EPTStudent Mafia (New/Newish players welcome)
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
| ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
On December 03 2011 09:10 xsksc wrote: There's a few people with 1-3 posts, are you guys smurfs or something? Not a smurf, just new. Never played forum mafia. Created an account a while ago to keep up with the LR threads easier. No posts since I didn't see the point in participating in that spam storm. This on the other hand might be something worth participating in. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
On policies: Lynch all liars and Lynch all lurkers are useful tools for hunting scum and promoting valid town discussion. Some random points: On December 04 2011 20:38 ElectricBlack wrote: Breadcrumbs aren't useful. Nothing about breadcrumbs confirms the person performing them. There is nothing that stops the mafia from having an elaborately thought out claim they've breadcrumbed since day one. Do not attempt to use breadcrumbs to confirm anything. Breadcrumbs alone can't confirm a claim, but they can still be useful in analyzing which claimant is the real one. Depending on who the claimants checked, whether any of those checks flipped is still valid information to use. Back to reading the thread, more thoughts later. Also feel free to ask me anything, I'll be happy to discuss stuff that's not already beaten to death. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
On December 04 2011 23:05 Tunkeg wrote: All right then: Who do you consider the most scummiest and who is the most townie thus far? Why? Of those who've actually posted BroodKingEXE reads a bit scummy to me. He has only offered some comments about policy and made a lot of apologies. That alone doesn't make him scum, but it's something. ey215 reads town to me. He defended himself well and raised some valid concerns while doing so. Good thing it seems most of the town isn't too intimidated by Blazinghand's style. I'd also lean towards town on Blazinghand and you at this point. That's simply for actively pushing discussion other than policy. That's too easy easy a topic for the mafia to take part in. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
On December 05 2011 04:49 ey215 wrote: Ok, just got back to the thread and I'll respond to things as I see them. I agree that we've reached a consensus to get rid of a lurker. That means lurkers, it's your time to step up and contribute. Here you seem to state that we should get rid of a lurker. That seems to imply lynching, though it's not specified. Am I just misreading here? On December 05 2011 07:00 ey215 wrote: No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. And here you're both arguing against a lurker lynch and for it? I disagree with you on lynching a lurker in the current situation. I don't really even think we have real lurkers at this point. There are already enough posts to get reads on people, and there will be more before the lynch. Of course activity can still be a factor in the evaluation. On December 05 2011 06:25 jaybrundage wrote: My question is what do you think of adam Bbyte One policy post and one (drunken?  ) response to some finger pointing isn't too much to go on.His response is somewhat accusatory, but he gives seemingly straight answers to the questions. Not a scum read for me, but of course we're waiting to hear more from him. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
He has been active (very much so actually), but what has he contributed? Some policy discussion, a bit of finger pointing (mostly to spark activity), some fluff. Mostly he has been following other people's ideas, not making his own calls. All of this is something scum could easily do with very little risk. Then there are a couple of posts of light analysis. His "reads post" sums it up best: + Show Spoiler + On December 05 2011 03:29 Velinath wrote: Whee, time to copy in my reads. Keeping a spreadsheet is going to be quite helpful, I think. Blazinghand: Feels very Townie to me. Posting reasonable content and post analysis already. Willing to take actions on his stances. Softclaimed Vanilla Townie http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291067¤tpage=8#152 Bringing lurkers out, which can ONLY help town. I approve. Call it 90% town. Also, his discussion with ey215 looked good, and convinced me further of his townieness. BroodKingEXE: Empty post. Worries me.Feels scummy but could be a noob. Amend: Six posts that don't sit right with me, but again, could be new player. xkskc: Leaning town for now. Started our policy discussion. Discussion is good. While he disagrees with BH's methods, I clearly feel like he's playing a townie game right now. Different methodolgy, same goal. To note, he pointed out that there may be mafia in the group leadership., which should be something to keep in mind. Question is whether it's sowing suspicion or genuine pro-town, and I haven't figured that out yet. xtfftc: Null read. He argued against LAL and LALurkers, and I don't wanna go with that. Let's look again once he posts again. (Amend: Looked through his filter to update this post, and I really liked his post here. Still a null read, but this feels positive to me.) ey215: Pointed out some good things. He sees Blazinghand's methods as creating tension within the town, and that's