This would be my 4th and final game as Newbie
Newbie Mini Mafia XXII
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
This would be my 4th and final game as Newbie | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
Deadline suits me perfectly btw | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
Sorry for posting this late, but I was asleep when the game started. Deadline is at 11 pm for me so I should be online for it but probably going to bed shortly after deadline. I just read through the posts and the case against Mordanis and Golbat. Mordanis: Right now I dont think he is scum. Basically people are calling him scum based on two things: Illogical arguments and persistence in his case on Keir. His post about Keir claiming blue was not very convincing, but he tried to use the little posting and information we had at that time to contribute to scum hunting. The first case made won't be of the finest quality because usually there is so little to work with. The far more important thing is to get people talking about something else than policy lynches so Mordanis was more than successful. Not changing his view on Keir directly after being called out on his poor case is not suspicious in my opinion. On the contrary, as townie you aren't afraid of being held responsible because when you make cases you are convinced they are scum. It's more the scum players who try to not gain too much attention when making cases as they might be lynched for a mislynch. So right now I have a slight town read on Mordanis. Golbat: You just unvoted Mordanis. Without an explanation. And you posted a list of every single player. I hate those lists. If you are town, you just show Mafia your entire town read. If you are scum, you can easily get town cred and posts with such a list. Why post that list? Town should makes cases, not lists. Besides that you never commented on Mordanis' case against you which is far more convincing than his first one on Keir btw. I am going to reread Golbat, but for now ##FoS Golbat | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 27 2012 17:14 Golbat wrote: I'm still not sure about your scum status, but at the same time, I want to explore all possibilities, and casting a vote before the halfway mark of the day is foolish anyways. If you're scum, it gives you time to shape up your posting, and if you're not, it gives scum time to run a train on you. Even while I was writing up my reads, I saw other people who could be scum just as easily as you. But now that I've been able to refocus, I really think I should give other people some space to talk, especially because half the town hasn't even really contributed, and that's never a good thing. I do want to state that whatever my read are in my previous post, they should not be taken as me being 100% certain of a person's innocence/guilt. DarthPunk and Shady could easily be scum too, but I think that before we come to conclusions, we have to look at the big picture, and that hasn't really been completely painted yet. Okay, I missed that explanation earlier. BUT this is such a bad explanation in my opinion. If you are convinced he is scum you should always pressure him. Of course pressuring him early would give a scum Mordanis and his team time to think of a good defense but Mafia would have to act upon it and therefore expose themselves. The second part just feels like an excuse for backing off from Mordanis. In a previous vote you seemed pretty convinced by him being scum: On July 27 2012 13:36 Golbat wrote: I mean honestly, it's gone on long enough. ##Vote Mordanis If you're red, try to be less obvious next time. If you're green, try to be less scummy next time. I certainly hope you're not a blue. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote: Pretty sure Mord is scum. I did vote for him after all. But, there is always the chance he was just a very eager townie. The only thing about him being town that rubs me the wrong way is how emphatically he decided to stay with his line of reasoning, despite the fact that it had been slapped down by multiple people. Very suspicious. Perhaps I myself jumped the gun in voting for him, but being one to not throw around votes lightly, i'm keeping my vote on him unless there is completely overwhelming evidence that he is either not scum, or that someone else is scummier. I really like the OMGUS! vote though, <3. So what exactly is the overwhelming evidence you just found out that he isn't scum? I assume you haven't found anyone else scummier as you haven't made a case. ##Vote Golbat + Show Spoiler + Sorry for triple posting but guys where are you? :D I don't want to talk to myself ^^ | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 27 2012 18:42 alan133 wrote: I have read and re-read the filters but couldn't find anything other than Mordanis' "meh" case on Kei and subsequent cases against Mordanis for that. I was kinda thrown off when Golbat decides to unvote Mordanis because he started off having high confidence that he is scum. His "I am a newbie post" also contributes to my suspicions on him. I quickly dismissed them because I still have my FOS on Mordanis and he did a case on Golbat too. Now that Ange777 has mentioned it, I would like to ask Golbat, what makes you think that Mordanis is not scum anymore? To me, his only "townie points" is that he is the first player who built a case, but that's about it. Is there some "obvious" reason that I missed? Every time I re-read Mordanis's posts I am more convinced that he is scum. Just to be clear, you mean Golbat is scum? Or Mordanis is scum? | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
I don't like your explanation. You are just playing the newbie card. Yes, this is a Newbie game but that does not mean that I am willing to overlook scummy behaviour. Therefore my vote still stands on you until you can at least give some effort in scum hunting to show that you are town. @Promethelax: While I agree with your suspicions on Zorkmid there are several players who need to step up their game. Posting fluff is not helping town at all! | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
