EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
On August 04 2012 02:10 marvellosity wrote: wtf! since when am I mean? :oooo I can't remember you ever not being mean :O | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
On August 04 2012 12:47 Golbat wrote: I promise not to get lynched d1 guise t.t Haha. From what I can tell, the bests thing to do are post consistently (both time and topic), back up your claims with reasoning, and always be furthering the town's goals (if you're actually town).Oh, and have fun. I guess you can add fun to the list  I'm excited to try my hand at forum mafia, since irl mafia seems to go too quickly to actually think about anything that's going on. But now I should sleep. I'm busy from 11-12 CST, but I'll try to post something before then if I'm awake/available. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
Just got back from dinner, so I'm going to go through the posts so far and get back to you with my thoughts. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
Blindly doing anything is a poor decision. If we're going to catch the correct people, it has to be based on reasoning and not the potential threat of a lurker. By the end of D1, we should have some read on most of the posters. It's much smarter to make a comparatively informed decision regarding someone we have interacted with than a random selection from those who have said very little. I think policy lynchings (or safeties) are a bad idea in general. It not only limits the amount of logical reasoning involved, but it gives scum the means of avoiding suspicion, hiding in the holes we've created for them. Force them to defend themselves and we'll force information out of them. On August 06 2012 10:07 Dandel Ion wrote: Scumslip or most obvious scumslip? Discuss. I think it's best if we avoid short claims like this without elaboration. Is the scumslip supposed to be that they both defended Golbat when Lvdr spread incorrect information? Or is it the spreading of information that is questionable? I could see arguments for both. Though it may be my inexperience showing a bit, this post seemed vague and despite your request for discussion only led to my confusion. Why call for discussion and then not clarify your own position? In this situation, Golbat seems to be simply defending himself from an accusation while Hapahauli was correcting misinformation. As for Lvdr, I don't think a mistake like this is enough to peg him as scum. If he makes a similarly misinformed statement later it would arouse my suspicions, but for now I'm considering him just about equal with everyone else. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
On August 06 2012 13:42 Hapahauli wrote: While I agree that blind policy lynching in its purest form is bad (i.e. lynching someone ONLY because they're lurking), I believe policy can be a good guideline to prevent mislynch. For example, given two equally "suspicious" players (one active and one "lurky"), I would be much more inclined to lynch the lurker, on the basis that in newbie games, active mafia are a rarity. Newbie mafia are usually incredibly lurky - especially Day 1 when they are still figuring out how to post. If they're both equally scummy, then wouldn't there be an equal chance of each being mafia? In that case wouldn't we gain more information from the flip of an active player than an inactive one? Also, an anti-lurker policy doesn't let mafia hide - it forces them to post and remain in the open. When mafia are forced to be active/scum-hunt, it is near impossible for them not to reveal their intentions. As a result, an anti-lurker policy can only be good for town (as long as it's not taken to logical extremes of course). I should have been more clear with this part. It was more in response to your assertion that we should not lynch highly active members on the first day, as well as a fear that people would prioritize lurking over logic. As I said above, I don't think that if two people are equally scummy, then we should lynch the one that we know the least about. This throws away the potential information that could be gained from the flip. I'm absolutely not against pressuring each other, in fact I welcome it, but when the time to vote comes we should commit to reason over lurkiness. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
On August 06 2012 16:47 YourHarry wrote: Policy lynching is not blind. It is a tested method to encourage discussion and is generally a pro-town strategy. This is different from lynching anyone who forgets to post one day. Further, if we allow lurking - and by allowing them to live, we are allowing them to lurk - there cannot be much "reasoning" to basis your "catching the correct people" on. On the contrary, policy lynching forces people to post. And with posts, there can be discussions and logical reasoning. With lurking, these things come by scarcely. Policy lynching is not a mean to an end. It is a strategy to enrich resources that townies can use. And I experienced first hand that the experienced player(s) support policy lynching lurkers. In the long run, it can be argued that this is also beneficial to the TL mafia community as a whole. Steer the TL mafia culture, where players are expected to actively participate. Your rest of the posts... there are way too many conditionals and wishy washy stuff. You see arguments for boht. You think your inexperience may be what's causing you to be wrong in your judgment. All to end in a wishy washy conclusiong - Lvdr is just as scummy as everyone else. Vote mkfuba I'm genuinely surprised that you found enough of concern in this post to instantly vote for me. I hope my previous post was enough to clarify my policy lynch position. I vote based on logical conclusions from the information I've gathered, not from standards of activity. I believe that there will be more than enough discussion D1 to make an informed vote, and based on the flip we will be able to carry out more discussion. That should cover everything that I intended to say about policy. Everything in the third nested quote looks reasonable to me. I asked that we actually support our own claims instead of asking