EPTMr. Wiggles Mini Mafia I
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On seph: On December 23 2011 13:35 sephirotharg wrote: For myself, I've never played mafia here on TL, but I've played a small amount on some other forums. I'm not skilled, but it's still fun  As for policy lynches, I'm against Lynch All Liars, only because it tends to lead to players narrowing their focuses too much - lynching someone, even if they are a liar, may not be the best idea for the town. And Lynch All Lurkers is also a bad idea, not the least because at times I am one . Same reason as before, with the added rationale that life gets in the way sometimes - papers, work, family and such all happen, and sometimes you can't devote the time necessary.With that said, doing some estimation, worst case scenario (assuming bad lynches and vig kills, with one vig, as well as all mafia kills), we have until day 3 to flip a red. Keeping that in mind, what say the people about a day 1 lynch? Interesting how the seph is against policy lynches, as they could be easily used as a case on him. Self admitting lurking, then later claims he did this on purpose to see if it would arouse attention? Wat? Note how this post really doesn't advance discussion, especially his last paragraph; it sounds longer he is being analytical with his reasoning but all he is doing is stating the obvious, that we need day 1 lynch is a forgone conclusion. However this I'd still early the day, seph gets more suspicious/weird as we move on. On December 24 2011 03:25 sephirotharg wrote: Well, I'm a bit surprised this didn't happen faster. Shraft, what do you want me to say? I merely made a comment based on my tendencies - if anything, explicitly stating how I play is pro-town. Add to my case the fact that I've already acted pro-town, in generating discussion with the last part of my first post, and I'm not sure how you can justify voting for me. Acting smug about doing something scummy, as though you're being actually a super sneaky pro-town? Seems like Betty poor backpedaling to me. Pointing out your negative tendencies just emphasizes that you are anti town, but trying to present it as though its no big deal. there is little reason to state this from a town perspective; you are just giving yourself an excuse for bad play and/or scum play. I and others already noted that you haven't generated any good discussion, so at this point your case is looking worse. On December 24 2011 03:38 sephirotharg wrote: RE: GiygaS No, you misinterpreted my post - I expected somebody to notice that part about me lurking long before they did - I didn't expect to get votes so early! You see, mafia will tend to push for a mis-lynch day 1 - and I don't mind putting myself out there as a target, if it lures them out of hiding. So, anyone who has pushed for lynching me, consider yourself on notice. More backpedaling with the justification for lurking. Very faulty logic, trying to claim people who are calling out your poor behavior are suspicious... For noticing that you are highly suspicious? No one is buying it. At this point I suspect this was a terribad GF gambit. On December 24 2011 08:14 sephirotharg wrote: Because I don't desire to appear mafia? If I'm town, the last thing I'd want to do is contradict myself, so it seems natural to me to re-read my posts. This sealed the case for me. Seph's defenses have positively become shorter and shadier. If your were town, your would have no reason to fear being scrutinized for bullshit unless a) you're a terribad townie who is disrupting play, or b) scummy scum. There is little backing up what you have said. Voting for self = just plain weird, shows that you don't have a case on ANYONE else, if you had any way to defend yourself, your vote and your reasoning would be the way... And you have shown that you have no defense. that, coupled with your defeatist mentality means you're either faulty townie with a lynch, or scum. ##Vote sephirotharg | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On December 24 2011 09:47 Misder wrote: The sephirotharg bandwagon is pretty stupid imo. I think it's pretty clear that he's noobtelling. ##Vote: jaybrundage Although early, not saying anything really in his two posts. Also seems to want to jump on the easy bandwagon. Compared to his posts in Student Mafia, pretty similar style. I don't follow, you are invoking meta off of two posts? State a stronger case please on jay, or why we shouldn't off seph. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
@Adam On December 24 2011 13:27 sephirotharg wrote: Honestly, you're reading too much into it. I actually am not skilled at this game (as you can tell), and to be honest there are situations where one might want one's opinion devalued, if one is a power role for example and desires to be less of a target. I'm not actuated by that motive in this particular case; I'm just a relative noob at mafia, and I said so in an attempt to be honest, You're saying that we are reading too much into your words when this is Mafia, a game where the main way to find scum is to find suspicious/twisted comments. If someone wants to scumhunt, as you claim your "I'm a lurker" comment was meant to be, they don't first seek to devalue their opinion... you say that you are a noob to wiggle out of scrutiny... this is