MrMedic aRyuujin Zork All have posted next to nothing of content. On to Shady: His filter is a lot of policy talking and then the case against Mordanis. I am unsure about him. On July 27 2012 13:29 Shady Sands wrote: Mordanis' response pretty much sealed the deal for me. I think it is clear that Mordanis is a red. Let's parse through his response. When you look at all that, and the weak logic against Keir, then what you see is the following pattern: Mordanis first claims that Keir is the likeliest candidate for lynching because he a likely candidate to be red. Then he backs off and claims that Keir could go red or green. Then he argues that we should lynch controversial candidates first. The point is, lynching controversial candidates would be fine, if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. This totally smacks of a Red finding out his original tactic for generating a bandwagon has failed, acknowledging that he is the only one arguing for a lynch, and then stating that because he is the only one arguing for a lynch, the person is "controversial" and should be lynched. The thing is, if Mordanis was convinced of the controversy of Keir's play than Mordanis' play is not scummy. I don't like Shady's case. I have to head out now. I'll try give a better read on Shady when I come back. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
You made some good points on Shady. I must admit I missed them. I felt a strange vibe from all his fluff posts but couldn't put the finger on it. Although before reading your post I was astonished to read this: On July 27 2012 20:33 Shady Sands wrote: I'm going to state that I share Mordanis' and Keir's concerns that Golbat may be scum. This is especially true if Mordanis flips green or blue--then Golbat is very clearly red, and vice versa. @Shady: Why would you assume that one of them has to be scum? It's not like both of them were claiming one blue role and therefore one of them had to be lying. This really seems as if you were preparing for possible mislynches. I want to hear your defense. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
Is this your standard way to play Mafia? I am confused ... | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 28 2012 04:40 aRyuujin wrote: Posting in Haikus Makes the game more interesting Spoilers organize Posting in Haikus just makes me want to skip your posts :D @Obvious: On July 28 2012 00:01 Obvious.660 wrote: Good morning. Going through filters before I end up suit shopping today. Ange777: + Show Spoiler [Ange777's last post] + On July 27 2012 23:24 Ange777 wrote: @Promethelax: You made some good points on Shady. I must admit I missed them. I felt a strange vibe from all his fluff posts but couldn't put the finger on it. Although before reading your post I was astonished to read this: @Shady: Why would you assume that one of them has to be scum? It's not like both of them were claiming one blue role and therefore one of them had to be lying. This really seems as if you were preparing for possible mislynches. I want to hear your defense. Totally agree with this concept. We should not let ourselves fall into the trap of confirming reds by mislynching town. This is true even on day 1. @Promethelax: I disagree that all lists are bad. That's just some people's method for addressing everything in a single post. While it is true that lists such as the one that got my lynched as town in my last game, as well as the one here posted by Golbat, can be misconstrued as scummy behavior, I don't feel that they indicate alignment. Look at the intent behind the list each time you read them. I don't want to have to read a bunch of lists, either. I wanted to give out as much information as I could knowing I probably couldn't get back before deadline. Outside of that my play was sloppy and ill informed. We shouldn't talk too much about my last game (Newbie Mini XXI), however, because that game is still not finished. Also, great catch in your last post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15625606 We should keep an eye on everyone's posting behavior, though, not just Shady Sands and Mordanis. @Mordanis: Great initiative to get the ball rolling on conversation. Your early case has initiated a lot of discussion, right or wrong, and that's pro-town behavior. Anyone keeping an eye on Mordanis specifically might want to note that we're not anywhere close to the deadline and this kind of behavior (generating discussion) is at least opening up avenues of discussion. Mordanis can't make you vote one way or another, decide the strength of his case(s) on your own. @MrMedic: Don't be afraid to post! We promise Marvellosity won't come out and shoot you, too. Let us know your thoughts. @Golbat: Your play reminds me of my own in my first game. Some friendly advice: focus on motive, not on what's being said. You enter this thread and all you do is (dis-)agreeing with other players about easy stuff or posting fluff? I want to hear your opinion on the cases made. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 28 2012 05:24 Golbat wrote: It looks like pretty much everyone else in the thread seems to think I'm scum. Well that's not good, because i'm not. You all seem to think that my incredibly poor play has something to do with me being scum, when that's not the case at all. I'm town. I'm very town, I'm just bad. I Honestly thought all of my posts were helpful when I posted them. I can see now why they aren't. I also think you can do better than lynching me. I propose instead that today we lynch someone who hasn't been a part of the conversation much, as it's entirely possible that the mafia has decided to sit back and let me and Mord go at it while the town analyzes itself to pieces. While you are right that lynching possible scum is always better than a mislynch on a townie, lynching a controversial player is most of the times preferable to lynching a lurker. There are several players including me who made cases on you and your death would just give so much more information right now than the death of Keir. How about instead of making cases on lurkers you start to address the questions we posted earlier regarding Mordanis and explain why you believe Mordanis to be less scummy than before? When unvoting you said: On July 27 2012 16:49 Golbat wrote:# My apologies. I completely forgot about those two posts. Maybe i'm being too hasty with my accusing Mord of being scum from one bad read early in the game. It just seems really fishy that he stuck with it for so long. For the time being mord, I'm not convinced you're not scum, but i'm being convinced less and less that you are the more I think about it. So for the time being, ##unvote | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 28 2012 06:36 Mordanis wrote: I'm starting to get a really bad feeling about Shady. Remember his post that said that no game in 20 lynched scum D1? + Show Spoiler + On July 27 2012 09:02 Shady Sands wrote: So pretty much, I looked through about 20 mafia games and found not a single night one lynch resulting in a red kill. This suggests one thing: Day 1 scumhunting actually has a lower success rate than a random day 1 lynch. If the lynches had been truly random, then maybe 20-30% of the games should have had day 1 lynches turn up red, but none of them did. Here are the D1 lynches from several games: NMM XXI: blue NMM XX: red NMM XIX: blue NMM XVIII: green NMM XVII: red NMM XVI: blue (I couldn't find XV or XIV, so I chose to go to the SNMMs) SNMM XI: red SNMM X: green SNMM IX: green So we have 3 blues lynched, 3 VT lynched, and 3 scum lynched. So it would appear that in Newbie mini mafia games, there is about a 1/3 chance of lynching scum D1. With 3/13 chance a random lynch would hit scum (~24%), and historically a 1/3 chance of hitting scum through hunting, the choice is clear. This is for future reference really, as we're already hunting. But this brings up the fact that Shady almost certainly lied. Now there is sometimes a reason for a townie to lie. If it opens up an avenue for them to discover scum, or take one for the team, or accomplishes another goal it can be a boon to lie to the town. On the other hand, by suggesting that scum hunting D1 is useless, Shady is 1) discouraging discussion (why discuss when it only lowers the probability of hitting scum?), 2) stalling the game (mafia wants to stall as long as possible. they use their kp regardless of where our lynch ends up), and 3) trying to influence newbies' thinking (if analysis/scum hunt isn't the main priority, then mafia get off free for mistakes while being able to penalize some other player. This goes with stalling). In short, Shady lied in a pretty baldfaced manner, and the lie only serves the interest of mafia. Also, after reading through Obvious's filter last game, I saw that his behavior was almost identical to Golbat's. Golbat, you need to contribute, because if you don't, you're going to be looking even scummier. But I have seen almost identical play from a townie (Obvious was lynched D1 though), so for now I am going to switch my vote. ##Unvote ##Vote: Shady_Sands I must admit I noticed this earlier as I played XV (we lynched scum day1) but didn't give it much thinking. Still waiting for Shady to reply to the questions earlier and this accusation. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + What a surprise/upset! I will catch up now with the thread. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
Your explanation for voting and then unvoting Mordanis is just weird. I don't understand how you can assume that he is godfather just because he was actively pursuing a poor case. Furthermore why should early voting be scummy? It is important to use your vote to pressure others and sometimes casting a vote early into a day is the only weapon you have. So just to be sure I understood you correctly, your best scum read when you unvoted was still Mordanis, you only feared to appear scum because of this early vote and therefore unvoted? On July 28 2012 06:36 Golbat wrote: Basically, at the time I was thinking about why he would be so vocal about his case on Keir, and why he would pursue it for so long despite the fact he knew it was an awful case. It wasn't adding up, so I started thinking, "maybe he's scum, but he probably isn't scum, seeing as he thrust himself so far into the spotlight". But after having some time to think about his play, I had the idea that he may be the godfather. I mean, think about it. It's a pretty smart play if he is, he can make all sorts of accusations, and then play like he was just trying to "stimulate discussion". He'll come back clean on a cop check, so he could also use that to further cement himself as a townie, while getting the town to lynch each other all day every day. My own flip floppiness can be attributed to realizing that brazenly voting so early is a bad idea. When I pushed Mord, he pushed back, and I thought to myself, "oh shit, I should probably back down, voting this early does seem kinda scummy". I didn't really think that doing what I thought was the most pro-town thing would cause myself to be brought under such suspicion, because I thought I made it abundantly clear that I was still suspicious, but just not as concrete about it. I wanted to see how the rest of the people were thinking before I actually casted my vote. I could easily still vote for Mord, but he isn't the only suspicious one here. I am curious because in your next post you state: On July 28 2012 07:39 Golbat wrote: + Show Spoiler + Just reading through your filter so far, I feel like you are saying "Oh shit, I made a mistake. Now how can I fix it?" The problem wasn't voting Mordanis early. You voted him without giving a solid reason why, then as soon as someone called you out on