Ok, so I still think VE has a fair shot of flipping scum, but I'd like to propose an alternative to vote.
Dropula. The majority of his posts are when the thread is incredibly busy.
All of his posts are somewhere between insane and recreational hallucinogen use.
He tunnels Zeph, but in a way that makes the case look weak. This is advantageous to a scum regardless of Zeph's alignment if and when he flips.
All of his posts seem intended to provoke arguments rather than thought, reactions rather than analysis.
More in-depth in the spoiler.
+ Show Spoiler +On August 04 2012 08:19 CountDropula wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 10:41 Zephirdd wrote:On August 03 2012 10:36 JingleHell wrote:On August 03 2012 10:34 prplhz wrote:
And we're off.
This is a 23 player game and I will not be able to handle it if there is a 130 page spamfest between a couple of people before night1. Seriously, condense your god damn posting. That said, there's also a couple of new/newer people on the list. You guys remember to post your thoughts and stuff on the game. No one here bites. Do you bite if we ask nicely? Zephirdd, don't you think there's danger of an early bandwagon voting with no cause like that? It's hard to defend yourself against a vote for no reason. FoS Zephirdd What. If you really think an early bandwagon would come from a vote like that, then you are silly. He doesn't even have to defend himself against non-existant accusations. ##unvote
##vote JingleHell Zephirdd's change from one unfounded vote to another tells me that 1. He doesn't care who is lynched 2. He doesn't feel comfortable dealing with pressure, so he fires back on jinglehell counterproductively. Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:02 Zephirdd wrote:
Masoned players should claim IMO.
masons themselves shouldn't unless that would save his life.
toad, why improvise? Are you feeling some kind of pressure that stops you from making a decent post? Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:27 Zephirdd wrote:
What you said makes sense. Mason'd people shouldnt claim :s
wbg mason does sound scary too
Another example of an unsubstantiated position-taking. After a legit response from toad, another switch. He sounds way too meek in the latter quote. Any objections/further evidence backed by specific evidence? Cause I'm leaning toward voting zephirdd. This is one of his only posts that doesn't sound insane. And he makes a weak case on Zeph, then asks if anyone else wants to lead the investigation. Scummy. On August 04 2012 10:16 CountDropula wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 08:59 Zephirdd wrote:On August 04 2012 08:19 CountDropula wrote:On August 03 2012 10:41 Zephirdd wrote:On August 03 2012 10:36 JingleHell wrote:On August 03 2012 10:34 prplhz wrote:
And we're off.
This is a 23 player game and I will not be able to handle it if there is a 130 page spamfest between a couple of people before night1. Seriously, condense your god damn posting. That said, there's also a couple of new/newer people on the list. You guys remember to post your thoughts and stuff on the game. No one here bites. Do you bite if we ask nicely? Zephirdd, don't you think there's danger of an early bandwagon voting with no cause like that? It's hard to defend yourself against a vote for no reason. FoS Zephirdd What. If you really think an early bandwagon would come from a vote like that, then you are silly. He doesn't even have to defend himself against non-existant accusations. ##unvote
##vote JingleHell Zephirdd's change from one unfounded vote to another tells me that 1. He doesn't care who is lynched 2. He doesn't feel comfortable dealing with pressure, so he fires back on jinglehell counterproductively. On August 03 2012 20:02 Zephirdd wrote:
Masoned players should claim IMO.
masons themselves shouldn't unless that would save his life.
toad, why improvise? Are you feeling some kind of pressure that stops you from making a decent post? On August 03 2012 20:27 Zephirdd wrote:
What you said makes sense. Mason'd people shouldnt claim :s
wbg mason does sound scary too
Another example of an unsubstantiated position-taking. After a legit response from toad, another switch. He sounds way too meek in the latter quote. Any objections/further evidence backed by specific evidence? Cause I'm leaning toward voting zephirdd. I just noticed this gem. Finally that paid off. Let me explain it to you. It was 5min into the game. I didn't even bother casting those votes on the voting thread. Why? Because they didn't matter, and I'd change them later anyway. It's not that I don't care, it's just that by creating a stupid vote, you take reactions from people. People like you, who is trying to take something as silly as that as an excuse to vote me, when in fact there is nothing there that makes me scum. I'm not afraid of having opinions change, as no town should be. My opinions did change quickly - and that's pretty damn common for a town player. You are creating bullshit reasoning to jump into the wagon easily. Nice first post scum. ##unvote (talismania)
##vote CountDropula Your burst of emotion is suspicious. If your play in the first 5 min paid off, why are you continuing the same behavior in the very response where you out it to the thread? Isn't it over? You never mentioned my second point in your response. I'm not the only one who is suspicious of you, but I don't know about a bandwagon. Just give everyone some concrete defense, we will determine that you are green, and this won't take up any more time. Calls a burst of emotion suspicious, but most of his later posting is intended to evoke emotional responses. That doesn't sound like a trap, that sounds like forcing a case. On August 05 2012 03:16 CountDropula wrote:
I really think the most important issue for us right now is getting people active. Were giving mafia too much space to hide.
