|
|
|
Ah, definitely. I forgot to add "GL and HF" too. :D
It's highly essential for our first time, I'm sure.
|
On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all.
Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/
|
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky.
|
On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all !
Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol
|
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum!
|
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself.
On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive.
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
|
On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second  Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis
"If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating.
On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad?
Exhibit A.
|
On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good.
I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Lucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in.
|
On April 16 2011 10:42 VarpuliS wrote:He never accused misfit. Misfit accused him. Believe me, I've read every one of his posts. I love the hypocrisy here. a few short posts ago, you defended your changing opinion with Show nested quote + I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view Then, when Zorkmid comes through and accuses you based off of what he sees, then changes his suspicions based off of new evidence (twice), you say that he's scum because he changes his mind a little. Show nested quote +
I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that... Misfit, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid?... To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in.
So, you change your mind, and you're not scum. He does the same, yet he is scum? "great" logic... Despite this, Zorkmid still seems pretty suspicious. Not sure whether or not this is just two townies arguing or if one of you is actually scum. For now, I'll back down. To reiterate, I'm trying to force activity, not bandwagon the first guy who seems suspicious. ## Unvote Shcoleosis
I'm only calling it like I see it. I changed my mind about how I believed the lynching should go, not about who I particularly thought was mafia scum.
|
On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action.
|
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj
|
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid.
|
On April 18 2011 01:11 VarpuliS wrote:
oh, maybe it was just Zorkmid asking for my opinion. oh well. A post-by-post of Shcoleosis would be very useful, Forumite. I might reconsider my suspicion, but right now her defense isn't adequate for me.
Hi. Please explain to me how my defense isn't adequate. Maybe then I can prove to you how I couldn't possibly be mafia. From what I see, everyone is still hung up on my first two posts. I've made posts since then, and I'm trying to contribute as much as I can when I can without being accused for being suspicious.
|
On April 18 2011 01:56 VarpuliS wrote:
If you'd like my analysis, i'll give you my analysis. Post-by-post, the same way I analysed you the first time.
If you think I'm scum, give some evidence. if you're demanding evidence from me, I'll demand evidence from you. Good luck finding it.
Lets see if I can get my analysis posted before Forumite does...
No need to get defensive, Varpulis. I'm only stating that there's a chance that anyone could be scum despite how much they contribute, admit, or lurk.
|
On April 18 2011 02:52 VarpuliS wrote:Shcoleosis First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again. + Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +On April 16 2011 08:05 VarpuliS wrote:...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts. First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:17 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all. Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/ This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange. This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum. Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level. Finally, we've got lucky number 3: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 13:01 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all ! Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do: - unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep - mafia -because they're trying to blend in I don't want either in my town come lategame. Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her. ## Vote Shcoleosis and we now pick up with the next post she writes: Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 08:55 Shcoleosis wrote:
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum! This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line). The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum." According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses. Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post: Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie. Moving on. Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum. Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense. In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj) Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 10:19 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good. I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in. Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book. This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid. Show nested quote +On April 16 2011 11:26 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action. This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please? This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me. Show nested quote +On April 17 2011 01:44 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument. This brings us to the last post to be analyzed. Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid. I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior. The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered.
tl;dr
Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that.
Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go.
|
On April 18 2011 06:05 Forumite wrote:
VarpoliS AND Shcoleosis are both defeatists?
I wouldn't say that exactly. Sometimes it's hard to sense sarcasm through text. Just so you know, I was being very sarcastic. I don't/can't speak for Varpolis, though.
|
On April 18 2011 04:23 VarpuliS wrote:
Well, If you think that I'm scum, there's probably nothing that I can do to dispel your suspicion. I'm Vanilla town. I've got no powers that I need to protect, only my analysis that will be ignored and discredited if everybody thinks that i'm scum.
I am confident that I've got at least one scum in my list of suspects. A townie for a mafia is a good trade in my book.
In my opinion, there's no doubt that Shcoleosis is a superior choice for the day 2 lynch. I'm sure that some people agree with me. I'm sure that others don't.
I urge you to all to vote for Shcoleosis. I've got multiple analyses to cite as to why. Forumite's got one "mistake" which was simply a miscommunication.