classic scum play. This critique of me stems from your misunderstanding of my original post. I have the time to play, I am actively playing, not lurking, and therefore my play style is rather pro-town. If I were to lurk, then my play style would be more mafia oriented - that is both what I contend now and what I meant in my other post. It's too simple to divide up non-lurking vs. lurking into pro-town vs. mafia play. You said it yourself, blues might want to fly under the radar, lurk a bit, don't post rabidly; you are trying to present a dichotomy, saying that "because I am active, it shows that I am pro-town!", but this really doesn't make sense. Your play is NOT pro-town... you are only active because you are flustered, trying to defend yourself, without contributing anything towards scumhunting. As I've explained earlier, voting for myself as a placeholder was merely because I didn't want to expose any of my feelings on other players at that time - I prefer to reserve my judgments for later on. The contradictory statement was merely me saying that I didn't want votes on myself, then later in the same post saying that I was watching anyone who voted for me. After reading it over, I realized it sounded dumb and contradictory, so I changed it. Re-read both posts for yourself if you don't believe me. Once again you said yourself that you are being active this game... yet you feel the need to put a placeholder vote so that you won't get modkilled or something? Why not instead use your time to post a breakdown of someone's filter and then put your vote on THAT person? contradiction after contradiction... saying "I prefer to reserve my judgements" is not reason enough to remain aloof. Right now, we are all asking you not for just defense, but for who you think is scum, because if you are not scum as you claim, there must be people you are suspicious of. I announced my intentions to go on a trip I'd planned for a few days - not to lurk. My message to Shraft was rather dumb, thinking over it. It came out all wrong, and I'm sorry. "I'm sorry", really? How is being apologetic now supposed to make up for contradictions made in the past? Apologizing without justifying is just a cop-out, I'm sorry. Is that an "I'm sorry that I am sounding all contradictory and strange, accusing people of attacking me for my weird play", or "I'm sorry that you homed in on my scummy play?" I'm leaning towards the latter. @Me, EchelonTee On December 24 2011 14:00 sephirotharg wrote: Again, I did not admit to lurking this game, merely stated that sometimes I play that way. This game is the opposite for me. And frankly, self-preservation is a natural instinct - who wouldn't be against something that could be used to kill them? We were speaking in the theoretical, and my thoughts generally are against both types of policy lynch, for reasons that encompass both self-preservation and other thoughts about their helpfulness. Stating that sometimes you play that way is giving yourself a way out if you had decided to lurk. You also seem to think that having a high post count means you are being active and pro-town; look at your own filter; you had essentially posted nil until people started getting all suspicious of your scumtastic first post. As I said before, posting a lot is beneficial to town, but not if you are not spending any of those posts scumhunting. Instead you are talking about theoretical scenarios that may or may not happen in this game, aka discussing nothing, nothing at all. No. They are suspicious for pushing for a mis-lynch - as lynching me surely would be. Noticing the line about lurking is exactly what I intended to be noticed, in the hopes of having some of the mafia pursue what seems like an easy lynch. I was attempting to scumhunt, and it didn't work quite as I hoped. No, actually, people being suspicious towards you is a resonable conclusion due to the many inconsistencies people have pointed out; you look like scum. Should we think you are doing a weird ass meta-game pull, looking scum so scum will come out, or should we think that you are simply scum? Occam's Razor: choose the hypothesis that makes the least assumptions. In this case, you looking like scum is the simplest conclusion. @Grackaroni On December 24 2011 14:21 sephirotharg wrote: At the risk of sounding pretentious, I give you this quote: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines" - Ralph Waldo Emerson. Relying on consistency as your argument is weak - it discounts the illogic that pervades the human mind. Okay, done with that rant. ...inconsistency is the hallmark of a mafioso. They spout some opinions of theirs, but under pressure or when they want to push a lynch on a hapless townie, their agenda shines through. invoking Emerson here doesn't make any sense in this context tbh: he is saying don't be FOOLISH in your consistency... that doesn't mean that focusing on consistency is a weak argument. Being inconsistent, as you have been, allows one to pursue their own agenda despite previous statements said. I can think of several roles in which it would be beneficial - perhaps not in this game, but they do exist. Semantics aside, I never said that I would not ever share my thoughts, merely that I wanted to hold them for a more opportune time. With nearly a day left, that time is not now. And my defense is this post, as well as several others. You are arguing semantics when you should be arguing scumhunting. Talking about theoretical situations where your play is pro-town does not mean that now you are being pro-town; you are being anti-town by NOT posting your thoughts on other players. Your defense is weak sorry, but that is not even what people are concerned about... you don't have a case on anyone else. Either you have some obscure reasoning for not posting a scumlist, or, more likely, you don't want to out your mafia buddies. The bottom line is this: I am not a mafia. (shades of Nixon, eh?) Oh, and I am Jesus. In all seriousness, all you have been doing is saying "I'm not mafia, honest guys!" in various permutations. I'm not buying it, sorry. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
My thoughts at this point are in line with Cyber's, that at least some of the sheep voting that happened is suspicious. Personally I have my eyes on Shraft. On December 24 2011 02:17 Shraft wrote: The more I think about it, the more I dislike sephirotharg's post. I am going to put my vote on him until I hear what he has to say. ##Vote sephirotharg After Dirk has started a case on seph, Shraft follows up with what looks like a pretty normal pressure vote; put some heat on the suspicious fellow to generate discussion, nothing wrong with that. Though he doesn't post any analysis on this, nor in his subsequent posts, that's not necessarily a red flag at this early stage in the game. However, after others have made their cases on jay and seph, he says: On December 24 2011 19:33 Shraft wrote: I'm going to read through his filter once again when I get back and try to be as objective as possible. Then I'll decide if my suspicion toward him was justified or not. But instead of coming back and posting anything from seph's filter that he finds scummy, all he says is: On December 25 2011 07:29 Shraft wrote: All right, just read through the last two pages. I still think that seph has a higher chance of flipping red than jay. At first glance the cases on jay seem far-fetched to me. I'm going to read them through in detail once again now and make a more substantial post, but at the moment the chance of me switching my vote from seph to jay is slim. After the wagon has hit full steam, Shraft seems to just sit back and let the show unfold. I don't like this; not only does he shrug off concerns with jay by simply discrediting seph, he is content with letting seph go under without making a strong case in either direction, or even re-analyzing his position as he said he would. sephirotharg, who, though misguided, is now known to be unbiased, also noted this odd behavior from Shraft. At the moment I am suspicious. I will be looking forward for what you have to say regarding who you want dead and why. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Dirk's + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2011 21:18 Dirkzor wrote: GiygaS: and He adds nothing new other then to hesitate a bit before voting for seph (after his first defence). This could easily be jumping on the wagon that Shraft and myself started. This is a really good point. Though I mentioned that I was suspicious of Shraft for not re-analyzing his position on seph, it still follows that shraft and dirk started the wagon based off of some solid scum readings from seph. Giygas just parrots what had been previously said and puts his vote down; this is classic scum play, jumping onto a bandwagon in its middle stages, where it is easier to escape notice. Shraft's + Show Spoiler + On December 27 2011 03:06 Shraft wrote: Notice how he went from being very hesitant to vote for Sephirotharg to voting for him without providing much thought or reasoning at all. (This happened over a span of two minutes - his first post was made 3:28 and his second 3:30.) This means that all it took was two minutes and a rather contentless post from Seph to turn the thoughful GiygaS into voting-aggressively-without-providing-much-thought-GiygaS. Seems rather odd and inconsistent to me. The only thing that might be interpreted as scummy in Seph's second post is that he tries to proclaim his actions as pro-town, but even taking this into consideration, it seems strange that this would be enough to warrant GiygaS's change in his attitude toward Seph. Odd and inconsistent? I agree. Giygas is jumping the bandwagon despite saying that he doesn't think people should be lynched for a singular post. So... then 2 posts is enough for Giygas to determine someone's guilt? Strange, especially noting the time frame within which it happened. + Show Spoiler + This is straight up buddying with jay. There is not a single reason for a townie to ever simply "believe" another player. The only healthy attitude to have as a townie toward other players is to never give them the benefit of the doubt. Always question them. Always demand of them to provide thoughts and reasons to back their statements. To buddy up with someone is foolish. This is pure anti-town play. There are a few situations where buddying can be pro-town, but this isn't one of them. Giygas completely ignores seph's defense and lends jay his support without any backing. Ignoring presented information then trying to advance your own agenda is anti-town; you made it look like you had read everything, then did as you pleased. I don't like it. Will read through Giygas' filter/defense before making a judgement. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
There hasn't been much to work off of these two days, I don't feel like making filler posts. the scum tells people are presenting (jay, hyshes) look suspicious but with low post content there's little to be said without beating a dead horse. Shraft, directing vig on me? OMGUS if I ever saw it, if you have a case on me please post it. I don't like Giygas; I've read everything in the thread and he looks like the only good lynch to me. Time constricts, I d say more but family calls. ##vote GiygaS | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Started by Misder: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2011 04:03 Misder wrote: Surprised no one called me out on not being here. Anyways, ##Vote: jaybrundage I'm still going to vote him because I think my gut read is correct. I was going to wait til he posted something, but meh. I think GiygaS is town. I think Adam is scum (though might be me being paranoid). I can see a hyshes scum. Everyone else is null. Your gut read was wrong brah. Interestingly enough your first line reminds me of seph's "surprised that no one called me out for lurking" thing from earlier. You make a bunch of gut assumptions. But you're not the one who's been twisting words to advance these bandwagons. That guy that your gut tells you is town is the one doing fishy shit. Let's examine, shall we? Giygas' post on jay, footnoted with red numbers: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2011 04:08 GiygaS wrote: Right off the bat we see hypocrisy, bolded for your leisure  .1Here are his next two posts, again, I bolded the offensive statements. The guy is fricking bipolar in his first 3 posts. He goes from Kill Seph to Maybe he's town but vote for him anyway, to Kill Seph again (notice the timing of him being attacked by seph based off instructions he gave out to aggressiveness on seph). He's also making a list of what seph has done this game, not detailing WHY it's scummy. But you know the scummiest thing in this last post? He does not defend himself here at all, He doesn't defend himself till the next day, on further prompting. Why wouldn't he do this?2 I find this part of your defense very interesting, as you had really no case on seph, you were, plain and simple, sheepvoting. Literally all he adds to the discussion this day is that Seph voting for himself has to be scummy, even though almost everyone else agreed, including vets, that it was a null read. You kept going on and on and on and on about it: why?3 This and you just say seph is scummy - "It speaks for itself" without ever giving reason for his scumminess beyond him voting for himself >.<. Another thing - Seph mentionned that you only posted to push Seph's lynch or to defend yourself, and otherwise you were lurking. Guess what's happened now that there's no easy bandwagon and your not the focus of scrutiny? Yep, we're all playing Where's Jay. Accusations like this are just retarded, no offense. Like seriously, you just make an accusation on him for being inactive, when you said specifically that LynchAllLurkers was a bad idea. Wtf?4 Final reason to lynch JB is that if he dies and is revealed as mafia, we can then lynch Shraft for chainsaw defensing for him. ##Vote jaybrundage 1.Jay is not being hypocritical; he is saying that soft-claiming that lurking is bad, and the he is SORRY for not posting much. He is actually discrediting himself by saying this; yes this makes no damn sense, but all game jay has been saying "im a bad player guys, honest, i havent been able to post much". You take his statement, "i havent been active much" and imply that jay is saying "its ok that i havent been active much right? Word twisting. 2.You are using strong language to try and convey that jay did egregious things; you state that he is being "friggen bipolar" yet if anyone examines jay's three posts, they are not inconsistent. Wishywashy as shit sure, but he is on seph in every one of those posts. The middle post says "if you're town, contribute". Not "i think you might be town... here's a vote anyways". You're twisting that shit up man. 3.what the hell are you even saying here? You are taking jay's quote out of context; he is defending himself by saying that Misder meta'ing him from 1/2 posts is illogical, and that Misder needs a case before accusing. You use this quote as evidence of jay not having a case on seph; read through jay's filter. He doesn't constantly go on and on about seph's self vote, other people continually brought it up. Jay's case was weak, but it had more than once facet. Why are you trying to make jay look one dimensional? 4.twisting words twisting words. where did jay "specifically" say that lynchallurkers was a bad idea. He called suspicion on seph, like everyone else did. That's why his case is weird and weak. Now why is he suspicious? Giygas' defense posts from pressure: From Dirk + Show Spoiler + 1.You hesitating to vote is indicative that you don't want to start a bandwagon, despite claiming that you "thought that he was scum after the first post". This is weird as hell. Maybe it's your playstyle, but when you feel that someone is scummy you press them, you analyze them you check things out. Not wait until the bandwagon is started then comfortably jump in. There's a term for that, I forgot it, but sitting in the middle of the bandwagon is where it's at for scum. Ive said this more than once. Also, you are not the only one to analyze that second post of seph's, I did too. 2.It's contradictory because you express reticence to jump onto something, then fn leap onto it when the goings good. Being contradictory makes you hard to believe. 