Nevertheless, I'm voting wbg right now though that can change.
For sure watching zeph though, but I need a better case. Complains about activity. Even though he barely posts, and when he does, it's tunneling Zeph. On August 06 2012 07:18 CountDropula wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 06:13 Lazermonkey wrote:On August 06 2012 05:56 CountDropula wrote:On August 06 2012 05:37 Lazermonkey wrote:
Okay, kinda changed my mind and I'm actually starting to like the kill-grush plan. It's impossible to get a read in him anyway if he is going to play like this. Also, a big bonus is that WBG should be somewhat confirmed town if he flips scum.
As for Dropula, his only defense against all of my suspicion was that he was inexperienced and that it was all a mistake. This can be explained in 2 ways.
1. He is inexperienced.
2. He is scum.
If he is town he will most likely be left by scum unless he improves his play by an miraculously amount. If he is scum... Then he is scum.
For all Vigis, I hope you shot these guys tonight, as lynching them tomorrow will not really generate any discussion if they keep on playing like they've done so far.
Which explanation do you like best? Inexperience or scum? Lolwut. Well, since I want to lynch you I'd much rather prefer you to be scum : ). You aren't helping town at all atm. If the only defense you have is the noob card then you must die. Preferably sooner than later. Unless you do some actual scum hunting, which it doesn't look like you are trying to. If you do not get shot tonight you will have 48 hours to convince me and everyone else why you shouldn't be the one to be lynched * hint * make some analysis * hint *. U mad? On August 06 2012 07:37 CountDropula wrote:
Oh ok. Ur mad. Thanks. Another attempt to get an emotional response. Laziness. On August 07 2012 00:56 CountDropula wrote:Zephirdd, it's time. I'm calling you out. This post is not me bashing you as a player. I'm picking up on general trends in your play and and using our interaction as an extended example. It's written in the second person because I'm confident you will crack under the pressure. You know this too, don't you?  Zeph. You don't think I read your previous games before our confrontation on d1? You were all about facts and concrete arguments in normal mini mafia 2. So when I tried acting level-headed and nooby (the profile of someone I think your town-self would be comfortable with) to gauge if you were the same town Zeph from that game, you acted in the exact opposite way town Zeph would have. Everything you have against me is against me personally. Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 08:59 Zephirdd wrote:On August 04 2012 08:19 CountDropula wrote:On August 03 2012 10:41 Zephirdd wrote:On August 03 2012 10:36 JingleHell wrote:On August 03 2012 10:34 prplhz wrote:
And we're off.
This is a 23 player game and I will not be able to handle it if there is a 130 page spamfest between a couple of people before night1. Seriously, condense your god damn posting. That said, there's also a couple of new/newer people on the list. You guys remember to post your thoughts and stuff on the game. No one here bites. Do you bite if we ask nicely? Zephirdd, don't you think there's danger of an early bandwagon voting with no cause like that? It's hard to defend yourself against a vote for no reason. FoS Zephirdd What. If you really think an early bandwagon would come from a vote like that, then you are silly. He doesn't even have to defend himself against non-existant accusations. ##unvote
##vote JingleHell Zephirdd's change from one unfounded vote to another tells me that 1. He doesn't care who is lynched 2. He doesn't feel comfortable dealing with pressure, so he fires back on jinglehell counterproductively. On August 03 2012 20:02 Zephirdd wrote:
Masoned players should claim IMO.
masons themselves shouldn't unless that would save his life.
