EPTI hated seeing the last newbie game get shit up because people went inactive, got replaced, then the replacements went inactive -_-
Newbie Mini Mafia III
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I hated seeing the last newbie game get shit up because people went inactive, got replaced, then the replacements went inactive -_- | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
As is regular with newbie games, someone went inactive and now you're stuck with me =) Ill catch up the thread over the next 24 hours. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 03:03 zarepath wrote: The third person I really want to hear from right now is Adam. I think it's unlikely that he inherited a Mafia spot... but that's pure speculation, and we need to hear something. I'm curious what your analysis is of the first day, and who you find most suspicious. You are correct in that I inherited a townie spot, but you can only take me at my word on that =) I read the entire thread last night. I will be posting my case closer to the deadline. SlOosh, in regards to your questions: I will answer them once day 2 stars. I’d rather not paint a target on my back if I am heading in the right direction. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
SacredSystem On January 25 2012 14:55 SacredSystem wrote: Zarepath's decision to lynch someone at random does sound like the calculated mind of a mobster. However, despite several conclusions that we all wish to draw, we need to wait, the mafia will all expose themselves at some point in time. on a side note Fakepromise agreed with him at 30% odds -_- SacredSystems first post. He implies that zarepath has “the calculated mind of a mobster”, but then says that in spite of this, we should wait for ‘the mafia to expose themselves’. The first part is a very underhanded way of implying that zarepath is scum, rather than being direct and labelling him as scum, he states zarepath has ‘scum-like’ features. The second line is encouraging passive play, or stalling until a wagon begins on zarepath and he can jump on guilt-free. On January 26 2012 07:01 SacredSystem wrote: you and fakepromise you for coming up with random killing and fakepromise for agreeing with you SacredSystems second post. Another attack on zarepath and FakePromise. On January 26 2012 08:27 SacredSystem wrote: ## vote: FakePromise SacredSystems third post. Looks like that guilt-free wagon arrived, better jump on it, he drops his vote onto FakePromise. CosmosXAM rightly points out how SacredSystem leaps from ‘we need to wait, the mafia will expose themselves’ to ‘zarepath and FakePromise are scum and im voting FakePromise’. This is very inconsistent, as all that occurred inbetween his first post and his third post was a few posts from other people saying ‘FakePromise looks suspicious’. On January 26 2012 10:34 SacredSystem wrote: i was saying that we shouldnt make wild assumuptions based on inconclusive logic traps, which many of you were doing also if you arnt saying anything, then dont say it now fakepromise made a decision which doenst make much sense from the townes perspective, now im not assuming anything in sayin that, which is why im voting for fakepromise as mafia sorry i forgot about the voting thread SacredSystems fourth post. After being called inconsistent by CosmosXAM, SacredSystem becomes overly defensive for being questioned: ‘also if you arnt saying anything, then don’t say it’. Now that the FakePromise wagon has started to build some momentum, notice how he stops mentioning zarepath? His post is entirely focused on FakePromise, when zarepath was the one who came up with the random lynch idea. The last sentence doesn’t even make sense, simplified it looks like this: “fakepromise made a statement which isn’t good for town, I’m not going to assume anything from it, therefore I’m voting for him as mafia.”. This is a statement that contains a conclusion that does not match the two premises. Posts five, six and seven are SacredSystem responding to some light probing from various people and hammering home that FakePromise agreeing with a 30% success rate is conclusive enough to hang him for. On January 27 2012 10:40 SacredSystem wrote: fakepromise, is a mafia with good mafia intentions also why do you keep defending him when its impossible to defend him with conclusive reasoning, prove it so because you keep defending someone that no townie would defend, im torn between fakepromise who betrayed the town by agreeing to a lynching which goes against the towns odds, or the person defending the traitor SacredSystems eighth post. He attacks zarepath for defending FakePromise. He even goes as far as calling FakePromise a traitor! This is blowing something out of proportion if I have ever seen it, and misrepresentation is a basic tool of scum. He begins teeing up tomorrows mislynch of zarepath. Hard defending FakePromise like zarepath is does not make him scum. SacredSystems ninth post is calling out FakePromise for voting for ‘thefearedbeing’ is just useless filler. FakePromise even stated right HERE that he was unsure and placed his vote