This feels a lot like shoving someone in front of you to dodge a bullet that was obviously meant for you.
|
On April 18 2011 06:15 VarpuliS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:05 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 18 2011 02:52 VarpuliS wrote:Shcoleosis First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again. + Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +On April 16 2011 08:05 VarpuliS wrote:...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts. First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:17 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all. Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/ This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange. This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum. Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level. Finally, we've got lucky number 3: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 13:01 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all ! Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do: - unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep - mafia -because they're trying to blend in I don't want either in my town come lategame. Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her. ## Vote Shcoleosis and we now pick up with the next post she writes: On April 16 2011 08:55 Shcoleosis wrote:
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum! This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line). The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum." According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses. Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post: On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie. Moving on. Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum. On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense. In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj) On April 16 2011 10:19 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good. I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in. Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book. This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid. On April 16 2011 11:26 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action. This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please? This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me. On April 17 2011 01:44 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument. This brings us to the last post to be analyzed. On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid. I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior. The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered. tl;dr Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that. Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go. Forumite, you think I'm mafia when we've got scum posting shit like this? And you said I was giving up on the game? I do think that Shcoleosis is mafia. Why don't we lynch her? It seems to me that she knows that I'm town, saw my defense, and realized that it might work. So she parroted it. Even if she isn't mafia --which I doubt-- She's not even reading the analysis people are posting. I don't want somebody like that on my team come LYLO. This bullshit about me being mafia because i'm the most pro-town player in this game is ridiculous. If I were scum, why would I provide all these tools for the town to use? Why would i make so many posts for people to analyze? Compare me to Shcoleosis. I ask you all now to be honest. Who seems more scummy?
Correction: I'm not reading YOUR long-winded analysis. I'm pretty embarrassed for you because you're wasting your time. A lot of it.
|
On April 18 2011 06:22 VarpuliS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:17 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 18 2011 06:15 VarpuliS wrote:On April 18 2011 06:05 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 18 2011 02:52 VarpuliS wrote:Shcoleosis First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again. + Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +On April 16 2011 08:05 VarpuliS wrote:...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts. First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:17 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all. Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/ This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange. This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum. Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level. Finally, we've got lucky number 3: Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 13:01 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky. Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all ! Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do: - unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep - mafia -because they're trying to blend in I don't want either in my town come lategame. Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her. ## Vote Shcoleosis and we now pick up with the next post she writes: On April 16 2011 08:55 Shcoleosis wrote:
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum! This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line). The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum." According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses. Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post: On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie. Moving on. Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum. On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter: In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person. On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive. Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them. I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense. In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj) On April 16 2011 10:19 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself.
[quote]
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie. Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue. ##Vote Scheleosis "If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating. On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad? Exhibit A. There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good. I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in. Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book. This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid. On April 16 2011 11:26 Shcoleosis wrote:On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action. This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please? This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me. On April 17 2011 01:44 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument. This brings us to the last post to be analyzed. On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid. I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior. The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered. tl;dr Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that. Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go. Forumite, you think I'm mafia when we've got scum posting shit like this? And you said I was giving up on the game? I do think that Shcoleosis is mafia. Why don't we lynch her? It seems to me that she knows that I'm town, saw my defense, and realized that it might work. So she parroted it. Even if she isn't mafia --which I doubt-- She's not even reading the analysis people are posting. I don't want somebody like that on my team come LYLO. This bullshit about me being mafia because i'm the most pro-town player in this game is ridiculous. If I were scum, why would I provide all these tools for the town to use? Why would i make so many posts for people to analyze? Compare me to Shcoleosis. I ask you all now to be honest. Who seems more scummy? Correction: I'm not reading YOUR long-winded analysis. I'm pretty embarrassed for you because you're wasting your time. A lot of it. ninja'd while I wrote my last post. wow... just... wow. You seem less pro-town with every post you make. I hope others see this as well. At this point you don't even have to be scum, I still think you'd make a nice lynch target.
less pro-town? Nope. You made an accusation about ME which I know and feel is not true, therefore I did not care to read it. I have no problems saying that. As for every other person you analyzed, you did a pretty good job of doing so. You know, you are starting to sound a lot like Zorkmid now....you just want to lynch me because you don't like me or my ideas. Sucks to be me, right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