toad, why improvise? Are you feeling some kind of pressure that stops you from making a decent post? On August 03 2012 20:27 Zephirdd wrote:
What you said makes sense. Mason'd people shouldnt claim :s
wbg mason does sound scary too
Another example of an unsubstantiated position-taking. After a legit response from toad, another switch. He sounds way too meek in the latter quote. Any objections/further evidence backed by specific evidence? Cause I'm leaning toward voting zephirdd. I just noticed this gem. Finally that paid off. Let me explain it to you. It was 5min into the game. I didn't even bother casting those votes on the voting thread. Why? Because they didn't matter, and I'd change them later anyway. It's not that I don't care, it's just that by creating a stupid vote, you take reactions from people. People like you, who is trying to take something as silly as that as an excuse to vote me, when in fact there is nothing there that makes me scum. I'm not afraid of having opinions change, as no town should be. My opinions did change quickly - and that's pretty damn common for a town player. You are creating bullshit reasoning to jump into the wagon easily. Nice first post scum. ##unvote (talismania)
##vote CountDropula Little did you know, I was the one baiting YOU. Your first posts looked suspicious, but I wasn't sure yet, so I tried to elicit some kind of response. You then validated my suspicion. You blinked first and outed your "plan" to the thread. You weren't being patient. Your goal was not to build a case. Your goal was to make an excuse for the sake of your appearance. This whole game, all your posts have done is feed the chaos. You don't focus. Examples. Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 08:59 Zephirdd wrote:
Hm, thats a lot of shit to skim through since my last post. Holy shit. erandorr/wbg logs are just a crapload of fuckity fuck. ghost_404(I see wat you did ther rastaban) was replaced by the one guy that I found to be scum last game. then there is both talismania and prplhz cases, but nobody cared enough about CountDropula I guess.
talismania's filter - summarized nicely by BKEXE - is terrible. He was helpful during the "discussion that everyone can take any instance and still be town" phase, but not after.
I am not sure about prplhz... I guess he is a decent lynch tho, he did go afk out of nowhere, and last time I saw him doing that he was scum. He's not the kind of guy who just "goes" away.
Well, consolidating votes won't hurt, right? I still want to go back to CD on the future. You are saying nothing. Ok now this is interesting. Calling town reads a scummy move, yet posting town reads. Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 05:43 Zephirdd wrote:So I decided to actually read stuff properly now. Talismania first post containing "Glasse" is: On August 03 2012 23:51 talismania wrote:
Erandorr what do you think of Glasse? (That was after hopeless1der voted him) His second post is exactly the same. The next instance is asking toad his instance on 4 people including Glasse On August 04 2012 04:37 talismania wrote:
yep zeph is scummy for exactly why sloosh says. erandorr I thought was for a bit but I don't understand masoning wbg from a scum pov. jinglehell is town, lazer is town, strongandbig is town. toad I thought was scum at first because of the timing of his patented color text post but he's just been being generally rather toady, which is to say he makes really strange (from my perspective) conclusions about what's good in the setup and what's not with strange (again from my perspective) reasoning behind it. Glasse I thought was hilariously obviously scummy. Like so blatant I honestly don't know what to think. Guess I should go dig up another game of his. Then he mirrors a player that has shown a case, throw a bunch of unnecessary town reads(nobody asked that, why do it) and after some fluff he says Glasse was "hilariously obviously scummy" without giving true reasoning(ie. giving a post and explaining why that was a scum post). Then he is rolefishing "for his own amusement". Hmm maybe people weren't wrong about questioning his plans on the beginning. Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 04:45 Zephirdd wrote:
"not contributing"? What do you want me to do, pull bullshit out of my ass the way you are doing?
wbg outing masons is a town move because he believes there is scum in the masons; He is outing them in order to pressure them.
VE is town because his posting lines up with cautious blue that wants to protect his supposedly powerful mason role.
Erandorr is dumb, but I'd say he wouldn't be that dumb as scum.
Talismania's posts made sense for me when he posted them, and I still see them as possible town opinions.
prplhz has been baiting scum with certain actions, while making sense with others. He hasn't caused chaos and is doing a good job in keeping the pace of the thread.
Everything else is a null tell.
I hate defending other people. That's their job. I only defend someone when I feel I have someone better to lynch. I don't.
Deal with it. Your play is getting worse. This last post is swiss cheese. Full of holes. Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 23:37 Zephirdd wrote:'sup folks. Busy sunday yesterday. Didn't read much, so I didn't post. I'm still re-reading some stuff, but I'll post some of my thoughts right now. The obvious one, CountDropula: 1. Uses terrible arguments to jump into my bandwagon: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=352668¤tpage=22#436He is using my random votings from 3-5minutes into the day as reasoning to vote me. He is using my change of instances based on someone's else opinion as reasoning to vote me. Neither of these are scum traits, nor do they push scum agendas.It's entirely reasonable that a town player would change opinions within two posts, given that someone gives the proper arguments. Random voting someone for the sake of random voting, 5 minutes into the day, is pretty much a bait for scum. A real town would look at that and realize it's not a reason to push someone; It means NOTHING action-wise. Yet, he uses it to make my wagon gain strength. Granted, he never voted me; which is even worse: if you have a suspicion on someone, why would you not vote him? 2. Appeal to emotion: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=352668¤tpage=23#459(From Ace's thread on how-to-play-scum: a good scum trait is provoking emotion out of town) I don't know where did he pull that I had a burst of emotion. Besides, why bring it up at all? Again, it's one of these traits that don't determine someone's alignment - in fact, I'd argue it's much more likely that a town player show a burst of emotion than a scum player. Then he pulls some bullshit "You never answered XXX" when I answered everything. And I even said more a few posts later. He never counter-argued. Then he calls for some "concrete defense" when he nevers says what about my defense is not concrete. Simply put, he is throwing loaded(and VERY loaded) sentences to try and break me down. How the f* does someone give a "concrete defense" on this game? Fucking no one can do that without being an Innocent Child or confirmed-town-dayvig. There is also these posts: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=352668¤tpage=40#800http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=352668¤tpage=41#802These posts have no purpose except bringing emotion into the table and - hopefully for him - numbing people's judgement. This is pretty much a scum move. 3. Hypocrisy, blending in: On August 05 2012 03:16 CountDropula wrote:
I really think the most important issue for us right now is getting people active. Were giving mafia too much space to hide.
Nevertheless, I'm voting wbg right now though that can change.
For sure watching zeph though, but I need a better case. This makes him look good right, he is calling for people to post... He has two freakingly terrible posts that only talk about one subject and is calling for people to be activeThat's trying to blend in without putting effort into the game. He is a lurker himself and is calling lurkers out. The more he post, the scummier he looks to me. Well, his first post is red as fuck already, but he is just being worse over time. So yeah, I'll keep reading stuff but my vote is on him already. ##Vote CountDropulaPlease don't ignore this guy. This is such a complete contradiction of your town play that it's absolutely ridiculous. Here is a post from normal mini mafia II. Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 13:12 Zephirdd wrote:On July 07 2012 13:04 Sinensis wrote:On July 07 2012 12:58 Zephirdd wrote:On July 07 2012 12:42 Sinensis wrote:
Okay, I'm caught up:
sloosh, what are you doing? You vote wiggles with no explanation, people call you out for it, you change your vote to me with no explanation at first, people call you out for it, then your explanation is that I was your first suspicion (even though you randomly voted wiggles first?) because my posting is mechanical? My posting is mechanical and that's why I'm scummy, maybe you could elaborate on that. Even though you seem to have changed your mind again to prplhz before I responded to you. Are you just jumping on the easiest target every time? What's the deal?
Prplhz shouldn't be lynched today. No way in hell. He's gotten too much negative attention from too many people, it seems likely to me mafia is pushing for the easy lynch against an aggressive player. And why wouldn't they? prplhz isn't playing as good or as friendly as he could be. This is the last time I defend him against the rest of the angry mob unless he stops with the "LOL SCUM LOL."
I am going to go with gut for my day one vote. Zephirdd's posting is the scummiest right now in my opinion. He spends a lot of his time telling other, presumably town players, how to play. Something mafia can't seem to resist doing in most of the games I play. He is stating mostly FACTS (people talking like they know something for certain are suspicious because only mafia have FACTS) and very little speculation.
As for everyone who is suspicious of me for lurking, you're right, it's suspicious, my bad. I work during the day (USEAST) and can't post till night usually. Expect my posts then, like I'm doing now. If anyone has any questions for me now is a good time I will be around.