it, you backed off with "Sorry, I'm an over-zealous noob." Being wrong doesn't make you scum, but not having conviction and flip-flopping that fast is certainly suspicious. So now you vote aRyujin. He already gave up the haiku style posting which seems to be your only issue with him. Any other reason why he should be lynched in your opinion? And why is Mord missing in your scum reads? On July 28 2012 13:46 Golbat wrote: I'll probably be able to read the thread before I have to go to work tomorrow morning, but in case I don't get that chance, ##Vote aRyujin This is why I am voting for him: His haiku style makes it easy for him to fill up his posts with a shit load of waffle and some nearly baseless accusations and almost get away with it. I hope in between now and deadline the eye of suspicion takes a long, hard look at him, because his confusing waffle is nothing short of a full-on impediment to real discussion. I would also consider voting for Shady Sands, depending on the consensus of the town for these reasons : His direct swap from "I agree with golbat, let's lynch Mord" after Mord drew such attention to himself to "Let's lynch Golbat and then Mord, because one of them HAS to be scum" after people started questioning me is something that I don't think anybody else agreed with. The way he seemed so concrete about who we should lynch for multiple days is really suspicious. We should be picking lynches on a day by day basis as more discussion takes place, not queue up our votes for several days straight. Right now these two seem to me to be the most scummy. Of course, if someone else decides to act scummy as all get out, i'd be happy to vote for them as well, but at the moment these two seem the most suspicious. @goodkarma: On July 28 2012 08:08 goodkarma wrote: I still would like to assert my opinion that removing lurkers from the game on day one is the most valuable play for town. Obviously, lurkers are hard to read. Mafia can easily hide as lurkers without any worry of slipping up. Meanwhile, day one, the most vocal people are sure to say some things that don't resonate quite right with the town. It is easy to start a lynch bandwagon on these people, while the lurkers sit back and provide no further information about themselves or their agendas. Lynch the vocal individuals day one, and you'll know just as little about the lurkers come day two. What? Yes, having lurkers is incredibly painful for town. Especially at MYLO or LYLO having lurkers just cripples town's ability to vote properly. But why would you even consider lynching a lurker when there are suspicious players? It's not always what they say that makes them scum but the intent behind it. And to be honest your post only deflects from the cases already made. On July 28 2012 08:08 goodkarma wrote: Redirection and "blending in with trending town arguements" are scum plays. Exactly. So why are you talking about lynching a lurker and totally ignoring existing cases? Scum? On July 28 2012 10:17 goodkarma wrote: First, @Keirathi, to address a few of your points: Yes, not all lurkers are mafia. And not all mafia are lurkers. Obviously it's great if a target flips red. However, even if a target flips green, you can still be in a better position if that townie was not providing constructive criticism and clarity in his posts. Above all else, the town needs to have clarity and focus to win. Removing lurkers early helps with this goal. By instituting a lynch the lurker policy day one, lurking townies will hopefully realize lurking is bad town play and shape up. Sadly lurking isn't necessarily bad mafia play, and this helps to bring any lurking mafia into the spotlight. Can mafia be active posters playing on the townies' fears? Of coarse they can, but if they are active posters they can and will slip up. They can be found. You let them lurk and you will have trouble winning. But here's the biggest reason I see to play lynch the lurker on day 1 (and I know some may disagree here): you cannot possibly have a good read on anyone before there's been a flip. A scum can sit in the background and lol at town. Scum can speak up in the first hour of day one as to why he thinks there's a premium lynch target. You just simply can't predict how they will play. They can have one scummy post and be town. It's the trend over time, including their voting histories, and the people they've attacked and defended, that will spell out their true intentions. However, by establishing a policy against lurking, you immediately set up a constructive town atmosphere even if you lynch town day one. I would be happy to see an informative post on this topic if you have read a different viewpoint. However, from the guides I've read on this subject clarity is key, and lurkers are definitely a good lynch target. I would be happy to provide links for you if you need, though the TL mafia central library should have all the guides I've looked at. So you are saying that there is no way to have an accurate read on players before any flip. I would say it is hard but not impossible. Pressuring people for the content of their posts and not the quality of their posts allows for a good read. If instead we just ask people to be more active and talk about safe topics such as policy lynches than nothing is accomplished through this! Which by the way is exactly what you achieved with your post ... On July 28 2012 11:56 goodkarma wrote: @DarthPunk Yes. I've talked a lot about lurkers. And tbh I consider that a very important contribution. It is day one and no one can truely have a good read on who is scum without any flips. We can go with our pitchforks at those we consider "scummy," and we should. But the absolute very first thing that needs to happen is that we establish solid town policy that ensures there's clarity in what is posted and everyone is participating. This is what I'm getting at with lynch the lurker. I apologize that I'm not bandwaggoning on some guy who has a couple