fine - he's entitled to opinion. Like xkskc, he disagrees with methods but seems to be working towards the same goal. Their discussion, while heated, really brought out to me that they both seem very town-aligned, and willing to take positions and defend them. EB: Makes good points. At this point I'm leaning town, simply because he's pro-discussion this early. That said I'd love to see more posts here. Tunkeg: Posted his reads, and is encouraging discussion. I think this is a good thing, and might peg him as one of the influential voices in the town soon. Largely a null read, but I'm starting to lean town. BByte: I'm not totally impressed yet. One post about breadcrumbs (which is more about the game in general than a content post) and one post about a couple of the players. That post was good, and I agree that we shouldn't be intimidated by one person, but I'd like to see more. jaybrundage: Neutral for now, but a lack of content disturbs me. We've still got like 30 hours though. Adam4167: Two posts, neither of which hugely impress me. I liked how he went through and stated a clear opinion on BH's play. While I disagree with his opinion, I think that the way he put things is pro-town in that post. I'd love to see more content here, but so far looks pretty good. Hassybaby: Disagrees with early targets, and I can see why. I think he is overly defensive towards Tunkeg - not an OMGUS vote, but definitely that kind of idea. Not sure what to think, but this early just a null read. Grackaroni: Posted reads, but before that there's a bunch of policy posts. Not that I haven't made a ton of policy posts too, but I'll wait for more content. Null read. How does half town, half null reads with a couple of unsures thrown in help the town in any way? Even those unsure reads are off people who have been previously called out by others. Everything seems very non-committal. #Vote Velinath | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
Now without directly saying anything about Ey215's alignment it looks a lot like you've flip-flopped on your opinion of him but I'm not sure if what you posted was intending to say that he was scum. For the record, we have lurkers and right now you are giving a lot less content than most of the town.Please tell me you're strongest town reads and people who you think are acting anti-town. On ey215: I was simply trying to understand what he meant. Probably should have just read more carefully. I did however want to say that I don't think lurker lynching is optimal in this situation. I've earlier given a few thoughts about who I think could be town. The situation hasn't changed much. I'm not going to do a list of my possible town reads since that doesn't really add anything to the discussion. Anyone can easily list town reads and appear active -- including scum. As for my strongest scum read, see my previous post. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
| ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
On December 05 2011 09:38 Grackaroni wrote: @BByte you didnt vote correctly. you need 2 ## or Zbot wont pick it up. Thanks! ##Vote Venilath | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
##Vote Velinath | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
On December 05 2011 12:24 Velinath wrote: Why should I be lynched? What don't you like about the EB or Adam4167 cases, if anything? He said he'd post thoughts on the lynch discussion but I haven't heard anything yet (maybe a time zone thing, but we've talked a lot since his last post and he's been silent). On December 05 2011 12:48 jaybrundage wrote: Also i would like your input on the other cases Bbyte and why they dont appeal to you as much The cases on Adam4167 and ElectricBlack look good now. However, both of them have promised to post their analysis and I'd expect that to change the situation. ElectricBlack's reaction seemed a bit rash but not necessarily scummy to me. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
First note: There's a reason a day lasts 48 hours. The first vote on me was made 9 hours ago, roughly 10 hours before the lynch deadline. Second note: I stand by my earlier statement: There are no real lurkers in this game. Instead of voting based on activity, I'd prefer a vote based on the actual content of the posts. For the people who are voting me: In case there are any specific questions that you'd like for me to answer, please post them and I'll give what answers I can. Whether my answers will be enough to convince you to vote someone else is up to you. On December 06 2011 00:31 Velinath wrote: Alright, that's fair Grack - but let's look at BByte. He posts once a few times 17 hours ago, comes back 8 hours ago to post one thing. He states in the thread that he'd post thoughts if needed, but he hasn't done that - a couple sentences here or there. I did however state that I'd be extremely busy with work today. It's only 9 hours since the first vote on me. That's not really enough time to expect someone to be able to answer. On December 06 2011 03:35 Blazinghand wrote: As you can see, he's got a vote on velinath, and hasn't made a serious argument. Velinath's arguments on his scumlist might have been vague, but since then, velinath has made a liberal outpouring of posts and BByte remains silent. I don't know who's mafia, but I know we