation on my case.

+ Show Spoiler +

On July 31 2012 22:02 Zorkmid wrote:
As for this:

Show nested quote +

I honestly just forgot about SS, but your accusation has led me to go back through his filter. I've noticed that he has never addressed my accusation about him.

+ Show Spoiler +

I see this as a GIANT leap of reasoning, and I still see Mordanis's case as an attempt (albeit a clumbsy one) to get the ball rolling in XXII.

Show nested quote +

which is odd given that he had been playing as if he was sure he would live to the morning and this is a really subtle way to say to people “I'm town too, I'm scared of dying” without coming out and saying that you are town.

So, first you believe showing relief to still be alive would be suspicious for a townie to do when his name is spelled out in the night post like that?

I also think that your "relief post" is strange. It's sort of WIFOM, but I don't think that as a green or blue I would ever post something like that. It's just yelling out "I'm A TOWNIE huehuehue". I wouldn't post it because it reeks of redness[/QUOTE]

A few of us have stated that this thought alone is not a convincing tell for scummy behaviour. But your thought should be taken as one! You are basically claiming scum in that post! Why do you need to state that as green or blue you would never post that? Because you are red. I can't believe I missed such a huge scum slip!

##Vote Zorkmid[/QUOTE]

So reasoning out what types of statements I think that greens and blues would or wouldn't make is my scumslip? My HUGE scumslip? Give me a break. One of the ways that I do analysis is to try and look at the suspicious posts through the lens of different roles.

Going through the posts of Zorkmid I still have the problem that he does not make his own cases. Instead he takes wishy washy stances as seen in this explanation for his suspicions against Shady.

The above example IS my own case.

1. semi-lurking
2. posting inconsistently

These other accusations (and the spoilered points) are just weak, and I've already addressed.

Zorkmid

4410 Posts

August 02 2012 12:42 GMT

#738

Sorry, I fucked up a quote there. Hit post before preview again.

ghost_403

United States1825 Posts

August 02 2012 13:51 GMT

#739

Alright! Back from vacation. Huge thanks to my marvelous cohost.

DarthPunk

Australia10847 Posts

August 02 2012 14:22 GMT

#740

OK so i said i would analyze mords post and so here I am.

Part of the trouble is that after all this pressure has reverted to what he used so effectively day 1.
Lots of WIFOM and speculation without adding anything real to the thread which makes his posting incredibly hard to read through and analyze, confusing people to his actual positions and obscuring his arguements.
His posting actually deters me from wanting to analyze him because it is so labourious to get through. This kind of posting obviously served him well on day 1
However as his posting became more readable it was easier to see how incredibly wishy-washy his conclusions were. So he has reverted back to what worked for him. Much to my dismay. but i will press on.

On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote:
Ok, so hopefully you guys aren't so sure I'm scummy you'll hear me out. Part of the reason that I was having trouble coming up with reads D2 is that I had no solid read on what strategy the scum were trying to use. Obviously they were trying to win which includes forcing mislynches and using their kp, but there is so much more to scum strategy. They could be trying to snipe blues, stall scum lynches as long as possible, force a few mislynches before having one blatant scum slip that destroys all lines of discussion, in hopes of "starting anew", bussing, etc. The playstyle for each would be different, so what traits would the scum exhibit? In this way the lack of a KP N1 actually harmed my analysis, as I couldn't think what scum traits to hunt for. Then they kill Keir. As I had mentioned earlier, I don't think Keir's play matched that of a blue, so the scum weren't trying to blue-snipe. Keir had no really solid outstanding cases, so they weren't looking to take pressure off themselves. Keir was, however, an even tempered and logical townie. Scum seem to be trying to destabilize town, either to put themselves in "mayor" position, or to simply eliminate a player whom few seemed to be suspicious of. The more everyone is suspicious of everyone, the less obvious scum slips are. Alternately, Keir may have been a random kp designed to simply keep town from getting more information. Traits that should be looked for then are people who are trying to gain a position of confidence, or active scum, or hardcore-lurking scum.

