EPTFor Vanilla Townie. Just kidding
But in!Newbie Mini Mafia XX
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
For Vanilla Townie. Just kidding But in! | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 05 2012 07:22 Hopeless1der wrote: What?...I...Its right there..with the underlined.. - There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie - Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue Is that not a contradiction? or did you mean actually claim as blue, not fakeclaim, because that's literally the only way those two statements don't conflict with one another. Mackin give the poor guy a chance, he's just a little excited I think. I just wanted to give him a heads up so he checks his posts more carefully, that way we can narrow down our scum lists earlier rather than later. 1. There is no situation where townie should fake claim 2. There are situations where townies with power should claim. If you read above propositions exactly as written, there is no contradiction. But what lazer probably meant was: 1. There is no situation where vanilla townie should fake claim 2. There are situations where townies with power should fake claim. Still, there is no contradiction. However, there are limited situations where a super-star vanilla townie may have a better chance leading the town by fake-claiming... obviously not in open set-up where all of the power roles are revealed. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
| ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
Lazermonkey wrote: I thought it would be obvious that I meant Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue(when playing blue). The post doesn't make any sense at all otherwise... There are situations where power roles may fake claim - for example, fake claim vanilla. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
BTW, jingle do u play on mafiascum? | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
Also, this is my first game in TL, but I did play a few games on mafiascum.net where random voting on D1 is prevalent. My voting on Hopless1der was to see his and others' reactions. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
Of course, a stronger case can be made if your meta is based on many games on an experienced player. But when dealing with new players, not sure how much info we can gain from it. Still, I will give it a read. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
BTW, is it OK to reference ongoing games? | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 05 2012 08:18 JingleHell wrote: Oh, and bear in mind, I won't do this if a case gets made. I let people make their own counter-claim. I only stepped in because I see random D1 votes as so dangerous in our newbie games. Random D1 votes may be dangerous. But even if the random vote somehow starts a bandwagon, who knows, maybe I got the scum by chance. But more importantly, it allows for more substantial discussions. Often times, scums under pressure gives off scum odor. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
| ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 05 2012 08:35 JingleHell wrote: Well then, consider yourself under pressure, and unconvincing, since you just basically admitted to being disinterested in making substantial cases, and said Funny, when it's 3/13... 23% chance. That's not good odds in my book. You sound scummy. Heh. It's actually 3/12 since I am not scum. WOOT! Townslip?? or WIFOM?? Yes, we do hope that after carrying out D1's worth of substantial discussions that our probability of lynching a scum would increase from 25%. But how much? Maybe to 30%? Do remember that I admitted to voting Hopeless1der to pressure him... to see his response and others'. I am willing to take part making substantial cases. So far, I have not been able to find one. As this game goes on and there are more posts to analyze, if I still fail to come up with substantial cases that falls short of reasonable standard, then it will be due to my shortcomings. At this time in the game, I think I adequately explained myself and am suspicious why you are suspicious of me  | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
I am not sure if you missed it, but I explained my reasoning for placing my vote on Hopeless1der. I will summarize here: 1. Hint of motivation to start a band wagon against a player who may have contradicted himself. (slightly scummy) 2. To see his and others' response (not related to scuminess) Jingle is telling me that I should not have done that. In fact he is saying that I am scum because: A. He thinks I am trying to mislynch. (False) B. I am not participating in case based on substantial evidence (True, but not my fault probably) | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
I didn't particularly find lazer monkey's post scummy. This is a newbie game. He is simply providing some guidelines on what townies should avoid - since (I assume) that his previous games have been tainted by vanilla towns claiming power roles. BTW, I am not OMGUSing Jingle. I just find it difficult to understand why he finds me scummy, since I think I explained myself and answered all of his questions. When someone is focusing his accusation on a player based on reasonable evidence, that someone could be town or scum. But when someone is stubborn about his accusation on a player, even after the accused player adequately explained himself, I think that someone is likely to be scum. Maybe he is not satisfied with my answers. If so, Jingle, please tell me what you still think I am scum. Here, someone may question whether my initial vote against Hopeless also makes me scummy for above reason. But as I explained, I don't particularly find him scummy and my initial attempt to incite responses from him and others did partially succeed - mostly in the forms of accusations toward me. ##Unvote ##Vote Jingle | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 05 2012 10:19 JingleHell wrote: It's like Harry is a stand-up comedian. It was not an reactionary OMGUS vote just because you were voting me. I had a valid reason for suspecting you, which I outlined in the post. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 05 2012 11:13 JingleHell wrote: EBWOP: Did you watch the rest of XVIII after you got killed, Release? If you did, you know how much it benefits scum to get into large, drawn out, chaotic, tunnel-vision shout-fests. What we want is a substantial discussion. But in order to get there, we have to start somewhere. Some random votes or some FOS on evidence that may seem trivial at first allows us to start up such discussions. Personally, I like to apply pressure - it usually works well for me in the past. And this is why I am questioning you now. You can answer my questions, in a logical manner. At this time, the only reason I am voting you is because I cannot understand the basis for your thinking that I am scum. While townies also do make mistakes during lynches and can sometimes be stubborn at times, in average townies tend to be more logical. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
| ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 05 2012 11:29 JingleHell wrote: You didn't even begin to answer them sufficiently, all you did was repeat yourself. You want to gamble, based on all your anecdotal experience playing with completely different people. That's great and all, but I consider it scummy. Now, considering that you seem to think votes are "just pressure" or some such, if you're really town, and think you can defend yourself adequately, why are you so concerned by my vote? Unless there's something to what I said, which you didn't seem to acknowledge, as you and lazer have made it into the basis of a "case" against me, then you shouldn't be bothered in the slightest. And if you do admit that there's something to what I said, you probably should have unvoted Hopeless instead of trying to start attacking me because of "just pressure". That would make sense, right? I never said I wanted to gamble. I said in the worst case, IF my voting based on less than substantial evidence actually DOES leads to a lynch, it may still be not the worst thing in the world because there is some chance that I might have picked the scum. It was a supporting evidence to my argument why it is OK to random vote in the beginning of day 1 (in fact, I think we SHOULD start voting light in the beginning, just to start reasonable discussion. Again, I have never advocated random voting. And even if this is a newbie game, people can read and discriminate bandwagon based on random vote vs. a case based on substantial evidence. You are saying that you experienced otherwise. If true, I would say that it was an exception rather than the norm. Ultimately, there is not much point in playing mafia if people you are playing with are incapable making such discrimination. I am not bothered, per se. I wanted you to explain why you think I am scum because your response did not make much sense to me. That said, beside what seems to be unreasonable suspicion against me, I do not get a scum vibe from you. ##Unvote | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
On July 05 2012 11:29 JingleHell wrote: . And if you do admit that there's something to what I said, you probably should have unvoted Hopeless instead of trying to start attacking me because of "just pressure". That would make sense, right? I realized I didn't answer this question. 1. I vote lightly in the beginning of the game, unless a player is close to lynch. With 13 players, it requires 7 to lynch. Even with lazer's vote, which came after mine, you had total of 2 votes. 2. I did have some suspicion that you were scum. Again, I outlined this multiple times. 3. Voting obviously pressured you to respond multiple times. This is what I want also. | ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
| ||
|
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
So either he's lying, which means he's mafia. Or he's telling the truth, because he's intimidated to play mafia. I will still catching up with the posts, BTW. | ||
| ||