scummy-looking posts right now, as many of our forum friends seem content to do, but I strongly feel that if we establish an atmosphere where we encourage participation that it will be that much easier to weed out scum. I will be more than happy to talk about scummy reads when there's more information to go off of, but that information just isn't there on day one. The scummiest looking people right now are the lurkers. And it's not like this is some crazy half-baked idea. I encourage you, like I encouraged Keirathi, to read some basic town guides on TL. Lurkers are a good target, especially when you don't have any good leads to go off of. I've discussed this point to death, and now this discussion is being reduced to rehashing what I've already said. Please thoroughly read my post before telling me my posting is only about lurkers, because what I propose is also about establishing the foundation for a winning town by encouraging participation and clarity. I feel I've talked this point to death, and I sincerely hope the town gets behind it. My biggest fear is that we will cherry-pick the most outspoken guy we can find, a couple of his posts read scummy, and he flips town. We have ~7 hours till deadline and yet the only thing you have talked about over and over again is your policy lynch. You may vote for whomever's death is most beneficial for town in your opinion but before that I want to hear you comment on the existent cases. And just to remind everyone making strong and logical cases is one of the more difficult things for scum. Therefore the easiest thing for scum is to just start a case on a lurker because let's admit it, everyone has to hate lurkers! ##FoS goodkarma And don't get me wrong. I am hundred percent behind getting rid of lurkers. So if we have vigs, please do your job! | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 28 2012 10:17 goodkarma wrote: @ and regarding aRyuujin: Here's the issues I currently have that make me think you're a good lynch day one. You have not really added any meaningful discussion presently for town. Your viewpoints have been rehashings of towns'. Your first critical post is what I'm looking for. I hate to reiterate this point but neither you nor Keirathi have really addressed it. Until I see that first critical post, you are by my definition a lurker. The other point is that there's one or two people that have come to your defense. You talk about scum buddies, which is most interesting to me. Because I would think scum buddies would be involved in the defense of their friend, especially on day one when it's nearly impossible to present a truely rock-solid case against anyone. Lynching you would give valuable information about those who choose to stand behind you. This is very valuable information, even if you flip town. If we were to lynch a Mord or golbat or shady right now and they flip town, all we would know is that no one in town really liked them much. If we were to lynch Mordanis, Golbat or Shady we would have a lot of information. As far as I remember all three were accused and defended by several players. All three of them have made cases against other players. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 28 2012 14:28 Obvious.660 wrote: Shady Sands' is 100% convinced Mordanis is scum. And is willing to waiting 2 days to lynch him. This is bad play. If we identify scum, we kill them. No crazy circular logic of if x person dies then we have more information y person. Just no. Scum can scheme, they are aware of eachother. Town cannot, except in the case of Masons. Shady Sands is my current #1 scum read. #FOS: Shady Sands While I have my suspicions about Shady I got the the feeling that Mordanis wasn't his strongest scum read especially as he soon after targeted Golbat. Your point is valid but I think it's quite common if you encounter active controversial players on day 1 to let them be and see how things go. Your filter is still pretty empty though, no other contribution than this rather sloppy case on Shady. I am still waiting for you to comment on Golbat! | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 28 2012 23:30 Keirathi wrote: No one has any comments on my case against Golbat? Valid points but I fear that we won't get an answer from Golbat before deadline. In general, activity in this game is aweful. Zorkmid and MrMedic have disappeared as well. | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 29 2012 00:15 Shady Sands wrote: Obvious, by the time I switched my vote off Mordanis to doing a 2 day wait on his lynch, I was no longer 100% convinced he was scum. I wrote that since he was playing "loud" (actively posting relatively strong analysis), if he was scum, he would quickly out himself in two or three days anyhow, so there was no need to rush a lynch. No offense Shady but it took you this long to write the defense above?? How about all the other questions we posted earlier? | ||
Ange777
Germany1164 Posts
On July 28 2012 16:42 Mordanis wrote: Darth: Where did I lie? I want one expression that is a bald-faced lie. You may disagree with my rushed read on Keir, but a read is a read. It is not a statement of fact. Shady said that he looked through 20 games without seeing any mafia lynched D1. I referenced 20 games with 5 scum lynched D1. His claim was at best an exaggeration, at worst a flatout lie. What I did in posting about Keir was different though. Analysis of posts is inherently subjective, so even if the language is objective, the content never is. Earnest subjective opinions can differ without either being dishonest. So you may disagree with my reads, but don't call them dishonest. I fear that I've had about 10 hours of sleep over the last several days, and I need some shut-eye. I'll be back at least 4 hours before the deadline unless I practically pass out from exhaustion. To keep myself honest, I'll go ahead and ## unvote. The reason for this: Shady made a very dear mistake by suggesting that we not scumhunt, and