How on earth does this address anything anyone has brought up? The problem wasn't that you had trouble coming up with reads, it was that you lacked the conviction and tenacity you had shown in your previous day. You made a case on prom that was in my opinion stronger than many of the others who voted for him. But it lacked conviction and gave you an out. It was wishy-washy etc. also after posting that case you posted very little then wait to see what others will post before voting for promethelax whilst naysaying the lynch.
Yet you address none of this. You say that you had trouble making reads which isn't what people were concerned with. I feel like I am constantly repeating myself but none of the cases against you were addressed. You then have a wall of WIFOM and speculation on mafia strategy. I mean wtf? people have specific cases against you and that doesnt explain anything or add anything. Again.

On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote:
I don't really think anyone is in a position of trust except for SS. It would have been hypothetically possible for scum to have a "will" written out beforehand, with just the name needing to be changed. The will was posted 12 minutes after the flip, and it contains the people whom he mistrusted, and some other things. If scum were to fake one of these, it would require only one "will" written per night. Assuming the broken link (when I click on the link that was provided in the will, I get a fun TL broken link message) actually provides pretty good evidence, SS is pretty much cleared.

More speculation that has been covered by others. still haven't adressed the cases against you.

On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote:
Analytical-Active scum tend to try to out-logic their opponents. Players whose playstyle has been dominated by arguing in pure logic include: No one. Maybe JH at this point, but he's new. Ange, Obvious, Alan, GK, Aryuu, Zork and myself don't fit. The first 5 because they haven't really posted a case, and myself because I've made some pretty bad mistakes. Over-pushing the thing about Keir not being blue, shitty D2 play, and no content N2 when people said I would seem really scummy if I started to go inactive are really dumb mistakes. Mistakes that I should not have made, but they don't fit the motives for an analytical-active scum.

This leaves inactive scum. I am most sure there will be at least one inactive scum 1.) because inactivity by its nature contributes no content, and scum have been trying to deprive us of content, and 2.) there's been basically no pressure on lurkers except for the votes on Aryuu. The main thing I find scummy about GK's play (his timing for policy-talking about lurkers when there was an active scum-hunting conversation happening) has already been discussed, so I'll move on to my other reads.

More irrelevant noise. In the midst of which you try and play off everyones cases against you as 'Oh my god I suck' whilst casting suspicion and confusion about like it's going out of style.

You then make cases on people which is good. If you didn't obscure them in the midst of things like this.

On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote:
Right now, assuming 3 scum, there are 4 townies dead, leaving 6 townies vs. 3 scum. We are neither in LYLO nor MYLO. Giving up a flip and the relevant discussion and voting patterns at this point is purely scum-motivated. Scum keep their KP and retain the vast advantage in information while talking policy, while town gives up information in policy talking. Or, think of it in a numerical sense. Say we mislynch, and scum KP hits. 4 town vs. 3 scum, so we're in MYLO. If we don't lynch today, and scum hits, we're down to 5 town vs. 3 scum. This is virtually a LYLO, as town could score a lucky save again and go to a lylo. But in all likelihood, D4 is going to be LYLO unless we lynch scum today. No-lynching today would not change that unless we got that luck save.

Right in the middle of your case on zork. He was talking about no-lynching early in the game, not today. (which was blatantly obvious) What does that do but obscure the case you are trying to make. But that's the point isn't it?

also, this:
[QUOTE]On August 02 2012 17:35 Mordanis wrote:
the later rant section and his ability to censor vulgarity seem to be emotionally at odds with the post itself. He was angry enough to yell at people and to call someone scummy as fuck, but calm enough to write some logic-based arguments and censor himself from saying "shut the fuck up". It just seems too strange, as if it were just a plan to show emotion. This feels like a veiled attempt at saying "Hey, I'm a frustrated townie", which I find suspicious.[/qoute]
Adds nothing to your case but to make it more confusing and difficult to follow.

You seem to be returning to what has served you in the past. Obscuring your arguements beneath wifom and speculation in order to confuse people to what you are actually saying, because you aren't saying anything. You have not defended yourself or sufficiently addressed anything that has been raised in regards to you. Your cases seem to have substance but are buried beneath your confusion mechanisms. The thing is your post gave the 'impression' that you had actually somewhat resolved people's cases against you, but on closer inspection you have done nothing but make some minor cases that you may easily back away from once again (like you are doing from the promethelax lynch at 100 miles an hour) and sow confusion.

It never left you,

But once again.

FoS: mordanis

Prev 1 35 36 37 38 39 68 Next

Please or register to reply.

Newbie Mini Mafia XXII - Page 37

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming