EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XVIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I'm not entirely convinced by most of the current cases being thrown around, but I have some reasons to wonder about a would-be "town leader", under the circumstances. While overall, being up-front and visible shouldn't scream "Scum", with the overall activity level right now, it almost seems like a role-reversal. There's far too much lurking and too little discussion for any policy lynches to be all that likely to work out in favor of our beloved town. There's one person practically calling out the scum, perhaps he knows he's safe? It certainly appears nothing happened, almost like an effort to earn airtight credibility in this low activity hunt. On June 27 2012 00:53 Vivax wrote: + Show Spoiler + FoS: Esspen I think the focus has to switch to the less active posters (NrGmonk, AegonC, roflwaffle55y, Esspen). Consider the amount of content, not just the amount of posts. I'll give you my opinions regarding the lurkers, I hope it's gonna help you in making a decision on which one to lynch. If someone of the would-be-modkilled lurkers just posts and votes shortly before the lynch without a damn good reason to do so, we should obviously lynch him. I think it's good to have a consensus on this alternative, I would appreciate if townies expressed their approval if they agree with this. NrGMonk: Gonna vote for him if he posts right before deadline to escape the modkill. AegonC: Doesn't offer any reads with his generic minipost. His priority is next to NrG's. Esspen: Kinda weird posts. He posts first when it's about discussing the lynch all liars policy. What strikes me here is that he questions the policy, but concludes the post with his line about lynching blues and confusing scum. That might have been a slip.His next post says it was intentional, and he immediately uses that explanation to put his FoS on Release. He never took a hard stance during this, he never tried to post a case on Release when he had reason to. And then he completely forgets Release in his last post, to 'completely agree' with Keirathi and hopeless1der about the lurker lynch policy. + Show Spoiler + Saying that he would be a too obvious mafia isn't a valid defense for me either, mafia can be obvious if the players make mistakes, and I still don't buy above blue role lynch mistake as intentional. It might have been, but that'd be very risky play by a townie. roflwaffle55: He comments on policy (lynch > NL), doesn't like Release style of posting, promises more contribution after sleeping. Him commenting negatively on Release very early looks townie to me. I wouldn't vote for him instead of the other three as of now. Note the levels of effort. It's almost like it should be a foregone conclusion who to target. On June 27 2012 04:33 Vivax wrote: I'm highlighting this for the guys who say they vote for the majority cause they fear No lynch (hey, Esspen). No Lynch isn't possible here, you will only vote for the ones you truly believe to be mafia, and not try to hide behind the majority. If you do vote hiding behind a majority, it will come back to haunt you cause it's scummy. Pointing out a definition of scummy that suits his agenda of trying to get people targeted. On June 27 2012 08:39 Vivax wrote: I don't understand town atm. We had policy lynch discussion just at the beginning of the game where the general consensus seemed to be lynch all lurkers. I have yet to see one guy who says that we should lynch lurkers in absence of clear scumtells. And yet there are people voting for all sorts of people except for AegonC, the biggest lurker (looks like there's gonna be lots to be replaced tho). Did I miss any decisive scumtells out there? Again, targeting specific people based on a policy lynch that actually doesn't favor town very well in the current climate. On June 27 2012 19:25 Vivax wrote: Esspen voted for hopeless when rofl was set to lynch, as already mentioned. If one of them is scum, the other most likely is, too. With the current information available, I would go for one of them. Also remember that posting cases during the night can make you a target for scum. Speaking of it, I think I'm the designed nightkill simply cause noone suspected me yet. Townies who are believed to be townies are dangerous for scum, and I didn't see any blue role vibes for them to use yet, so they don't have many alternatives. Calling out the scum, but absolutely no interest in him? It's like he wants to look above reproach. I agree this is by no means airtight, but I've got an FoS on you, Vivax, and I'll be keeping an eye on you as well. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
You receive an FoS, and start discussing the merits of lynching me compared to a person who has a reasonable case against them. Better still, after running in those circles faster than a poodle on cocaine, you attempt to misdirect suspicion to a third party for lurking, even though killing just for lurking is a horrible plan when there's so many lurkers. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I can't help that my alternate personality roflwaffles seemed suspicious to you. Hell, I know he was town, and he still looks a little fishy to me. I can, however, look at inconsistencies and strange behavior in people, and what you've been saying is enough to make me wonder about you. Granted, I don't know why Esspen made that miracle vote to save me. What I do know is that there's a few of us trying to pierce the pall of lies and the veil of obfuscation hanging over our town, and there's you, just adding a huge pile of vague suspicions and serpentine logic, trying to cast doubt in every direction. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I don't know why you keep pressing lurkers, in a town of this activity level, that's like a surefire way to keep the heat off of the scum until it's too late. What we need to do is increase the pressure in general, spot inconsistencies, and lean on people. Right now, I have my sights on you. Think about it, people, Vivax is arguing in favor of a policy lynch that isn't clearly in the town's best interest right now, he's sowing confusion, he's trying to spread the blame around. This isn't majority lynch, so if there's enough confusion, all it could take is 1-2 scum votes to tilt things, without them even looking like they're working together. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 01:21 Vivax wrote:+ Show Spoiler + On June 28 2012 00:25 JieXian wrote: No. It was between roffles and Hopeless. You weren't on the chopping block at all. If roffles was scum and Esspen saved him at the last moment -> Esspen = scum. Simple right? JieXian, you posted this earlier. Don't you support the gain of information from a lynch of either Esspen or the roflewaffle55 replacement? Right now two are pushing a case against me, one of them might be scum, and you prefer to suspect Bio. While I don't trust Bio entirely cause of Release's connection to him and his following death, it would be nice if town could focus and handle single cases instead of making so many at once, and atm my case and the Esspen vs rofl one are unsolved and need feedback. You're trying to push three people at once, one a lurker, and you say we should handle single cases? Then, from the same bit... On June 29 2012 01:21 Vivax wrote:+ Show Spoiler + On June 28 2012 00:25 JieXian wrote: No. It was between roffles and Hopeless. You weren't on the chopping block at all. If roffles was scum and Esspen saved him at the last moment -> Esspen = scum. Simple right? JieXian, you posted this earlier. Don't you support the gain of information from a lynch of either Esspen or the roflewaffle55 replacement? + Show Spoiler + Right now two are pushing a case against me, one of them might be scum, and you prefer to suspect Bio. While I don't trust Bio entirely cause of Release's connection to him and his following death, it would be nice if town could focus and handle single cases instead of making so many at once, and atm my case and the Esspen vs rofl one are unsolved and need feedback. You suggest lynching for "information". We stand to gain just as much, if not more, information from lynching for truly suspicious behavior and wishy-washy play than we do lynching based on some hapazard spreading of guilt. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Right now it's feeling more and more like you're trying to flood irrelevant posts to cover for the inconsistencies we've been pointing out. I'm not going to take the bait on your OMGUS directed at me, because the evidence against you is standing for itself. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 08:17 Vivax wrote: There is one thing I did that is pretty failsafe proof of my townie status. I'll post it in the second half of day 2. If you think you are a good townie, then you should have found it already. At least now town will know that there is at least one scum jumping on the bandwagon against me, and scum might even have started it. You keep bringing up this whole notion that spotting your inconsistencies somehow makes people anti-town, and that your behavior is so textbook that anybody who's above suspicion should refuse to suspect you because of it. This isn't a defense. This is an effort to encourage a fear reaction in anyone wanting to push a read on you. Also, if you've done something too textbook to miss, I would also consider it to be too textbook to trust entirely. On June 29 2012 09:13 dNa wrote: + Show Spoiler + ##Vote Esspen first of all sorry for my inactivity in the past 24 hours, i meant to check in but i kinda forgot :/ after reading everything that has been said in my absence, i come to the conclusion that there's too much bandwagoning going on. This might not neccessarily be a bad thing though. It might very well be, that all the people, who made a major case out of Vivax are scum. I'm pretty sure Esspen is scum, reason behind it being that he changed his mind about 5 minutes before the deadline to kill off hopeless instead of roflwaffles, whom i still consider to be scum as well. JingleHell (roflwaffle's replacement) is the other one who is making alot of ruckus in Vivax's general direction. Overall this whole case against him seems like a VERY good distraction from this little head-over-heels misshap that could've been disasterous for scum if it wasn't swept under the rug by a lot of commotion. The reason why i vote for Esspen and not for JingleHell is that, Esspen's posts overall are just confusing, not really helpful, and even if all my suspicions on them were wrong and they really would be townies, he seems the better guy to lose of them. I can understand why you'd see it that way, dNa. Like I said earlier, I can't help much the bizarre things that happened before I came in, regarding Esspen's behavior. The best I could suggest is that he might be scum, (there's some reasonable cases, for sure), and seeing a mislynch was guaranteed with either winner, he did a miracle save to make my predecessor look like a false positive. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 10:20 Miltonkram wrote: @ Jinglehell What do you think of dNa's reasoning for his Esspen vote? Pretty scummy right? I have a few thoughts on this, but just in case you're right, I'd rather wait to post them until he's stated his reasoning for himself, to avoid muddying things up. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