being factually incorrect makes this much worse. Let me be clear, this is scummy behavior, but the rest of his play exonerates him. As soon as I force the game to scumhunting, he posts the most obvious case after allowing a reasonable attempt at defense for me. + Show Spoiler [Case Against Me] + On July 27 2012 12:51 Shady Sands wrote: Nope, you're not missing anything. However, I was saying that it's fine to post scenarios which are mutually contradictory. That in and of itself should not be grounds to dismiss someone's arguments. I agree though that Mordanis' case itself doesn't make much sense. The reason I think it's likely he'll flip green right now is because we haven't been able to see his response to these accusations. If he responds in the way in which I think he will (or chooses not to respond at all) then I think he's a clear red. The other reason I think it's likely he'll flip green is because in the other games I looked through, it was very hard for the town to actually make a successful day 1 lynch. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, though. Generally a Day 1 lynch is critical for filtering out who is actually a contributing member of the town versus who is simply generating more heat than light. On July 27 2012 13:29 Shady Sands wrote: Mordanis' response pretty much sealed the deal for me. I think it is clear that Mordanis is a red. Let's parse through his response. I'm completely unsure of what point Mordanis is trying to make here. So people who post are innocent, and people who don't post are also innocent? The town isn't talking about lynching people for heading to work--it's talking about lynching people who have never made a single post since the game began. Nothing to argue against here, but when combined with the next part of Mordanis' post, it gets troubling: So... wait a second. Mordanis thinks that because Keir posted a policy question, then fits two out of the five other indicators for being blue, he's trying to fake blue? Then Mordanis cites his own actions playing as a blue in a prior game to contrast with Keir's supposed blue fakery. This is weak logic at best, but when combined with his last post, really makes things an open and shut case: Mordanis claims Keir is trying to make people who are looking for blues beeline to him. This is a claim that Mordanis has not backed up with logic. All Keir said was for RBs not to RB on day 1. That's not trying to make blues beeline to him, it's sound advice--just like telling vigis not to waste their hits on night 1. Second, how does Keir's behavior not resonate with that of a "true blue?" Throughout both his posts, Mordanis has claimed to be able to tell who a "true blue" is, but he hasn't really shared what the criteria are other than saying "be lurky but still contribute", which is so vague as to be meaningless. Third, where has Keir claimed town RB? Where has he encouraged blues to roleclaim? Indeed, these two sentences serve only one purpose: showing that somehow, Mordanis is scared of blues roleclaiming to Keir because of some unstated belief that Keir is red. When you look at all that, and the weak logic against Keir, then what you see is the following pattern: Mordanis first claims that Keir is the likeliest candidate for lynching because he a likely candidate to be red. Then he backs off and claims that Keir could go red or green. Then he argues that we should lynch controversial candidates first. The point is, lynching controversial candidates would be fine, if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. This totally smacks of a Red finding out his original tactic for generating a bandwagon has failed, acknowledging that he is the only one arguing for a lynch, and then stating that because he is the only one arguing for a lynch, the person is "controversial" and should be lynched. What? On July 27 2012 20:33 Shady Sands wrote: I think this is pretty important to parse through, because it makes me want to refrain from lynching Mordanis until day 2 or 3. I'm going to state that I share Mordanis' and Keir's concerns that Golbat may be scum. This is especially true if Mordanis flips green or blue--then Golbat is very clearly red, and vice versa. That being said, however, I'm still pretty suspicious of Mordanis' desire to start scumhunting an hour and a half into the game, when only half of the players had even posted. This was exacerbated by the fact that his case against Keir was extremely poor, almost intentionally so--as if Mordanis wanted more heat than light to be shed on the situation. One of the main things I'd like to point out here is that scum do not necessarily have to play quietly. It's easier for the scum to play that way, but playing loudly is also a valid scum tactic for sowing discord and division within the town--which is what I thought Mord's post was trying to do. Now that the Keir case is closed, however, and Mord+Keir have both identified Golbat's behavior as pretty odd in and of itself, then I think it would be worthwhile to take a look at Golbat. (I'm still a suspicious of Mord, but mainly because his behavior has created so much uncertainty as to what he really could be--and Golbat can clear up a lot of that.) Besides being the first one to "formally" vote for Mordanis, Golbat was also the first one to accuse Mord of faulty analysis. Granted, Golbat's claims were valid--but his more recent posts have made me pretty suspicious. First, let's ignore the list for a bit--we'll circle back to it, but one general thing to note about Golbat's posting: he seems to spend more time trying to make himself look like a townie than trying to figure out who is scum. This is the kicker that shifted my focus from Mord to him. Look at this train of posts below: + Show Spoiler [Golbat's posts since the "…] + On July 27 2012 16:21 Golbat wrote: That's not what I said. I said that you didn't call him out at all, not that you didn't vote for him. I wouldn't expect you to vote for