##vote: Zephirdd Alright, there are a couple of wrong things here. 1. Calls sloosh out, yet considers me the scummiest target 2. Says prplhz has gotten too much negative attention. Can you tell me it is possible to give him a positive trait to his play? No you can't. Because there is NO positive trait to his play so far. He's gotten a lot of negative attention because that's what his play warrants - and you agree with this on your very last sentence. In fact, his lynch has actually gotten an awfully lot of resistance, more than I would like. 3. Reasoning for me being scum is bullshit and does not warrant a vote. I posted an awful lot for day 1 this game, so if you want to point out specific points in my play, do it and I'll counter anything you have. I've stated things with certainty, because that's what I believe to be true. Stating things as FACTS means being certain of yourself. Maybe they are wrong later, who cares. What's important is that I'm decisive in what I say, and I should be held accountable to that later. Also, I love how it took you 39mins to arrive at the conclusion that I am scum, when you are behind 10 pages. Will want to hear more from you. 1. Well, at least you can read. 2. I stand by what I said. 3. "Your reason is bullshit because it's bullshit." Good job. As I said, I posted an awfully lot. Point me what is scummy specifically, and I'll point out why it is not scummy. Additionally, I added reasoning for stating things with certainty. That alone should show why it's a bad argument to vote me for that. Also, I just realized I kinda read your third paragraph wrongly. I thought you were complaining that I was posting with certainty, but you're complaining that I am mostly stating "facts" instead of "speculation". Guess what, speculating stuff is terrible =_= Oh I think you are mafia oh maybe you are town! No. I look at what people post, and define scum or town according to what they do. Then, I state a FACT and use it to prove that someone is SCUM. In fact, my spreadsheet right now only has facts, and these facts help me determine an alignment. Playing under speculations is a bad way to play imo. On July 07 2012 13:08 Sinensis wrote:
Yeah, and I don't think he'd post like that as mafia. I don't think anyone would. I don't know how else you want me to explain it to you but I believe what I believe and if you take a look at my history in TL games, it's usually pretty hard to change my mind once I've made it up. Won't even bother rebutting then :| No compulsion to go crazy in response to suspicion because you are town in this game. In Mad Men, you say that nothing is concrete because you don't want it to be. You thrive on chaos. And another one from normal mini. Note the importance he places on facts. Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 13:50 Zephirdd wrote:I knew you'd go quote a bunch of stuff unrelated to what we were talking about and ennumerate them as bolded FACTS WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT WHAT WAHT AWHTAW THAW HT ATA THSDDS What the fuck. How. What. I need a break. Look. Can you define a fact in simple terms? I can: it's something that can't be denied. I posted facts. I literally pointed the obvious. Things that cannot be denied. These things made me infer that someone is scum - scumhuntingI have not seen you pointing out facts about me. I have not seen you pointing out things that can't be denied, specifically, the way I'm doing to an actual candidate. Do you think your vote on me has any chance of gaining any traction to form into a lynch? If you think so, I think you are wrong because your case is substantially weak when compared to what I point out about the actual candidate. If you don't think so, then why are you even bothering with me? I need a break. I'll grab some beer. Watch EVO. and go to sleep. Don't wait my answers until tomorrow at ~00KST(which should be noon for me). Day and night. All you are posting in this game is speculative, your case against me is not complete and irrefutable - actually it's the opposite since its based on so little. Town Zeph would never have done this. This is expected from a lazy scum case. Same thing with that "minicase" on talismania. It's well below the standard of your previous town game. You voted me at 8.59 August 4. I had one post at the time. one. Ever since then you've been pushing me as scum. How can you draw a conclusion like that from nothing? You know something we don't, and you were trying to create a distraction from more relevant issues. If you respond with a crazy belligerent post you just lynched yourself. Honestly you are dead with any response you make, because you are so irredeemably bad at playing scum that you will make a mistake and I will pick you apart with it. Now who's the noob scum? Guys, don't bury this post. Please give it serious thought, cause I've got a really strong read on this guy. If I'm wrong about this, I deserve to be lynched. Get this guy into the spotlight and he will crack. Please. Lets lynch Zephirdd and start killing mafia. Posts a giant read on Zeph, but a lot of it boils down to "baiting" emotional responses. Baiting an emotional response is a scum move, not a town move. An emotional response to a real case is one thing, but this is the first time he actually did anything besides trying to "bait" Zeph. After this, he stops analysis in favor of his "scumpuppet" horse shit, and continues to tunnel based purely off of the same mediocre evidence.
I'm strongly convinced we're dealing with CountDropula the scum here. However, even if I'm right and he flips red, I don't think that's indicative either way on Zeph, due to the nature of his "case" it could just as easily be an effort to discredit a real case against Zeph.
##Vote CountDropula
|
EPT