on the inactive because he wasn’t prepared to take a side. That is his total filter. Lets bullet-point recap: -Calls out zarepath and FakePromise with shaky reasoning -Once the wagon picks up on FakePromise, he forgets about zarepath -He is overly defensive when questioned -He uses inconsistent logical arguments -A couple of filler posts, asking about things that have already been explained. -Once the FakePromise lynch hits the point of no return, he switches back to attacking zarepath I don’t see any genuine attempts to scumhunt when I look through his filter. He is entirely focused on FakePromise and zarepath throughout the whole day period. No analysis, none. He seems to be very much flying under the radar as few people have even mentioned him, only posting to further his scummy agenda. Now that FakePromise has flipped Town, take a good hard look at who was trying to drive the wagon, without sticking his head up too high to get noticed. This is a scum. Town kills scum. Do what needs to be done: ##Vote SacredSystems P.S If you intend on quoting this case, please spoiler it, keep the thread clean. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
MidnightGladius' pressure vote that stuck is far more suspicious to me. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 13:00 SacredSystem wrote: still no one has explained this to me yet im mafia for accusing fakepromise after he agreed to 30% odds and for saying that it was a bad idea from a townes perspective to hold a random lynch Doing these things is not inherently scummy, its how you did them. You advocated patience and then jumped onto FakePromise a couple posts later. You stated that 'it was conclusive!', yet your reasoning was poor and bandwagony. I dont dare to assume the inner workings of zarepaths head, but I doubt he was ever going to follow through with the random lynch plan. It was a discussion starter... and guess what, it worked. Your actions since my first case was written aren't flattering either: -More discrediting of zarepath -a giant OMGUS at Chocolate -You state 'im most suspicious of zelblade', then in your next post THREE MINUTES LATER, you state hes probably noobie town. -And the out-of-nowhere question 'Are the mafia told who the other mafia members are at the start of the first day, or only at night?' just stinks of 'oh look guys, i really don't understand how the mafia team works, I couldn't possibly be mafia'. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Declare your votes in the thread when you make them, and actually have them backed up with some reason. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 13:34 balt11t wrote: Did I not back my position against FakePromise explicitly beforehand? Why should I repeat myself, when he was (in my opinion) the only true candidate for lynching? As I mentioned earlier, for a random lynch, 30% success is not very good odds, and I was prominent in advocating my dislike for his plans, which seemed rather scummy. OK, but why not vote for him when you made those statements? rather then voting 8 hours later after hes nigh-on-dead already. And again, make sure you say it in the thread. Otherwise it looks as though you're trying to sneak a vote through when no one is looking. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Everything you just asked I went through in my case or the follow up post on this page, go read that, I'm not repeating it again. If Chocolate is suspicious for being on the back of the bandwagon, why isn't Simberto? why isnt balt11t? If you claim to not know if mafia knew each other or not, why were you claiming zarepath was suspicious for defending FakePromise? More inconsistencies | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Your evasiveness is obvious. But indulge me, who are the 4 mafia in this game? | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 29 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote: Here's an observation of day 1, with a focus on slOosh(me), DoYouHas and Zarepath. I will ignore other stuff. Analysing night actions is an exercise in WIFOM. The only thing that can be taken from them is that they attempted to shoot at someone who was probably town. In this scenario we don’t even know for sure that that is the case, as no one died. I sincerely doubt both SacredSystem and zarepath are mafia. I find SacredSystem almost surely to be mafia, whereas I see things in zarepaths filter that I wouldn't expect from a scum player. I feel we should lynch the guy who has been evasive, non-contributal and overly defensive (ie SacredSystem). | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 14:10 Adam4167 wrote: You advocated patience then did a complete 180 later when nothing changed in between. Everything you just asked I went through in my case or the follow up post on this page, go read that, I'm not repeating it again. If Chocolate is suspicious for being on the back of the bandwagon, why isn't Simberto? why isnt balt11t? If you claim to not know if mafia knew each other or not, why were you claiming zarepath was suspicious for defending FakePromise? More