EPTSign me up!
Newbie Mini Mafia XXVIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
Sign me up! | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
 | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
This is my first game on TL Mafia, but I've been doing some lurking and would really like to get into the thick of things. Between school, work, and other obligations, I believe this would be great fun (and possibly frustrating!) On Lurker Lynching Personally, anyone who is being too quiet has something to hide. This isn't to say we should just go berserk lynching everyone who isn't posting a specific quota, but those who don't wish to participate in discussion seem rather scummy. The less you say, the less chances of slipping and making the town realize your scum. If someone is lurking extensively, calling them out on it can't hurt... and if they continue, they are afraid for a reason. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
| ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
The game began, and people were stating their opinions about lurking lynching. DP notes that talk of this policy is simply a way to engage day 1 conversation, and that extended discussion of it can be suspicious. Kush then says: On September 28 2012 09:01 kushm4sta wrote: Sorry but who appointed this asshole boss? It's quite the arrogant remark, to be honest. DP may have been a little stern with his wording, but he certainly didn't come off as an "asshole boss" to me. In my opinion, Kush came on too strong regardless of his role--and i certainly don't like the play. People have mentioned his "scummy meta", but I don't read it as scum, just inconsiderate. This remark catapulted into the DP-Kush arguments. When Kush refers to DP as an "active townie", DP accuses him of a huge slip. On September 28 2012 11:27 DarthPunk wrote: How do you know I am town? You are SCUM The accusation was simple reciprocation. Kush was strong with DP, and now DP is going hard on him with evidence. Fair enough. While the aforementioned scumslip could have been a townie error, I find Kush's response underwhelming, and still, a bit arrogant. On September 28 2012 20:12 kushm4sta wrote: 2. My supposed scumslip: huh? What else should I have called you? Player? Person? Maybe but to me those things sound awkward. Townie just seemed like the most non awkward word to use. Innocent until proven guilty. That's how we do it in America bro. To me, "The most active player; the most active person" don't seem awkward to me. The excuse is weak. And the "bro" at the end is telling of people with weak defenses that need to seem confident. Those are just my thoughts on Kush so far: Reckless, overconfident, and a little suspicious. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:36 kushm4sta wrote: I'm sorry you don't like my early play. Care to expand on that? I don't like your early play either, except I will tell you why: you are a lurker. It's been several hours since you said you read everything in depth, why not share your thoughts then? @stutters I'm inclined to agree here. Seems like you kind of jumped on the anti-Kush bandwagon without much thought. Admittedly, I didn't like his early play either, but I'm interested in hearing what you have to say concerning it. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:55 debears wrote: @Djoref Please pm marv for help. The coaches are great So you're confirming him town? | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
The narrative was intentional; both to reiterate events and to weave my thoughts into it. My stance is pretty clear on Kush. He's definitely a possible lynch candidate in my eyes, but I wouldn't go as far as to vote him just yet. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
On September 29 2012 09:08 debears wrote: 1) Mafia trying to pity your way out of being lynched. or 2) A little bitch ##Vote: Kush | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
Such contextual poetry! | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
I found Z-BosoN's case to bear much validity, actually. It confirmed the suspicions I had when debears instantly assumed djodref was a townie. How was his case so, erm, "try harded"? | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
On September 30 2012 06:09 Djodref wrote: I would like people to focus more on corrosion than debears because corrosion tired to cast a scummy shadow on Darth while deabears looks more genuine. I agree we should take the focus off of Debears, as Z-BosoN did a fair job of outlining the points against him. But why Corrosion? I realize he opposed the fact that Darth was so heavily attacking Kush, but I don't think he was casting him in a "scummy shadow". His case against Darth was based on nothing, really; just the fact that he thought pursuing the scum-slip and ignoring everyone else was a poor idea. I don't read Corrosion as scum at all. And Debears in no way looks more genuine than him. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On September 29 2012 21:59 corrosion wrote: Let me just state the reasons that my vote is on Kush right now: I'm sorry, but I don't believe these are reasons a town would choose to make a vote. On September 29 2012 21:59 corrosion wrote: 1) I think his explanation of the slip was poor. If he had given a good explanation, I might have believed him. So the scum slip itself doesn't give you good reason to vote for him, but his poor defense does? A mafia making a scum slip could have the best explanation in the world. That doesn't exonerate them. On September 29 2012 21:59 corrosion wrote: 2) I've been thinking about who would benefit if the result is a no-lynch. I'm thinking mafia is likely to benefit the most from a no-lynch. So your second reason isn't even something that Kush has done. Wouldn't you also say that mafia would benefit from a mis-lynch more than from a no-lynch? Could you elaborate more on the bolded part, because you give no explanation as to how a mafia would benefit more from a no-lynch. On September 29 2012 21:59 corrosion wrote: Right now, I think that there's more than a 25 % chance that Kush is scum. Therefore, I'm voting for him. I'm not sure if any of these points are original. I'm having trouble keeping up with the thread, because I tend to get hanged up in details. You would think a town would want to be more than 25% sure the person they are voting for is scum. You don't even have any cases made against kush. No questions asked. Very vague reasons given... I find it odd that RSC was attacking Corrosion for voting Kush. At this point in the game, RSC had already cast his vote for Kush, and his best reason was: On September 29 2012 12:14 RemedySC wrote: You [Kush] are not creating an ideal atmosphere. RSC doesn't really have much motivation for voting Kush, other than the fact that he's disruptive to the gameplay environment. Yet, he picks apart Corrosion for voting him. I don't understand why he'd attack Corrosion's "poor reasons" at all. Take a look at the bolded part of the spoiler. He condemns Corrosion for not having made any cases again Kush, yet RSC himself hasn't done anything of the sort. RSC hasn't posted anything in regards to Kush being scum besides the "creating a bad atmosphere" and "not posting in a pro-town manner" argument. RSC doesn't seem to be any more sure than Corrosion is about lynching Kush, yet he is condemning Corrosion for having bad reasoning. His post seems hypocritical to me. @RemedySC Why, if you had voted Kush with such little evidence, were you outing Corrosion for doing something similar? You almost seemed as if you were defending Kush for no reason in this post. I'm curious, and would like to hear your opinion on things. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
Appreciate the response. I somewhat misinterpreted your goal in the post concerning Corrosion. Now that I look at it, the second reason for Corrosion's voting Kush is actually ridiculous. On a side note - are most people in this game asleep when we are able to post? Seems that way. Time differences  | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
| ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
On September 30 2012 09:48 DarthPunk wrote: Hey. I am back. I fully expect to get killed tonight. At least Kush was right, he won't get NK'd :p. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
| ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
| ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
On September 30 2012 23:46 Djodref wrote: Debears didn't write "Get some help from the coaches !", he wrote me to get help from the town coach because he knows I am town. Now please have a look on how he answered me when Omniscient asked him about it + Show Spoiler + On September 29 2012 03:28 debears wrote: @Omniscient No. I am trying to help a newbie get into the swing of things. Last game, there was a large portion of lurkers, and it destroyed the game atmosphere. If he gets help and posts more quality, we have a much better read on him. He denies it right away and gives a town motivation for his post. But then he starts talking about lurkers. I think lurkers and newbies are two different things and he was trying to divert everybody with this line. Thank you for pointing this out. When I asked him about it at first, I didn't think much of it. But now that I look at his response, it seems to inherently dodge the question; no mention of why Marv specifically. Also, don't write stuff like this: On September 30 2012 23:46 Djodref wrote: For the people suspecting me, please consider this post written by a town Djodref ^^ By flaunting yourself as town, you make yourself look suspicious. And for those that have scumreads on you, that can only provide a point for them. | ||
|
Omniscient4983
United States32 Posts
On October 01 2012 01:29 Djodref wrote: In fact, this is what I did by checking the filter of corrosion. I read his twice with the two following assumptions :
His filter makes more sense with the second option, especially when I look at his latest posts. So I have a mild town-read on him. @Djodref That's exactly my read on him atm. He certainly seems more newbie-town than scum right now. This is why I was questioned your suspicions of him. Glad to see we can agree on this read. | ||
| ||