someone just because they voted for you. But saying "hey bro, cool your jets" at least would have been something. Until page 12 I'm pretty sure you didn't even respond to his accusations, but I might have missed a post. What Mord did was go "Oh so you're gonna vote for me? WELL I'M GONNA VOTE FOR YOU, TAKE THAT! Completely different. And then this post: On July 27 2012 16:49 Golbat wrote: My apologies. I completely forgot about those two posts. Maybe i'm being too hasty with my accusing Mord of being scum from one bad read early in the game. It just seems really fishy that he stuck with it for so long. For the time being mord, I'm not convinced you're not scum, but i'm being convinced less and less that you are the more I think about it. So for the time being, ##unvote I just really want to win my first game, and I want to do it while playing well, which is what got me excited to get a slam-dunk mafia kill on day one. I know for a fact that i'm not scum, and that's all I really know at this point. Right now, besides Mord, I think that our best bet is to see who isn't contributing anything to the discusssion and then get rid of them. I admit that all of my reads so far could be wrong 100%. However, i don't think posting my day1 reads about all of the people is the same thing as making a town list, because I didn't even give an opinion on half of the people. I could also do without your "oh look at how good I am, you guys are bad" attitude. This is a newbie game, and calling people bad accomplishes nothing except potentially driving people away. P.S. I know I said "i'm not one to throw votes around yadda yadda yadda, but + Show Spoiler + That was me trying to be all internet tough And this: On July 27 2012 18:51 Golbat wrote: The reason I backed off of Mord is because I felt like I may have been pushing too strongly against him based on his first bad read. I didn't want to appear to be scum myself, so I backed off for the moment. I still have a sneaking suspicion about him that he may be mafia, but I didn't want to lynch myself by pushing too hard on a bad read. I feel like i've been talking in circles around mord, "He's scum, no he's town, no he might be scum, no he's probably town", so I feel like I need to take a definite stance on the matter, and that is ##FoS Mordanis It's not the flat-out vote that it was before, but I still don't trust you. I've heard several times to trust my reads, and so this is my position. We'll see what happens between now and lynch time. + Show Spoiler + but for real now, I need to step away from the thread for a few hours And this: On July 27 2012 18:44 Golbat wrote: I can understand why you would read my actions so far in the game as scum, but they're honestly just the actions of a bad player who thought he had a dead on scum read and was most likely very, very wrong. From now on i'll be more careful with who I vote for, because while I DID indeed redact my vote, I really really dislike when that happens on the whole. I got a little carried away and luckily it happened this early on and not in a situation where I might have cause a loss for town. Basically, I'm NOT scum, and anything scummy I have said or done so far can be explained by my inexperience. After reading Prom's post (especially the bit regarding self-imposed posting limits), I feel like it's time for me to take a break, especially after spewing so much bullshit and bad play all over the thread. See you in about 6-12 hours. As soon as people start pressuring him, Golbat says that he's not scum in 4 different ways. He emphasizes his newbieness, he says he's just eager to win, then he self-consciously makes a post to make himself not seem like a flip-flopper. Then, when he finally realizes he's digging himself into a hole, he decides to pull the Ostrich maneuver and stick his head into said hole for 6-12 hours. Undoubtedly, if he is red, he is now sending a clear signal to his buddies to bail him out and hopefully shift the discussion to someone else by the time he is out of said hole. Next post will be about Golbat's "list post". On July 27 2012 20:39 Shady Sands wrote: Right, while I think Mordanis' train of posts is suspicious, I think Golbat just sort of exposed himself with his giant train of self-covering posts. I'd go with Golbat right now as I think lynching him does one of two things: 1) He flips red, in which case we've gotten a D1 red lynch which puts us in the 75% win range 2) He flips green or blue, in which case Mordanis will be under quite a bit of pressure. On July 27 2012 21:16 Shady Sands wrote: Onto the list post by Golbat: + Show Spoiler [List post by Golbat] + Now let's look at his list post: + Show Spoiler + On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote: While we're all here, let's not waste time. We might as well discuss people other than Keir, because there ARE other people besides Keir. I think MrMedic may be scum, and is "reluctant to make a big first post" because he doesn't know how to post without being scummy. It's a legitimate concern, and if I had rolled scum in my first game, I might be in much the same state of mind. That being said, he might also be town, and reluctant to make a big post because he doesn't want to look scummy. I can understand that as well, and that was my concern before I actually got stuck into the discussion. Basically what my point is is that he either is or is not scum (lol), and that i'm going to be reading his posts very carefully until further notice. Keir seems to me to be town. He gave some good advice for our (potential) roleblocker where scum might have done the opposite and given intentionally bad advice while appearing to have good intentions. However, beyond that first bit of advice, he hasn't contributed anything to the scumhunt. He hasn't even called out his accuser as being scummy at all. It is possible that, knowing that they are both mafia, Mord made a really bad case against him so that the town would rally to his