EPTWheel of Fortune Mini Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
| ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 21 2012 07:02 Toadesstern wrote: Please no policy lynch because I'm less disruptive and posting less which neither fits my town meta nore my mafia meta  Only policy lynch I will condone from the get go is the following: LAB (Lynch all Bluelightzes) | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
 . | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
First of all, strongandbig's posts are big and mostly useless. Specifically, this encrypted message stuff that takes up a large portion of his posts. Anyone can hide something in their post, we don't need you padding your filter and clogging the thread with that sort of stuff. Last time you started a game like that (SS Mafia) you were scum. Are you scum this game too? MrZentor, you're abrasiveness and dismissal of people's questions, while not necessarily (or likely) mafia behaviour doesn't really help the town. I'm sure I'm not the only person who would appreciate a more respectful player than the one who needs to call everyone "illiterate, boring, dull, stupid, or thick" just to make a point. I'd say it actually lessens the strength of your cases when you resort to ad hominem attacks. As for the other things that have been talked about: -Hydra should sign their posts -Masons should claim if they feel like it will benefit town -Town reads are not necessarily only negative (though admittedly they are not as important as scum reads) | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
strongandbig, I actually did read your full post. It just seemed like a lot of setup speculation coming from the same guy who said this: On April 22 2012 09:14 strongandbig wrote: At this point I think everyone involved in the "sign your posts" debate looks pretty suspicious. It's a distraction from what we should be focusing on, which is finding the cheating bastard trying to take our money (aka the scum). Purplehaze I'm looking at you. It feels like you made this an issue just to make an issue of it. >.> What was it about the setup speculation that was more important than discussing the hydra signing their posts and why should we not consider you "suspicious" for the same reasons that you thought prplhz was suspicious? | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 23 2012 08:53 Sbrubbles wrote: That said, I suppose it might be a good strategy to claim if the masons are two relatively new players (like myself), in that it would draw fire away from more veteran town players. If the masons do decide to claim, though, I don't think we should waste town powers confirming them. I'd be happy with believing them and only doubt them if they start acting specially scummy or aren't dead by day 4. Cops are here to investigate scummy players, not to confirm townies. I agree with all this also. That said, I agree with the hydra in that it's time to stop talking about the masons and to start hunting scum. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 23 2012 09:12 Snarfs wrote: I agree with all this also. That said, I agree with the hydra in that it's time to stop talking about the masons and to start hunting scum. Speaking of which, I'd like to hear some from Ace, whose posts have almost entirely been about Masons at this point. Ace, what do you think of VE has a lynch candidate? If you had to pick a second candidate, who would it be? I think it would be valuable to have two candidates to consider going into the last 18 or so hours before the lynch. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 23 2012 12:39 Sbrubbles wrote: Radfield, you are the one looking the most suspicious to me right now. On the Zentor/prplhz exchange, you defend Zentor, but agree with Forumite on Zentor's case on prplhz being weak: ... These are excellent points, sbrubbles. Thank you for pointing them out, my suspicion of Radfield has also risen because of this and I look forward to his response. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 01:18 strongandbig wrote: When it comes to actual suspects, I'd like to point to Snarfs. He's done a few things so far that make me suspicious. First, we have + Show Spoiler + On April 23 2012 09:12 Snarfs wrote: I agree with all this also. That said, I agree with the hydra in that it's time to stop talking about the masons and to start hunting scum. In this post, he says that we should be hunting scum, but in none of his later posts does he actually do any scum hunting. My scum hunting method is my own. I like to ask people questions based on their actions when I notice something weird and gauge their responses. Me asking you and Zentor, as well as Ace and Radfield, to explain your actions is my method of scum hunting. Looks like trying to gain town cred for getting us focused when he's actually not adding anything to the discussion. Also note that this comment at this point was not really trying to change the arc of the thread; at the point he made it we were already moving on from the masons discussion. That comment was just me making sure to put my opinions on things in the thread so that people can have an easier time following my thought process later on. The two posts we have from him after that are the following: + Show Spoiler + On April 23 2012 09:21 Snarfs wrote: Speaking of which, I'd like to hear some from Ace, whose posts have almost entirely been about Masons at this point. Ace, what do you think of VE has a lynch candidate? If you had to pick a second candidate, who would it be? I think it would be valuable to have two candidates to consider going into