3. You might not be jay's scumbuddy, but you were sure happy tunneling him, despite saying that you weren't going to do any of that nonsense anymore. First you "believe" jay in his defense, then you nail jay using a bunch of ill-conceived tells to get him lynched, while ignoring the defenses that you had previously acknolwedged. Contradictory, while tunneling. 4. ohai scum slip. The case against jay is "twisting words to say he's mafia", eh? Funny that you do exactly that to put jay under. You acknowledge here that the case on jay so far has little substance. When you turn around to tunnel jay, all you CAN do is exactly what you stated: twist words. From Shraft: 1.Stating that it is a "policy" of yours to avoid starting voting is a convenient out; just like policy lynches are a convenient way to avoid discussion, having a policy to your play means that you can say "yeah it looks scummy, but I always play like this so i'm townie". Or, you're scum. Also, contradiction: you say that seph's post "isn't" super scummy, but earlier you said that you thought seph was scum based off his first post. 2.you are justifying your mistake by saying you were "tunneling"; yet you do the same thing with jay? You even acknoweldge that your actions are strange, but by saying that your "conclusion" differs, you acknolwedge your suspicious behavior but cleverly subvert what should be concluded. That you are tunneling townies. 3.you are making excuses for ignoring defenses from people. everyone's busy, town doesn't need to hear about your activities. putting on airs to justify inactivity. 4.Going to be more indepth with your analysis? Sure, you're writing more. But what about? Your next few posts are about random people who are townies. Why did you do this? You got some pressure from people, saying that it's needless to post this stuff, but you haven't gotten enough pressure imo. ugh reading over it again, 2 of the 4 town analyses posts you do are about DEAD people already confirmed. You are trying to show your support for their ideas, as they are confirmed green and thus will give you some cred. The other two are hyshes and adam; hyshes = easy lynch target at this point in time, while adam you act all buddy buddy with, agreeing with him to show respect to him. all of these posts are fluffy and full of words, but lack both consistency and actual substance; why didn't you analyze dirk or shraft, the people ACCUSING you? are they least worthy of analysis, despite the fact that they suspect you? I'm coming after you in the day, GiygaS. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On December 28 2011 23:32 Shraft wrote: Why'd you go all inactive on us yesterday? If you'd posted this only a few hours earlier, we might have had the power to lynch GiygaS. [...] Family has been here since before Christmas. I can read everything in the thread on my phone, but only have time pockets to post bursts of things. Without getting too personal, obligations arose that got in the way of me posting a decent analysis. I wanted to be more convincing before, now is my chance to be. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On December 29 2011 11:11 GiygaS wrote: Also, why has Cyber_Cheese, a veteran, not been a target for the mafia? My problem right now guys is that we're at LyLo, after tonight we will have 7, if we lynch a town, that's GG right there. If we don't lynch, that's GG right there. We need to broaden our horizons. I urge people to think about the big picture. Why are you contemplating mafia night kills when you should be responding to this or putting up real analysis? We're aware it's at LyLo, all you are saying is that we should lynch a scum. What have we been trying to do before this? Oh yeah, we were busy getting jerked around by scum. The "big picture" as I see it as that you were instrumental in both bandwagons so far. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
##Vote GiygaS | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Our team was really well coordinated using IRC, our plans worked like a charm haha | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
This mafia team was greaaaaaat for my first game. Both were immensely helpful and answered all my noob questions. If I had been town in this game, I wouldn't have had any clue about how to post or how to recognize easy tells... much gratitude to Adam and Cyber_Cheese, hope to play with you guys in the future, on the same side preferably :p I'll acknowledge that town's mistakes allowed a lot of the mislynches to happen, but mafia was working really hard to push things in the directions we wanted them to. aka, big plays were made. All in all, despite rampant inactivity (christmas ><), I had a great time, and I've gotten to see TL Mafia as a pretty chill, fun place. Hope to be around here in the future. | ||
| ||