defense, thus keeping suspicion away from him, while also making Mord seem like a townie who had simply jumped at the first thing he saw that was a bit off. I hope he isn't scum, but I won't rule it out just yet. Pretty sure Mord is scum. I did vote for him after all. But, there is always the chance he was just a very eager townie. The only thing about him being town that rubs me the wrong way is how emphatically he decided to stay with his line of reasoning, despite the fact that it had been slapped down by multiple people. Very suspicious. Perhaps I myself jumped the gun in voting for him, but being one to not throw around votes lightly, i'm keeping my vote on him unless there is completely overwhelming evidence that he is either not scum, or that someone else is scummier. I really like the OMGUS! vote though, <3. DarthPunk seems like a pretty straight-forward townie to me. He picked apart Mord's case against Keir, and hasn't said one thing yet that doesn't seem pro-town. I agree with almost all of the things he says, and look forward to winning with him after we lynch the final mafia. Promethelax Hasn't said much of substance, but that can be excused due to not being able to post. He said he'd be here to watch GSL, so he's probably going to post very soon. I have no idea about his alignment, other than that he claimed to be town. aRyuujin Has said nothing of substance, and hasn't given a reason for his lack of content. Seems to be a lurker, and if he doesn't speak up with something useful by the day2 deadline, he's certainly one of the people I have my sights on. goodkarma has given a legitimate reason not to vote Mord, and I can respect that. Going for the policy lynch on a lurker I can respect too, but I think that we should lynch someone who feels scummy before someone who feels asleep on their keyboard. alan133 has one good post, and nothing else of substance. But being from Malaysia I can understand not being synched up with the rest of us. I'll have to read his posts when I wake up tomorrow. Zorkmid seemed to be active before the ball truly got rolling, and then ceased to post after it did. Being canadian, he's probably asleep, and as such I'll have to wait to pass judgement on him as well. Shady Sands, aside from being a good writer, also seems to be town. He agrees with my assessment of Mord, and that is a good enough reason for me to avoid casting too much suspicion on him, but of course I can't completely trust anyone on day one. Obvious.660 is asleep Ange777 has said nothing since the game started. I hope to hear from him soon I'd like to hear other people's reads as well, this is going to be the only time I post a list of my reads on everyone, so as not to appear too spammy, even though I hope this clears me of any potential scum suspicion, seeing as i'm town as all get out. Very spurious reasoning on MrMedic, even more spurious than Mord's reasoning on Keir. The reason this looks worse than Mord's post on Keir is that this comes after he himself has made a giant post about how poor reasoning by Mord is counterproductive as his very first post in the game. What makes it seem guilty is that again, after making that accusation, Golbat drops it without bringing up MrMedic again in any of his other posts. Then Golbat states, again, that his only reason for posting a list is to clear himself of town suspicion. This is, again, pretty weird. It's almost as if Golbat is saying "Hey! Look, I'm contributing by making a giant long post! Don't lynch me!" Golbat says that he's going to keep the vote on Mordanis until better evidence comes up that shows Mord is innocent. Then a few posts down, Golbat unvotes Mord (in spite of Mord doing more of what Mord was doing--arguing his point emphatically and often alone against the rest of the town), then puts him on FoS. Then Golbat moves down to systematically state that every member of the town is innocent in his eyes due to a wide variety of excuses. This was a major WTF moment for me, as I didn't really understand the necessity of doing something like that. The only way this move makes sense is if Golbat is somehow trying to cover for his scum buddies by lumping them all in with the rest of the town, and by subtly equivocating any sort of analysis (from time of posting analysis to post content analysis to voting analysis) into mediocrity and uselessness. On July 27 2012 21:22 Shady Sands wrote: EBWOP: Just realized I forgot to slot in why Mord's post makes me want to hold off to Day2/3--Mord highlights "drawing attention to himself" and a willingness to stand up for his beliefs as keystones of his in-game habits. The thing with this playstyle is that playing as a "noisy scum" is very hard to keep up over 2 or 3 in-game days, because in a game as small as this, the analysis will very quickly start to shift in the right direction and noisy attempts to derail become more and more risky as the posts pile on--inevitably a fairly major scumslip will be made. By committing publicly to this sort of strategy, we can judge Mord the following way: if Mord continues to play loud and does not get quiet over the next few days, then Mord will either burn out quickly and scumslip or prove that he is not scum. If Mord quiets down after Day 1, then his above post basically consigns him to becoming an easy lynch--especially if Golbat flips blue/green. In short, before the scumhunt began, he seemed very scummy, but since then seems very town. Golbat, on the other hand, has played fairly scummily the entire game. Shady has contributed, Golbat has not. I need time to look more closely at these two and some other players, but now is unfortunately not the time. I need rest now, and I will be able to post tomorrow much more cohesively. My sincere apologies if this is poorly worded/spelled :C Wait ... did you even consider Promethelax' case on Shady? Shady's latest posts have made a few people suspicious (including me) and yet you believe his posting to have improved? | ||
| ||