the last 18 or so hours before the lynch. + Show Spoiler + On April 23 2012 15:31 Snarfs wrote: These are excellent points, sbrubbles. Thank you for pointing them out, my suspicion of Radfield has also risen because of this and I look forward to his response. Neither of these actually lays out an opinion on who is playing scummy and who we should actually vote for. Again more behaving like he's moving discussion along without actually contributing. Especially with his "suspiciousness of radfield" post, this looks a lot like trying to bandwagon onto a case without actually contributing anything to said case. I did think twice about posting that, but I figured since I was just about to head to bed and wouldn't be posting for a while that, again, I should put my thoughts down on the activity that had occurred over the 5 or 6 hours since my last post. Finally, here's his first major post (and the only post in which he actually expresses opinions): + Show Spoiler + On April 23 2012 03:11 Snarfs wrote: Couple of things to comment on in the beginning. First of all, strongandbig's posts are big and mostly useless. Specifically, this encrypted message stuff that takes up a large portion of his posts. Anyone can hide something in their post, we don't need you padding your filter and clogging the thread with that sort of stuff. Last time you started a game like that (SS Mafia) you were scum. Are you scum this game too? MrZentor, you're abrasiveness and dismissal of people's questions, while not necessarily (or likely) mafia behaviour doesn't really help the town. I'm sure I'm not the only person who would appreciate a more respectful player than the one who needs to call everyone "illiterate, boring, dull, stupid, or thick" just to make a point. I'd say it actually lessens the strength of your cases when you resort to ad hominem attacks. As for the other things that have been talked about: -Hydra should sign their posts -Masons should claim if they feel like it will benefit town -Town reads are not necessarily only negative (though admittedly they are not as important as scum reads) Let's look at both of the points he makes here. First, his response to my mason encryption plan is nonsensical. It's a plan that would, I admit, only help town in maybe 1% of situations, but could literally not possibly hurt the town. It died, I believe, mostly because Ace was dismissive and seems to be leading the whole "mason theory" discussion; that's not actually out of character to me, Ace seems pretty dismissive in general of plans that aren't his. However, the first few reactions to the plan are still interesting. Snarfs's seems like what I would expect from a scum reaction to a complex or convoluted townie plan; dismissal without actually engaging the details, as well as accusations being thrown around. Additionally, if you look at my post, the real filler wasn't the encrypted message stuff; it was me trying to work through the scenarios that could come out of a mason claim. I was responding to the question Ace asked, when he asked for reactions to his mason plan. To reiterate, my point was that you were using a very large post to not do any actual scumhunting. That is where I still stand on the usefulness of that post. Maybe it's just me, but I don't believe that all the effort going into setup speculation is really worthwhile or meaning when it is just that: speculation. Now, look at his arguments on MrZentor. Note that he calls him out for being weird and not townie without actually accusing him of being scum or anti-town. He doesn't take a position on whether or not Zentor is scum or town at all, just saying he could be anti-town. I didn't think he was scummy or I would have said it. I said exactly what I intended to say: That his posting style was abrasive and could only hurt town. I generally give people the benefit of the doubt at the beginning of the game and then see later on if they are willing to consider my thoughts. Then there's the little comment blurb. None of the things he says there are actually meaningful, but seem like they might be an attempt to jump in on a discussion that already happened without actually adding anything new to the topic. Snarfs, J'Accuse! ##vote: Snarfs I believe you want: Je t'accuse Now if you'll give me a little bit, I need to read through the thread again and see if I can pick up what sandroba was saying about Forumite. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 01:36 prplhz wrote: ##Vote Snarfs I can understand s&b's vote because he's never really seen me play before outside of SS Mafia, but this one I can't quite figure out. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
I think the best lynch would be a marvellosity lynch. All he's done this game is soft-defend Forumite, VE, MrZentor and Ace. That and ask for filters. My vote will stay on him unless I need to change it to consolidate for a lynch on someone else I wouldn't mind lynching. From my point of view, it's too early to lynch into the pool of potentially amazing town players when nothing stands out as really scummy yet. ##Vote marvellosity | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
What do you guys think about a marvellosity lynch? strongandbig and prplhz, what makes me a better lynch than him? Of the other players who have votes on them already, I'd probably prefer a Radfield over a Zentor, mainly based on the difference in effort between I'm a Cop You Idiot and this game. In this game, his vote on VE was apparently just a pressure vote and he's happy leaving it there as opposed to someone who he actually thinks might be mafia: As far as VE goes, he still has not commented since I put my vote down. My intention was simply to apply pressure and see how he reacted, but he has not posted/reacted at all. At this point I'm willing to keep my vote there. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
| ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 04:21 marvellosity wrote: s&b's effort on Snarfs is the best I've seen so far, and due to my own failure to make good scum-reads, that will be where my vote will rest atm. ##Vote: Snarfs Did you read my response to his case? I addressed everything he said. Also, why would you choose to sheep s&b when there are probably at least a half dozen more reputedly decent scum hunters in this game? | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 04:26 VisceraEyes wrote: I mean, as it stands right now, town is going to have to massively consolidate just to GET a lynch. What do you guy suggest? One of MrZentor or Snarfs? They're the leading candidates with 2 votes, one of MrZentors being his own. I think Zentor is town, and I don't think he'll end up voting for himself, so I'd have to go with Snarfs...but Snarfs looks town to me too. There seems to be a consensus behind a Radfield lynch, would you guys join me in lynching him over an inactive I feel has a huge chance of flipping scum? Other than these options, it's looking like a No Lynch situation to me. While I did find his actions suspicious, I don't think that he's a better lynch than marvel right now. The problem I have with lynching Radfield day 1 is that if he can provide the kind of analysis later on in the game that he provided in the last game he played, then it would be a huge waste. Plus, if he's town, isn't he usually target number 1 for the night? Scum would have to deal with him and I'd rather not do their work for them. That being said, if he's scum, then we should have a much better idea of that day 2. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 06:11 MrZentor wrote: Hey guys! Here are my thoughts. Forumrite and Prphlz are being stupid for attacking me even though it's obvious that I'm innocent. I have a feeling scum would switch over to an easier lynch such as Marv or Sbrubbles. Everybody who keeps repeating how innocent I am is annoying for being ridiculously ridiculously redundant. I feel at this point talking about how innocent I am is like talking about what the masons should do. We need to do four things. 1. Decide if we have a lynch or not- I feel we should because of what somebody said about it not helping us all if we don't lynch somebody, because we'll end up losing on the same day anyways. 2. Decide if we want to lynch a lurker or an active person- I would like to lynch a lurker, because currently there isn't any solid case on any active person, and I would prefer to lose a lurker over an active person. 3. Lower the number of possible lynch victims- I believe right now 6 different people are being voted for. That means scum have complete control of the lynch; we need to have 1-2 suspects, or we're not going to get a good lynch. 4. We need to decide who to lynch. I'll be back soon with a suitable lurker to lynch. I really don't like this post from Zentor. His first sentence is just WIFOM. The four part list reminds me a lot of the first half of this post from Death Factory 2. This seems really scummy to me, like a post for the sake of posting, but I wasn't getting a scum read from MrZentor at the beginning of the day so I'm not sure. I think I'd be fine with a no lynch in this situation as well. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 06:38 Snarfs wrote: I think I'd be fine with a no lynch in this situation as well. EBWOP: To clarify - lynch marv > no lynch > lynch Zentor (in my mind). | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 06:47 Ace wrote: @Snarfs: Where are the posts that show marvelosity soft defending players? I admit I could have read further into it than it really was, but it definitely stood out as the only thing in his filter at the time I posted: Defending: Forumite (that's who Zentor was calling thick), VE, Mr Zentor thrice, and Ace. I prefer to let people answer questions about their play themselves which is why I called him out on it. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 07:05 marvellosity wrote: Considerably more people trying to prevent my lynch than there are scum, in fact... What's your defense here, that town is preventing your mislynch or that scum is NOT preventing your mislynch? Please pick one... | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On April 24 2012 06:03 marvellosity wrote: I would like to note that there has been no opposition to the growing bandwagon of my lynch when clearly scum has had the options to direct the vote almost anywhere with a maximum of 2 votes on any one person. On April 24 2012 06:30 marvellosity wrote: Sigh. I dislike the fact that I'm scummy because I've not been able to form a decent read although I have been extremely transparent about it. I dislike the fact no-one answered my questions on VE/Radfield cases. I dislike the fact that there's been no opposition to my lynch. Objectively the way this lynch is going down is making it pretty clear this is going to be a mislynch. On April 24 2012 06:58 marvellosity wrote: The thing that ISN'T circumstancial is the fact that the lynch on me gently drifted into being without anyone trying to prevent it. You should be able to discern the difference between the two. Engage logic please. On April 24 2012 07:05 marvellosity wrote: Considerably more people trying to prevent my lynch than there are scum, in fact... Just an observation. | ||
| ||