need more commitment than that out of our townies, and BByte's soft case and small vote count make it seem like he's hiding something. How exactly is my vote suspicious? I posted my read (which was against pretty much everyone else, is that mafia behavior?) and I perhaps didn't articulate my case as well as I should have, but what am I hiding? For my activity see above and my previous posts. I also find weird from a quick skim through the posts since the last I've read the thread that no one has actually even commented on the actual content of my accusation on Velinath. What do people think about his posting, especially up to the point I accused him? Was / am I sure he's scum? No, but at least my vote was based on a read instead of a non-read. The post I made about the case was perhaps "half-assed" in hindsight. I did spend a lot of time reading and analyzing, but not enough time in forming my case to a coherent post. Also I didn't use nearly enough quotes. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
1. If I was simply lurking / pretending to be AFK, wouldn't I have come around to post something a bit earlier (the vote is now 7-2)? 2. The votes seem to have moved pretty quickly here. Whether I get lynched or not I'd strongly suggest looking at the voting pattern to see if someone voting for me comes up looking scummy. On the other hand this vote disparity allows scum to even vote for someone else than me to claim town cred later, that's something to keep in mind as well. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
I've tried to post honestly and openly. What I've said so far I still think is pro-town. Apart from that, I'd like the town to note two additional people: Blazinghand: He has been very active and vocal so far. That paints him as town. However, he could have made all the posts nearly as easily if he were scum. To the townies: Please hold him up to the high standard he has presented so far. He still might be scum, just well hidden in plain sight. He was also the second guy to vote for my lynch. xtfftc: Some scum vibes off him, not enough time to post an actual case. | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
| ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
 | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
Unfortunately I couldn't make a bigger contribution in the game. I was caught by a perfect (RL) storm towards the end of Day 1. And while I may not agree with all that happened, I certainly don't blame anyone but myself for getting lynched. I was going for a strict no-fluff style, trying to say something meaningful in every post. Unfortunately my low post count + making a controversial case and not being around to defend it (or agree to drop it more likely) did me in. Good thing at least something good came out of my lynch (BH's initial read on jay). And day 1 was really active, so lynching someone who contributed rather little makes some sense. Of topics discussed in the observer QT (might as well continue here if needed?): I don't think I'll play in another game here too soon. At least I'd have to clear two weeks in my calendar first + make some time in the morning to comment on what the US players have posted. I also spent way too much time at work thinking about the game. Maybe I'll take a vacation to play some more mafia. Thanks to syllogism for coaching! I got quite a few practical tips on how to actually play / what to do in various situations. The stickies are pretty good for learning about tactics and how to read people, but it'd be hard to get started in your first game based on just those. Having someone to discuss things with is definitely a great help. And thanks to Zona and Forumite for hosting! | ||
|
BByte
Finland49 Posts
On December 15 2011 19:20 Palmar wrote: Did you like having a veteran in the newbie game? Would you prefer the veteran did not smurf? Would you prefer giving both factions a veteran? I think overall having a veteran in the game is a good idea. In this game it probably wasn't actually needed because there was a lot of quality discussion from the start, but that wasn't guaranteed pre-game. Making sure everything is balanced is of course something of a concern. I think smurfing is better than not. The newbies are not very likely to catch it too quickly, but the coaches might. I'm not entirely sure how the information would come into play then. The only problem I see with giving mafia a veteran is that if the veterans identify each other too easily then Day 1 could be spent just deciding on which one to lynch. Maybe it'd work a bit better in a larger game, with more vets thrown in? I don't think giving mafia a veteran is in itself a huge benefit compared to having a good scum player coach them. One thing I wasn't entirely sure of was how to handle discussing specific players with my coach. With coaches coaching more than one town player, they inherently have more information about the game than you do. How should you react to any mention of a specific player in the discussion, or for example advice regarding pushing a case against a player (who just might be another townie your coach is also helping)? Edit: Or am I wrong about there being multiple town players per coach? I think I at least read an earlier game where that was the case and assumed the same was true here. | ||
| ||