after reading everything that has been said in my absence, i come to the conclusion that there's too much bandwagoning going on. This might not neccessarily be a bad thing though. While I don't agree with all of his reasoning, it seems to me that this was intended to suggest that he was contributing his final thought process, after reading cases made against both myself and Esspen. Not that it was his sole reasoning. Even with the weight of evidence stacking in certain places, the last thing we want is to tunnel so badly that scum could straight up roleclaim as scum and get away with it. I like his effort at objectivity, even if I don't agree with him on everything. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 11:57 BassInSpace wrote: On my phone right now, skimmed over stuff. Vivax still holding out on defense post? And I'm guessing your failproof defense is that you attempted to switch last minute to roflwaffle in the day one vote but it wad too late. I'd guess he's hoping that someone will come up with a good defense for him, since his efforts to misdirect reads and pressure people into changing their votes have all failed. It would sound better if someone else found his "failsafe" evidence. I'd be willing to switch to another person with a fairly solid read against them if he could present his defense, but for now, delaying and scare tactics seem like an effort to just create enough confusion to get him benefit of the doubt, rather than a reason to target someone else. I'm still keeping vigilant, though, as should we all. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
I suppose, Vivax, that on night 1, you checked every single individual who was going to make a case against you today, and everyone is scum, right? Tell me, out of your "scumlist" you posted earlier, of Miltonkram, JingleHell, Esspen, Keirathi, NrGMonk listed in that order, why would you not have listed or weighted the names differently? Why would you discuss lynching for information that you already have and aren't uncomfortable giving out with a roleclaim? Something doesn't add up here, so I'm going to accuse you of a false roleclaim to get your head off the chopping block. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 28 2012 20:45 Vivax wrote: Regarding JingleHell vs Esspen: I think lynching Jinglehell would give us more information. Esspen might very well just be a sloppy player. But I prefer a Keirathi lynch cause of the scummy behavior and the low attention on him right now. You prefer a Keirathi lynch over someone you claim to KNOW is scum? Intriguing. This is all sounding increasingly desperate. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 29 2012 23:44 Vivax wrote: Lol what. I can only check one, and you know it. Also,there was no case against me on night 1. The cases started when I unfolded my suspect list, just that I wasn't sure of Esspen cause he covered you with his vote in the last minute, so I tried to breadcrumb it in a way that town would lynch one of you. Keirathi was simply the next one to suspect. There are still 2 other mafia besides you, and 4 people left to choose them from my list. Your behavior proves that you are scum, too. If you knew you were townie, you could just stay cool now, since no matter who of us dies today, the other will die too the next day. That's a situation with a guaranteed -1 scum. Actually, the cases started BEFORE you unfolded your "suspect list", and I believe they helped shape it, as it's been changing constantly since. I'm unsure how posting evidence (what I've done) is supposed to make me scum, compared to someone who's entire case is a (fake) roleclaim and a rather weak attempt at bullying the vote. You aren't answering why you were more interested in lynching Keirathi than me until recently, when you theoretically knew I was scum, and only really had him for lurking. I wouldn't buy that with a coupon and someone else's money. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
But I prefer a Keirathi lynch cause of the scummy behavior and the low attention on him right now. Somehow that's supposed to line up with Never been more interested in lynching him. I just found the reasons to add him to my list of suspects. I can place my FoS on multiple people at once. Your inconsistencies have been the primary basis of my case the entire time. And as usual, your tactic is to lie and manipulate, rather than just making a clear case and a clear defense. You accuse me of tunnel vision, but I've mentioned Esspen's behavior, even suggested a possible explanation for his bizarre vote, and reminded people that while there's a pile of evidence building, we should still remain vigilant for anything. I suppose that's tunnel vision too? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 30 2012 00:30 Vivax wrote: JingleHell's first post against me contains these accusations (actually they are lines) after he quotes me 4 times to inflate his post, bolded ones are my answers: Exactly which post of mine suggests that I have no interest in what I'm targetting?What kind of bad accuse is this? Aside from your ridiculous arguments in your first case against me, you seem to assume again that I would just blindly pursue you in front of the other townies cause you returned scum. You should know that I wouldn't have managed to get you lynched if I didn't claim. You complain about my criticism of your effort, where it was clearly related to individual effort in each of your supposed "cases". Some of them were a single line (something you're trying to accuse me of now), while others were closer to a paragraph. You seem to consider Esspen's last minute save of [b]me to be scummy, why shouldn't your "attempt" also be scummy? You claim to be targetting people day2 based on analysis. Shortly after your fake roleclaim. Which is supposed to support a case that's utterly inconsistent with your agenda from the beginning of the day. And point four, I was talking about you calling out the scum, and them showing no interest in you. Why are you trying to turn that into something so unrelated? All of your "defense" is based on a rather bad semantics game. And right at the end, you admit that you're only roleclaiming to support your OMGUS case against me. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
Vivax fakes roleclaim to support an OMGUS against me. Keirathi jumps in supporting that. And somehow, according to Vivax, the case against HIM is a bandwagon? | ||
| ||