inconsistencies On January 28 2012 14:42 Adam4167 wrote: You weren't sure if mafia knew who each other were, so how could you use one player defending another as evidence that both of them are scum? Your evasiveness is obvious. But indulge me, who are the 4 mafia in this game? Underlined for your convenience, since they were apparently missed the first time. Your ‘contributions’ consist of 1 liners and jumping on whoever has votes on them already. Your defences to me have amounted to you saying ‘you have no case’ over and over, even when I’m presenting one. You’ve had close to 96 hours since the game started to actually go scum-hunt and find someone who you consider to be scum. Instead you seem content to just sit around, and attack anyone who mentions you in their posts and stalling on giving up any substantial reads. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 13:50 SacredSystem wrote: as for someone who is bandwagon, look at the votes for that day http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=306091¤tpage=2#23 chocolate actually looks like a bandwagon You were the one who brought up the days vote count as evidence of why chocolate is scummy. I asked you to clarify why specifically chocolate was scummy above others around him for being on that vote and you reply with: ’theres more to suspicion then just a vote, 7 people voted for fakepromise, obviously not all of them could be mafia’ So… you didn’t answer my question at all. I am not contradicting myself anywhere. If you are not mafia… prove it. You seem to suspect chocolate… so go through his entire filter and highlight everything that is scummy – that is scum motivated. Your last line is just pointless fluff, honestly. You think doing the same analysis as someone else and coming to the same answer proves your town? On the contrary, heavily implies that you are not. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
This can only mean one thing. There are mafia voting for him. Since I know I'm town, at least one of the mafia team (if not more) are on this vote. There's always the possibility that his team has abandoned him, but I am really doubting it at this point. There's been almost no opposition to this lynch other then myself, and no other real case has appeared on day 2 other then mine on SacredSystem. Lynches that go too easy are almost universally mislynches. I concede that no other lynch is going through considering we are ~5 hours to crunch-time and everyone seems pretty sold on this one. Ill shift my vote closer to the deadline to prevent some kind of mass-unvote shenanigans if he is indeed mafia. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
This is one time id be happy for my read to be wrong. I have to take my PC offline for a couple of hours to re-install windows. I should be back before the lynch, but in case i am not, ill move my vote now. ##Unvote SacredSystem ##Vote zarepath | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I approve of that vig shot. I wouldn't have announced it in thread though, as they may have been hiding their role-blocker, as in the last newbie game. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Featuring both heads of our hydra, Jitsu and Probulous. The mafia withheld the roleblock on nights 1 and 2. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
After going through Bromances' filter, I find it odd that Jitsu never followed this up: On January 28 2012 09:11 Bromancipate wrote: RE: MG Beyond that, I think you're just upset that I called you out and put you in the spotlight. ~J If you thought he was uncomfortable being in the spotlight, wouldn't you push him further to get a better read on him? Just leaving this alone feels like you didn't want to step on toes.. the Jitsu ive seen isn't afraid to step on toes. At this point I think Zelblade looks pretty bad for being the only person to jump on my SacredSystem case on day 2 and then abandon it when it looked hopeless for Zarepath. Balt11t also looks pretty bad, first a ninja-bandwagon vote on day 1, then a stealth vote within an hour of the deadline on day 2. If hes town, hes not doing a very good job of showing it. And for the 3rd scum, id be looking at Chocolate or Bromancipate. Simberto has gone a little quiet in the last 48 hours compared to day 1, which is odd. Zarepath attacking CosmosXAM on day 1 and trying to push him as an alternative lynch gives him some credibility (yes yes i know, not proven townie or anything) I think SlOosh has done enough to quell any initial paranoia I had towards him. DoYouHas sponging last nights shot has him off my radar for now. SacredSystem... well i have mixed feelings here. It doesn't fit the puzzle for him to be scum, he didn't react as I expected a mafia might to my tunneling, hence why I took my foot off the pedal. From here, I say we flip Zelblade, followed by Balt11t if he doesn't have a run-in with the vigilante-fairy tonight. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
| ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
This opens up the possibility of a mass claim for blues barring the medic. | ||
| ||
