Aperture Mafia 2: Portal Edition

On September 30 2012 10:37 austinmcc wrote:
Actually, this seems to rule out a two-man mafia team. So 3, 3/1, or 4?

On September 30 2012 10:46 Keirathi wrote:

Having to kill 2 scum in a Mini before there are less than 2 KP is rough. If its 9/4 split, then day2 is MYLO.

On October 01 2012 04:26 ghost_403 wrote:
So, hiro, whatchoo think's going on in this here thread?

On October 01 2012 04:40 ghost_403 wrote:
Alright, Hiro, so who do you think we should be lynching today? So far, all you've done in this game is setup speculation (a big no-no), and what else?

However, I could let Nisani pass, since he did minimally discuss his read of Drazerk later (it was 1 post, but at least it was something). Plus it's Nisani and I can see him acting like that as town.

On October 01 2012 06:30 Mementoss wrote:


I wasn't I was just saying that HiroPros point on JingleHell was invalid.

On October 01 2012 06:45 gonzaw wrote:



What about my other points? That Jingle comes out to post just to "appear he's contributing" and "justify himself" and seems less interested about his actual read and convincing people of it?

On October 01 2012 07:03 Crossfire99 wrote:
So, I think Keirathi's conflicting reasons for his earlier behavior that austin already pointed out are weird, but it isn't enough for me to vote for him right now. I'll need some more evidence.

I'm confused about Drazerk. I guess I haven't played with him before and some people seem to have used this to inform their decision.

As for Jingle, I don't think that we can use the fact that he posted a defense when he did as justification for voting for him. If he continually has that timing, then I'll use that as evidence. Also, I think people are reading too much into Jingle's early vote on Drazerk because I'm confused by Drazerk, and can understand Jingle's reasoning for voting him. But some of you are saying that Drazerk is just acting like his normal self...so I guess I'm still just confused by Drazerk...

I don't understand this post of yours, Drazerk.

Don't scum make mistakes, too? And isn't that how we catch them?

On October 01 2012 12:03 strongandbig wrote:
Hey guys

So I'm just checking in

I call Drazerk out for scummy play
He says "I play like this always so you can't call me out for it"

My response: okay so we lynch you for it, you know it's scummy play but you do it anyway.

When is the deadline?

On October 01 2012 04:02 HiroPro wrote:
hey s&b you think keirathi is telling the truth with his plan or do you think he came up with reasons for it afterwards?

On October 01 2012 14:20 Keirathi wrote:
Actually, I guess you wouldn't want to answer those questions yourself before Crossfire and S&B answer them.

So how about an opinion on austin changing his conclusion towards my case super easily?

And maybe a quick read of Mementoss while you're at it?

On October 01 2012 03:18 austinmcc wrote:
Keirathi, I'm a little troubled by this when I look back through your explanation:

When you unvote, you specifically note that you want real, meaningful opinions that people can be held accountable for. So you're interested in getting discussion going in general.

This seems to not match up. If you wanted people to give opinions, how was your goal accomplished when only Mattchew responded?

On October 01 2012 14:30 strongandbig wrote:
@hiro's question about keirathi's plan
so i assume the plan you're talking about is "make a shitty case on purpose to start discussion" ?

it's a god-awful plan, the only discussion you'll start is people saying "what a shitty case, you sure you give a fuck this game?"

also kenpachi rule lol

also keirathi says

- first drazerk "legitimately trying" as town? you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

second this reads pretty sketchy to me, scum like to ingratiate themselves with townies who are suspicious of them as long as their lynch appears remote.

so yeah, keirathi not looking too great to me right now.

but i'm not sure about it - i'm actually not sure if you're right to call it a "plan" - sometimes townies do make weak cases right at the start of a day to get the ball rolling. it's just a thing, not a plan or a gambit or whatever. So I think he may not have been thinking to himself, 'i'll make this case as shitty as possible to bait out responses', but he could have been thinking 'this is dead so even though there's nothing to work with i'll do what i can."

On September 30 2012 13:01 Keirathi wrote:
For completeness sake, though, I did go back through all of your games up to Movie Star, and the only pattern was that you seem to claim town if you get into the thread early, and otherwise say you are catching up and reading the thread in your first post

On October 01 2012 05:55 Keirathi wrote:
Here's how I see it: I could have just said "Hey guys lets stop speculating about the setup and someone do some scumhunting!", or I could have pointed out what I found mildly scummy and accomplished the same goal in a better way because now people actually have something to actually talk about.

On October 01 2012 15:12 gonzaw wrote:
About Drazerk:
Can someone tell me why Drazerk might be scum?

I'm genuinely interested, because I can't seem to read him right. I get the feeling he's one of those kind of players you just have to keep alive throughout the whole game to analyse their play.
As in, you need a large time span to gauge his contributions and actions and see if they are anti-town or not because they rarely contribute at any specific time and just troll or post irrelevant stuff and just kind of hang around.

Saying "because he switched his vote with little reason" is not enough since that's one of those things I kind of assume his kind of player does most of the time (vote and unvote randomly, or just sheep, talk about irrelevant stuff and never giving enough good reasoning behind their actions, etc).

The way I think of it, Drazerk had the chance to shit up the thread a lot but didn't take it, instead just "discussed" his read on Keirathi (somehow, I don't really understood what he did there) and then backed off, which doesn't seem something his type of player would do as scum IMO, specially early on D1.

On October 01 2012 14:25 strongandbig wrote:
he knows that he and i often get into shitfights and it's advantageous for him as scum to try and start one, as long as he thinks i won't be able to push a scum read on him through, which he probably does because he's arrogant. the thing is - his argument works both ways around - he says that I should know he doesn't actually try to win as town, but he focuses on third party, so my calling him out for that makes me scum. The thing is, I call him out for that every game - his attempting to call me out on it this game for being scum makes no sense. he's trying to use circular logic but it backfired.

On October 01 2012 15:22 Keirathi wrote:

While I appreciate the read, this in particular shouldn't give you a townie read on me. Go read the post game comments from GSL Open Mini Mafia. I specifically mentioned that I spent a lot of time in filters and digging through meta to strengthen (or crush) cases that I was planning to make, even though I was scum.

On October 02 2012 00:39 Mattchew wrote:
gonna hop right back into the thread with some analysis

I believe iamperfection is scum and I would like everyone to click on his filter


This post clearly mis-reads what ghost is trying to say and jumps on him with a hyperbole and what feels like a very fake sense of confidence. The way this post is worded is not as much anger as much as it reads "grab your pitchforks and bandwagon with me"

After this, his teeth are sunk into ghost, and he is afraid to move. He also has failed to comment on literally anyone else in the thread. His reasoning is bad, his contributions are next to nothing.

Honestly I don't think anything more needs to be written. Enough time has past for iamperfection to comment on other players, or contribute to actual discussion. His reasoning for pushing a ghost lynch is bad and grasping at straws.

##unvote
##vote Iamperfection