others to support them for us. I stated that the claim was vague, and provided a few ways in which it could be interpreted. I then stated that both possibilities could be (weakly) supported, and therefore I could not determine what his claim actually was. I then attempted a bit of discussion regarding the situation. Since I found the case to be vague, I stated my observations for each of the possibilities. There is one conditional, and that is: if Lvdr provides another easy-to-refute statement, then he gets an FoS. If anything is wishy-washy, it's because there is not enough evidence to prove anything, which was my conclusion. Oh, and I don't believe myself to be in any way "wrong in my judgement." I find it reasonable that I point my FoS at YourHarry for voting for someone within 12 hours of the game starting, after a single post, and with contrived evidence. (I hope it's alright that I modified his post in my quote so that it was correctly formatted. This made it much easier to read.) | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
On August 06 2012 22:42 Dandel Ion wrote: Thank you for that.. The rest of your post was fluff and OMGUS stuff, but at least I could read YourHarry's post. I don't feel that it was fluff since my single post had been misinterpreted and used to start a case against me. I clarified my post so that others wouldn't misinterpret it similarly. I felt that most of what I said in that response was self-explanatory, but since YH evidently didn't think so, I saw the need to basically repeat myself. I suppose what I mean to say is that normally I would see my post as fluff, but in this case it was necessary as a response to accusations. I also don't consider it to be OMGUS, as I would have had the same suspicions were it not me he was voting for. I would be surprised if everyone else didn't become a bit suspicious of his haste in voting. I didn't vote for him, which I think is an action that would be just as hasty as his own, but I did want to voice what I saw. What was your read on him following that post? Following Prom's explanation of YH's behavior in the past, I'm left more confused than suspicious, but I'm not quite ready to drop my FoS. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
Alright, so I've been looking through the filters and something struck me as odd. Promethelax has become a pretty frequent poster, but if you look at what he's actually contributed, it's pretty limited. He spends much of his time talking about meta and previous games, even though the conclusions he draws from them don't actually say much. + Show Spoiler + On August 07 2012 03:00 Promethelax wrote: okay that is what I thought. You are completely ass backwards on this one. XIX and XXI the most active mafia in both of those were Goon, not GF. I do not feel that the role someone gets should effect their play. Most players have a general meta and they play to it whether blue, green or red. (Some have specific metas to each alignment). i.e. If I were to role a blue I would have said the same things I have said although I am in fact a VT. Also the goal of being a really pro-town player as scum is to never get a dt check on you, be so clearly town that checking you would be a waste of a night check. He says that a sound strategy the mafia might be employing is "completely ass backwards" because it didn't occur in two previous games, and then he carries on with more meta knowledge. + Show Spoiler + On August 07 2012 02:31 Promethelax wrote: I'd like to bring attention to this post: it is neither a scum or a town tell but if you promise to make reads you had better do it. Golbat I want to hear what you think about people and I will be happy to vote you if you do not provide these cases, I know irl things can get in the way so I don't expect them at this moment but I do expect them within this day. goodluck on your tuition moneys. So harry, though I think your play seems scummy I am going to base my read off of your meta, prove me right and play a pro-townrole here. 1. True! 2. Did you read that game? I had town by the nose by virtue of not lurking. 3. No! Bad YourHarry, lynching a townie is always bad. Lynching a bad townie hurts town because we lose a townie. He mentions many actions that are considered pro-town, gives advice for appearing pro-town, and states as a strength "posting in an active and pro-town manner." When not giving meta advice, his posts are filled with instructions for how to be a good townie. This isn't an issue on its own, but he then avoids contributing to the discussion, either simply agreeing/disagreeing with people or telling them he'll look into it. His only case is one against Golbat based on something he admits is not a scum tell. He votes for Golbat despite stating that he feels that YH's play is scummy, and this is after he states that it's bad to lynch townies no matter what. His greatest focus seems to be his assurance that YH is innocent despite using what he admits is a confusing, scummy playstyle. He says that this is consistent with YH's town playstyle, so it is unlikely that he is scum. Again, he is basing his reasoning on meta knowledge. Furthermore, his conclusion is in direct conflict with some of the other meta knowledge he provided: that people tend to behave similarly no matter their role(first spoiler). You can't claim that players' actions are generally uniform across all roles and then claim that someone's actions denote him as a member of a certain faction. In short, I see many contradictions within Prom's posts, and little contribution despite appearing to contribute heavily. He is posting frequently without giving away any information, which is a scum trait. This leads me to believe that he is scum. ##FoS: Promethelax | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
I was really confused when you mentioned Promethelax's thoughts on Golbat's "anti-town behaviour", so I went back through his filter again. You're absolutely right, and I'm not sure how I missed the majority of that post. + Show Spoiler + On August 07 2012 10:01 Promethelax wrote: Though Harry has played so far with his pants squarely atop his head I feel that this is totally in line with his town meta, essentially I find his posting scummy and will be watching him but am hesitant to vote into him because his play is simply bad and, as any coach will tell you, bad play is a dumb-tell not a scum tell. The player I have the most concern with right now is Golbat, as I said earlier making a promise and not following through is an anti-town behavior. Not simply bad play but anti-town. This allows for a player to get off the hook of suspicion because they have promised to do work to help town but also keeps them from having to put their reads into the thread which allows a scum player to stay neutral about people until they can let a townie make the case. Until he posts his 'cases' my ##Vote will be on Golbat In my skimming I must have filled in the second paragraph with the information from his previous post where he said that it was "neither a scum or a town tell." At that point I was feeling so clever that I'd discovered this "brilliant new case" that I didn't take the time to make sure I had the facts straight. Confirmation biases abound! Sorry for misrepresenting you Prom. I'll also have to keep in mind that just because something can be considered scummy behaviour doesn't mean that it is. That being said, I would like to see Prom's thoughts more when he responds to other peoples' posts. It feels to me like you are trying to encourage discussion, but are letting others do the talking for the most part. When I finally read it, your reasoning for Golbat was great, and I'd like to read more. I have a quick question: In general is it better to spoiler quotes or leave them visible? I've seen both, so I'm not sure of the protocol. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
My top pick at the moment is iamperfection. On top of what others have stated, I have one thing to add. To iamperfection: If you came into this game knowing what you do about YourHarry's behaviour, and you had the intention to lynch him if he behaved the same way again, then why would you wait until after you receive your role to state that? You admit that you will vote for him based on this reasoning despite the fact that there is far more evidence in game for other players. Your defense seems like an afterthought, using his meta as a means of implicating him despite a lack of in game evidence. You tell him that you'll be suspicious if he posts the way he always posts, and then when he does it you say he's should be lynched. This tactic doesn't even require a slip on YH's part, it simply requires him to behave like himself. While I'm not sure that his methods are the best, and I was quite suspicious of him early game, he does seem to have generated a lot of discussion, which is certainly a pro-town action, and has drawn a lot of attention to himself. My second pick is Golbat. In addition to Prom's case, I have some questions. Drunk. If I attempted it, it would not be pretty. Syn is the person i'm looking at the most, so I don't see a need to push it out right now. I may have gotten a bit ahead of myself with 2-3 cases in 8 hours so early in the game. it'll get here when it gets here. I'd like some clarification on most of what you've said here. When you say you've gotten ahead of yourself, do you mean that you didn't actually have cases against that many people? If so, why did you say you did? Or have you changed your mind regarding your suspicions? I feel that after almost a full day we at least need to see your previous suspicions and why you no longer feel that way, or you have just been pulling us along. And tautology aside, 24 hours is more than enough time to have at least stated your cases and given a few of your reads, especially when you said you'd provide them (probably) in 8. Third on my list is Synystyr. While the later reads on him seem valid to me, I think the one that started the case against him was an overreaction (that syn was trying to imply that Hapahauli was suspicious). It was an extremely difficult post for me to understand to begin with, and I see the rest of his posts as attempts to both clear the suspicion from him as well as begin some (admittedly poorly thought out) reads to begin discussion. It may be because I did the exact same thing (defended myself against YH's vote, and proceeded to make a poorly considered case against Prom), but at the moment I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I think Dandel lon's demand that he post well thought out reads on players he finds most suspicious is a good idea, and will definitely sway my vote. My suspicion is there, but I don't think there's enough to go by to place him higher on my list. Finally, my last read is on Lvdr. On this I feel like there's little to say other than I agree with Hapahauli's analysis. Lvdr has been the second most active poster (by rough estimation on my part) and has provided some really good insight (pointing out that Syn used fluff to apologize for fluff, and his addition to Shady's case against Syn struck me as reasonable and convincing reads). It would take a lot more convincing to get me to vote for Lvdr D1. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
On August 08 2012 02:37 Hapahauli wrote: @mkfuba - you scumslipped harrrrrrd here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=355874¤tpage=15#300 @ Shady - if Synyster didn't flip red, you would've looked awful from the case you pushed @ YourHarry - you just blew my mind lol Would you mind explaining my slip(s) to me? I felt that each of my reads was acceptable given the concerns I presented, so I would guess that the slip was part of the concerns themselves. I thought it was pretty well constructed  | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
| ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
If you ask people to post their top scum read, and then say why they're more scummy than the others, I'm going to have to post my reads on my top few in order to show why I chose the top one. | ||
|
mkfuba07
United States1151 Posts
I actually had no idea who we were going to kill. We didn't really discuss it much yet. I think it's safer to make that decision after the lynch and flip. | ||
| ||
